At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?
I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
I'm not going as far as 46 for the Lib Dems, but they have a chance of rebuilding the Yellow Wall through Cornwall, Devon and Somerset that they used to have prior to 2015. It's not outside probability to have 12 seats just in those 3 counties.
I'd be surprised by that, but the Lib Dem results in Devon this year and Somerset last year were strikingly good. Cornwall was dismal, though, in 2021.
The Tiverton by-election may well have been the shot in the arm they needed there, and it does open up another front in addition to the stockbroker belt, where I have a suspicion that Sunak will ultimately steady the ship even though the results today are pretty poor for the blues.
There seems little evidence today of Sunak appealing to the Stockbroker belt, nor to the Red Wall for that matter.
Sunak = toast.
Yep I think this is the real problem. He falls between two stools.
He is nothing to anyone.
At risk of running counter to the hubristic glee of the left, this was a local election, not a general. People vote differently.
Not long ago on PB Sunak was written off, had missed his chance, would never be PM.
Before that Labour were going to be out of power for another 10 years.
I would wait till after the nex5 election to judge Sunak fairly.
Could we a Tory blue wall collapse to the yellows. What this election has done is clarify who the anti Tory challenger is.
Was it that hard to guess already?
Parliamentary by-election results show voters are able to figure out who the best challenger is, even if it is the party in a distant third place, without any help from local elections or parties.
If this pattern is maintained in the general election it could be delicious.
It used to be one of England's most corrupt councils.
And that's REALLY saying something!
But how so, specifically? Dubious planning? Crony contracting? Dodgy personnel and/or bookkeeping?
It was notorious in the locality that planning permission was bought and sold.
At officer level or councillor, out of interest?
There is huge scope for it in some places and I am sure it goes on. Some of it is semi-official - the Chair of Planning at a nearby Council to me was declaring lavish hospitality left, right and centre (miles in excess of any other councillor - I mean VIP Cup Final tickets, a new conservatory and all that jazz compared with someone at some point picking up the bill for a pub lunch for Cllr Bloggs). Ultimately the Council Leader had to take him in hand as it was ridiculous. Technically, I think he was possibly not committing a breach as long as the developer didn't have a plan in at the specific time and didn't actually say "look, councillor, here's the dealio...", but it was mad and corrupt in the ordinary meaning of the term.
This is going back to the Seventies, and involved both councillors and officers.
Vale looks very good indeed for us (and the Greens)
Well done, who is us!?
Sorry - Lib Dems. We've held on to all of our gains from last time so far (despite it looking like a freak result in 2019) and even made further gains. Greens have taken out other Tories; they look to be becoming the official Opposition.
When we walked into the hall four years ago, the Tories were defending 29 seats out of 38. They were reduced to 6 four years ago and may end up with none after today.
Vale of White Horse, I assume? Went to have a look and yes, that does indeed look like a massacre. I noticed earlier that you guys have come close to a lock-out in St Albans; these results look similarly emphatic.
Yup. There's been quite a swing around these parts. We've also made it to a majority on South Oxfordshire - going into the election four years ago, we had only one seat there and the Tories had 33 out of 36. They have been smashed there as well.
2019 was an asteroid strike here for the Tories. This year has been the Deccan Traps.
You know more than I do Andy but my understanding is that there is a lot of anger in that part of Oxfordshire about fields been lost to housing and the Tories are blamed for this. Is that fair?
The Green surge in Suffolk is the most unexpected and interesting development for me. I thought the consensus view was the Greens were the Party of the highly educated moneyed urban hipster? Apparently not.
I think a lot of rural voters think they are a cuddly party which looks after the environment.
Silly mistake, of course, but if you're not paying attention, the name 'Green' might give you that impression.
I find a few fascinating possibilities with this - either some places are going to find a rude shock as it turns out the inoffensive Green they elected is actually a far left radical obsessed with a lot more than just Green matters (yes, not every Green is like that, but the party as a whole in its presentation and leadership does trend very left). Or we may see the development of a more conservative Green faction, as less economically radical but still Green figures, less shocking to the placid shires, grow in influence.
Sky national vote projection, just reported on Sky News:
LAB 36% CON 29% LD 18% OTH 17%
Seats
LAB 298 CON 238 LD 39 OTH 75
I suspect (but don't know for sure) that some/many of the OTH seats are SNP for the same reasons as posted earlier, so real position could be better for LAB
Take 15 or so off the others and 10 off the Lib Dems and give them to Lab and that looks to be a plausible outcome IMHO.
Labour 323 - Talk about nip and tuck for a majority lol!
Technically it would be a HP, but they would have a majority in practice given the SF abstentions.
That's what I mean. Proper nip and tuck. How exciting would that election night be lol?
On track for the best result: Labour needing LD support but not SNP etc.
As a non expert on the maths, the fact that LDs come out of this with notional vote share of 20% suggests that all this is a unicorn. They don't get that sort of figure in GEs.
If of course the GE turned into a genuine tactical voting fest - like a nationwide by election - to get the Tories out and Lab/LD in, it could get interesting.
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/
Sounds like he wants the BNP. The Tories are better off without him.
No. I follow him on Twitter and he’s a pretty standard right wing Thatcherite who wants lower immigration and hates Wokeness. I’ve never encountered a single racist sentiment from his account
These people - probably @Luckyguy1983 is the closest to him on here - feel that the Tory party has deserted them. They will sit on their hands in 2024, exacerbating defeat
Good.
And no offence intended, but I take your view of what is "standard right wing" with a massive grain of salt. With all due respect, you and Putinguy represent some of the very worst of right wing politics on this site, so what you consider to be standard and what I do are fairly different.
Yeah, but you’re actually insane, so there’s that
I don't feel that the Tory Party as such has deserted me - I feel that a small group of politicians with an agenda that directly contradicts Toryism are squatting at the top of the party, telling it that it needs them to get elected. The Labour Party is in a similar position. Actually, neither party needs these ludicrous faux-competent suits to get elected - on the contrary, there is close to zero public demand for eco-authoritarianism, and what benighted fools do subscribe to this agenda are well catered for by the Green and Lib Dem Parties. It is obvious to me that most Conservative MPs and practically all the rank and file are deeply uncomfortable with Hunt/Sunak's agenda.
Redwood also nails this sentiment in his blog about the locals:
"My advice to the leader is to understand these were Conservative voters. It is unlikely adopting more Labour or Lib Dem policies will win them back. The political market for those who want a faster drive to net zero, who want higher taxes, who want more subsidies and interventions in business, who want rent controls and more migrants, who want to import more and make less here is highly congested. Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Plaid and others are all jostling to offer a bigger state, more money taken from those who work hard and who save, more directions over how we should travel, what we should eat and how we should pass our time. There is no point in Conservatives trying to compete for that part of the electorate."
What is the point of Rishi/Hunts crappy sellout agenda? Piss off to Palm Springs and let someone run the country who wants to do something more than run it into the ground.
Without being unkind, you've been in power for the last 13 years and through three or four different incarnations as you've sought to renew yourselves within office which never really works.
The stock response when things go badly is "be more Conservative" but you've tried that - you've tried One Nation, you've tried populism - perhaps the truth is people are tired of Conservatives and the Conservative Party and want a different set of people governing them.
It's just 'one more heave' as applied from the right.
Or a variant of the Corbynite solution to go yet further left(or right in this case) because clearly that's what people want.
Could we a Tory blue wall collapse to the yellows. What this election has done is clarify who the anti Tory challenger is.
Was it that hard to guess already?
Parliamentary by-election results show voters are able to figure out who the best challenger is, even if it is the party in a distant third place, without any help from local elections or parties.
The Lib Dems were so badly mauled in 2015 that voters in many areas might be forgiven, come a GE, for not being sure which hopeless and very distant challenger to the incumbent Tory would be the one to back (or even if it was worth bothering even to try.) In many areas, if there is an obvious choice for tactical voters to turf out the sitting Conservative then these elections may have helped to clarify matters.
FWIW, where I live the parliamentary seat straddles two hung district council areas and whether to go Lab or LD is still about as clear as mud, so our local Tory MP (who made it through 1997 with some room to spare, and would probably survive a nuclear holocaust) should still be safe.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
Just seen that. Amazing result and the Tories deserve every bit of pain this causes. I was enraged at having to.pay 3.20 to park.in Denne Road car park for an hour... you have to.pay for two because the wardens are like hornets and you cannot risk overruning.
Those like me who failed to vote can now see what the Lib Dems will do. We may suffer for our lethargy.
Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?
I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
I'm not going as far as 46 for the Lib Dems, but they have a chance of rebuilding the Yellow Wall through Cornwall, Devon and Somerset that they used to have prior to 2015. It's not outside probability to have 12 seats just in those 3 counties.
I'd be surprised by that, but the Lib Dem results in Devon this year and Somerset last year were strikingly good. Cornwall was dismal, though, in 2021.
The Tiverton by-election may well have been the shot in the arm they needed there, and it does open up another front in addition to the stockbroker belt, where I have a suspicion that Sunak will ultimately steady the ship even though the results today are pretty poor for the blues.
There seems little evidence today of Sunak appealing to the Stockbroker belt, nor to the Red Wall for that matter.
Sunak = toast.
Yep I think this is the real problem. He falls between two stools.
He is nothing to anyone.
At risk of running counter to the hubristic glee of the left, this was a local election, not a general. People vote differently.
Not long ago on PB Sunak was written off, had missed his chance, would never be PM.
Before that Labour were going to be out of power for another 10 years.
I would wait till after the nex5 election to judge Sunak fairly.
Unless the Tories lose only 1 seat per council left to declare they are breaking 1000 very shortly. And Labour creeping over 500 to boot, nice round figures to set narratives.
Could we a Tory blue wall collapse to the yellows. What this election has done is clarify who the anti Tory challenger is.
The Greens edged the Tories by 28% to 27% in the votes for Forest of Dean district council. The Westminster constituency currently covers the council and an additional ward from Tewkesbury. Worth the Greens making it a target for the next GE, perhaps?
So is the consensus... bad for tories but maybe not quite good enough for labour?
No. Not from me.
The NEV with its seat protection of Labour under 300. This calculation is on the basis of 20% Lib Dem vote, 39 Lib Dem’s, and % green have today, all voting as they did today in next years GE. This Westminster seat projection has no lab Lib green helping each other out at all, anywhere. It’s a seething volcanic mountain of LLG that will vote just as it did today in a GE.
It is a NEV, a seat model projection with zero tactical voting built into it.
Come on. Let’s all be grown up and professional about this. We are PB. We know exactly how this cartridge of results sets up next years GE and what is going to happen. 😇
Anyway. I’m signing off. My other half is getting ready, and wants me to get ready, we are going out to stand out all night and bag our spot. The atmosphere is going to be brilliant out there on the street tonight and tomorrow.
I’m going to close the pad now.
Enjoy the weekend 🙋♀️
God save the King!
I'm clearly being thick here... and he should obviously enjoy the weekend... but he means Lab majority gonna happen right?
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/
Sounds like he wants the BNP. The Tories are better off without him.
No. I follow him on Twitter and he’s a pretty standard right wing Thatcherite who wants lower immigration and hates Wokeness. I’ve never encountered a single racist sentiment from his account
These people - probably @Luckyguy1983 is the closest to him on here - feel that the Tory party has deserted them. They will sit on their hands in 2024, exacerbating defeat
Good.
And no offence intended, but I take your view of what is "standard right wing" with a massive grain of salt. With all due respect, you and Putinguy represent some of the very worst of right wing politics on this site, so what you consider to be standard and what I do are fairly different.
Yeah, but you’re actually insane, so there’s that
I don't feel that the Tory Party as such has deserted me - I feel that a small group of politicians with an agenda that directly contradicts Toryism are squatting at the top of the party, telling it that it needs them to get elected. The Labour Party is in a similar position. Actually, neither party needs these ludicrous faux-competent suits to get elected - on the contrary, there is close to zero public demand for eco-authoritarianism, and what benighted fools do subscribe to this agenda are well catered for by the Green and Lib Dem Parties. It is obvious to me that most Conservative MPs and practically all the rank and file are deeply uncomfortable with Hunt/Sunak's agenda.
Redwood also nails this sentiment in his blog about the locals:
"My advice to the leader is to understand these were Conservative voters. It is unlikely adopting more Labour or Lib Dem policies will win them back. The political market for those who want a faster drive to net zero, who want higher taxes, who want more subsidies and interventions in business, who want rent controls and more migrants, who want to import more and make less here is highly congested. Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Plaid and others are all jostling to offer a bigger state, more money taken from those who work hard and who save, more directions over how we should travel, what we should eat and how we should pass our time. There is no point in Conservatives trying to compete for that part of the electorate."
What is the point of Rishi/Hunts crappy sellout agenda? Piss off to Palm Springs and let someone run the country who wants to do something more than run it into the ground.
The Overton Window has shifted. There are very few votes left in promulgating a small state.
We have ever-increasing taxes because voters want loads of stuff, especially the older ones. Again, we must remember that all of the following is true:
+ Pensioners account for half the entire NHS budget, the bulk of social care costs and, of course, the entirety of the ever-escalating cost of the triple-locked state pension. They also expect never to be asked to pay for anything, so all the money for their upkeep has to be extracted through continually rising taxes on commerce and on the incomes of working-age taxpayers + You can't extract any more money from the nation's extraordinary massive store of property wealth to get around that problem either, because the large bulk of it is in the hands of older people, who expect to be able to enjoy their estates untroubled for the remainder of their lives and then pass their value on intact to their heirs when they snuff it + About a third of the entire electorate is aged over 65, and a full half over 55, so they grey vote is too massive to be easily defied
Oh, and, largely through an epidemic of poverty that leaves many people unable to afford to eat anything but cheap ultra-processed rubbish, the nation is also literally groaning and collapsing under the weight of millions of fatties, who also end up costing gargantuan sums in healthcare, sickness and disability benefits.
In short, Government has an immense burden of unproductive people to look after, and it can only pay to look after them by taxing the remaining productive elements of the economy, because going after the assets of the wealthy has become politically impossible. Which is why the UK is irretrievably and completely fucked. And also why the probability of any party promising low taxes coming to power is precisely nil.
Sorry.
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage."
So is the consensus... bad for tories but maybe not quite good enough for labour?
For me the key takeaway is the revival of the Lib Dem vote in the south more than anything. It heralds the return of the anti-Tory tactical vote. That combined with encouraging (if not dramatic) Labour successes will see Starmer into Number 10 next year, the question is whether he will have a majority or not.
Barring seismic events, Starmer will be our next PM.
Lib Dems have won a lot of seats... not far off Labour. Not sure whether they'll get the headlines but very impressive
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
As far as I recall only one poster on here has predicted a Labour landslide. I do think they are likely to gain a majority but only a slim one, and they could quite possibly fall short, or alternatively do a bit better. I would say a Labour landslide or Tories biggest party are both unlikely outcomes.
The way to do Brexit was to do a practical deal, clear it quickly out the way, and move back rapidly to economic prosperity and reform.
Instead, they descended into dogma, ideology, incompetence and venality.
Were too busy fighting an internal ideological battle to think about next steps. Who knows, without Covid maybe they would have finally gotten their shit together, with Brexit out the way. Though given the personality of the administration probably not.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
Sunak is not in peril. Tory MPs have been nervous and unhappy for quite some time now, this won't change things.
There isn't a magic bullet left to shoot. The idea of defenestrating another leader likely for the birds. As a poster said upthread, there comes a point where the captain has to go down with the ship.
The Green surge in Suffolk is the most unexpected and interesting development for me. I thought the consensus view was the Greens were the Party of the highly educated moneyed urban hipster? Apparently not.
I think a lot of rural voters think they are a cuddly party which looks after the environment.
Silly mistake, of course, but if you're not paying attention, the name 'Green' might give you that impression.
Some of them genuinely are cuddly types and (aside from a keen focus on environmentalism) weirdly centrist, particularly in the rural areas.
The urban members and the party leadership are generally the nutty activist types however.
My local Green* is a strident eco-authoritarian. That's where the Green Party should be pitching.
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/
Sounds like he wants the BNP. The Tories are better off without him.
No. I follow him on Twitter and he’s a pretty standard right wing Thatcherite who wants lower immigration and hates Wokeness. I’ve never encountered a single racist sentiment from his account
These people - probably @Luckyguy1983 is the closest to him on here - feel that the Tory party has deserted them. They will sit on their hands in 2024, exacerbating defeat
Good.
And no offence intended, but I take your view of what is "standard right wing" with a massive grain of salt. With all due respect, you and Putinguy represent some of the very worst of right wing politics on this site, so what you consider to be standard and what I do are fairly different.
Yeah, but you’re actually insane, so there’s that
I don't feel that the Tory Party as such has deserted me - I feel that a small group of politicians with an agenda that directly contradicts Toryism are squatting at the top of the party, telling it that it needs them to get elected. The Labour Party is in a similar position. Actually, neither party needs these ludicrous faux-competent suits to get elected - on the contrary, there is close to zero public demand for eco-authoritarianism, and what benighted fools do subscribe to this agenda are well catered for by the Green and Lib Dem Parties. It is obvious to me that most Conservative MPs and practically all the rank and file are deeply uncomfortable with Hunt/Sunak's agenda.
Redwood also nails this sentiment in his blog about the locals:
"My advice to the leader is to understand these were Conservative voters. It is unlikely adopting more Labour or Lib Dem policies will win them back. The political market for those who want a faster drive to net zero, who want higher taxes, who want more subsidies and interventions in business, who want rent controls and more migrants, who want to import more and make less here is highly congested. Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Plaid and others are all jostling to offer a bigger state, more money taken from those who work hard and who save, more directions over how we should travel, what we should eat and how we should pass our time. There is no point in Conservatives trying to compete for that part of the electorate."
What is the point of Rishi/Hunts crappy sellout agenda? Piss off to Palm Springs and let someone run the country who wants to do something more than run it into the ground.
It's a shame that John Redwood didn't win either of the Tory leadership elections he stood in. He could have brought events forward by 20 or 25 years.
Redwood is much better on policy than he is on politics.
I wish he was. If there were a Toryism plan which could: reduce the state, abolish inflation, build houses where needed but not near Tory voters, make life liveable for for poor, cut taxes, abolish non-jobs, arrange health care well, pay off the debt, abolish the deficit, encourage industrialisation, pay decent pensions, be a big cheese in the world, be both in and out of the single market, not trash the country and win the next election...Rishi wants to hear from you.
Truss was Redwood in action. How did that get on?
Not the case. Redwood advised a fully-costed budget - at some point Truss was persuaded to go with Kwasi's eventual approach.
Could we a Tory blue wall collapse to the yellows. What this election has done is clarify who the anti Tory challenger is.
The Greens edged the Tories by 28% to 27% in the votes for Forest of Dean district council. The Westminster constituency currently covers the council and an additional ward from Tewkesbury. Worth the Greens making it a target for the next GE, perhaps?
Worth a try - even where they have strong council results they probably won't get much of a look in, but it at least gives them so local relevance to try, and a way to identify good targets.
Labour will be riding high enough they won't need to cut a deal anywhere, but maybe they can do another one with the LDs.
Before getting carried away, remember that Labour won 24% in 2008, and 21% in 2009. But, in 2010, they still got 255 seats. One can assume on these results, the Conservatives should achieve something similar.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
I'm really happy if the erroneous Thrasher NEV gets repeated all the way from now until the GE. Why? Because it will suit Labour admirably for people to think they may fall short and that every vote will count.
I am more than ever convinced after today of a Labour landslide. The Lab + LibDem vote share is in the mid 50's.
The Thrasher NEV is so full of holes. The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.
Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.
That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.
So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.
Throw Scotland and London into the mix, the former completely discounted by Thrasher, and you start to see just one of the problems with his NEV. For instance, 20 gains for Labour in Scotland is now a real possibility.
The tories are in the 20's which is where every national opinion poll has them and just today Omnisiss, who correctly got the 9% local election lead spot on, has the national lead at 21%.
The way to do Brexit was to do a practical deal, clear it quickly out the way, and move back rapidly to economic prosperity and reform.
Instead, they descended into dogma, ideology, incompetence and venality.
Were too busy fighting an internal ideological battle to think about next steps. Who knows, without Covid maybe they would have finally gotten their shit together, with Brexit out the way. Though given the personality of the administration probably not.
More fundamental than that.
Going back decades, the UK has struggled with the "give something, get something" nature of Euronegotiations. The only way to get the degree of freedom the UK craved (and probably the only way to justify the faff) was to accept the degree of separation and bordering that we ended up with.
And deep down, I'm not sure that we've fully intenalised this yet.
The Green surge in Suffolk is the most unexpected and interesting development for me. I thought the consensus view was the Greens were the Party of the highly educated moneyed urban hipster? Apparently not.
I think a lot of rural voters think they are a cuddly party which looks after the environment.
Silly mistake, of course, but if you're not paying attention, the name 'Green' might give you that impression.
I find a few fascinating possibilities with this - either some places are going to find a rude shock as it turns out the inoffensive Green they elected is actually a far left radical obsessed with a lot more than just Green matters (yes, not every Green is like that, but the party as a whole in its presentation and leadership does trend very left). Or we may see the development of a more conservative Green faction, as less economically radical but still Green figures, less shocking to the placid shires, grow in influence.
If the greens experience in Solihull is anything to go by, these blue/greens are vulnerable to tying themselves in knots and/or tearing themselves apart over the trans issue.
Also, sexual harassment/personal conduct.
The red/greens are like a purity cult on this sort of stuff.
298 seats for Labour and 39 odd for the Lib Dems would be a great Government. Yes please!
Well that's no guarantee. I quite liked the Coalition, despite some missteps, but plenty of people who voted LD did not agree.
And I don't think being more 'natural' bedfellows would make it that much easier - there's a reason the two are not formally aligned, and why former Tories are often more comfortable switching to one than the other.
Before getting carried away, remember that Labour won 24% in 2008, and 21% in 2009. But, in 2010, they still got 255 seats. One can assume on these results, the Conservatives should achieve something similar.
You've gone for a should when a could would be better.
The Green surge in Suffolk is the most unexpected and interesting development for me. I thought the consensus view was the Greens were the Party of the highly educated moneyed urban hipster? Apparently not.
I think a lot of rural voters think they are a cuddly party which looks after the environment.
Silly mistake, of course, but if you're not paying attention, the name 'Green' might give you that impression.
I find a few fascinating possibilities with this - either some places are going to find a rude shock as it turns out the inoffensive Green they elected is actually a far left radical obsessed with a lot more than just Green matters (yes, not every Green is like that, but the party as a whole in its presentation and leadership does trend very left). Or we may see the development of a more conservative Green faction, as less economically radical but still Green figures, less shocking to the placid shires, grow in influence.
If the greens experience in Solihull is anything to go by, these blue-y greens are vulnerable to tying themselves in knots and/or tearing themselves apart over the trans issue.
The English Greens have been accused of being anti-trans by the Scottish Greens.
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/
Sounds like he wants the BNP. The Tories are better off without him.
No. I follow him on Twitter and he’s a pretty standard right wing Thatcherite who wants lower immigration and hates Wokeness. I’ve never encountered a single racist sentiment from his account
These people - probably @Luckyguy1983 is the closest to him on here - feel that the Tory party has deserted them. They will sit on their hands in 2024, exacerbating defeat
Good.
And no offence intended, but I take your view of what is "standard right wing" with a massive grain of salt. With all due respect, you and Putinguy represent some of the very worst of right wing politics on this site, so what you consider to be standard and what I do are fairly different.
Yeah, but you’re actually insane, so there’s that
I don't feel that the Tory Party as such has deserted me - I feel that a small group of politicians with an agenda that directly contradicts Toryism are squatting at the top of the party, telling it that it needs them to get elected. The Labour Party is in a similar position. Actually, neither party needs these ludicrous faux-competent suits to get elected - on the contrary, there is close to zero public demand for eco-authoritarianism, and what benighted fools do subscribe to this agenda are well catered for by the Green and Lib Dem Parties. It is obvious to me that most Conservative MPs and practically all the rank and file are deeply uncomfortable with Hunt/Sunak's agenda.
Redwood also nails this sentiment in his blog about the locals:
"My advice to the leader is to understand these were Conservative voters. It is unlikely adopting more Labour or Lib Dem policies will win them back. The political market for those who want a faster drive to net zero, who want higher taxes, who want more subsidies and interventions in business, who want rent controls and more migrants, who want to import more and make less here is highly congested. Labour, Lib Dem, SNP, Plaid and others are all jostling to offer a bigger state, more money taken from those who work hard and who save, more directions over how we should travel, what we should eat and how we should pass our time. There is no point in Conservatives trying to compete for that part of the electorate."
What is the point of Rishi/Hunts crappy sellout agenda? Piss off to Palm Springs and let someone run the country who wants to do something more than run it into the ground.
The Overton Window has shifted. There are very few votes left in promulgating a small state.
We have ever-increasing taxes because voters want loads of stuff, especially the older ones. Again, we must remember that all of the following is true:
+ Pensioners account for half the entire NHS budget, the bulk of social care costs and, of course, the entirety of the ever-escalating cost of the triple-locked state pension. They also expect never to be asked to pay for anything, so all the money for their upkeep has to be extracted through continually rising taxes on commerce and on the incomes of working-age taxpayers + You can't extract any more money from the nation's extraordinary massive store of property wealth to get around that problem either, because the large bulk of it is in the hands of older people, who expect to be able to enjoy their estates untroubled for the remainder of their lives and then pass their value on intact to their heirs when they snuff it + About a third of the entire electorate is aged over 65, and a full half over 55, so they grey vote is too massive to be easily defied
Oh, and, largely through an epidemic of poverty that leaves many people unable to afford to eat anything but cheap ultra-processed rubbish, the nation is also literally groaning and collapsing under the weight of millions of fatties, who also end up costing gargantuan sums in healthcare, sickness and disability benefits.
In short, Government has an immense burden of unproductive people to look after, and it can only pay to look after them by taxing the remaining productive elements of the economy, because going after the assets of the wealthy has become politically impossible. Which is why the UK is irretrievably and completely fucked. And also why the probability of any party promising low taxes coming to power is precisely nil.
Sorry.
That gloomy outlook is based on a lot of flawed premises in my opinion. For example, that all those employed by the State are instrumental in providing indispensable public services.
If there are so many people employed by the State who it would be easy to dispense with, why did the Tories cut essential public services - like the court system - back when they did make an effort to cut departmental spending (excl. the NHS) under the Austerity twins, Dave and George?
As has been reminded periodically big losses for the party of government after 13 years really isn't totally shocking. But even with that said it is a lot, and the bigger issue for the Tories is they are still not agreed on what to do - how powerful the Borisite faction is who can say, but it is there. They are not enthusiastic about Rishi, or what the government is doing, and are too divided to do something radical between now and the next GE.
So is the consensus... bad for tories but maybe not quite good enough for labour?
No. Not from me.
The NEV with its seat protection of Labour under 300. This calculation is on the basis of 20% Lib Dem vote, 39 Lib Dem’s, and % green have today, all voting as they did today in next years GE. This Westminster seat projection has no lab Lib green helping each other out at all, anywhere. It’s a seething volcanic mountain of LLG that will vote just as it did today in a GE.
It is a NEV, a seat model projection with zero tactical voting built into it.
Come on. Let’s all be grown up and professional about this. We are PB. We know exactly how this cartridge of results sets up next years GE and what is going to happen. 😇
Anyway. I’m signing off. My other half is getting ready, and wants me to get ready, we are going out to stand out all night and bag our spot. The atmosphere is going to be brilliant out there on the street tonight and tomorrow.
I’m going to close the pad now.
Enjoy the weekend 🙋♀️
God save the King!
I'm clearly being thick here... and he should obviously enjoy the weekend... but he means Lab majority gonna happen right?
Yes. And no. It sets up a tactical 'Get the Tories Out' election where there is no mass swooning about Labour, so over half the population will vote according to which party (Lab/LD) can beat them, except in Scotland where its own arcane rules will apply and a more complex formula to decide who you want to lose/win, and where the main party may have ceased to function by next year.
Before getting carried away, remember that Labour won 24% in 2008, and 21% in 2009. But, in 2010, they still got 255 seats. One can assume on these results, the Conservatives should achieve something similar.
I agree that there is a slight over-egging of this (because the prospect of the Tories losing power now looms quite large). These aren't the worst local election results a governing party has faced. Indeed as you mention the Labour results were shocking in the runup to 2010.
I am not convinced that this naturally translates into the Tories saving c.255 seats. My only real takeaway from this is that they are, absent a seismic event, losing power next year.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
I'm really happy if the erroneous Thrasher NEV gets repeated all the way from now until the GE. Why? Because it will suit Labour admirably for people to think they may fall short and that every vote will count.
I am more than ever convinced after today of a Labour landslide. The Lab + LibDem vote share is in the mid 50's.
The Thrasher NEV is so full of holes. The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.
Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.
That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.
So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.
Throw Scotland and London into the mix, the former completely discounted by Thrasher, and you start to see just one of the problems with his NEV. For instance, 20 gains for Labour in Scotland is now a real possibility.
The tories are in the 20's which is where every national opinion poll has them and just today Omnisiss, who correctly got the 9% local election lead spot on, has the national lead at 21%.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
I'm really happy if the erroneous Thrasher NEV gets repeated all the way from now until the GE. Why? Because it will suit Labour admirably for people to think they may fall short and that every vote will count.
I am more than ever convinced after today of a Labour landslide. The Lab + LibDem vote share is in the mid 50's.
The Thrasher NEV is so full of holes. The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.
Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.
That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.
So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.
Throw Scotland and London into the mix, the former completely discounted by Thrasher, and you start to see just one of the problems with his NEV. For instance, 20 gains for Labour in Scotland is now a real possibility.
The tories are in the 20's which is where every national opinion poll has them and just today Omnisiss, who correctly got the 9% local election lead spot on, has the national lead at 21%.
If you add the Labour and Liberal scores together, the two parties combined would have won every election since 1945.
At current Tory attrition rate (losing 31% of net council seats), the end figure would be 1046 losses.
If they do pass 1000 seat losses it will feel even more symbolic and significant. Despite the coronation 'distraction', the hacks will like to have an easy number to get their head around.
Is Sunak's position in peril? I don't know but there are going to be a lot of nervous and unhappy MPs on the tory benches after this.
On the contrary, I have it on good authority that many expected it to be a lot worse. A 9% Labour lead is a lot lower than many feared and whilst I think it unlikely, many will see that as not impossible to erode.
Sorry to piss on your parade. Labour are a long way from sealing the deal even tho Starmer has made impressive progress
Unfortunately "I have it on good authority" butters no parsnips (as someone else once said).
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
Don't get me wrong, I think they are fucked, but so many Labour supporters on here think they are marching toward 1997, when in fact they might be marching to 1992. I actually think the country deserves a change even though I am concerned about Labour, but if Labour supporters think a 9% lead mid term is something to be cheering about then they might find themselves in for a shock even without a Sheffield rally
I'm really happy if the erroneous Thrasher NEV gets repeated all the way from now until the GE. Why? Because it will suit Labour admirably for people to think they may fall short and that every vote will count.
I am more than ever convinced after today of a Labour landslide. The Lab + LibDem vote share is in the mid 50's.
The Thrasher NEV is so full of holes. The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.
Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.
That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.
So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.
Throw Scotland and London into the mix, the former completely discounted by Thrasher, and you start to see just one of the problems with his NEV. For instance, 20 gains for Labour in Scotland is now a real possibility.
The tories are in the 20's which is where every national opinion poll has them and just today Omnisiss, who correctly got the 9% local election lead spot on, has the national lead at 21%.
I think you are going to be disappointed, but anything is possible. Most likely is a minority government which after all the madness of the last few years will be a good thing.
Not sure it makes strategic, tactical OR horse sense, for Conservatives to turn Rishi Sunak into their Fifth Stooge (aka Five Failed PMs) then flail about in search of Stooge #6.
Comments
Last weekend, the Mail were claiming a "Rishi Bounce" would keep losses to 250 - others were saying 500 and we've ended up nearly 1,000.
How much "worse" were your good authorities expecting - 1,500, 2,000?
There have been a few decent results for the Conservatives - a couple of Councils regained following splits and defections and progress in some Labour areas. The heartlands of the Midlands stayed mainly loyal but most of the rest has been poor.
Labour may not have "sealed the deal" (whatever that means) but the Conservatives have a lot of work to do to prove to the electorate they deserve another term in Government.
The way to do Brexit was to do a practical deal, clear it quickly out the way, and move back rapidly to economic prosperity and reform.
Instead, they descended into dogma, ideology, incompetence and venality.
Not long ago on PB Sunak was written off, had missed his chance, would never be PM.
Before that Labour were going to be out of power for another 10 years.
I would wait till after the nex5 election to judge Sunak fairly.
As a non expert on the maths, the fact that LDs come out of this with notional vote share of 20% suggests that all this is a unicorn. They don't get that sort of figure in GEs.
If of course the GE turned into a genuine tactical voting fest - like a nationwide by election - to get the Tories out and Lab/LD in, it could get interesting.
Or a variant of the Corbynite solution to go yet further left(or right in this case) because clearly that's what people want.
FWIW, where I live the parliamentary seat straddles two hung district council areas and whether to go Lab or LD is still about as clear as mud, so our local Tory MP (who made it through 1997 with some room to spare, and would probably survive a nuclear holocaust) should still be safe.
I was enraged at having to.pay 3.20 to park.in Denne Road car park for an hour... you have to.pay for two because the wardens are like hornets and you cannot risk overruning.
Those like me who failed to vote can now see what the Lib Dems will do. We may suffer for our lethargy.
https://democracy.lichfielddc.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=122&RPID=25802368
https://democracy.lichfielddc.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=17&RPID=25803689
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage."
Alexander Tytler 1747
2,559
+503
Labour 2,559 councillors 503 councillors gained
CON
2,171
-1,000
Conservative 2,171 councillors 1,000 councillors lost
LD
1,539
+400
Liberal Democrat 1,539 councillors 400 councillors gained
IND
823
-101
Independents 823 councillors 101 councillors lost
GRN
450
+230
Green 450 councillors 230 councillors gained
RA
93
-12
EDIT: now -1,005 according to BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65147839
13 councils to go so it will happen...
*My wife.
Labour will be riding high enough they won't need to cut a deal anywhere, but maybe they can do another one with the LDs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/results
I am more than ever convinced after today of a Labour landslide. The Lab + LibDem vote share is in the mid 50's.
The Thrasher NEV is so full of holes. The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.
Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.
That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.
So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.
Throw Scotland and London into the mix, the former completely discounted by Thrasher, and you start to see just one of the problems with his NEV. For instance, 20 gains for Labour in Scotland is now a real possibility.
The tories are in the 20's which is where every national opinion poll has them and just today Omnisiss, who correctly got the 9% local election lead spot on, has the national lead at 21%.
Going back decades, the UK has struggled with the "give something, get something" nature of Euronegotiations. The only way to get the degree of freedom the UK craved (and probably the only way to justify the faff) was to accept the degree of separation and bordering that we ended up with.
And deep down, I'm not sure that we've fully intenalised this yet.
Open toed sandals and corduroys.
Also, sexual harassment/personal conduct.
The red/greens are like a purity cult on this sort of stuff.
And I don't think being more 'natural' bedfellows would make it that much easier - there's a reason the two are not formally aligned, and why former Tories are often more comfortable switching to one than the other.
These results are sufficiently bad to call Sunak's leadership into question.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/police-urged-to-investigate-boris-johnson-video/ar-AA1aMnJv?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=3334c6e20ad84e2f8d45618fc87c232a&ei=10
We're marching towards 2010 in reverse.
I think in the election after they'll achieve a Cameron-style majority as the Tories do a Labour and go mad.
And Thrasher has made no adjustment for likely Labour gains in Scotland, nor their results in London and Wales.
The NEV is a joke. But it suits Labour.
I am not convinced that this naturally translates into the Tories saving c.255 seats. My only real takeaway from this is that they are, absent a seismic event, losing power next year.
Perhaps therefore, they don’t form a monolith.
It is best to read what she writes and conclude the opposite.
Labourites would do well to remember that, because they almost never do.
Not the leadership?
Almost like people vote on economics and not woke issues?
That said these are awful results for the Tories.
https://twitter.com/BHDemocracyNews/status/1654553783140073472?s=20