It’s costing Labour and could well cost them the West Midlands mayoralty.
You would imagine a human rights lawyer might have qualms when saying “Israel has the right” to withhold power and water from Palestinian civilians. The irony being it was one of the few bits of substance he's said.
Alternatively, if you look at the nature of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel activism - is there any plausible position Starmer could take that would appease people who have a visceral hatred of Israel and believe it is inherently evil?
No doubt it was a misstep - and has given enemies ammunition - but if he hadn't said it, the same people would still be accusing anyone who takes a remotely understanding position of Israel's actions against Hamas, of Genocide. Bernie Sanders has been condemned as a 'Zionist' genocide supporter FFS.
The important question is whether Starmer, and more importantly we as a country end up in a position that brings about lasting peace (or tries to, most have failed). Sod whether it costs Labour some votes in some constituencies, frankly.
He's very good at saying nothing of substance, so why not do that? Platitudes for both sides, wishing for an end to the violence and acknowledging that whatever the UK's shadow PM says it makes no difference.
Instead he went in two footed and shattered the ankle of ambiguity. Completely out of his public character. So maybe he meant it? And those who believe that denial of water to civilians is a red line will vote else where.
oof, don't know what happened about the Tory candidate for Hedge End North (Eastleigh) or was it the 2021 candidate very good.
Hedge End North (Eastleigh) Liberal Democrats 1,105 (+14.1% compared to 2021) Labour 290 (+9.0%) Green 185 (+1.9%) Conservative 167 (-25.0%) Lib Dem HOLD
Blackpool South result not expected until 6 am . Pathetic !
At the last general election it was declared at about 2:15am, and was number 86 out of 650 to be declared.
Curtice has said as Labour held it from 1997 to 2019 a win is a no triumph for Labour but swing is what's important. Correct me where wrong, Curtice had just set 20% Swing as a benchmark par score for Labour, compared to their recent by election wins and national polling?
That's what I heard. And Refuk sound reasonably confident of coming second, pushing the Tories to third - could be the story of the night if that happens.
Blackpool South result not expected until 6 am . Pathetic !
At the last general election it was declared at about 2:15am, and was number 86 out of 650 to be declared.
Curtice has said as Labour held it from 1997 to 2019 a win is a no triumph for Labour but swing is what's important. Correct me where wrong, Curtice had just set 20% Swing as a benchmark par score for Labour, compared to their recent by election wins and national polling?
That's what I heard. And Refuk sound reasonably confident of coming second, pushing the Tories to third - could be the story of the night if that happens.
If Labour can take it with swing of 20% or near it, is probably the most important take out. Even when winning it before 2019 the graph shows it was tight both main parties losing votes to UKIP.
If Reform come second, what does it really mean? Anything? If we add the Ref+Con as a bloc and it’s bigger or close to Labour, that could be more meaningful?
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
One measurement we are using at the end of counting is the NEV and PNS. And early signs is not good for Labour.
After a hundred wards, Labour ate down on what they got last year. They are on course or worse for the 35% NEV and PNS they got last year. if it stays like that till the end it’s way down on all the opinion polls. And the celebrity psephologists will certainly be pointing to how poor that is.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
It really highlights what we already know, which is that the Conservatives are doing very badly, though probably not dropping to Con/Canada 1993 levels.
Labour are doing OK but are quite short of the glory days of Tony Blair in the mid-90s
And Lib-Dems are sort of back in business but still not completely forgiven for the coalition.
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
American "upper middle class" is similar to the English skilled working class or lower middle class, isn't it? So wine mom = social side of middle-market gyms sounds about right to me. Used to wear Lululemon to Bikram yoga, but has now moved to the suburbs and goes to Fitness First, drinks rosé, and browses Jojo Maman Bébé.
It’s costing Labour and could well cost them the West Midlands mayoralty.
You would imagine a human rights lawyer might have qualms when saying “Israel has the right” to withhold power and water from Palestinian civilians. The irony being it was one of the few bits of substance he's said.
Alternatively, if you look at the nature of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel activism - is there any plausible position Starmer could take that would appease people who have a visceral hatred of Israel and believe it is inherently evil?
No doubt it was a misstep - and has given enemies ammunition - but if he hadn't said it, the same people would still be accusing anyone who takes a remotely understanding position of Israel's actions against Hamas, of Genocide. Bernie Sanders has been condemned as a 'Zionist' genocide supporter FFS.
The important question is whether Starmer, and more importantly we as a country end up in a position that brings about lasting peace (or tries to, most have failed). Sod whether it costs Labour some votes in some constituencies, frankly.
He's very good at saying nothing of substance so why not do that? Platitudes for both sides, wishing for an end to the violence and acknowledging that whatever the UK's shadow PM says it makes no difference.
Instead he went in two footed and shattered the ankle of ambiguity. Completely out of his public character. So maybe he meant it? And those who believe that denial of water to civilians is a red line will vote else where.
Well isn't that the nature of the issue? To some people even the simple statement of the facts and responsibility makes you evil. Everyone knows Hamas use aid, electricity, and supply for dreadful purposes. While acknowledging aid is desperately needed. This is why the US is building an aid pier so can make sure it goes to people. Not a terrorist group.
This is quite a lonely view on the left - I am well aware having argued, good naturedly with friends (we haven't fallen out) - that if you have a concept whereby Hamas and Iran are responsible for many evils, while condemning lunatics like Ben Gvir and despising Netanyahu, you are supposedly on "the wrong side of history". I don't think so. And what matters will be how peace is furthered. Joe Biden has seen people violently opposing him despite his government working harder than any other for a ceasefire that works.
I'm not sure that people who think either that or Keir Starmer's views are toxic because he made a bad comment in an interview are either serious about peace and understanding the Israeli side, or should be listened to as you didn't gain Oldham when you might have done. It's either right or wrong. And fundamentally I don't think lots of people care about right or wrong rather than picking their side and supporting like a football team.
oof, don't know what happened about the Tory candidate for Hedge End North (Eastleigh) or was it the 2021 candidate very good.
Hedge End North (Eastleigh) Liberal Democrats 1,105 (+14.1% compared to 2021) Labour 290 (+9.0%) Green 185 (+1.9%) Conservative 167 (-25.0%) Lib Dem HOLD
The Tory candidate at the previous election was one (different) Susan Hall, as it happens.
It's interesting.
The Eastleigh Council makeup is
Liberal Democrats 35 Independent 3 Conservative 1
So a sticky wicket for all non-LDs.
It's like Ashfield, but with Lib Dems not former Lib Dems dominating.
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
It was originally a bit of a flippant joke, meant to convey the type of people who used to vote Tory but now very much don't in Surrey.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
No. It’s not about lead, it’s about looking after your own share by getting your vote out.
If Labour get about 43% PV at the general election they won’t have to be looking over their shoulder at how much of the Reform total the Tory’s are eating into and closing up on them.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
There are many more independent candidates now and the Greens are doing much better so not sure comparisons with years ago stand up to scrutiny . People are much happier to vote for a wider range of candidates in local elections . That won’t be the case at the GE .
There are many more independent candidates now and the Greens are doing much better so not sure comparisons with years ago stand up to scrutiny . People are much happier to vote for a wider range of candidates in local elections . That won’t be the case at the GE .
Yeah, but that works the other way from Ref > Con too.
It’s costing Labour and could well cost them the West Midlands mayoralty.
You would imagine a human rights lawyer might have qualms when saying “Israel has the right” to withhold power and water from Palestinian civilians. The irony being it was one of the few bits of substance he's said.
Alternatively, if you look at the nature of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel activism - is there any plausible position Starmer could take that would appease people who have a visceral hatred of Israel and believe it is inherently evil?
No doubt it was a misstep - and has given enemies ammunition - but if he hadn't said it, the same people would still be accusing anyone who takes a remotely understanding position of Israel's actions against Hamas, of Genocide. Bernie Sanders has been condemned as a 'Zionist' genocide supporter FFS.
The important question is whether Starmer, and more importantly we as a country end up in a position that brings about lasting peace (or tries to, most have failed). Sod whether it costs Labour some votes in some constituencies, frankly.
He's very good at saying nothing of substance so why not do that? Platitudes for both sides, wishing for an end to the violence and acknowledging that whatever the UK's shadow PM says it makes no difference.
Instead he went in two footed and shattered the ankle of ambiguity. Completely out of his public character. So maybe he meant it? And those who believe that denial of water to civilians is a red line will vote else where.
Well isn't that the nature of the issue? To some people even the simple statement of the facts and responsibility makes you evil. Everyone knows Hamas use aid, electricity, and supply for dreadful purposes. While acknowledging aid is desperately needed. This is why the US is building an aid pier so can make sure it goes to people. Not a terrorist group.
This is quite a lonely view on the left - I am well aware having argued, good naturedly with friends (we haven't fallen out) - that if you have a concept whereby Hamas and Iran are responsible for many evils, while condemning lunatics like Ben Gvir and despising Netanyahu, you are supposedly on "the wrong side of history". I don't think so. And what matters will be how peace is furthered. Joe Biden has seen people violently opposing him despite his government working harder than any other for a ceasefire that works.
I'm not sure that people who think either that or Keir Starmer's views are toxic because he made a bad comment in an interview are either serious about peace and understanding the Israeli side, or should be listened to as you didn't gain Oldham when you might have done. It's either right or wrong. And fundamentally I don't think lots of people care about right or wrong rather than picking their side and supporting like a football team.
Personally, I think the path mapped out by Cameron is the one that Starmer should have taken. I accept that he may have misheard the question, but having given the impression that he thought it was fine to withhold power and water, his failure to walk back from that or acknowledge the harm he had caused was very definitely noticed.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
American "upper middle class" is similar to the English skilled working class or lower middle class, isn't it? So wine mom = social side of middle-market gyms sounds about right to me. Used to wear Lululemon to Bikram yoga, but has now moved to the suburbs and goes to Fitness First, drinks rosé, and browses Jojo Maman Bébé.
The Fitness First note is interesting - I think they are pay-as-you-go, like Puregym.
I'd call middle market more like Virgin or Bannatyne, with David Lloyd a slight cut above.
Crossfit etc fit alongside as stripped out and a bit more expensive / hardcore for the more dedicated.
There are many more independent candidates now and the Greens are doing much better so not sure comparisons with years ago stand up to scrutiny . People are much happier to vote for a wider range of candidates in local elections . That won’t be the case at the GE .
One interesting point for me is that the Greens are really only starting to get into the need to retain significant numbers of councillors rather than win new ones game. How many they keep will be interesting.
Has Topsham in Devon ever voted in a Labour candidate before?
Topsham (Exeter) Labour 1,339 (+16.4% compared to 2021) Conservative 1,094 (-14.9%) Green 332 (-1.1%) Liberal Democrats 217 (-0.4%) Labour GAIN from Conservative
Labour joy in Topsham offset by defeat elsewhere in Exeter.
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021) Labour 941 (-8.3%) Conservative 211 (-6.4%) Independent 122 (+4.7%) Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%) Green GAIN from Labour
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
American "upper middle class" is similar to the English skilled working class or lower middle class, isn't it? So wine mom = social side of middle-market gyms sounds about right to me. Used to wear Lululemon to Bikram yoga, but has now moved to the suburbs and goes to Fitness First, drinks rosé, and browses Jojo Maman Bébé.
The Fitness First note is interesting - I think they are pay-as-you-go, like Puregym.
I'd call middle market more like Virgin or Bannatyne, with David Lloyd a slight cut above.
Crossfit etc fit alongside as stripped out and a bit more expensive / hardcore for the more dedicated.
Fitness First are still a monthly contract, and I think they've tried to move upmarket over the past decade - £95/month for my local one. Agreed that David Lloyd is a tier above.
Back onto the elections, the BBC are now predicting 539 Tory losses - worse than any predictions I had seen until now. Perhaps things will get better for them tomorrow?
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
An Anti LTN independent romped home in Heavitree (Exeter) on the perspective that the LTN proposed will increase pollution.
Heavitree (Exeter) Independent 1,171 (+36.0% compared to 2021) Green 948 (-9.4%) Labour 705 (-17.3%) Conservative 355 (-11.6%) Liberal Democrats 76 (+2.3%) Independent GAIN from Labour
Labour joy in Topsham offset by defeat elsewhere in Exeter.
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021) Labour 941 (-8.3%) Conservative 211 (-6.4%) Independent 122 (+4.7%) Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%) Green GAIN from Labour
It's remarkable how far to the Left Exeter has shifted in recent decades.
Labour joy in Topsham offset by defeat elsewhere in Exeter.
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021) Labour 941 (-8.3%) Conservative 211 (-6.4%) Independent 122 (+4.7%) Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%) Green GAIN from Labour
It's remarkable how far to the Left Exeter has shifted in recent decades.
Are Greens widely seen as left? Then how come they take so many Conservative seats in solid Conservative area's?
Starmers stupid comments re Gaza on LBC coming back to haunt him .
Later in the night there are plenty of further wards with a high Muslim percentage of voters.
And of course, London.
Khan came out early for a ceasefire and the Muslim population will back him especially as he’s up against Hall .
“especially as he’s up against Hall”
How well did many of the voters really know Hall, for it to become a motivational factor in their voting?
It's a good point - I've not seen much local TV news myself, but hearing from friends who have it sounds like Hall has mostly been talking about housing and crime to the traditional media.
The ULEZ / racist stuff has been confined to the micro-targetted Facebook campaign - if you're not a boomer or actively follow politics, it's unlikely that you'll have seen it.
Two reasons I fear for Khan.
1.) He's not got the same inner city enthusiasm as in the past. Not entirely his fault, or even mostly that, given councils block development and licensing, the government stop serious reform of the Met and crap on TfL but it's not a good record of promises and delivery. The Night Czar is a good example. He's employed a pointless PR person to celebrate nightlife when venues keep closing due to councils' behaviour. On a more serious note. There have been endless initiatives to tackle crime while Johnson-era police uselessness and closures continue.
I'd vote for him if still lived in London in a heartbeat over Hall but others will not turn out.
2.) Hall has likely been very effective in targeting ULEZ-land. The bits of London that fall within the mayoralty but aren't London but part of the surrounding counties. That was Boris' route to victory against people who were fed up with Livingstone.
I dunno. But I worry the Labour campaign about Hall's crank views - and she is a crank - won't resonate as much as people blaming the Mayor for stuff that isn't necessarily his fault but is blamed for being ineffective on.
On your first point, I agree entirely. I've heard Khan described as "a mayor for people who catch the bus, rather than those who use the tube". His biggest achievement from his second term has been the Superloop, and who in central london cares about that?
The Night Czar stuff is a great example of how limited the Mayor's role is outside of transport - Amy Lame has done a decent job of publicising the issues, but the actual problem lies with the councils, the Home Office, and the DCMS. The Mayor should either back off entirely or there should be an all-out campaign with a full-time deputy Mayor rather than single part-time czar.
Really, London desperately needs more coherent devolution - give the Mayor and GLA full control of the Met, and push responsibility for things like licencing and large-scale planning up to them from the borough councils.
Entirely agree with that - as I say I am sympathetic to Khan, I think he is generally decent. And the problems are not his own. It's always worth remembering he has been the first London mayor to serve for 8 years under a government that has deliberately set out to stymie him and then blame him for the result (if I was him I'd have made a lot more of this and accused the Tories of stealing from London).
Just, that's not politics, is it? People say what has been done for me, and what's been done against me. And there's not a huge amount in the inner city pro-Khan ledger, while people who hate him have their rallying cry in ULEZ despite it being good policy once the teething problems are over and vehicles have been replaced.
Even Lamborgini are releasing ULEZ-compliant hybrids now. Not least as they are faster than the petrol versions.
Serving for 8 years is a big part of the problem, at least amongst the people I know. There's a genuine feeling that two terms had been established as the norm - and that Khan hasn't done enough to warrant bucking the trend. I mean, he's not FDR, is he?
To me, his manifesto was pretty weak. Going back to the fares freeze promise from his first term - well, fine, but that just means less money for much-needed infrastructure, doesn't it? Free school meals, ending rough sleeping, more police - all need a Labour govt to deliver. Otherwise, there are some promises around youth clubs, extending the Superloop, and the London Growth Plan. So what?
He's a safe pair of hands, but offers nothing to actively vote for if you're pissed off with Labour for other reasons.
You can still get 18.5 if you think Susan Hall is going to win.
Labour joy in Topsham offset by defeat elsewhere in Exeter.
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021) Labour 941 (-8.3%) Conservative 211 (-6.4%) Independent 122 (+4.7%) Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%) Green GAIN from Labour
It's remarkable how far to the Left Exeter has shifted in recent decades.
Topsham isn’t really Exeter although it will go from East Devon to ‘Exeter East’ constituency but, yes Exeter is comfortably settled left of centre.
It all began to go wrong for the tories in 1997 with the execrable Dr Adrian Rogers who led a disgustingly homophobic campaign against Ben Bradshaw under a Conservative badge.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
I doubt if Reform will win a single seat, other than perhaps a London List.
It’s beginning to look as if the Cons may lose close to 500 seats, which is worse than any commentators I saw forecast.
Crucial to note: Projected share is roughly where we expected based on the polls, but seat gains/losses seem to be a good 30% worse than expected - suggests an additional efficiency to the anti-Con vote.
"Labour gain Hartlepool" won't butter any parsnips if they lose in London.
This looks like a story of two halves: terrible council local election results, that may be overshadowed by Houchen, Street and what happens in London.
The former is more important for predicting the GE, however.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
Tony Blair 1995 46%
Milliband 2012 38%
Starmer 2024 36%
It’s not me compiling the NEV and PNS it’s the Celebrity Psephologists who are doing it for us. They will write headlines about Starmer massively underperforming the polls.
…Wait. Why are you saying it’s been good for Reform?
For the umpteenth time, Broxbourne returns 9 Con to 1 Lab
Claims Tories will finish minus 500 from only 970 defences are beginning to look very fanciful already.
Some of the celebrity Psephologists set the Tory par score too high I think. Minus 400 Net might be a pretty bad result, but some of the celebrity psephologists who tend to write the headlines for the TV companies, won’t call it the bad result. Tories will certainly spin minus 390 as good result.
But beware the Blue rinse out. We have been here before where the red wall rush is not so bad headlines for Tories at dawn, but by dusk the blue wall is a mess.
Most sensible predictions I saw were around 400. They are going to overperform national polling in some places and do catastrophically in others. What's important, probably, is where. I'd look to obvious red wall Labour gains - is it winning enough switchers. And whether places like Surrey commuterland utterly collapse.
Bizarrely, Surrey is a very interesting place to watch at the moment (full disclosure - Wokingian who went to Godalming college) as it's ground zero of the "people under 65 who used to vote Tory have just stopped and hate them for umpteen reasons" phenomenon. People are incredibly pissed off (notably Woking was a rare Tory stronghold that voted remain, and I'm sure we all know of the council's antics, and its house prices).
Anyway, if the Tories perform badly but respectably around here - I think we can close off the Canada 93 speculation. If get slaughtered in places that have more golf clubs than football clubs. Then they really could be slaughtered.
Good post.
Tonight hasn’t been great for Labour on the Red Wall yet again, and it’s a pattern now throughout this Parliament, considering mid terms like last year and year before supposed to be difficult for governing party. At the GE I’m beggining to think Labour will fail in some surprising Red Wall targets, but pick up surprise wins in Blue Wall.
There's an interesting question about whether 2024/25 is Labour's version of Tory 2017 or 2019 on a very small change in its own vote - and what the Tory vote does. They could gain huge swathes of the 'Red Wall' - but not some oddball places that for various reasons are now quite Tory - on a middling swing. And daft places (along with the Lib Dems) down south that are traditionally Tory as sin but now despise their guts and have a sweetspot that delivers a landslide (2019).
Alternatively, they do a Tory 2017 and miss lots of 'Red Wall' seats by narrow margins and give people like Michael Gove huge scares but they all hang on as Bagshot wine mums decide they like they like their local MP and the idea of the Tories over booting them out. In the same way many Red Wall places gave Labour one last shot in 2017. Just. Even while the Tories narrowed previously unsurmountable majorities hugely.
wine mums You meant wine gums, though it makes sense either way.
Where many on PB point out old Labour seats, like where there used to be mines, are changing and trending away from Labour, perhaps I’m wrong but it seems to me cities are trending away from Tories and their suburbs become the bellweather seats. And Brexit has accelerated this by making working class voters Labour all their lives vote Tory and Blue Wall remainers vote Lib Dem or Labour. I think in 1945 Labour won a lot in the countryside because there’s lots of poorly paid people living and working there, but used to lose in cities because people lived in big houses poor people couldn’t afford. Society has changed. Landscapes have changed. Aspirations are different. Work life balance is different, as rites of passage is now non existent. Wage slaves are still there, but hunched over laptops at home all hours like my ex was, and that could be scattered throughout the country not focussed in specific places like workers used to be.
Reading the definition, it seems quite incoherent, and particularly to stretch "upper middle class" so thin as to take it beyond breaking point.
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
American "upper middle class" is similar to the English skilled working class or lower middle class, isn't it? So wine mom = social side of middle-market gyms sounds about right to me. Used to wear Lululemon to Bikram yoga, but has now moved to the suburbs and goes to Fitness First, drinks rosé, and browses Jojo Maman Bébé.
NO, in USA the "upper middle class" traditionally & historically means top managers, college-educated professionals and their dependents. NOT similar to English skilled workers & lower middle class.
Keep in mind that (again traditionally & historically) the term "middle-class" has been VERY elastic. Including plenty who in UK would (trad. & hist.) been considered & considered themselves working class.
There are so many independents at local level, and Reform on the scene, that trying to compute an NEV to national GE voting isn’t just fraught, it’s ‘voodoo' work.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
I doubt if Reform will win a single seat, other than perhaps a London List.
No but if they come 2nd in Blackpool that’s huge surely?
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
Tony Blair 1995 46%
Milliband 2012 38%
Starmer 2024 36%
It’s not me compiling the NEV and PNS it’s the Celebrity Psephologists who are doing it for us. They will write headlines about Starmer massively underperforming the polls.
…Wait. Why are you saying it’s been good for Reform?
PNS calculation won't be released til late tomorrow afternoon, I think - so the Blackpool South result is likely to lead the headlines this morning.
A near miss for another Anti LTN independent in Exeter, maybe not helped by a tweet where he suggested posting 'an envelope full of poo' though a county councillor's letterbox.
Mincinglake and Whipton (Exeter) Labour 842 (-7.7% compared to 2021) Independent 775 (+37.1%) Conservative 190 (-18.1%) Green 169 (-9.3%) Liberal Democrats 111 (-2.0%) Labour HOLD
It’s beginning to look as if the Cons may lose close to 500 seats, which is worse than any commentators I saw forecast.
Crucial to note: Projected share is roughly where we expected based on the polls, but seat gains/losses seem to be a good 30% worse than expected - suggests an additional efficiency to the anti-Con vote.
Would translate to Lab 36% Con 24% Lib-Dem 17% in projected national share of the vote.
Doesn’t look like Labour are getting up to the late thirties or 40% at this stage.
Curtice suggested an 8% swing, since 2021, which implies a 9% lead. It’s enough for Labour to win comfortably.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
???
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2% 2001 40.7% 2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
I doubt if Reform will win a single seat, other than perhaps a London List.
No but if they come 2nd in Blackpool that’s huge surely?
In 2004, UKIP outpolled the Conservatives in Hartlepool, but it did not lead to much.
Labour joy in Topsham offset by defeat elsewhere in Exeter.
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021) Labour 941 (-8.3%) Conservative 211 (-6.4%) Independent 122 (+4.7%) Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%) Green GAIN from Labour
It's remarkable how far to the Left Exeter has shifted in recent decades.
Topsham isn’t really Exeter although it will go from East Devon to ‘Exeter East’ constituency but, yes Exeter is comfortably settled left of centre.
It all began to go wrong for the tories in 1997 with the execrable Dr Adrian Rogers who led a disgustingly homophobic campaign against Ben Bradshaw under a Conservative badge.
(Declared interest: Ben is a friend of mine)
Exeter 1997 still makes me ache, went all the way from Yeovil to work in Exeter and Eddie Lopez puts me at the bottom of the steepest road in Pennsylvania.
It’s costing Labour and could well cost them the West Midlands mayoralty.
You would imagine a human rights lawyer might have qualms when saying “Israel has the right” to withhold power and water from Palestinian civilians. The irony being it was one of the few bits of substance he's said.
Alternatively, if you look at the nature of pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel activism - is there any plausible position Starmer could take that would appease people who have a visceral hatred of Israel and believe it is inherently evil?
No doubt it was a misstep - and has given enemies ammunition - but if he hadn't said it, the same people would still be accusing anyone who takes a remotely understanding position of Israel's actions against Hamas, of Genocide. Bernie Sanders has been condemned as a 'Zionist' genocide supporter FFS.
The important question is whether Starmer, and more importantly we as a country end up in a position that brings about lasting peace (or tries to, most have failed). Sod whether it costs Labour some votes in some constituencies, frankly.
He's very good at saying nothing of substance so why not do that? Platitudes for both sides, wishing for an end to the violence and acknowledging that whatever the UK's shadow PM says it makes no difference.
Instead he went in two footed and shattered the ankle of ambiguity. Completely out of his public character. So maybe he meant it? And those who believe that denial of water to civilians is a red line will vote else where.
Well isn't that the nature of the issue? To some people even the simple statement of the facts and responsibility makes you evil. Everyone knows Hamas use aid, electricity, and supply for dreadful purposes. While acknowledging aid is desperately needed. This is why the US is building an aid pier so can make sure it goes to people. Not a terrorist group.
This is quite a lonely view on the left - I am well aware having argued, good naturedly with friends (we haven't fallen out) - that if you have a concept whereby Hamas and Iran are responsible for many evils, while condemning lunatics like Ben Gvir and despising Netanyahu, you are supposedly on "the wrong side of history". I don't think so. And what matters will be how peace is furthered. Joe Biden has seen people violently opposing him despite his government working harder than any other for a ceasefire that works.
I'm not sure that people who think either that or Keir Starmer's views are toxic because he made a bad comment in an interview are either serious about peace and understanding the Israeli side, or should be listened to as you didn't gain Oldham when you might have done. It's either right or wrong. And fundamentally I don't think lots of people care about right or wrong rather than picking their side and supporting like a football team.
Personally, I think the path mapped out by Cameron is the one that Starmer should have taken. I accept that he may have misheard the question, but having given the impression that he thought it was fine to withhold power and water, his failure to walk back from that or acknowledge the harm he had caused was very definitely noticed.
Cameron has made him seem very clumsy.
Cameron has made comments that have also gone down quite badly. I tend to think neither matters but where we end up. Starmer is quite a clumsy interviewee on lots of stuff but I don't think it matters. It is pretty much impossible to not upset people with what you say as there is no good answer. Even the pabulum of a peaceful two state solution requires huge sacrifices that are sadly currently implausible thanks to extremists. Maybe they never were plausible.
That's not to say Cameron couldn't and shouldn't be trying to achieve things. But it's difficult, difficult lemon difficult. There's no right approach for a British politician on this that doesn't cause huge division and upset. Starmer is as likely to help it as he is - i.e, not at all other than on aid.
It’s beginning to look as if the Cons may lose close to 500 seats, which is worse than any commentators I saw forecast.
Crucial to note: Projected share is roughly where we expected based on the polls, but seat gains/losses seem to be a good 30% worse than expected - suggests an additional efficiency to the anti-Con vote.
Rallings & Thrasher were expecting about 500 losses, back in March.
R&T March 26th: "If the Conservatives repeat their poor performance of 2023, when the NEV put them below 30%, they stand to lose up to 500 seats – half their councillors facing election. Labour may make about 300 gains, with the Liberal Democrats and Greens both likely to advance"
So 500 was an upper limit of "poor performance" a couple of weeks ago.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
It's not necessarily a stupid idea depending on what this chatter is based on, assuming it is based on anything at all.
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Frankly I think you are desperately grasping at straws and failing to read the mood.
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I wouldn't be backing Khan at 1.05 - that's certainly not value.
He should probably be at 1.25 to 1.3 based on current information.
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Frankly I think you are desperately grasping at straws and failing to read the mood.
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
The London result is not as remotely important as the main PB point of contention in this thread. What do you know of Wine Mums?
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Frankly I think you are desperately grasping at straws and failing to read the mood.
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
It’s beginning to look as if the Cons may lose close to 500 seats, which is worse than any commentators I saw forecast.
Crucial to note: Projected share is roughly where we expected based on the polls, but seat gains/losses seem to be a good 30% worse than expected - suggests an additional efficiency to the anti-Con vote.
Rallings & Thrasher were expecting about 500 losses, back in March.
R&T March 26th: "If the Conservatives repeat their poor performance of 2023, when the NEV put them below 30%, they stand to lose up to 500 seats – half their councillors facing election. Labour may make about 300 gains, with the Liberal Democrats and Greens both likely to advance"
So 500 was an upper limit of "poor performance" a couple of weeks ago.
I didn't see anyone predicting more than "perhaps up to 500 at most" Tory losses. It's beginning to look like it's going beyond that, isn't it?
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Frankly I think you are desperately grasping at straws and failing to read the mood.
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
The London result is not as remotely important as the main PB point of contention in this thread. What do you know of Wine Mums?
I don’t know what a Wine Mum is but that did make me chuckle x
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I wouldn't be backing Khan at 1.05 - that's certainly not value.
He should probably be at 1.25 to 1.3 based on current information.
I'm no Khan fan, but he's a lot better than an 80% chance to hold on
John Curtice (BBC):Blackpool South is the 5th time this parliament there has been a Cons to Lab swing of over 20% and the third biggest by-election swing since WWII
The last time we saw consistent swings like this? The 1992-7 Parliament
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
It's not necessarily a stupid idea depending on what this chatter is based on, assuming it is based on anything at all.
It was coming from all parties shortly after 10, presumably as their election workers got back to base.
There’s been shock results before, will be shock results again, it’s not that big a deal.
Would mean though that rather than a flash in the plan, Uxbridge was a beacon to a Tory mayor victory.
It’s beginning to look as if the Cons may lose close to 500 seats, which is worse than any commentators I saw forecast.
Crucial to note: Projected share is roughly where we expected based on the polls, but seat gains/losses seem to be a good 30% worse than expected - suggests an additional efficiency to the anti-Con vote.
Rallings & Thrasher were expecting about 500 losses, back in March.
R&T March 26th: "If the Conservatives repeat their poor performance of 2023, when the NEV put them below 30%, they stand to lose up to 500 seats – half their councillors facing election. Labour may make about 300 gains, with the Liberal Democrats and Greens both likely to advance"
So 500 was an upper limit of "poor performance" a couple of weeks ago.
There are three conclusions from these elections:
1. The anti-Conservative vote is increasingly efficient. And a return to tactical voting is definitely bad news for the conservatives.
2. Refuk is taking votes from the conservatives. There's probably the opportunity to bring them back, but it won't be easy.
3. The electorate is willing to look beyond ConLabLD: that's bad news for all the incumbent pastors.
John Curtice (BBC):Blackpool South is the 5th time this parliament there has been a Cons to Lab swing of over 20% and the third biggest by-election swing since WWII
The last time we saw consistent swings like this? The 1992-7 Parliament
Source: BBC
That understates it.
I count only 4 by-elections with >20% swing in the 1992-7 parliament, and only 1 with >25%.
Labour 38.6% (8 seats, -2 and -4.8% compared to 2021) Green 20.3% (2 seats, +1 and +3.8%) Conservative 16.9% (1 seat, -1 and -12.9%) Independents 12.8% (1 seat, +1 and +11.4%) Liberal Democrats 11.3% (1 seat, +1 and +2.6%)
Full Council is now Labour 24, Green 7, Liberal Democrats 4, Conservative 3, Independent 1.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
It's not necessarily a stupid idea depending on what this chatter is based on, assuming it is based on anything at all.
It was coming from all parties shortly after 10, presumably as their election workers got back to base.
There’s been shock results before, will be shock results again, it’s not that big a deal.
Would mean though that rather than a flash in the plan, Uxbridge was a beacon to a Tory mayor victory.
As I often point out, Labour has lost 50 per cent of Mayoral elections so far. (Ken Livingstone first won as an independent, beating Labour's Frank Dobson.) It might have been more if CCHQ had not written off Shaun Bailey last time. CCHQ buys into the myth that London is lost, just as they recently did for Scotland and Wales.
ETA that said, I remain sceptical and if Tory activists believe they have won, surely there'd not still be double figure prices on Betfair.
So in summary so far - Labour not smashing it overall but smashing it where it matters in scary targets. Losing votes to the Greens/Indies where relevant. Tories getting battered beyond what initially thought.
If you're a Tory you have to hope for some pity votes at a GE that want rid of you but don't want Keir Starmer to be a God Emperor.
Mayorals may change this. But not much unless Sadiq loses.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
It's not necessarily a stupid idea depending on what this chatter is based on, assuming it is based on anything at all.
It was coming from all parties shortly after 10, presumably as their election workers got back to base.
There’s been shock results before, will be shock results again, it’s not that big a deal.
Would mean though that rather than a flash in the plan, Uxbridge was a beacon to a Tory mayor victory.
The Ulez furore was at its height and has since somewhat abated.
Anecdote. My bro’ who lives in outer London was furious about ulez and with Sadiq. Doesn’t much like him and, at the time, said he would never vote for him again.
The size of the Blackpool South win is what Labour needed to grasp positive headlines for themselves.
If other things now go wrong for them in next two days, Mayor’s, their underperforming NEV share, they have at least got something good from this.
Seriously, seriously, you are looking at this through fantastically blue tint specs.
Not everything will go Labour’s way during these two or three days but they are basically, so far, very good results for Labour and pretty terrible for the Conservatives.
Much as expected and much as the national opinion polls have been showing.
If I had a Betfair Exchange account I'd take the £19 on Susan Hall. Not in any knowledge of win or loss, but simply on the grounds that the chatter is too negative to ignore a value bet at small prices.
Yes but what is the chatter based on? They are not counting yet. It might be that Sadiq at 1.05 is the value, or perhaps vote share or winning margin. There again, it turns out I made a small bet on Susan Hall months ago which gives me the luxury of not reacting now. (Not at 30 like Anabobazina, sadly.)
I don't know, sorry. Got woken up by various bits ouching and am a bit frazzled. Am not really capable of interpreting low signal/noise data. Will make more sense in morning. Intended Hall bet as shits-n-giggles bet. Apols if stupid. ☹️
It's not necessarily a stupid idea depending on what this chatter is based on, assuming it is based on anything at all.
It was coming from all parties shortly after 10, presumably as their election workers got back to base.
There’s been shock results before, will be shock results again, it’s not that big a deal.
Would mean though that rather than a flash in the plan, Uxbridge was a beacon to a Tory mayor victory.
The Ulez furore was at its height and has since somewhat abated.
Anecdote. My bro’ who lives in outer London was furious about ulez and with Sadiq. Doesn’t much like him and, at the time, said he would never vote for him again.
Yesterday he voted for Sadiq Khan.
You do love your anecdotes and focus groups of 1 at a time. 🙂
I don’t disbelieve you. But from 10 to midnight Labour themselves put out it’s very very close, and Tory HQ and Halls “inner zones” put out they were very excited, even claiming victory.
We will just have to ignore speculation about that, as there’s lot of fascinating Blue Wall stuff to come in the Friday daytime counts. Sunak looks set for an unrest stirring loss of councillors, so is going to need those mayors from the hat.
Looking at the London 2021 election results, and how Shaun Bailey overperformed, and the MoE in the polling then, it is conceivable that Khan is hovering between 37-38% of the vote and Hall on 35-36% of the vote, if turnout is very poor for him and she's got her vote out. YouGov polls keep overcooking Reform whereas Savanta and Redfield & Wilton had Hall in the low 30s just a few weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Frankly I think you are desperately grasping at straws and failing to read the mood.
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
The London result is not as remotely important as the main PB point of contention in this thread. What do you know of Wine Mums?
Comments
Instead he went in two footed and shattered the ankle of ambiguity. Completely out of his public character. So maybe he meant it? And those who believe that denial of water to civilians is a red line will vote else where.
Hedge End North (Eastleigh)
Liberal Democrats 1,105 (+14.1% compared to 2021)
Labour 290 (+9.0%)
Green 185 (+1.9%)
Conservative 167 (-25.0%)
Lib Dem HOLD
If Reform come second, what does it really mean? Anything?
If we add the Ref+Con as a bloc and it’s bigger or close to Labour, that could be more meaningful?
"Upper middle class" surely is a tiny segment of the population, unless an imaginary self-description by Daily Mail Femail readers?
I'd apply "wine mum" more loved-up or separated All Bar One customers turned early (or later) middle-aged or gone for the social side of middle-market gyms.
Liberal Democrats (12 candidates, 10 wins) 48.1% (+3.4% on 2021)
Conservative (12 candidates, 1 win) 24.4% (-11.8%)
Labour (11 candidates) 11.7% (+0.4%)
Independents (3 candidates, 1 win) 8.1% (+1.9%)
Green (11 candidates) 7.7% (+5.5%)
Reform UK (1 candidate) 0.7% (+0.5%)
After a hundred wards, Labour ate down on what they got last year.
They are on course or worse for the 35% NEV and PNS they got last year. if it stays like that till the end it’s way down on all the opinion polls. And the celebrity psephologists will certainly be pointing to how poor that is.
Labour are doing OK but are quite short of the glory days of Tony Blair in the mid-90s
And Lib-Dems are sort of back in business but still not completely forgiven for the coalition.
Labours projected score isn’t great.
Lib Dem’s losing key councils wouldn’t be great.
Reform might not win a single thing.
They all might lose 🤭
Blame the independents, they seem to be having a good night.
This is quite a lonely view on the left - I am well aware having argued, good naturedly with friends (we haven't fallen out) - that if you have a concept whereby Hamas and Iran are responsible for many evils, while condemning lunatics like Ben Gvir and despising Netanyahu, you are supposedly on "the wrong side of history". I don't think so. And what matters will be how peace is furthered. Joe Biden has seen people violently opposing him despite his government working harder than any other for a ceasefire that works.
I'm not sure that people who think either that or Keir Starmer's views are toxic because he made a bad comment in an interview are either serious about peace and understanding the Israeli side, or should be listened to as you didn't gain Oldham when you might have done. It's either right or wrong. And fundamentally I don't think lots of people care about right or wrong rather than picking their side and supporting like a football team.
It's interesting.
The Eastleigh Council makeup is
Liberal Democrats 35
Independent 3
Conservative 1
So a sticky wicket for all non-LDs.
It's like Ashfield, but with Lib Dems not former Lib Dems dominating.
If Labour get about 43% PV at the general election they won’t have to be looking over their shoulder at how much of the Reform total the Tory’s are eating into and closing up on them.
Even Ed Milliband managed 38%. Blair 46%. The fact best Starmer managed was 35 or 36% might well come to mean something in how badly you undershoot polls in the actual result come GE.
Cameron has made him seem very clumsy.
I'd call middle market more like Virgin or Bannatyne, with David Lloyd a slight cut above.
Crossfit etc fit alongside as stripped out and a bit more expensive / hardcore for the more dedicated.
Topsham (Exeter)
Labour 1,339 (+16.4% compared to 2021)
Conservative 1,094 (-14.9%)
Green 332 (-1.1%)
Liberal Democrats 217 (-0.4%)
Labour GAIN from Conservative
That is as near as dammit 500 losses, is it not?
Green 1,215 (+6.3% compared to 2021)
Labour 941 (-8.3%)
Conservative 211 (-6.4%)
Independent 122 (+4.7%)
Liberal Democrats 96 (+3.7%)
Green GAIN from Labour
Back onto the elections, the BBC are now predicting 539 Tory losses - worse than any predictions I had seen until now. Perhaps things will get better for them tomorrow?
Labour under Tony Blair:
1997 43.2%
2001 40.7%
2005 35.2%
Or are you trying to extrapolate an NEV from the locals? If so, that’s not really comparable. So many variables.
Great night for Labour so far. Terrible for the Conservatives. Good for Reform.
Heavitree (Exeter)
Independent 1,171 (+36.0% compared to 2021)
Green 948 (-9.4%)
Labour 705 (-17.3%)
Conservative 355 (-11.6%)
Liberal Democrats 76 (+2.3%)
Independent GAIN from Labour
Blackpool South looks like "an overwhelming majority for Labour" - Sky
Must mean that the Tories are genuinely at risk of dropping to third place.
I expect it could be much closer than expected though as the MoE in the polling last year was quite large.
You can ask for a recount for the win, natch, and for saving a deposit.
If it's just for bragging rights about being 2nd or 3rd, can the RO tell you to FO?
It all began to go wrong for the tories in 1997 with the execrable Dr Adrian Rogers who led a disgustingly homophobic campaign against Ben Bradshaw under a Conservative badge.
(Declared interest: Ben is a friend of mine)
https://twitter.com/Dylan_Difford/status/1786223776172007564
The former is more important for predicting the GE, however.
Milliband 2012 38%
Starmer 2024 36%
It’s not me compiling the NEV and PNS it’s the Celebrity Psephologists who are doing it for us. They will write headlines about Starmer massively underperforming the polls.
…Wait. Why are you saying it’s been good for Reform?
Keep in mind that (again traditionally & historically) the term "middle-class" has been VERY elastic. Including plenty who in UK would (trad. & hist.) been considered & considered themselves working class.
Mincinglake and Whipton (Exeter)
Labour 842 (-7.7% compared to 2021)
Independent 775 (+37.1%)
Conservative 190 (-18.1%)
Green 169 (-9.3%)
Liberal Democrats 111 (-2.0%)
Labour HOLD
That's not to say Cameron couldn't and shouldn't be trying to achieve things. But it's difficult, difficult lemon difficult. There's no right approach for a British politician on this that doesn't cause huge division and upset. Starmer is as likely to help it as he is - i.e, not at all other than on aid.
"If the Conservatives repeat their poor performance of 2023, when the NEV put them below 30%, they stand to lose up to 500 seats – half their councillors facing election. Labour may make about 300 gains, with the Liberal Democrats and Greens both likely to advance"
So 500 was an upper limit of "poor performance" a couple of weeks ago.
So, I can just about believe it's close. It's even conceivable it's very close.
Massive swing to Labour - 26%, I think?
I may be wrong but I doubt it’s going to be anywhere near close in London
He should probably be at 1.25 to 1.3 based on current information.
Blimey
The last time we saw consistent swings like this? The 1992-7 Parliament
Source: BBC
There’s been shock results before, will be shock results again, it’s not that big a deal.
Would mean though that rather than a flash in the plan, Uxbridge was a beacon to a Tory mayor victory.
1. The anti-Conservative vote is increasingly efficient. And a return to tactical voting is definitely bad news for the conservatives.
2. Refuk is taking votes from the conservatives. There's probably the opportunity to bring them back, but it won't be easy.
3. The electorate is willing to look beyond ConLabLD: that's bad news for all the incumbent pastors.
I count only 4 by-elections with >20% swing in the 1992-7 parliament, and only 1 with >25%.
Labour 38.6% (8 seats, -2 and -4.8% compared to 2021)
Green 20.3% (2 seats, +1 and +3.8%)
Conservative 16.9% (1 seat, -1 and -12.9%)
Independents 12.8% (1 seat, +1 and +11.4%)
Liberal Democrats 11.3% (1 seat, +1 and +2.6%)
Full Council is now Labour 24, Green 7, Liberal Democrats 4, Conservative 3, Independent 1.
ETA that said, I remain sceptical and if Tory activists believe they have won, surely there'd not still be double figure prices on Betfair.
If you're a Tory you have to hope for some pity votes at a GE that want rid of you but don't want Keir Starmer to be a God Emperor.
Mayorals may change this. But not much unless Sadiq loses.
Anecdote. My bro’ who lives in outer London was furious about ulez and with Sadiq. Doesn’t much like him and, at the time, said he would never vote for him again.
Yesterday he voted for Sadiq Khan.
If other things now go wrong for them in next two days, Mayor’s, their underperforming NEV share, they have at least got something good from this.
Not everything will go Labour’s way during these two or three days but they are basically, so far, very good results for Labour and pretty terrible for the Conservatives.
Much as expected and much as the national opinion polls have been showing.
Now unpopular across the board.
Morning all.
I don’t disbelieve you. But from 10 to midnight Labour themselves put out it’s very very close, and Tory HQ and Halls “inner zones” put out they were very excited, even claiming victory.
We will just have to ignore speculation about that, as there’s lot of fascinating Blue Wall stuff to come in the Friday daytime counts. Sunak looks set for an unrest stirring loss of councillors, so is going to need those mayors from the hat.