Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
Rochdale: Labour ex candidate disgraced Green ex candidate disgraced RefUK candidate disgraced Galloway - meow Tory candidate whose party is a disgrace
Or do as the town has done so often, vote Liberal Democrat.
Ah, yes, the party who had the disgraced Cyril Smith as their Rochdale MP for 16 years.
Rochdale: Labour ex candidate disgraced Green ex candidate disgraced RefUK candidate disgraced Galloway - meow Tory candidate whose party is a disgrace
Or do as the town has done so often, vote Liberal Democrat.
Ah, yes, the party who had the disgraced Cyril Smith as their Rochdale MP for 16 years.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
It was disappointing, though not surprising - cos that's what party leaders do - that his first instinct was to support him. But fair play, he's not-too-belatedly done the right thing here. Corbyn wouldn't have done.
To be honest, I feel like Sir Keir has been MIA during this whole thing. Has he personally said anything?
The right of passage to be a Labour MP is to swear allegiance to the Israeli flag however right wing or tainted. It's pathetic and embarassing. Watch Krishnan Guru Murthy's interview with Ayol Levy on Channel 4 News. He;s the only person in the British media who doesn't genuflect before asking the slimeball a question. As for British politicians there's now only Cameron.
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
That's about where I'm at too.
Torn between voting Lib Dem, or voting Labour.
The more people speak up about Labour or Starmer, the more I'm tempted to go Lib Dem, but I won't be voting Tory until the Tories become the party of aspiration, of low taxes, of wanting everyone to be able to afford their own home etc once more.
Until they become worth voting for. Or until it becomes time to kick out the other lot, but right now they [the Tories] are the lot who don't deserve to be voted for and do deserve to be kicked out.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
It was disappointing, though not surprising - cos that's what party leaders do - that his first instinct was to support him. But fair play, he's not-too-belatedly done the right thing here. Corbyn wouldn't have done.
To be honest, I feel like Sir Keir has been MIA during this whole thing. Has he personally said anything?
The right of passage to be a Labour MP is to swear allegiance to the Israeli flag however right wing or tainted. It's pathetic and embarassing. Watch Krishnan Guru Murthy's interview with Ayol Levy on Channel 4 News. He;s the only person in the British media who doesn't genuflect before asking the slimeball a question. As for British politicians there's now only Cameron.
You're so pathetic.
That you're even against Israel rescuing its hostages speaks volumes.
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
@DeltapollUK 🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨 Labour lead widens to eighteen points in the latest results from Deltapoll. Con 27% (-) Lab 45% (+2) Lib Dem 8% (-2) Other 19% (-1) Fieldwork: 9th - 12th February 2024 Sample: 1,977 GB adults (Changes from 2nd - 5th February 2024)
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
Rochdale Gate leads the Beeb 10 news.
Terrible day for Starmer.
What would be worse for Labour? Galloway winning or their own candidate?
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
That's about where I'm at too.
Torn between voting Lib Dem, or voting Labour.
The more people speak up about Labour or Starmer, the more I'm tempted to go Lib Dem, but I won't be voting Tory until the Tories become the party of aspiration, of low taxes, of wanting everyone to be able to afford their own home etc once more.
Until they become worth voting for. Or until it becomes time to kick out the other lot, but right now they [the Tories] are the lot who don't deserve to be voted for and do deserve to be kicked out.
As far as I can tell, Labour have two remaining policies. Increasing class sizes at state schools and increasing lng imports. But you do what you want.
Sorry if this is teaching Granny, but I have a tip for the Yorkshire Pudding.
Sift the plain flour through a sieve into the bowl, but when you do so, hold the sieve well above the bowl. This is not to remove lumps from the flour (you don't get any these days) but it allows air into it. The result is a light, airy pudding which rises pleasantly and gives that neat crust that is to die for.
Apologies if you knew this already.
PS. And don't forget the pinch of salt.
I’ve not tried that. Will do so. I do always use the salt as that makes the surface glossy.
My trick is basically as many eggs as humanly possible, plus one for luck.
What recipe do you follow ?
I do Mary Berry.
35g flour 1 egg 75ml milk
Proportionally.
TimS “cooking for boys”. I use 6 eggs, a bit of water and a bit of milk, and bung in some flour with a pinch of salt.
I use soda water, as it makes for a light batter that rises well. Beat in plenty of air and let the mixture rest for a while before using it too, it improves the structure.
Important to have the oil in the baking tray as hot as possible before adding the batter, almost at smoke point.
Fearnley-Whiiingstalls trick of adding chunks of onion and apple to a toad in the hole is a good twist, if non-canonical.
6-egg hole mix ready for tomorrow (always good to leave it a day in the fridge). This is a mix of t65 and t45 flour.
Allergen-packed. I should really add some peanuts to go with the gluten, dairy and eggs.
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
That's about where I'm at too.
Torn between voting Lib Dem, or voting Labour.
The more people speak up about Labour or Starmer, the more I'm tempted to go Lib Dem, but I won't be voting Tory until the Tories become the party of aspiration, of low taxes, of wanting everyone to be able to afford their own home etc once more.
Until they become worth voting for. Or until it becomes time to kick out the other lot, but right now they [the Tories] are the lot who don't deserve to be voted for and do deserve to be kicked out.
As far as I can tell, Labour have two remaining policies. Increasing class sizes at state schools and increasing lng imports. But you do what you want.
I've not decided what to do but if I vote Labour it won't be because I want Labour's policies, it'll be because I want the Tories out.
I'm a big believer in evolution. Change for the sake of change can be a good thing.
The Tories don't deserve to win, so its time for Labour to have a go - and equally importantly time for the Tories to reflect upon why they lost. And if they go down the Bad Enoch route then they will deserve to lose in 2028 too.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
It was disappointing, though not surprising - cos that's what party leaders do - that his first instinct was to support him. But fair play, he's not-too-belatedly done the right thing here. Corbyn wouldn't have done.
To be honest, I feel like Sir Keir has been MIA during this whole thing. Has he personally said anything?
Sensibly, he sent out spokespeople to defend the previous position over the weekend and earlier today, rather than defend them himself. Now those same loyal frontbenchers may justifiably feel a little humiliated.
But of course, Sir Keir is an honourable man, and always takes full responsibility for what happens in organizations that he leads. So we must interpret the words of his MPs over the past couple of days to have reflected his very will at the time, and the party's sudden withdrawal of support for the candidate is thus reflecting a personal, and perhaps unnecessarily late, change of mind on his part.
This reminds me rather of when Rory Stewart (when a minister in either the Cameron or May government) was defending an unpopular Conservative policy on a Sunday morning show, only for the policy to be reversed during that very same interview, with the interviewer (Marr?) interrupting him to tell him so.
Glen O'Hara @gsoh31 · 56m Just like conservatives in the US Republican Party, Sunak will find you can't ride the angry and conspiracist tiger. It just turns round and eats you.
US Republicans can because they believe in it, and have supporters angry enough to try to literally overthrow election results as a result of it. We thankfully do not have that.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
It was disappointing, though not surprising - cos that's what party leaders do - that his first instinct was to support him. But fair play, he's not-too-belatedly done the right thing here. Corbyn wouldn't have done.
To be honest, I feel like Sir Keir has been MIA during this whole thing. Has he personally said anything?
Sensibly, he sent out spokespeople to defend the previous position over the weekend and earlier today, rather than defend them himself. Now those same loyal frontbenchers may justifiably feel a little humiliated.
But of course, Sir Keir is an honourable man, and always takes full responsibility for what happens in organizations that he leads. So we must interpret the words of his MPs over the past couple of days to have reflected his very will at the time, and the party's sudden withdrawal of support for the candidate is thus reflecting a personal, and perhaps unnecessarily late, change of mind on his part.
This reminds me rather of when Rory Stewart (when a minister in either the Cameron or May government) was defending an unpopular Conservative policy on a Sunday morning show, only for the policy to be reversed during that very same interview, with the interviewer (Marr?) interrupting him to tell him so.
Happens quite a bit in politics. People are willing to carry the can for awhile, it's if you are constantly being asked to defend unpalatable things which are then reversed that you lose patience with your leader. Keir has many a flip flip to go before he loses credit with his supporters.
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
Rochdale Gate leads the Beeb 10 news.
Terrible day for Starmer.
What would be worse for Labour? Galloway winning or their own candidate?
They shouldn't have got into this mess.
Is there no one in the room from Labour HQ on the day they do the hustings to select a candidate when he said these things about Gaza?
Can we place Rochdale Labour in the By-elections hall of fame for poor choices of candidate. Had they all just transferred from Sheffield Hallam or something?
I thought Rochdale was tricky for them. Now I suppose they can try to wave off a defeat as 'exceptional circumstances'. Not sure I accept that. Meanwhile, on a probable very low turnout, if Galloway can get his people to turn out then who knows?
Galloway has won a by election in the past. I wouldn't rule out him doing it again. Sadly
The voters are in a mood to kick against the pricks whoever they are. Starmer risks being treated as the incumbent even before he enters No 10. That's his problem - he really doesnt look like a positive change candidate in the way that Tony Blair did.
LOL. "Positive change candidate"?
I think he buried that this weekend when he scuttled his own flagship.
Do you honestly think this is the thing to move the dial?
This feels like beergate all over again to me.
Whether this moves the dial is not really the point. Labour has been shown to be so incompetent that they do not have a candidate in a by election that they are nailed on to win. Not auspicious. And just after a major policy reversal.
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
The problem with that idea is that this iteration of Labour will fail and instead of the Tories coming up with something vaguely approximating to a sensible platform we'll simply get lumbered, a few years down the line, with whatever extreme lunatic the hurt, rejected party membership installs to replace Sunak.
Oh well, whatever. Trying to predict the outcome of this mess is an entertaining parlour game, but there's no point in worrying about that which one cannot control.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
It was disappointing, though not surprising - cos that's what party leaders do - that his first instinct was to support him. But fair play, he's not-too-belatedly done the right thing here. Corbyn wouldn't have done.
To be honest, I feel like Sir Keir has been MIA during this whole thing. Has he personally said anything?
Sensibly, he sent out spokespeople to defend the previous position over the weekend and earlier today, rather than defend them himself. Now those same loyal frontbenchers may justifiably feel a little humiliated.
But of course, Sir Keir is an honourable man, and always takes full responsibility for what happens in organizations that he leads. So we must interpret the words of his MPs over the past couple of days to have reflected his very will at the time, and the party's sudden withdrawal of support for the candidate is thus reflecting a personal, and perhaps unnecessarily late, change of mind on his part.
This reminds me rather of when Rory Stewart (when a minister in either the Cameron or May government) was defending an unpopular Conservative policy on a Sunday morning show, only for the policy to be reversed during that very same interview, with the interviewer (Marr?) interrupting him to tell him so.
Happens quite a bit in politics. People are willing to carry the can for awhile, it's if you are constantly being asked to defend unpalatable things which are then reversed that you lose patience with your leader. Keir has many a flip flip to go before he loses credit with his supporters.
It also depends upon how long you can keep the public on side too.
If the public are with you, then your backbenches can forgive a lot. If the public turn, then suddenly sharpening the knives can seem all the more attractive.
It was the polls turning that helped Tory MPs decide they have had enough of Boris. As long as Keir is popular, he has a shield.
As turbotubbs noted, the two points are not necessarily as divergent as they may seem. It's not a good look when avoiding terrible candidates was part of the image Keir has been trying to build, which means when they win big there will certainly be a lot of other terrible candidates who win, which is unfortunate. It's just that individual matters like this rarely shift things on their own, particularly when facing a flood of factors in the other direction.
Fair to say that this guy is possibly in the minority of Democratic activists - but his point that the administration has delivered for the young is a sharp contrast to anything anyone has ever said about our government.
The linked Politico article is worth reading.
I’m 21. I don’t give a damn about Joe Biden’s age because he has delivered for Gen Z more than any president in history. THAT is why my peers & I will vote for him again. We see his accomplishments over his age.
Rochdale: Labour ex candidate disgraced Green ex candidate disgraced RefUK candidate disgraced Galloway - meow Tory candidate whose party is a disgrace
Or do as the town has done so often, vote Liberal Democrat.
Ah, yes, the party who had the disgraced Cyril Smith as their Rochdale MP for 16 years.
Labour councillor Smith, as he was during the pertinent years, you mean?
I suppose your attitude to all this is bound to be influenced by how much faith you put in the polls as a reliable indicator of future electoral outcomes. Without bothering to go back and start trawling through the old records, I seem to recall that EdM led Cameron for the bulk of the 2010-15 Parliament, and TMay was on for a landslide til about four weeks out from the 2017 GE. So, we shall see.
Rochdale: Labour ex candidate disgraced Green ex candidate disgraced RefUK candidate disgraced Galloway - meow Tory candidate whose party is a disgrace
Or do as the town has done so often, vote Liberal Democrat.
Ah, yes, the party who had the disgraced Cyril Smith as their Rochdale MP for 16 years.
Labour councillor Smith, as he was during the pertinent years, you mean?
He liked them young as a Liberal MP and a Labour Councillor. In all fairness to the Liberals and Labour it was the man and not the respective parties. Although wasn't there more than a hint of later cover up?
Oh dear, just heard the news about Labour's candidate in Rochdale. I bet it isn't long before someone describes the fact that you can't change a candidate once nominations are in as "antiquated in this day and age".
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
Wait. You think the Tories will poll more than 32?
What’s interesting about the Delta Poll is outside the big 3 it bundles the rest as others. 20%, in contrast 1997 others was 6%. This makes historical comparisons and “what always tends to happen” a little more uncertain. We know from 92 to 97 Labour didn’t get many direct switchers from Con, about 14% tops, what caused the landslide was stay at home Con voters. This time it’s not just apathy peeling voters from the Tories, it’s sirens in form of an electoral machine and party called reform.
That current 20% others makes Labour not polling as high PV as Johnson and even May a possibility, but similarly takes top off the Tory PV compared to history. It’s a new fluid ball game, and the scoreboard reads Tories no higher than 31 and no more than 170 seats.
The other thing pointing to me being right is say, in 2015 although Labour had campaign poll leads, in terms of best PM and best for economy they were very much behind. Not so this time, to the extent of asking has there ever been an election where opposition were so far ahead on best PM and best for the economy?
The ever impressive Owen Jones is predicting a catastrophe for Starmer over Rochdale. LBC
Kind of impossible now he hasn't got a candidate.
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
It’s only 24 hour politics nerds like us that are going to notice this anyway. As it is the bloke was rumbled yesterday and they withdrew support today, which will seem like swift action when the story is written
Visiting my parents in Rochdale, so can provide on the ground reportage.
If enough headbangers vote for Galloway, and a much smaller number of headbangers vote for Danczuk then the Tories could take the seat.
Tory candidate is someone local who doesn't appear to be actively mad, a massive bigot or a sexter of teenage girls, unlike several of the Independent candidates, the Labour candidate, the Reform candidate and the Green candidate.
I'm just hoping for someone who doesn't embarrass us further. Labour should have picked Paul Waugh whilst they had the chance.
I've had £5.39 on the Lib Dems to win Rochdale at average odds 55.35
There are the first signs that their campaign is stepping up, with calls going out for volunteers, but it’s a bit last minute. I don’t get the impression the by-election campaign has been that active up to now. Punters, DYOR.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
Depressed turnout does affect younger voters, but also SE groups C2DE, who became core Con 2019 vote.
I think it will be a lowish turnout GE because 1) lack of enthusiasm for any party, 2) the outcome looks a foregone conclusion.
So a turnout in the low 60's percent, but in terms of party turnout pretty much a wash. Unenthusiastic Lab voters more or less paired by unenthusiastic Con ones.
Fair to say that this guy is possibly in the minority of Democratic activists - but his point that the administration has delivered for the young is a sharp contrast to anything anyone has ever said about our government.
The linked Politico article is worth reading.
I’m 21. I don’t give a damn about Joe Biden’s age because he has delivered for Gen Z more than any president in history. THAT is why my peers & I will vote for him again. We see his accomplishments over his age.
Any notion of delivery for the young died with the previous Labour Government. Everyone under 50 just exists now to be farmed for taxes and rents. Prediction: this will not change one iota when the current lot get the boot.
It's a bit bizarre that a UK by-election is being fought and the major issue seems to be a war thousands of miles away not involving us.
wtf is that all about.
I agree.
I really don't see how any British politicians position on Israel/Gaza would make the slightest difference to the outcome.
It's like Scumbag College Students Union declaring itself a nuclear free zone. Gesture politics at its most pointless.
I disagree. I think it’s significant when the foreign secretary (in support of the US administration) reaffirms commitment to a two state solution - in opposition to the Israeli PM’s assertion that the idea is dead.
It’s only influence, and you can argue about what weight it carries, but it’s not nothing.
(Obviously, no one gives a crap about what a by-election candidate has to say about it.)
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
38-32 is my projection and I think that will give LAB a majority of about 30. Which is oddly enough what I put down for Ben's 2024 predictions quiz! 👍
I mean, political betting wise, Rochdale, what a time to be alive!
So, we have:
Ali - may get some support for being dropped, possibly eating at the Galloway vote. With the Rose next to his name could still get up to 20 odd %
Galloway - Capable of 20% in Batley in normal times, similar constituency profile, so capable of more here with Gaza relevant, but Ali could split the vote! Might pick up some horseshoe types as well as some Muslim vote.
RefUK - Should have been capable of a decent showing and 20% possible, but there isn't going to be a Danczuk vote and by choosing him they will be stuck in the low teens at best.
Conservatives - on 30% last time, some will stay home, but who the hell are they going to actually bleed votes to here - Labour, RefUK? So they could keep over half their vote and get in the 20s. Low 20s, but could that be enough?
LD - 8% last time out doesn't sound like a lot, but compared to the 2-3% in a lot of the north there is clearly a residual support base here. The favoured switch of the Labour moderate presumably. 20%+ very doable.
That's 5 candidates who could all hit 15% and 4 who could top 20%.
It makes Mid Beds look simple.
Declaration of interest. After 9 years on here, doing the odd bit of tipping as well, I jumped and made my first political bet last night, and got a few quid on LD at 100/1.
The decision means there is now no official Labour candidate – but three former Labour representatives standing against each other in Ali, Galloway and Danczuk....has that ever happened before?
Tucker Carlson: "It was a shock to me that Moscow, where I had never been before, the largest European city with 13 million people, was much nicer than any city in my country. I had no idea about that. It is much cleaner, safer, and prettier aesthetically. Its architecture, food, services are better than any city in the United States."
Moscow is the only city in Europe where I've had to bribe some police officers to allow me to continue going about my business.
When I was there, with my stepmother, I got a lecture on the etiquette of bribing the police.
I mean, political betting wise, Rochdale, what a time to be alive!
So, we have:
Ali - may get some support for being dropped, possibly eating at the Galloway vote. With the Rose next to his name could still get up to 30 odd %
Galloway - Capable of 20% in Batley in normal times, similar constituency profile, so capable of more here with Gaza relevant, but Ali could split the vote! Might pick up some horseshoe types as well as some Muslim vote.
RefUK - Should have been capable of a decent showing and 20% posdible, but there isn't going to be a Danczuk vote and by choosing him they will be stuck in the low teens at best.
Conservatives - on 30% last time, some will stay home, but who the hell are they going to actually bleed votes to here - Labour, RefUK? So they could keep over half their vote and get in the 20s. Low 20s, but could that be enough?
LD - 8% last time out doesn't sound like a lot, but compared to the 2-3% in a lot of the north there is clearly a residual support base here. The favoured switch of the Labour moderate presumably. 20% very doable.
That's 5 candidates who could all hit 15% and 4 who could top 20%.
Last week the media in general and our very own William Glenn in particular were outraged after a Republican lawyer exonerated Biden by means of his lack of clarity. It has gained traction in the polls too.
On the last weekend Donald J Trump, regaling a fake story about a conversation he never had with European Statesman coated his old rubbish with an invitation to Putin to invade/attack NATO countries of Putin's choice. And not so much as a titter of nervous laughter from our own William Glenn.
Did anyone else catch the irony of Trump defending a Russian invasion of a NATO country because they "didn't pay their dues". This from a grifter who avoids paying invoices, much to the detriment of useful idiots like former 9/11 national treasure Rudi Guiliani.
The ever impressive Owen Jones is predicting a catastrophe for Starmer over Rochdale. LBC
Kind of impossible now he hasn't got a candidate.
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
It’s only 24 hour politics nerds like us that are going to notice this anyway. As it is the bloke was rumbled yesterday and they withdrew support today, which will seem like swift action when the story is written
That was my take. Thought it was my inner bias at work, but interesting that you see it likewise.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
38-32 is my projection and I think that will give LAB a majority of about 30. Which is oddly enough what I put down for Ben's 2024 predictions quiz! 👍
Was that a thing? I must've missed it, I've not been around here much later. Too much else on my plate.
My reasoning is that the Conservatives managed to salvage about 31% of the vote in 1997, that was against a Labour leader who actually gave a reasonable impression of being interested in the job of governing, and both polarisation by age cohorts and the median age of the electorate have increased significantly in the intervening period. I obviously risk being proven disastrously wrong by sticking my head above the parapet and making these predictions, but I just don't see getting rid of Sunak and replacing him with continuity Sunak as being a solid foundation for a mighty triumph.
“Just heard an update from the Rochdale Lib Dem campaign HQ... The campaign is ramping up, some interesting canvassing returns so far and this will really make this a free-for-all. Remember it's historically a Lab/Lib marginal.”
No brainer. They really have to chuck the kitchen sink at this one.
Hmm. Potentially winnable with a low vote-share if LibDems build momentum and Galloway bites into the Labour vote. Difficult to predict.
The decision means there is now no official Labour candidate – but three former Labour representatives standing against each other in Ali, Galloway and Danczuk....has that ever happened before?
What?! I hadn't realised before that Danczuk was standing for Refuk. That's something of a surprise (to me, at least).
Rochdale: Labour ex candidate disgraced Green ex candidate disgraced RefUK candidate disgraced Galloway - meow Tory candidate whose party is a disgrace
Or do as the town has done so often, vote Liberal Democrat.
Did we ever find out what the Green had done?
All I know he is something about past social media comments.
Honestly, why does anyone in public life go on social media?
Hasn't got his tongue far enough up Hamas' arse for Green Party's liking.
The ever impressive Owen Jones is predicting a catastrophe for Starmer over Rochdale. LBC
Kind of impossible now he hasn't got a candidate.
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
It’s only 24 hour politics nerds like us that are going to notice this anyway. As it is the bloke was rumbled yesterday and they withdrew support today, which will seem like swift action when the story is written
That was my take. Thought it was my inner bias at work, but interesting that you see it likewise.
In the outside world, taking action within 1 working day is pretty quick. For a start, if you are going to show any kind of fairness, you have to ask a person if they said what they are reported to have said. And provide some kind of explanation. Then write that up and make a written decision. Then communicate that back to the person in question before releasing it to the media.
Unless you are Saddam Hussein and you just shoot the offender with the gold plated Beretta. But that is probably frowned upon in the more middle of the road social democratic parties.
Rochdale: I have cashed out because of uncertainty of whether Betfair will settle an Ali win as a Labour win. It would not surprise me if they void the market.
Quick question. On Betfair you can back Labour still at 2.82. But they have no candidate, so would they pay out if Ali won? Or can we safely lay Labour? I’m reminded f the Aussie open when Jokovic was refused entry into Australia and all Jokovic bets were voided.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
38-32 is my projection and I think that will give LAB a majority of about 30. Which is oddly enough what I put down for Ben's 2024 predictions quiz! 👍
Was that a thing? I must've missed it, I've not been around here much later. Too much else on my plate.
My reasoning is that the Conservatives managed to salvage about 31% of the vote in 1997, that was against a Labour leader who actually gave a reasonable impression of being interested in the job of governing, and both polarisation by age cohorts and the median age of the electorate have increased significantly in the intervening period. I obviously risk being proven disastrously wrong by sticking my head above the parapet and making these predictions, but I just don't see getting rid of Sunak and replacing him with continuity Sunak as being a solid foundation for a mighty triumph.
Yes @Benpointer ran the competition at the start of Jan.
I am not expecting LAB to exceed 40% or CON to get less than 30% notwithstanding what the polls say at the moment.
Rochdale: I have cashed out because of uncertainty of whether Betfair will settle an Ali win as a Labour win. It would not surprise me if they void the market.
I think that’s likely. See Jokovic in Australia a couple of years ago.
We're back onto beergate levels of "this is the end of Keir Starmer" I see.
No, he'll probably be the next Prime Minister. Likely another completely useless one, but he'll get to play with the train set for a bit, which is the aim of the exercise.
"We're standing by our candidate who said some terrible things"
What? Really?
"Well no, not really."
So we now have a Parliamentary by election that Labour should walk without a candidate who the party itself can support. Careless would be an extremely generous description. Following on from the Green £28bn it is starting look Starmer really doesn't know what he is doing. And he's not even PM yet.
He's blundering from one U-turn to the next, calculating along the way what decision he thinks is most likely to get him into power. He's not at all bothered about what policies he does or doesn't ditch, or whatever new ones he might make up on the hoof, along the way - and there's no particular reason to suppose he'll be any different as Prime Minister. Just the same as the one we have at the moment, actually. Careering about like a wobbly shopping trolley, with no interest in anything at all except squatting uselessly in Downing Street for as long as possible. It's just about being Prime Minister for the sake of it. Existing, but doing nothing of any conceivable worth.
I don't know what motivates these people, I can only imagine that being Prime Minister is the summit of a political career and they're satisfied with just having made it, seeing how long they can sit there and which of their predecessors they can outlast before getting the boot, and then retiring to write a vacuous and pathetic memoir. Neither use nor ornament, the lot of them.
It's quite possible the LAB lead really falls away as people focus on the election. They will probably still win but could be as close as 38 - 32. There really is no real enthusiasm for LAB.
Yep, low turnout (which strongly favours the Tories as it'll drive the median age of the electorate up even more,) resulting in a hung parliament. The Conservatives are so useless that it'll most likely persuade enough of their backers to switch sides or stay at home to rob them of a majority, but there exists no positive reason to endorse any of the alternatives. Except for voters in Scotland minded to pull the plug on Britain, who can always stick with the equally useless SNP to protest the fact.
Labour 300, Con 260, SNP 40, LD 25. One term of total non-achievement, followed by a prompt return to Toryism.
38 - 32 is rather possible, but I’m still raotflmfao at your 300-260 seat numbers from 38-32.
38-32 would deliver an eighty Starmer majority and Tories below 200 seats with the amount of tactical vote in addition to that swing.
You seem to be assuming an immense amount of tactical voting. Why would there be? Some grand alliance of progressive voters all so desperate to be rid of the Tories that they'll troop down to the polling stations in their droves to back a unity candidate? No, not when there is zero enthusiasm for the alternative.
Low turnout, apathy, and Green voters in particular sticking to their guns rather than endorsing continuity Conservatism. That's what we can expect from the next election.
🤣 you seem to be assuming NO tactical voting to get 300-260 from 38-32.
But my straightforward answer to you is yes, with LLG still over 60, and demonstrating voting tactically with razor precision in local elections and by elections for years now, we should all be expecting a large amount of razor sharp tactical voting butchering the Tory seat total come the General Election. That LLG is huge, there’s plenty of evidence of tactical voting in recent elections, and the main appetite and enthusiasm that is out there amongst the electorate is get Sunak out.
38/32 was someone else's guesstimate. I'd be surprised if the Con vote share is less than a third of the popular vote, and they'll probably do a little better than that. Depressed turnout disproportionately impacts lower age cohorts and therefore favours the Tories whom, lest we forget, have delivered a golden age of loot for the majority of pensioners who own their own homes.
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
Wait. You think the Tories will poll more than 32?
What’s interesting about the Delta Poll is outside the big 3 it bundles the rest as others. 20%, in contrast 1997 others was 6%. This makes historical comparisons and “what always tends to happen” a little more uncertain. We know from 92 to 97 Labour didn’t get many direct switchers from Con, about 14% tops, what caused the landslide was stay at home Con voters. This time it’s not just apathy peeling voters from the Tories, it’s sirens in form of an electoral machine and party called reform.
That current 20% others makes Labour not polling as high PV as Johnson and even May a possibility, but similarly takes top off the Tory PV compared to history. It’s a new fluid ball game, and the scoreboard reads Tories no higher than 31 and no more than 170 seats.
The other thing pointing to me being right is say, in 2015 although Labour had campaign poll leads, in terms of best PM and best for economy they were very much behind. Not so this time, to the extent of asking has there ever been an election where opposition were so far ahead on best PM and best for the economy?
Why shouldn't the Tories poll above 32%? It's no more ridiculous a notion than RefUK coming in north of 10%, which are the kinds of suggestions coming out of the random number generators that are the opinion polls at the moment.
I don't trust the polls. I dare say they offer a reasonable approximation of what people think right now, but I doubt the current numbers will survive contact with an election campaign where voters have to think about who is actually going to form an administration (or, indeed, whether or not they care who does from the options available.)
I've further justified my reasoning for putting the Conservatives north of a third of the vote in a different reply so won't elaborate here.
Fair to say that this guy is possibly in the minority of Democratic activists - but his point that the administration has delivered for the young is a sharp contrast to anything anyone has ever said about our government.
The linked Politico article is worth reading.
I’m 21. I don’t give a damn about Joe Biden’s age because he has delivered for Gen Z more than any president in history. THAT is why my peers & I will vote for him again. We see his accomplishments over his age.
It's a bit bizarre that a UK by-election is being fought and the major issue seems to be a war thousands of miles away not involving us.
wtf is that all about.
I agree.
I really don't see how any British politicians position on Israel/Gaza would make the slightest difference to the outcome.
It's like Scumbag College Students Union declaring itself a nuclear free zone. Gesture politics at its most pointless.
I disagree. I think it’s significant when the foreign secretary (in support of the US administration) reaffirms commitment to a two state solution - in opposition to the Israeli PM’s assertion that the idea is dead.
It’s only influence, and you can argue about what weight it carries, but it’s not nothing.
(Obviously, no one gives a crap about what a by-election candidate has to say about it.)
The significance of which is that that is 2 Permanent members of the security council saying they re-affirm the 2 state solution. Given the voting records of the others, that means that 5 out of 5 are in support of the 2 state solution.
It's a bit bizarre that a UK by-election is being fought and the major issue seems to be a war thousands of miles away not involving us.
wtf is that all about.
Mass immigration & Multiculturalism
Obviously you two haven’t heard about, inter alia, the 1938 Oxford and Bridgewater by elections.
That's a ridiculous comparison. An impending war with Germany is not the same as a foreign conflict in which we have no direct interest.
The comment was about a foreign war not involving us impacting by elections in this country.
"A quarrel in a far away country, between people of whom we know nothing.”
Sounds familiar.
What's the equivalent of the Munich agreement in this analogy?
Oslo?
Which is clearly not a critical aspect of British foreign policy, is it? Did the British Prime Minister fly back from Oslo saying that he'd avoided us having to get involved in another world war?
The decision means there is now no official Labour candidate – but three former Labour representatives standing against each other in Ali, Galloway and Danczuk....has that ever happened before?
What?! I hadn't realised before that Danczuk was standing for Refuk. That's something of a surprise (to me, at least).
You would have thought Danczuk would have kept you informed with a text or two.
The ever impressive Owen Jones is predicting a catastrophe for Starmer over Rochdale. LBC
Kind of impossible now he hasn't got a candidate.
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
It’s only 24 hour politics nerds like us that are going to notice this anyway. As it is the bloke was rumbled yesterday and they withdrew support today, which will seem like swift action when the story is written
That was my take. Thought it was my inner bias at work, but interesting that you see it likewise.
In the outside world, taking action within 1 working day is pretty quick. For a start, if you are going to show any kind of fairness, you have to ask a person if they said what they are reported to have said. And provide some kind of explanation. Then write that up and make a written decision. Then communicate that back to the person in question before releasing it to the media.
Unless you are Saddam Hussein and you just shoot the offender with the gold plated Beretta. But that is probably frowned upon in the more middle of the road social democratic parties.
Wasn't Al Campbell's Law that you had a week to see if the scandal would subside before you were out? Different times, of course, with a much more intense and continuous media cycle these days.
As for Labour, it would be interesting (if irrelevant) to know who knew what when? Was there a reasonable way for Rochdale Labour to know about these remarks, or were they made somewhere else? Did anyone ask Ali the "is there anything else we should know about?" question over the weekend, and if so, what did he say?
Ali is the official Labour Party candidate. The Labour Party has 'withdrawn support' from him but they are too late to stop him standing for election as the Labour Party representative. If he wins the Returning Officer will declare a victory for Labour. So I don't think Betfair will or should void this market.
The fact that nobody in Rochdale cares about Russia shows that @TheScreamingEagles is screaming up the wrong tree.
Tut. Stylistic fail. Reader grinds to a halt because as any fule kno, eagles don't scream up trees (though they possibly might scream from their tops).
Quick question. On Betfair you can back Labour still at 2.82. But they have no candidate, so would they pay out if Ali won? Or can we safely lay Labour? I’m reminded f the Aussie open when Jokovic was refused entry into Australia and all Jokovic bets were voided.
He is still the Lab candidate as far as the electoral system is concerned is how I understand it.
He is on the ballot and cannot be removed now (although possibly he can remove himself but maybe even that date has passed as well???). The ballot will show his name and Lab logo and so on.
Quick question. On Betfair you can back Labour still at 2.82. But they have no candidate, so would they pay out if Ali won? Or can we safely lay Labour? I’m reminded f the Aussie open when Jokovic was refused entry into Australia and all Jokovic bets were voided.
I’d be amazed, stupefied even, if Betfair did anything at all. Labour are still standing a candidate, they’re just not backing him. As a betting heat, nothing has changed
It's a bit bizarre that a UK by-election is being fought and the major issue seems to be a war thousands of miles away not involving us.
wtf is that all about.
I agree.
I really don't see how any British politicians position on Israel/Gaza would make the slightest difference to the outcome.
It's like Scumbag College Students Union declaring itself a nuclear free zone. Gesture politics at its most pointless.
Which raises the question why Starmer has screwed up so badly on Gaza - leaving aside the antisemitic candidate in Rochdale that wasn't his fault. He didn't need to take an unsustainable position on a war that was clearly going to go the way it did go.
Ali is the official Labour Party candidate. The Labour Party has 'withdrawn support' from him but they are too late to stop him standing for election as the Labour Party representative. If he wins the Returning Officer will declare a victory for Labour. So I don't think Betfair will or should void this market.
It’s farcical that Labour have to have him as their candidate now even though they don’t want him! Is it because the ballot papers have already been printed or some similarly mundane convention the reasons for which are lost in the mists of time?
The ever impressive Owen Jones is predicting a catastrophe for Starmer over Rochdale. LBC
Kind of impossible now he hasn't got a candidate.
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
It’s only 24 hour politics nerds like us that are going to notice this anyway. As it is the bloke was rumbled yesterday and they withdrew support today, which will seem like swift action when the story is written
That was my take. Thought it was my inner bias at work, but interesting that you see it likewise.
In the outside world, taking action within 1 working day is pretty quick. For a start, if you are going to show any kind of fairness, you have to ask a person if they said what they are reported to have said. And provide some kind of explanation. Then write that up and make a written decision. Then communicate that back to the person in question before releasing it to the media.
Unless you are Saddam Hussein and you just shoot the offender with the gold plated Beretta. But that is probably frowned upon in the more middle of the road social democratic parties.
Wasn't Al Campbell's Law that you had a week to see if the scandal would subside before you were out? Different times, of course, with a much more intense and continuous media cycle these days.
As for Labour, it would be interesting (if irrelevant) to know who knew what when? Was there a reasonable way for Rochdale Labour to know about these remarks, or were they made somewhere else? Did anyone ask Ali the "is there anything else we should know about?" question over the weekend, and if so, what did he say?
I know a little of the Rochdale Labour Party, and AFAIK they are not the types to cheer on mad bastards like Ali. I assume ignorance rather than indifference. That being said, he was hardly an unknown quantity. You'd have thought people would have known a bit about him.
A rare mistake by Labour HQ in Rochdale. Tony Lloyd died on 17 January, so they haven't had very long to get a candidate in place. But the due diligence they've been conducting for candidates in other seats clearly hasn't been expedited either swiftly or thoroughly enough. I suspect Starmer will be bollocking those he's delegated to check on candidates.
I do wonder if the bad headlines may have an impact on the outcome this week in Wellinborough.
Quick question. On Betfair you can back Labour still at 2.82. But they have no candidate, so would they pay out if Ali won? Or can we safely lay Labour? I’m reminded f the Aussie open when Jokovic was refused entry into Australia and all Jokovic bets were voided.
I’d be amazed, stupefied even, if Betfair did anything at all. Labour are still standing a candidate, they’re just not backing him. As a betting heat, nothing has changed
Yes, it sounds like they are effectively forced to stand him. Daft but seemingly that is the case. I’m keeping out of this market in any case, as low information. Would have had a flutter on the Libs if I’d spotted them at 120 a la @rottenborough though
Ali is the official Labour Party candidate. The Labour Party has 'withdrawn support' from him but they are too late to stop him standing for election as the Labour Party representative. If he wins the Returning Officer will declare a victory for Labour. So I don't think Betfair will or should void this market.
It’s farcical that Labour have to have him as their candidate now even though they don’t want him! Is it because the ballot papers have already been printed or some similarly mundane convention the reasons for which are lost in the mists of time?
There was a similar case in Wellingborough in 2015 when the Labour candidate was convicted of fraud before the election and also accused of inappropriately texting a teenager, but he still appeared on the ballot as the Labour candidate after he was suspended:
Ali is the official Labour Party candidate. The Labour Party has 'withdrawn support' from him but they are too late to stop him standing for election as the Labour Party representative. If he wins the Returning Officer will declare a victory for Labour. So I don't think Betfair will or should void this market.
It’s farcical that Labour have to have him as their candidate now even though they don’t want him! Is it because the ballot papers have already been printed or some similarly mundane convention the reasons for which are lost in the mists of time?
There was a similar case in Wellingborough in 2015 when the Labour candidate was convicted of fraud before the election and also accused of inappropriately texting a teenager, but he still appeared on the ballot as the Labour candidate after he was suspended:
Comments
I am still intending to vote for Labour, but I am under no great U.K. illusions of a shiny new age for Britain. It’s more to give someone else a go and give the Tories the chance to go home and think about what they’ve done…
Torn between voting Lib Dem, or voting Labour.
The more people speak up about Labour or Starmer, the more I'm tempted to go Lib Dem, but I won't be voting Tory until the Tories become the party of aspiration, of low taxes, of wanting everyone to be able to afford their own home etc once more.
Until they become worth voting for. Or until it becomes time to kick out the other lot, but right now they [the Tories] are the lot who don't deserve to be voted for and do deserve to be kicked out.
That you're even against Israel rescuing its hostages speaks volumes.
Terrible day for Starmer.
🚨🚨New Voting Intention🚨🚨
Labour lead widens to eighteen points in the latest results from Deltapoll.
Con 27% (-)
Lab 45% (+2)
Lib Dem 8% (-2)
Other 19% (-1)
Fieldwork: 9th - 12th February 2024
Sample: 1,977 GB adults
(Changes from 2nd - 5th February 2024)
@robfordmancs
Fieldwork covering the period of the Rochdale mess.
“Nothing matters very much, and few things matter at all.”
Voting requires effort, whether it's applying for, filling in and returning a postal ballot, or trudging to the local primary school in the rain. If it's transparently going to make no difference then why bother? A lot of voters are going to look at the non-choice being offered them and decide they'd rather spend quality time drinking or fucking or picking their noses.
(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
1h
Be weird if after all this Azhar Ali won...
I'm a big believer in evolution. Change for the sake of change can be a good thing.
The Tories don't deserve to win, so its time for Labour to have a go - and equally importantly time for the Tories to reflect upon why they lost. And if they go down the Bad Enoch route then they will deserve to lose in 2028 too.
But of course, Sir Keir is an honourable man, and always takes full responsibility for what happens in organizations that he leads. So we must interpret the words of his MPs over the past couple of days to have reflected his very will at the time, and the party's sudden withdrawal of support for the candidate is thus reflecting a personal, and perhaps unnecessarily late, change of mind on his part.
This reminds me rather of when Rory Stewart (when a minister in either the Cameron or May government) was defending an unpopular Conservative policy on a Sunday morning show, only for the policy to be reversed during that very same interview, with the interviewer (Marr?) interrupting him to tell him so.
I really don't see how any British politicians position on Israel/Gaza would make the slightest difference to the outcome.
It's like Scumbag College Students Union declaring itself a nuclear free zone. Gesture politics at its most pointless.
“Terrible day for SKS”.
Interesting
Is there no one in the room from Labour HQ on the day they do the hustings to select a candidate when he said these things about Gaza?
This is a by-election selection.
Jeez.
Oh well, whatever. Trying to predict the outcome of this mess is an entertaining parlour game, but there's no point in worrying about that which one cannot control.
If the public are with you, then your backbenches can forgive a lot. If the public turn, then suddenly sharpening the knives can seem all the more attractive.
It was the polls turning that helped Tory MPs decide they have had enough of Boris. As long as Keir is popular, he has a shield.
Fair to say that this guy is possibly in the minority of Democratic activists - but his point that the administration has delivered for the young is a sharp contrast to anything anyone has ever said about our government.
The linked Politico article is worth reading.
I’m 21. I don’t give a damn about Joe Biden’s age because he has delivered for Gen Z more than any president in history. THAT is why my peers & I will vote for him again. We see his accomplishments over his age.
I took my thoughts to Politico.
https://twitter.com/Victorshi2020/status/1756708479899980073
What's the worst that can happen?
His party loses? 'Unique circumstances, we had no candidate'.
His party wins? 'Shows how popular we are despite not being able to endorse the candidate'.
*Presumably not as short as Sherlock Holmes’s exile as per Mark Gatiss.
What’s interesting about the Delta Poll is outside the big 3 it bundles the rest as others. 20%, in contrast 1997 others was 6%. This makes historical comparisons and “what always tends to happen” a little more uncertain. We know from 92 to 97 Labour didn’t get many direct switchers from Con, about 14% tops, what caused the landslide was stay at home Con voters. This time it’s not just apathy peeling voters from the Tories, it’s sirens in form of an electoral machine and party called reform.
That current 20% others makes Labour not polling as high PV as Johnson and even May a possibility, but similarly takes top off the Tory PV compared to history. It’s a new fluid ball game, and the scoreboard reads Tories no higher than 31 and no more than 170 seats.
The other thing pointing to me being right is say, in 2015 although Labour had campaign poll leads, in terms of best PM and best for economy they were very much behind. Not so this time, to the extent of asking has there ever been an election where opposition were so far ahead on best PM and best for the economy?
If enough headbangers vote for Galloway, and a much smaller number of headbangers vote for Danczuk then the Tories could take the seat.
Tory candidate is someone local who doesn't appear to be actively mad, a massive bigot or a sexter of teenage girls, unlike several of the Independent candidates, the Labour candidate, the Reform candidate and the Green candidate.
I'm just hoping for someone who doesn't embarrass us further. Labour should have picked Paul Waugh whilst they had the chance.
I think it will be a lowish turnout GE because 1) lack of enthusiasm for any party, 2) the outcome looks a foregone conclusion.
So a turnout in the low 60's percent, but in terms of party turnout pretty much a wash. Unenthusiastic Lab voters more or less paired by unenthusiastic Con ones.
I think it’s significant when the foreign secretary (in support of the US administration) reaffirms commitment to a two state solution - in opposition to the Israeli PM’s assertion that the idea is dead.
It’s only influence, and you can argue about what weight it carries, but it’s not nothing.
(Obviously, no one gives a crap about what a by-election candidate has to say about it.)
So, we have:
Ali - may get some support for being dropped, possibly eating at the Galloway vote. With the Rose next to his name could still get up to 20 odd %
Galloway - Capable of 20% in Batley in normal times, similar constituency profile, so capable of more here with Gaza relevant, but Ali could split the vote! Might pick up some horseshoe types as well as some Muslim vote.
RefUK - Should have been capable of a decent showing and 20% possible, but there isn't going to be a Danczuk vote and by choosing him they will be stuck in the low teens at best.
Conservatives - on 30% last time, some will stay home, but who the hell are they going to actually bleed votes to here - Labour, RefUK? So they could keep over half their vote and get in the 20s. Low 20s, but could that be enough?
LD - 8% last time out doesn't sound like a lot,
but compared to the 2-3% in a lot of the north there is clearly a residual support base here. The favoured switch of the Labour moderate presumably. 20%+ very doable.
That's 5 candidates who could all hit 15% and 4 who could top 20%.
It makes Mid Beds look simple.
Declaration of interest. After 9 years on here, doing the odd bit of tipping as well, I jumped and made my first political bet last night, and got a few quid on LD at 100/1.
The decision means there is now no official Labour candidate – but three former Labour representatives standing against each other in Ali, Galloway and Danczuk....has that ever happened before?
Last week the media in general and our very own William Glenn in particular were outraged after a Republican lawyer exonerated Biden by means of his lack of clarity. It has gained traction in the polls too.
On the last weekend Donald J Trump, regaling a fake story about a conversation he never had with European Statesman coated his old rubbish with an invitation to Putin to invade/attack NATO countries of Putin's choice. And not so much as a titter of nervous laughter from our own William Glenn.
Did anyone else catch the irony of Trump defending a Russian invasion of a NATO country because they "didn't pay their dues". This from a grifter who avoids paying invoices, much to the detriment of useful idiots like former 9/11 national treasure Rudi Guiliani.
My reasoning is that the Conservatives managed to salvage about 31% of the vote in 1997, that was against a Labour leader who actually gave a reasonable impression of being interested in the job of governing, and both polarisation by age cohorts and the median age of the electorate have increased significantly in the intervening period. I obviously risk being proven disastrously wrong by sticking my head above the parapet and making these predictions, but I just don't see getting rid of Sunak and replacing him with continuity Sunak as being a solid foundation for a mighty triumph.
https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/daily-mail-front-page-2024-02-13/
https://x.com/jaheale/status/1757169558488555878
What an absolute nutjob
"A quarrel in a far away country, between people of whom we know nothing.”
Sounds familiar.
I hadn't realised before that Danczuk was standing for Refuk. That's something of a surprise (to me, at least).
Unless you are Saddam Hussein and you just shoot the offender with the gold plated Beretta. But that is probably frowned upon in the more middle of the road social democratic parties.
I am not expecting LAB to exceed 40% or CON to get less than 30% notwithstanding what the polls say at the moment.
I don't trust the polls. I dare say they offer a reasonable approximation of what people think right now, but I doubt the current numbers will survive contact with an election campaign where voters have to think about who is actually going to form an administration (or, indeed, whether or not they care who does from the options available.)
I've further justified my reasoning for putting the Conservatives north of a third of the vote in a different reply so won't elaborate here.
DYOR 😈
As for Labour, it would be interesting (if irrelevant) to know who knew what when? Was there a reasonable way for Rochdale Labour to know about these remarks, or were they made somewhere else? Did anyone ask Ali the "is there anything else we should know about?" question over the weekend, and if so, what did he say?
He is on the ballot and cannot be removed now (although possibly he can remove himself but maybe even that date has passed as well???). The ballot will show his name and Lab logo and so on.
Nothing Lab can do about that now.
So I am assuming BF will pay up if he wins.
I just hope that the scoundrel Galloway fails to gain traction.
I do wonder if the bad headlines may have an impact on the outcome this week in Wellinborough.
https://www.itv.com/news/update/2015-04-30/labour-candidate-suspended-after-fraud-conviction/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3064732/Police-probe-Labour-parliamentary-hopeful-went-Snapchat-asked-public-schoolgirl-17-Ready-bed-yet.html