I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
It’s great that Barty has come over from the dark side. Ultimately he favours some vague sentiment in favour of economic growth, over Brexit purism.
I’m pleased to hear the Lib Dems are the party of growth. They had hidden it well I thought behind demands for ever growing windfall taxes (I suppose that’s growth of sorts) that ultimately makes BP and Shell think “uh, you do realise most of our profits aren’t generated in the UK and if you are going to screw us then maybe we move our HQ and listings?”
But then maybe they will get growth through building millions of houses, loudly announced on the Today programme whilst constituency candidates promise their nimby electorate that they clearly don’t mean they will be building anywhere near the constituency.
I must pay more attention and find out their other genius plans for growth.
Note: this is not saying any of the other parties have serious workable plans for growth either.
My post was clumsily worded. Barty is looking for pro-growth and pro-aspiration policy, and the Tories gave up on that a long time ago.
I accept and am disappointed by the lack of Lib Dem vision on this.
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely close to doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss? 🤷♀️
I would also not be doxing you as who you REALLY ARE, merely suggesting you sound like someone who used to post. Is doxing really the right word for that?
It would be something the ban hammer would fall frequently, as there is regular such discussions.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
He’s not “hardcore” at all. Immigration levels are higher than ever.
As I said that's a problem in delivering, which is a separate issue, judging in competency. This is the chap 100% behind Braverman, he's not some woolly liberal on immigration.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
I am near 100% convinced that Starmer will be next PM, assuming Sunak makes it to the next election that is.
But does this enthral me? Not really. Bear in mind that I never voted for Tony Blair though. I want to see these wretched tories booted out, and for a long time, but I'd hope for something more progressive and radical than continuity Blair. The LibDems would bring that to the Cabinet table.
I'd just be content to have a government that would be more likely to imprison Braverman for hate speech than appoint her Home Secretary
I think she’s in with a great chance of becoming the next Tory leader.
Agreed, and into the wilderness they go…
Badenoch is the one to go for if they are going for someone “of the right” (and I suspect they will).
Not at all. Starmer is clearly going to win in 2024. But it is far from clear he is going to get a 1997 style landslide - indeed that would be borderline miraculous given the incline he faces now
He has to do historically well just to get to a majority
So let’s say he gets a small maj -20-50 seats. He then has to face an economy in all sorts of continuing shit (like much of the world) and probably roiled by the early years of the AI Revolution
And remember that Starmer will then own the huge migration influx. He can’t blame it on the Tories. He either stops migrants or he doesn’t
I can see him failing badly in his first term. He’s not inspiring or charismatic enough to charm his way out of a poor performance. So then the Tories could be straight back in to power in 2028-9
1979, 1997, 2010. If you lose power in this country, prepare to be in opposition for a while. History suggests that the Tories might be back in the mid to late 2030s. Their leader then is probably not in Parliament yet.
An incoming government is going to be able to use "the mess left by the last Conservative government" for quite a while.
Also, remember the formula that 'Success = Results - Expectations'. If you come in with fanfare and trumpets you are bound to disappoint. Starmer looks like he'll hit the sweet spot of winning power (decisively) but with nobody thinking he'll do exciting beautiful things. This is a fabulous platform on which to govern. There's far more upside than downside. At worst he'll satisfy and there's just a chance he'll thrill.
If you could bottle that optimism you would be rich beyond the dreams of an ex Tory PM.
Ah but to clarify, I'm not optimistic for the country, I'm optimistic for Keir Starmer to get a good run as PM. Two terms if he has the stamina.
"However, Professor Sir John Curtice, the polling expert, poured cold water on the claim about Labour being on course to win a majority.
He said the local election results suggested Labour should win the most seats at the next general election but it remained "uncertain" if Sir Keir could secure a majority."
Uncertain is rubbish terminology here however esteemed the Professor may be. Uncertain could mean he thinks the probability of a Labour majority is a range between 30% and 70% or it could be a range between 80% and 90%, or pretty much any other percentages that are not 0% or 100%. Tell us the odds, or at least the range of odds, otherwise its a statement of the bleeding obvious.
Ah, you don't like what he's saying.
Got it.
I have no idea what he is saying is the problem. What range do you understand by uncertain?
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
He’s not “hardcore” at all. Immigration levels are higher than ever.
As I said that's a problem in delivering, which is a separate issue, judging in competency. This is the chap 100% behind Braverman, he's not some woolly liberal on immigration.
It’s not a delivery problem.
It’s appears to be a conscious policy choice as one of the few levers left available to the government to crank growth.
Braverman is against it, and there have been vigorous “debates” behind scenes.
When we talk if immigration we need to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
There are numerous factors, for sure, and I'd certainly agree with the one you highlight. How many of the really bright people you have met in your life decided to go into Politics? The number in my case is zero. That's a serious problem.
I do think voting reform would help though. How is ok for one Party to win 15% of the national vote and yet return only one MP? We need to sort that, but I doubt it will happen in my lifetime.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
Politicians want votes of racists, they count like anyone else. The good ones hope they receive the votes incidentally and not because they are acting racist themselves.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
You're right, there isn't a single racist statement in that thread. There are several.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
No, I'm a doctrinaire democrat. Democracy must be respected. Having voted to leave, it was important we left. We have.
Brexit is no longer an issue for me. We have left, it is done. If a government pledging to rejoin the EU is elected, which I do not see happening to be frank, then that too would be democracy and should also be respected.
I can't imagine either the LDs or Labour wanting to reopen the EU sore at the next election anymore. If they do, and they win, then that's democracy, but I just don't see it happening.
That's my view too. And anyway, I always said I would be happy with "Norway" so if we did ever rejoin the single market I personally would be fine with that.
Trading with Europe but outside all the political nonsense... However, like you say I just don't see Starmer wanting to reopen all of this. He'll tinker at the edges of our relationship with the EU but I think all those remainers that are putting their hopes and dreams in him to basically rejoin us back to the EU are going to be disappointed... which in itself is going to cause a lot of angst for the Labour government IMO.
By the 2029 general election we might actually have specific a REJOIN party emerging.
Surely the Lib Dem’s will take up that spot just as soon as they think they can get away with it? They have form.
Sky News: Tories making gains from Labour in Stockton, against expectations. Interesting.
Having run there (and lost) in 2015 and 2019 I am following this with interest. New boundaries in almost all wards, and the Tories appear to have benefitted from the changes.
Assuming that the Tories take control it will be interesting to see what policies they bring in. They have been against all of the things which have transformed the town centre for the better, including the in progress demolition of the old shopping centre and creation of a riverside park. If they just leave a flattened site and do nothing because "we can't afford it" it would be funny.
The ruling Labour group on there deserve to lose. Sadly they are all holding their seats. Arrogant tossers the lot of them.
I think Badenoch is still green, but she is certainly smarter than Leadsom, sharper than Raab, and less loopy and self-regarding than Truss.
Perhaps she is the William Hague de nos jours, who was denounced as a right-wing young fogey back in the late 1990s.
Hague grew in stature after losing the populist leader slot.
When people lose, they are simply seen as less of a threat, particularly if they lighten up a bit and it's fairly clear they aren't coming back. A lot of ex-leaders follow that pattern (Major, May, Bush etc). Not everyone does, but a lot do.
I'd also quibble with "populist" as a description of Hague. He was really a pretty conventional Tory politician. He was never pretending to be the maverick outsider taking on the establishment - he was, and didn't really try that much to hide being, an Oxbridge career politician. Sure, he did a bit of the old grammar school boy, Yorkshire lad, 16 pints blarney, but every politician does that sort of thing to soften the edges.
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
As an individual voter I would like my vote to reflect my nuanced opinions. With FPTP I am forced to game the system and choose to vote against my least favourite choice rather than for my favourite so as to avoid wasting my vote. STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count. So, yes it would help.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
HYUFD will be pleased. The Conservatives easily held Epping Forest, with just one loss. The Conservatives have been doing really rather well in Essex, this time.
There will still be some awful Conservative results to come, but I think the losses will be around 800, rather than 1,000 +.
As far as I can google, he held his seat – although not clear whether it was up for election this time.
Unless I have got this wrong (and I may well have) hyufd was standing in an Epping Forest District seat. I believe it was a Conservative held seat. He lost it to the LDs. Very close, only 20 vote.
I won't say which one as although he has outed himself here I won't.
I believe previously he has said he is/was a parish/town councillor. No idea if that is still the case.
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
Completely missing the point. It's not the voting system that makes people who would make good MPs look at the way that MPs in general get treated and think "fuck that for a game of soldiers".
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss?
This sounds a bit like the logic behind trial by drowning. Either admit its Mr X posting and validate the doxxing when they want to be anonymous or accept there is no issue and let the doxxing attempt continue.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
I think it’s fair to say Labour still has a Black Country problem.
Yes. Odd one. Any theories?
Age and home ownership - and possibly a bit of Long Corbyn, though I suspect that’s a very minor factor.
The Black Country has had an edge through the mists of time. Peter Griffiths's Smethwick by election victory in 1964, unfortunately explains part of the problem.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
It’s great that Barty has come over from the dark side. Ultimately he favours some vague sentiment in favour of economic growth, over Brexit purism.
I’m pleased to hear the Lib Dems are the party of growth. They had hidden it well I thought behind demands for ever growing windfall taxes (I suppose that’s growth of sorts) that ultimately makes BP and Shell think “uh, you do realise most of our profits aren’t generated in the UK and if you are going to screw us then maybe we move our HQ and listings?”
But then maybe they will get growth through building millions of houses, loudly announced on the Today programme whilst constituency candidates promise their nimby electorate that they clearly don’t mean they will be building anywhere near the constituency.
I must pay more attention and find out their other genius plans for growth.
Note: this is not saying any of the other parties have serious workable plans for growth either.
My post was clumsily worded. Barty is looking for pro-growth and pro-aspiration policy, and the Tories gave up on that a long time ago.
I accept and am disappointed by the lack of Lib Dem vision on this.
Fair enough however out of Sunak, Starmer and Davies who do Barty and others think is more likely, once sanity has returned to the public finances after the next GE, to pivot to a low tax, pro growth and pro aspiration approach because my money would definitely be on Sunak.
Does anyone believe that once there is room for tax and spending cuts that Labour or Lib Dem will do that or will they keep the receipts for government splurging?
It is a joy to have a day on PB post-elections. This place is great anyway, but on a day like this the mixture of insight, speculation and jubilant/forlorn partisanship is unequalled anywhere else in the internet. Thanks @MikeSmithson@TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000.
Sky News: Tories making gains from Labour in Stockton, against expectations. Interesting.
Having run there (and lost) in 2015 and 2019 I am following this with interest. New boundaries in almost all wards, and the Tories appear to have benefitted from the changes.
Assuming that the Tories take control it will be interesting to see what policies they bring in. They have been against all of the things which have transformed the town centre for the better, including the in progress demolition of the old shopping centre and creation of a riverside park. If they just leave a flattened site and do nothing because "we can't afford it" it would be funny.
The ruling Labour group on there deserve to lose. Sadly they are all holding their seats. Arrogant tossers the lot of them.
Just seen that my mate has won his seat on Stockton. My old ward now Labour having finally ousted the mayor for life and the other one who never showed up for anything
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
As an individual voter I would like my vote to reflect my nuanced opinions. With FPTP I am forced to game the system and choose to vote against my least favourite choice rather than for my favourite so as to avoid wasting my vote. STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count. So, yes it would help.
And potentially give more scope for regional interests to have a voice, which would loosen the London lock hold.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
Well who knows without meeting him. Hence 'sounds like' is the right phrasing. But, c'mon, somebody obsessed with 'our culture', feeling it under attack 24/7, forever banging on about immigration and borders, such a person is far more likely than the average bear to be racist. Course they are.
It is a joy to have a day on PB post-elections. This place is great anyway, but on a day like this the mixture of insight, speculation and jubilant/forlorn partisanship is unequalled anywhere else in the internet. Thanks @MikeSmithson@TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000.
I've been doing this since 2006 and it's always fun. Only thing is it distracts me from the day job lol!
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
Completely missing the point. It's not the voting system that makes people who would make good MPs look at the way that MPs in general get treated and think "fuck that for a game of soldiers".
If we paid MPs more we'd get better MPs precisely the same bunch just on more money.
Like local councillors. Even with big increases in allowances since 2000, most of them are still animals or vegetables.
I find most are pretty decent and less partisan than MPs or activists because many are less ambitious and just pootling along. Might be different in more competitive areas.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
No, I'm a doctrinaire democrat. Democracy must be respected. Having voted to leave, it was important we left. We have.
Brexit is no longer an issue for me. We have left, it is done. If a government pledging to rejoin the EU is elected, which I do not see happening to be frank, then that too would be democracy and should also be respected.
I can't imagine either the LDs or Labour wanting to reopen the EU sore at the next election anymore. If they do, and they win, then that's democracy, but I just don't see it happening.
That's my view too. And anyway, I always said I would be happy with "Norway" so if we did ever rejoin the single market I personally would be fine with that.
Trading with Europe but outside all the political nonsense... However, like you say I just don't see Starmer wanting to reopen all of this. He'll tinker at the edges of our relationship with the EU but I think all those remainers that are putting their hopes and dreams in him to basically rejoin us back to the EU are going to be disappointed... which in itself is going to cause a lot of angst for the Labour government IMO.
By the 2029 general election we might actually have specific a REJOIN party emerging.
Surely the Lib Dem’s will take up that spot just as soon as they think they can get away with it? They have form.
Doubt it. Badly burned by 2019 experience - you get nowhere by totally alienating about half the electorate before the campaign even starts.
If rejoining happens, it would be a few decades down the line when a lot of the leavers are in the ground, and a Labour Government or two have gradually moved the UK closer to the EU through various treaties.
There's just not going to be a big Brexit election again in the sense of the last couple.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
I really hope the Tories follow Danjsalt's advice after they get kicked out next year, veer off to the far right, they'll be in the wilderness for years.
All the polls show that immigration and culture wars are not the big issues for most people, despite repeated attempts by right-wing media and the Tories to whip up hysteria about it.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss?
This sounds a bit like the logic behind trial by drowning. Either admit its Mr X posting and validate the doxxing when they want to be anonymous or accept there is no issue and let the doxxing attempt continue.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
I’ve hardly dug out a photograph of them and posted that. Though we’ve seen hot headed posters do that before haven’t we. Or used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster.
What exactly are you accusing me of NOTA? I’m now the Witch Finder General?
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
As an individual voter I would like my vote to reflect my nuanced opinions. With FPTP I am forced to game the system and choose to vote against my least favourite choice rather than for my favourite so as to avoid wasting my vote. STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count. So, yes it would help.
And potentially give more scope for regional interests to have a voice, which would loosen the London lock hold.
Does "London" have a lockhold on the country, or do the "establishment" have a lockhold on the country?
Not really convinced your average middle class Londoner gets a great deal or their wishes inflicted on the shires, let alone your average working class or precariat Londoner of which there are plenty.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
It could try getting a grip on the future.
If AI is on track to destroy millions of jobs in the next few years why do we need migration ?
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
British universities should never have got themselves in a position where they were financially dependent on students from other countries, a lot of them with unsavoury regimes.
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss?
This sounds a bit like the logic behind trial by drowning. Either admit its Mr X posting and validate the doxxing when they want to be anonymous or accept there is no issue and let the doxxing attempt continue.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
I’ve hardly dug out a photograph of them and posted that. Though we’ve seen hot headed posters do that before haven’t we. Or used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster.
What exactly are you accusing me of NOTA? I’m now the Witch Finder General?
For mid-term elections these are roughly what I would expect for any government. Labour are going to win the next general election but it is not looking like a Tory wipe-out. Being there or thereabouts, ideally with Labour a minority government, is probably the ideal situation for the Tories in the long term. Of course, that isn't going to suit a lot of Tory MPs who will lose their seats. I still see the 2024 GE as a "good one to lose".
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
British universities should never have got themselves in a position where they were financially dependent on students from other countries, a lot of them with unsavoury regimes.
HYUFD will be pleased. The Conservatives easily held Epping Forest, with just one loss. The Conservatives have been doing really rather well in Essex, this time.
There will still be some awful Conservative results to come, but I think the losses will be around 800, rather than 1,000 +.
As far as I can google, he held his seat – although not clear whether it was up for election this time.
Unless I have got this wrong (and I may well have) hyufd was standing in an Epping Forest District seat. I believe it was a Conservative held seat. He lost it to the LDs. Very close, only 20 vote.
I won't say which one as although he has outed himself here I won't.
I believe previously he has said he is/was a parish/town councillor. No idea if that is still the case.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread.
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
I think Badenoch is still green, but she is certainly smarter than Leadsom, sharper than Raab, and less loopy and self-regarding than Truss.
Perhaps she is the William Hague de nos jours, who was denounced as a right-wing young fogey back in the late 1990s.
Hague grew in stature after losing the populist leader slot.
When people lose, they are simply seen as less of a threat, particularly if they lighten up a bit and it's fairly clear they aren't coming back. A lot of ex-leaders follow that pattern (Major, May, Bush etc). Not everyone does, but a lot do.
I'd also quibble with "populist" as a description of Hague. He was really a pretty conventional Tory politician. He was never pretending to be the maverick outsider taking on the establishment - he was, and didn't really try that much to hide being, an Oxbridge career politician. Sure, he did a bit of the old grammar school boy, Yorkshire lad, 16 pints blarney, but every politician does that sort of thing to soften the edges.
The baseball cap? The quaffing of pints on telly / tabloids? "Last chance to save the Pound"? His dabbling with law changes in the Tony Martin case? And, IIRC, he was an early adopter of the "migrants coming over here knicking all our jobs and houses" meme (although ably assisted by New Labour in that one)
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
The rumour earlier was that oblivion awaits CON this afternoon...
Places like Wealden, Tewkesbury, Bournemouth will have huge Conservative losses, but in other parts, losses are negligible. Roughly, it looks like the Conservatives are doing better in the East than the West (Black Country excepted)..
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
Outside chance of sub 1000 loses?
Unless there are a higher percentage of losses in the remaining seats, and there is a higher percentage of Tory councillors at the moment, we seem to be on track for something like 750. Which is a lot given their starting point but not the biblical wipeouts of times past.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
Build the houses needed to house the immigrants.
Would that be before building houses for all the homeless brits ?
What about the infrastructure needsd - reservoirs, electric, schools hospitals. Sounds like quite a lot of money.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
When is it obviously published, what we’ve been discussing all week.
If the Tories want to sneak it out there, today would be a great day for burying bad news.
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss?
This sounds a bit like the logic behind trial by drowning. Either admit its Mr X posting and validate the doxxing when they want to be anonymous or accept there is no issue and let the doxxing attempt continue.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
I’ve hardly dug out a photograph of them and posted that. Though we’ve seen hot headed posters do that before haven’t we. Or used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster.
What exactly are you accusing me of NOTA? I’m now the Witch Finder General?
Why do it at all?
Although I tend to the view advanced by the great Nick Palmer when, in days of yore having 'multiple screen names' was seen as a mega-crime on PB: "Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?"
Of course, Nick and Sean were pretty much the only guests who did post in their real names, for which they both deserve great credit.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
Build the houses needed to house the immigrants.
There's an interesting trope/meme on Left Twitter - that no more housing is needed.
This is about the Green agenda meeting the Open Borders agenda. It will be interesting see what happens when reality dawns....
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
Visa issuance and net migration is not the same thing - students, for instance, are assumed to return home at the end of their study so aren’t included in the net figures.
You also need to consider emigration - how could you ignore poor old @Gardenwalker ?
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
As an individual voter I would like my vote to reflect my nuanced opinions. With FPTP I am forced to game the system and choose to vote against my least favourite choice rather than for my favourite so as to avoid wasting my vote. STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count. So, yes it would help.
And potentially give more scope for regional interests to have a voice, which would loosen the London lock hold.
Does "London" have a lockhold on the country, or do the "establishment" have a lockhold on the country?
Not really convinced your average middle class Londoner gets a great deal or their wishes inflicted on the shires, let alone your average working class or precariat Londoner of which there are plenty.
Well it certainly gets the investment, so at least in that sense it does. PR is far from a panacea - no one policy is - but it would at least be an improvement on what we now have, IMO.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
British universities should never have got themselves in a position where they were financially dependent on students from other countries, a lot of them with unsavoury regimes.
Arguably, a lot of universities also - long-term - hurt the economy,
Firstly, because we have so many second-rate ones propped up by foreign students, we have a bunch of under-employed graduates who will never be able to pay back their student debt at a cost to the Government. Such students would have been better off long-term not getting a crap degree.
Secondly, and related, if those people were working, in many cases they would be paying taxes, NI etc. thus helping the coffers.
In effect, the UK is hurting itself so that foreign students can say they have a degree from a UK university.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread...
Don't try to reason with Leon when he's in a mischievous mood. A polite FU suffices.
The Conservatives, since 2017, left no stone unturned, in their determination to trash the brand. Up till 2019, Labour were doing likewise, but the Conservatives carried on.
It remains to be see whether Labour in office will trash their brand.
The behaviour of far too many of the MPs is lamentable.
One would hope a clear out would allow a fresh start but I'm not holding my breath. Some of the biggest wallies hold the safest seats.
This is a general truth.
Actually, if we want better politics, ultimately we need to figure out how to get better MPs.
May I tentatively suggest a better voting system?
I don’t think it helps, honestly.
I think the issue goes back to structural factors relating to candidate appetite, candidate selection, and perhaps also the lockhold London has on the rest of the country.
As an individual voter I would like my vote to reflect my nuanced opinions. With FPTP I am forced to game the system and choose to vote against my least favourite choice rather than for my favourite so as to avoid wasting my vote. STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count. So, yes it would help.
And potentially give more scope for regional interests to have a voice, which would loosen the London lock hold.
Does "London" have a lockhold on the country, or do the "establishment" have a lockhold on the country?
Not really convinced your average middle class Londoner gets a great deal or their wishes inflicted on the shires, let alone your average working class or precariat Londoner of which there are plenty.
The phenomenon which means you need to make your career (in politics, in Treasury, in the professional services, etc) in London.
If anyone is still harbouring any doubts about what Russia would do if it could then watch this video. They really are Nazis wanting to subjugate all of Europe under their control or else destroy it.
Blocked by the Russians on YouTube, watch it here ⤵️
State TV propagandists on Vladimir Solovyov's show blamed Americans for the Kremlin drone "attack" and plotted to use it as a pretext to kill Zelensky, pause elections in Russia and boost military recruitment. https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1654279938495635456
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
Outside chance of sub 1000 loses?
Unless there are a higher percentage of losses in the remaining seats, and there is a higher percentage of Tory councillors at the moment, we seem to be on track for something like 750. Which is a lot given their starting point but not the biblical wipeouts of times past.
I think your maths is wrong - almost exactly 1,000 formerly Tory seats declared so far and net loss running at 324. So looking more like 1,000 losses based on defending 3.365 total.
If you're confident in "something like 750" get onto Betfair exchange quick as over 750 is trading at 1.01 and under at 21, so potentially a great opportunity for you there.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
No, I'm a doctrinaire democrat. Democracy must be respected. Having voted to leave, it was important we left. We have.
Brexit is no longer an issue for me. We have left, it is done. If a government pledging to rejoin the EU is elected, which I do not see happening to be frank, then that too would be democracy and should also be respected.
I can't imagine either the LDs or Labour wanting to reopen the EU sore at the next election anymore. If they do, and they win, then that's democracy, but I just don't see it happening.
That's my view too. And anyway, I always said I would be happy with "Norway" so if we did ever rejoin the single market I personally would be fine with that.
Trading with Europe but outside all the political nonsense... However, like you say I just don't see Starmer wanting to reopen all of this. He'll tinker at the edges of our relationship with the EU but I think all those remainers that are putting their hopes and dreams in him to basically rejoin us back to the EU are going to be disappointed... which in itself is going to cause a lot of angst for the Labour government IMO.
By the 2029 general election we might actually have specific a REJOIN party emerging.
Surely the Lib Dem’s will take up that spot just as soon as they think they can get away with it? They have form.
Doubt it. Badly burned by 2019 experience - you get nowhere by totally alienating about half the electorate before the campaign even starts.
If rejoining happens, it would be a few decades down the line when a lot of the leavers are in the ground, and a Labour Government or two have gradually moved the UK closer to the EU through various treaties.
There's just not going to be a big Brexit election again in the sense of the last couple.
So, you're happy for the UK to decline relative to the EU for the next few decades?
Is this too good to be true (about to be shafted by banking crisis, etc), or is Biden going to have rather a good story to put to the electorate next year ?
Holy moly, we've got another one!
Payrolls grew a huuuuuge +253k in April, well above market expectations. There's no hint of any sort of labor market slowdown in these numbers. Other indicators had been hinting at a slowdown, but these are more reliable. https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1654463816338472960
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
Outside chance of sub 1000 loses?
Unless there are a higher percentage of losses in the remaining seats, and there is a higher percentage of Tory councillors at the moment, we seem to be on track for something like 750. Which is a lot given their starting point but not the biblical wipeouts of times past.
I think your maths is wrong - almost exactly 1,000 formerly Tory seats declared so far and net loss running at 324. So looking more like 1,000 losses based on defending 3.365 total.
If you're confident in "something like 750" get onto Betfair exchange quick as over 750 is trading at 1.01 and under at 21, so potentially a great opportunity for you there.
My maths is we are currently on 96/230 councils declared (roughly 40%). Losses are currently just over 300 x2.5 =750.
But I agree there is more to lose in the remaining councils so the attrition rate may go up. It depends if those areas are as hostile as some of those which have already voted and that might depend on how the LDs do as much as Labour.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread.
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
I find your endless barely-disguised homophobia and transphobia quite distasteful
But it is not for me to prohibit you, nor would i want to. If the mods think it is acceptable, so be it
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
It’s great that Barty has come over from the dark side. Ultimately he favours some vague sentiment in favour of economic growth, over Brexit purism.
I’m pleased to hear the Lib Dems are the party of growth. They had hidden it well I thought behind demands for ever growing windfall taxes (I suppose that’s growth of sorts) that ultimately makes BP and Shell think “uh, you do realise most of our profits aren’t generated in the UK and if you are going to screw us then maybe we move our HQ and listings?”
But then maybe they will get growth through building millions of houses, loudly announced on the Today programme whilst constituency candidates promise their nimby electorate that they clearly don’t mean they will be building anywhere near the constituency.
I must pay more attention and find out their other genius plans for growth.
Note: this is not saying any of the other parties have serious workable plans for growth either.
My post was clumsily worded. Barty is looking for pro-growth and pro-aspiration policy, and the Tories gave up on that a long time ago.
I accept and am disappointed by the lack of Lib Dem vision on this.
Fair enough however out of Sunak, Starmer and Davies who do Barty and others think is more likely, once sanity has returned to the public finances after the next GE, to pivot to a low tax, pro growth and pro aspiration approach because my money would definitely be on Sunak.
Does anyone believe that once there is room for tax and spending cuts that Labour or Lib Dem will do that or will they keep the receipts for government splurging?
Aren’t you begging the question by linking together “low tax”, “pro growth” and “pro aspiration”? Some politicians, typically on the right, believe that low taxes promotes growth, but the evidence that this is the case is questionable.
I am pro growth: I think growth is achieved, in part, through government investment (see Mazzucato, 2011, http://oro.open.ac.uk/30159/1/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf ), functioning public services, sensible regulations, good international relations and free trade. Liz Truss said she was pro growth but wanted less government spending and supported Brexit. We can’t both be right. You can decide for yourself which of us you think is closer (although I would point out that I’ve still got my job and Truss doesn’t!).
The question is not whether Bart is pro-growth, but how he believes low growth can be delivered. Or, put another way, I think Sunak is more likely to cut taxes than Starmer or Davey, but I don’t believe Sunakism in general (which appears to mean NIMBYism + slightly more maths teaching) is going to deliver high growth.
I think Badenoch is still green, but she is certainly smarter than Leadsom, sharper than Raab, and less loopy and self-regarding than Truss.
Perhaps she is the William Hague de nos jours, who was denounced as a right-wing young fogey back in the late 1990s.
Hague grew in stature after losing the populist leader slot.
When people lose, they are simply seen as less of a threat, particularly if they lighten up a bit and it's fairly clear they aren't coming back. A lot of ex-leaders follow that pattern (Major, May, Bush etc). Not everyone does, but a lot do.
I'd also quibble with "populist" as a description of Hague. He was really a pretty conventional Tory politician. He was never pretending to be the maverick outsider taking on the establishment - he was, and didn't really try that much to hide being, an Oxbridge career politician. Sure, he did a bit of the old grammar school boy, Yorkshire lad, 16 pints blarney, but every politician does that sort of thing to soften the edges.
The baseball cap? The quaffing of pints on telly / tabloids? "Last chance to save the Pound"? His dabbling with law changes in the Tony Martin case? And, IIRC, he was an early adopter of the "migrants coming over here knicking all our jobs and houses" meme (although ably assisted by New Labour in that one)
That's simply not what "populist" means, and there are very, very few politicians who don't try to be a bit relatable.
A "populist" is someone who says you're being targeted by establishment elites (the swamp, the blob, call it what you will). It isn't simply someone who is fairly right wing and has a bit of a go (rather an unsuccessful one in Hague's case) at coming across vaguely like a normal person. Indeed, although sometimes they do, often populists DON'T try to come across as normal - they are setting themselves up as saviours.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread.
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
I find your endless barely-disguised homophobia and transphobia quite distasteful
But it is not for me to prohibit you, nor would i want to. If the mods think it is acceptable, so be it
Stupid post. I agree with Bart on few matters. But he is certainly not homophobic. Quite the opposite.
If we paid MPs more we'd get better MPs precisely the same bunch just on more money.
Like local councillors. Even with big increases in allowances since 2000, most of them are still animals or vegetables.
What does your average councillor actually get in terms of money in the bank account, each month - and in terms of expenses?
I genuinely have no idea.
It varies massively (Wales I think is sensible and has a single rate). Some get 6-7k allowance per annum, others 14k+. Not including those with special responsibilities like leaders.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Numbers do matter, whether legal or illegal, but you can't see it because you are an ideologue.
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
Outside chance of sub 1000 loses?
Unless there are a higher percentage of losses in the remaining seats, and there is a higher percentage of Tory councillors at the moment, we seem to be on track for something like 750. Which is a lot given their starting point but not the biblical wipeouts of times past.
I think your maths is wrong - almost exactly 1,000 formerly Tory seats declared so far and net loss running at 324. So looking more like 1,000 losses based on defending 3.365 total.
If you're confident in "something like 750" get onto Betfair exchange quick as over 750 is trading at 1.01 and under at 21, so potentially a great opportunity for you there.
My maths is we are currently on 96/230 councils declared (roughly 40%). Losses are currently just over 300 x2.5 =750.
But I agree there is more to lose in the remaining councils so the attrition rate may go up. It depends if those areas are as hostile as some of those which have already voted and that might depend on how the LDs do as much as Labour.
There's also the fact that more of the shire districts are all-out elections rather than electing by thirds, so for example Exeter only had 13 seats contested, East Devon has 60.
With 40% of councils declared the Tories have lost 300 seats. Maybe the remaining councils have more seats available than the ones so far.
Outside chance of sub 1000 loses?
Unless there are a higher percentage of losses in the remaining seats, and there is a higher percentage of Tory councillors at the moment, we seem to be on track for something like 750. Which is a lot given their starting point but not the biblical wipeouts of times past.
I think your maths is wrong - almost exactly 1,000 formerly Tory seats declared so far and net loss running at 324. So looking more like 1,000 losses based on defending 3.365 total.
If you're confident in "something like 750" get onto Betfair exchange quick as over 750 is trading at 1.01 and under at 21, so potentially a great opportunity for you there.
My maths is we are currently on 96/230 councils declared (roughly 40%). Losses are currently just over 300 x2.5 =750.
But I agree there is more to lose in the remaining councils so the attrition rate may go up. It depends if those areas are as hostile as some of those which have already voted and that might depend on how the LDs do as much as Labour.
Your main mistake there is a lot of councils that declare early elect in thirds (less to count, for a start) and the all-up ones tend to be later, so the number of declared Councils is a misleading measure as quite a few of the already declared councils only had a dozen or so seats up.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
It seems in my local ward not only did I switch from Tory to Lib Dem but plenty of others did too, our incumbent Tory has been ousted and the Lib Dems have won a fairly comprehensive victory.
I don't see any way back to sanity for the Tories under Sunak, and I can't see yet another leadership contest making things better either, so the only question it seems to me now is whether Sunak has a minority or majority government.
Hopefully its a minority government with the Lib Dems as a moderating influence that can lead to a period of good governance as we had in 2010-2015.
You voted Lib Dem?! You do realise they’d have us back in the Single market in a trice
Maybe that’s what you want and fair enough but I thought you were a doctrinaire brexiteer
It’s great that Barty has come over from the dark side. Ultimately he favours some vague sentiment in favour of economic growth, over Brexit purism.
I’m pleased to hear the Lib Dems are the party of growth. They had hidden it well I thought behind demands for ever growing windfall taxes (I suppose that’s growth of sorts) that ultimately makes BP and Shell think “uh, you do realise most of our profits aren’t generated in the UK and if you are going to screw us then maybe we move our HQ and listings?”
But then maybe they will get growth through building millions of houses, loudly announced on the Today programme whilst constituency candidates promise their nimby electorate that they clearly don’t mean they will be building anywhere near the constituency.
I must pay more attention and find out their other genius plans for growth.
Note: this is not saying any of the other parties have serious workable plans for growth either.
My post was clumsily worded. Barty is looking for pro-growth and pro-aspiration policy, and the Tories gave up on that a long time ago.
I accept and am disappointed by the lack of Lib Dem vision on this.
Fair enough however out of Sunak, Starmer and Davies who do Barty and others think is more likely, once sanity has returned to the public finances after the next GE, to pivot to a low tax, pro growth and pro aspiration approach because my money would definitely be on Sunak.
Does anyone believe that once there is room for tax and spending cuts that Labour or Lib Dem will do that or will they keep the receipts for government splurging?
Aren’t you begging the question by linking together “low tax”, “pro growth” and “pro aspiration”? Some politicians, typically on the right, believe that low taxes promotes growth, but the evidence that this is the case is questionable.
I am pro growth: I think growth is achieved, in part, through government investment (see Mazzucato, 2011, http://oro.open.ac.uk/30159/1/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf ), functioning public services, sensible regulations, good international relations and free trade. Liz Truss said she was pro growth but wanted less government spending and supported Brexit. We can’t both be right. You can decide for yourself which of us you think is closer (although I would point out that I’ve still got my job and Truss doesn’t!).
The question is not whether Bart is pro-growth, but how he believes low growth can be delivered. Or, put another way, I think Sunak is more likely to cut taxes than Starmer or Davey, but I don’t believe Sunakism in general (which appears to mean NIMBYism + slightly more maths teaching) is going to deliver high growth.
A wish for slightly more maths teaching without extra funding for maths teachers, a teacher strike and a shortage of maths teachers results in slightly less maths teaching.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
Rishi is hardcore on immigration, so that looks like an excuse - even if they've failed Labour won't be tougher.
“Hardcore”?
You what?? Net migration last year was 500,000 - an all time record - and is now heading for 700,000. The new Sunak Tories have abandoned any attempt to limit legal immigration and seem incapable of dealing will illegal immigration
Many think that’s fine. Fair enough. But I predict that if these figures are sustained migration - once again - will become an enormous issue in the public mind
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
Apparently wrong
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
And there's the problem.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
British universities should never have got themselves in a position where they were financially dependent on students from other countries, a lot of them with unsavoury regimes.
The British government should never have left British universities in a position where they were financially dependent on students from other countries…
The main determinant of university income is government policy. Universities need overseas fees because the government chooses to pay insufficient amounts of money for home fees and research. The government chose to have a university sector funded by overseas fees income.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread.
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
I find your endless barely-disguised homophobia and transphobia quite distasteful
But it is not for me to prohibit you, nor would i want to. If the mods think it is acceptable, so be it
@leon unless I am very badly mistaken that it libellous. I have never seen a single post from @BartholomewRoberts that is either. You should withdraw and apologise.
Is this too good to be true (about to be shafted by banking crisis, etc), or is Biden going to have rather a good story to put to the electorate next year ?
Holy moly, we've got another one!
Payrolls grew a huuuuuge +253k in April, well above market expectations. There's no hint of any sort of labor market slowdown in these numbers. Other indicators had been hinting at a slowdown, but these are more reliable. https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1654463816338472960
The PMIs for the UK, especially in services, are also suggesting significantly higher growth than was forecast along with higher inflation. And if these immigration figures are anywhere near right we have been generating more jobs than we thought.
I am a floating voter - you got my vote in 2019 - I didn't vote this time - you won't stand up for our culture - you do zero about illegal migration - you are flooding the country with legal migration
1/
That just sounds like a racist to me. Decent politicians of any political party don't want that sort of vote.
“Sounds like a racist” - tho there is not actually a single racist statement in his thread. He just “sounds racist” - to you
From the very first Tweet in the thread, the one you linked to: "you are flooding the country with legal migration" is pretty racist. And note, its legal migration he's objecting to.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Yes yes yes. Yawn
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
Eh? I never bring up the trans debate, you do. And that racist weirdo you quoted did in that Twitter thread.
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
I find your endless barely-disguised homophobia and transphobia quite distasteful
But it is not for me to prohibit you, nor would i want to. If the mods think it is acceptable, so be it
I don't agree with much of what Barty says but I have never seen any homophobia or transphobia from him, barely-diguised or otherwise.
There is a poster on here who is frequently exhibiting barely-disguised racism though, someone who ramps up xenophobic tweeters.
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss?
This sounds a bit like the logic behind trial by drowning. Either admit its Mr X posting and validate the doxxing when they want to be anonymous or accept there is no issue and let the doxxing attempt continue.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
I’ve hardly dug out a photograph of them and posted that. Though we’ve seen hot headed posters do that before haven’t we. Or used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster.
What exactly are you accusing me of NOTA? I’m now the Witch Finder General?
Why do it at all?
Although I tend to the view advanced by the great Nick Palmer when, in days of yore having 'multiple screen names' was seen as a mega-crime on PB: "Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?"
Of course, Nick and Sean were pretty much the only guests who did post in their real names, for which they both deserve great credit.
I post with my real one on ConHome, but I’m thinking of changing that.
I really don’t want to do actual doxing, or wind someone up so they are upset like this. I havn’t used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster. Is that actual doxxing? Or just someone having an unnecessary tantrum?
Labour gained eight seats on Swindon council. Looking at it, by convincing leads too.
Can Labour now take both Westminster seats? The maths looks challenging looking at the majorities.
The Tory vote did not collapse in all the seats, so holding one seems viable.
But in fact it will be three by the next election and one will have rural hinterland.
Not convinced LAB will have much joy in Swindon next time. Maybe if one of the new seats is focussed on the town centre? (I haven't seen the proposed new boundaries).
Comments
Tsk
Barty is looking for pro-growth and pro-aspiration policy, and the Tories gave up on that a long time ago.
I accept and am disappointed by the lack of Lib Dem vision on this.
If it’s not you, then it’s not remotely close to doxing you is it, in which case why all the fuss? 🤷♀️
I would also not be doxing you as who you REALLY ARE, merely suggesting you sound like someone who used to post. Is doxing really the right word for that?
It would be something the ban hammer would fall frequently, as there is regular such discussions.
But you can't see it, because you are yourself a racist.
Net migration was unusually high in 2022, as several factors came together at once, including the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian route for Hong Kong British National Overseas (BNO) status holders. Increased net migration in this period was not primarily the result of the post-Brexit immigration system that replaced free movement.
500,000 net migrants is the highest ever recorded in UK history. Some predict 2023 could see 700,000-1m. See Robert Colville in the Times
You’re just a weirdo provincial dweeb who hates trans people
It’s appears to be a conscious policy choice as one of the few levers left available to the government to crank growth.
Braverman is against it, and there have been vigorous “debates” behind scenes.
When we talk if immigration we need to distinguish between legal and illegal immigration.
I do think voting reform would help though. How is ok for one Party to win 15% of the national vote and yet return only one MP? We need to sort that, but I doubt it will happen in my lifetime.
Assuming that the Tories take control it will be interesting to see what policies they bring in. They have been against all of the things which have transformed the town centre for the better, including the in progress demolition of the old shopping centre and creation of a riverside park. If they just leave a flattened site and do nothing because "we can't afford it" it would be funny.
The ruling Labour group on there deserve to lose. Sadly they are all holding their seats. Arrogant tossers the lot of them.
I'd also quibble with "populist" as a description of Hague. He was really a pretty conventional Tory politician. He was never pretending to be the maverick outsider taking on the establishment - he was, and didn't really try that much to hide being, an Oxbridge career politician. Sure, he did a bit of the old grammar school boy, Yorkshire lad, 16 pints blarney, but every politician does that sort of thing to soften the edges.
STV in multi-member constituencies would allow us all to vote to get what we want and for that vote to count.
So, yes it would help.
“the main driver is a huge post-pandemic surge in the numbers arriving to work and study, which rose from 239,000 and 435,000 in 2021 to 423,000 and 626,000 in 2022. Both are record highs, by a very long way.”
I won't say which one as although he has outed himself here I won't.
I believe previously he has said he is/was a parish/town councillor. No idea if that is still the case.
It's a fairly simple rule whether one agrees with it or not. Hardly difficult to comply.
Does anyone believe that once there is room for tax and spending cuts that Labour or Lib Dem will do that or will they keep the receipts for government splurging?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/results
If rejoining happens, it would be a few decades down the line when a lot of the leavers are in the ground, and a Labour Government or two have gradually moved the UK closer to the EU through various treaties.
There's just not going to be a big Brexit election again in the sense of the last couple.
All the polls show that immigration and culture wars are not the big issues for most people, despite repeated attempts by right-wing media and the Tories to whip up hysteria about it.
People coming to UK universities to study is a decent money spinner for the country- quite a few unis would collapse without huge international fee income.
People coming to the UK to work props up the economy. Maybe it shouldn't be necessary to import people to keep the plates spinning, but it's where the UK is right now.
So, if the realistic choice is accept hefty migration or be poorer, what's a nation to do?
What exactly are you accusing me of NOTA? I’m now the Witch Finder General?
Not really convinced your average middle class Londoner gets a great deal or their wishes inflicted on the shires, let alone your average working class or precariat Londoner of which there are plenty.
Remember that those that elect in thirds tend to declare earlier than all up areas.
If AI is on track to destroy millions of jobs in the next few years why do we need migration ?
As far as I'm concerned let people be who they are and so long as it doesn't violate any safeguarding call them by what they want to be called.
If you want to be called Leah or Leon, we should all call you whatever you choose to be known as.
"Britain Elects
@BritainElects
Middleton Park (Leeds) council election result:
SDP: 46.0% (+22.2)
LAB: 36.8% (-6.0)
CON: 8.7% (+2.7)
GRN: 4.3% (-0.6)
LDEM: 2.0% (-1.2)
SDP GAIN from Labour."
What about the infrastructure needsd - reservoirs, electric, schools hospitals. Sounds like quite a lot of money.
If the Tories want to sneak it out there, today would be a great day for burying bad news.
Although I tend to the view advanced by the great Nick Palmer when, in days of yore having 'multiple screen names' was seen as a mega-crime on PB: "Who cares if one anonymous poster returns as another anonymous poster?"
Of course, Nick and Sean were pretty much the only guests who did post in their real names, for which they both deserve great credit.
This is about the Green agenda meeting the Open Borders agenda. It will be interesting see what happens when reality dawns....
You also need to consider emigration - how could you ignore poor old @Gardenwalker ?
Her: "I'm looking for an SDP mug"
Him: "You've found one."
PR is far from a panacea - no one policy is - but it would at least be an improvement on what we now have, IMO.
Firstly, because we have so many second-rate ones propped up by foreign students, we have a bunch of under-employed graduates who will never be able to pay back their student debt at a cost to the Government. Such students would have been better off long-term not getting a crap degree.
Secondly, and related, if those people were working, in many cases they would be paying taxes, NI etc. thus helping the coffers.
In effect, the UK is hurting itself so that foreign students can say they have a degree from a UK university.
(Thought I'd get that in before anyone else)
A polite FU suffices.
Blocked by the Russians on YouTube, watch it here ⤵️
State TV propagandists on Vladimir Solovyov's show blamed Americans for the Kremlin drone "attack" and plotted to use it as a pretext to kill Zelensky, pause elections in Russia and boost military recruitment.
https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1654279938495635456
If you're confident in "something like 750" get onto Betfair exchange quick as over 750 is trading at 1.01 and under at 21, so potentially a great opportunity for you there.
Holy moly, we've got another one!
Payrolls grew a huuuuuge +253k in April, well above market expectations. There's no hint of any sort of labor market slowdown in these numbers. Other indicators had been hinting at a slowdown, but these are more reliable.
https://twitter.com/JustinWolfers/status/1654463816338472960
Can Labour now take both Westminster seats? The maths looks challenging looking at the majorities.
I genuinely have no idea.
But I agree there is more to lose in the remaining councils so the attrition rate may go up. It depends if those areas are as hostile as some of those which have already voted and that might depend on how the LDs do as much as Labour.
But it is not for me to prohibit you, nor would i want to. If the mods think it is acceptable, so be it
But in fact it will be three by the next election and one will have rural hinterland.
I am pro growth: I think growth is achieved, in part, through government investment (see Mazzucato, 2011, http://oro.open.ac.uk/30159/1/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf ), functioning public services, sensible regulations, good international relations and free trade. Liz Truss said she was pro growth but wanted less government spending and supported Brexit. We can’t both be right. You can decide for yourself which of us you think is closer (although I would point out that I’ve still got my job and Truss doesn’t!).
The question is not whether Bart is pro-growth, but how he believes low growth can be delivered. Or, put another way, I think Sunak is more likely to cut taxes than Starmer or Davey, but I don’t believe Sunakism in general (which appears to mean NIMBYism + slightly more maths teaching) is going to deliver high growth.
A "populist" is someone who says you're being targeted by establishment elites (the swamp, the blob, call it what you will). It isn't simply someone who is fairly right wing and has a bit of a go (rather an unsuccessful one in Hague's case) at coming across vaguely like a normal person. Indeed, although sometimes they do, often populists DON'T try to come across as normal - they are setting themselves up as saviours.
The main determinant of university income is government policy. Universities need overseas fees because the government chooses to pay insufficient amounts of money for home fees and research. The government chose to have a university sector funded by overseas fees income.
There is a poster on here who is frequently exhibiting barely-disguised racism though, someone who ramps up xenophobic tweeters.
I really don’t want to do actual doxing, or wind someone up so they are upset like this. I havn’t used their actual name. Merely said you remind me of a much missed former poster. Is that actual doxxing? Or just someone having an unnecessary tantrum?