About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
This is staggeringly ignorant. The takbir is used in many social contexts as well as its liturgical primacy. It's the first line of both the adhan and iqama.
It's ludicrously and offensively reductive to characterise it as a "rallying call for terrorists and extremists".
No it’s not. At a time when white people can be cancelled for “micro aggressions” like using the wrong pronoun or asking “where do you come from” or wearing a sombrero it’s really not much to ask Muslims to stop shouting a phrase which is indelibly associated with live streamed beheadings and the burning alive of captured prisoners. Just stop saying it. Thanks
But were we to admit mere "indelible associations" in one person's head, as opposed to common use in public life, then Islam itself would be cause to send people to internment camps, or deportation to Rwanda.
I am completely lost, if you don't know if somebody is a man or a woman, what should you call them?
In the Derby area you could call them duck. The word can be used by anyone when talking to anyone else. Unusual to have a traditionally gender neutral word like that.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
This is staggeringly ignorant. The takbir is used in many social contexts as well as its liturgical primacy. It's the first line of both the adhan and iqama.
It's ludicrously and offensively reductive to characterise it as a "rallying call for terrorists and extremists".
No it’s not. At a time when white people can be cancelled for “micro aggressions” like using the wrong pronoun or asking “where do you come from” or wearing a sombrero it’s really not much to ask Muslims to stop shouting a phrase which is indelibly associated with live streamed beheadings and the burning alive of captured prisoners. Just stop saying it. Thanks
But were we to admit mere "indelible associations" in one person's head, as opposed to common use in public life, then Islam itself would be cause to send people to internment camps, or deportation to Rwanda.
Shouting allahu akbar is common use for violent terrorists and extremists.
Saying it in prayer in a Mosque may be different but when it comes to politics, it is a violent threat. Context matters.
Religion shouldn't be mixed in with politics anyway.
Re: the woeful (and likely criminal?) failure of PO to properly disclose evidence, you UKers are NOT alone . . .
Seattle Times - WA State Patrol fined $750,000 for failing to disclose public records after crash
The Washington State Patrol has been fined $750,000 for public-disclosure failures surrounding a couple’s efforts to find out why troopers dismissed a citation given to a driver believed responsible for a crash that killed their son.
[Judge] Chushcoff, in an order issued April 12, found the State Patrol “failed to conduct reasonable searches for records responsive” to more than 40 public disclosure requests filed by Bart and Penny Adler of Olympia and their attorneys for information into the investigation of a Sept. 2, 2020, collision on Highway 512 that killed their 23-year-old son, Isaac.
In all, the court found the State Patrol failed to “properly produce” more than 647 records — and concealed another 1,700 emails and other documents the judge found were responsive to the Adlers’ repeated requests.
The Adlers’ public records lawsuit turned up evidence that investigating troopers failed to prepare a “Fatality Packet” — including all reports, diagrams and photographs detailing the crash — for nearly nine months after it occurred, and that during that time, dash-camera video and other records were destroyed, according to court documents. . . .
Issac Adler was stopped at a red light on Highway 512 near Interstate 5 when his Subaru was struck from behind by a speeding vehicle . . . .
Bart Adler said the State Patrol treated his son’s death “as a matter of no consequence.
“They treated our son like roadkill,” he said. . . .
The State Patrol have been held accountable though, 'fairly' quickly. This has been going on for around 20 years.
Yes. Also, WA State Patrol is admitting its culpablity/idiocy:
(from Seattle Times story) - Chris Loftis, a spokesman for the State Patrol, said in a statement that the dash-camera video was likely erased due to “miscoding” combined with a “cascading procedural mishandling of the same case in the public disclosure office.”
“Neither situation meets our standards of service as the penalty would suggest,” he said.
“We accept the court’s criticisms and recognize that the performance of some of our personnel was not in keeping” with WSP standards, Loftis said. . . .
SSI - That may NOT go far enough, but it's LIGHTYEARS ahead of the PO. Which IIRC has yet to come anywhere near fessing up?
Asked if he would implement in full the Cass Review, ‘Honest John’ Swinney - First Minister in-waiting - could not bring himself to give an unequivocal YES. Stop playing politics with children’s lives FFS.
Big of fag packet calculating to throw some further manure into the NEV mix. If your central calculation is, let's say, an 80 seat labour majority then using 2019s results as a very rough guide to how tight the top x defences for either party would be, losing 40 of those seats would be about a 4% swing, so a 4% swing takes a central forecast of 80 to HP (just), 100 majority central forecast you might need about a 5% swing. Apropos of nothing but it suggests that if you are not expecting the tsunami style results then it's not a massive swingback to bring HP into your 'best case' scenario. Obviously if the tsunami is on its all totally moot and thanks for playing.
I am not, by the way, expecting swingback of 4%. My central forecast is 90 majority (for clarity)
Re: the woeful (and likely criminal?) failure of PO to properly disclose evidence, you UKers are NOT alone . . .
Seattle Times - WA State Patrol fined $750,000 for failing to disclose public records after crash
The Washington State Patrol has been fined $750,000 for public-disclosure failures surrounding a couple’s efforts to find out why troopers dismissed a citation given to a driver believed responsible for a crash that killed their son.
[Judge] Chushcoff, in an order issued April 12, found the State Patrol “failed to conduct reasonable searches for records responsive” to more than 40 public disclosure requests filed by Bart and Penny Adler of Olympia and their attorneys for information into the investigation of a Sept. 2, 2020, collision on Highway 512 that killed their 23-year-old son, Isaac.
In all, the court found the State Patrol failed to “properly produce” more than 647 records — and concealed another 1,700 emails and other documents the judge found were responsive to the Adlers’ repeated requests.
The Adlers’ public records lawsuit turned up evidence that investigating troopers failed to prepare a “Fatality Packet” — including all reports, diagrams and photographs detailing the crash — for nearly nine months after it occurred, and that during that time, dash-camera video and other records were destroyed, according to court documents. . . .
Issac Adler was stopped at a red light on Highway 512 near Interstate 5 when his Subaru was struck from behind by a speeding vehicle . . . .
Bart Adler said the State Patrol treated his son’s death “as a matter of no consequence.
“They treated our son like roadkill,” he said. . . .
So basically, powerful people the world over are cheating, lying, cowardly c****?
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
It is a very commonly used phrase in Muslim communities and in Arab (including non-Muslim Arab) communities. It is a phrase said billions of times a day around the world. Over 99.9999% of the time it has nothing to do with terrorism and extremism.
Somehow, I don’t think that the Green councillor (given his record), intended it innocently.
It was being used in celebration of his election victory, wasn't it? It's about as offensive as a christian saying something like "thank god" as an expression of relief.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
This is staggeringly ignorant. The takbir is used in many social contexts as well as its liturgical primacy. It's the first line of both the adhan and iqama.
It's ludicrously and offensively reductive to characterise it as a "rallying call for terrorists and extremists".
No it’s not. At a time when white people can be cancelled for “micro aggressions” like using the wrong pronoun or asking “where do you come from” or wearing a sombrero it’s really not much to ask Muslims to stop shouting a phrase which is indelibly associated with live streamed beheadings and the burning alive of captured prisoners. Just stop saying it. Thanks
Time it was made a criminal offence and 3 years minimum in pokey if using it , more offensive than the n word.
Re: the woeful (and likely criminal?) failure of PO to properly disclose evidence, you UKers are NOT alone . . .
Seattle Times - WA State Patrol fined $750,000 for failing to disclose public records after crash
The Washington State Patrol has been fined $750,000 for public-disclosure failures surrounding a couple’s efforts to find out why troopers dismissed a citation given to a driver believed responsible for a crash that killed their son.
[Judge] Chushcoff, in an order issued April 12, found the State Patrol “failed to conduct reasonable searches for records responsive” to more than 40 public disclosure requests filed by Bart and Penny Adler of Olympia and their attorneys for information into the investigation of a Sept. 2, 2020, collision on Highway 512 that killed their 23-year-old son, Isaac.
In all, the court found the State Patrol failed to “properly produce” more than 647 records — and concealed another 1,700 emails and other documents the judge found were responsive to the Adlers’ repeated requests.
The Adlers’ public records lawsuit turned up evidence that investigating troopers failed to prepare a “Fatality Packet” — including all reports, diagrams and photographs detailing the crash — for nearly nine months after it occurred, and that during that time, dash-camera video and other records were destroyed, according to court documents. . . .
Issac Adler was stopped at a red light on Highway 512 near Interstate 5 when his Subaru was struck from behind by a speeding vehicle . . . .
Bart Adler said the State Patrol treated his son’s death “as a matter of no consequence.
“They treated our son like roadkill,” he said. . . .
The State Patrol have been held accountable though, 'fairly' quickly. This has been going on for around 20 years.
Yes. Also, WA State Patrol is admitting its culpablity/idiocy:
(from Seattle Times story) - Chris Loftis, a spokesman for the State Patrol, said in a statement that the dash-camera video was likely erased due to “miscoding” combined with a “cascading procedural mishandling of the same case in the public disclosure office.”
“Neither situation meets our standards of service as the penalty would suggest,” he said.
“We accept the court’s criticisms and recognize that the performance of some of our personnel was not in keeping” with WSP standards, Loftis said. . . .
SSI - That may NOT go far enough, but it's LIGHTYEARS ahead of the PO. Which IIRC has yet to come anywhere near fessing up?
The Post Office top brass have not yet been questioned. Next month IIRC.
Do you think that maybe Boris Johnson is regretting quitting the Commons? If he had stayed then yes he would have been suspended from the House, maybe even expelled outright but would surely have won the resulting by-election and would be still a viable leadership/PM candidate. The press would have been camped around his house all weekend looking for the white smoke of a challenge to Rishi Sunak? Would he be the reborn Cincinnatus, reluctantly returning from his farm? Instead he's an afterthought, only living on in the dreams of Nadine Dorries, yesterday's man.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
The genetic variant isn't just a risk factor - it means you will develop Alzheimer's.
A desperately grim finding - but it also suggests that we should be trying clinical trials of potential therapies on much younger individuals than us currently the case.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
The swastika is used to evoke the Nazi Party, with a small set of purposes, primarily to intimidate individuals or to undermine public order in the eyes of a reasonable person. There is no widespread use of swastikas in the UK for other purposes.
That's why I said previously. Previously there were other, multicultural, uses for the swastika as a traditional Persian design used by Hindus, Buddhists and Jains. Nowadays its not used, due to its darker connotations.
Similarly with Allahu Akbar. It may have once been an innocent phrase, but today it is a rallying cry for terrorists and extremists.
The “other way” swastika is used quite a bit in India and Nepal.
I used to have a house in my ward whose front door was decorated in them. A bit of a double take the first time I knocked on their door. They were Hindus, and really nice people.
We had a couple move in next door, from India. They painted a swastika with dots on the doorstep in some red powder.
My wife was a bit startled, until I explained what it meant.
This is all very true regarding doorsteps.
However, as a word to the wise, if you ever see a heavy-set gentleman in the pub with one tattooed on his forehead, just take a bit of care about going up to him and warmly wishing him a happy Diwali.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
It is a very commonly used phrase in Muslim communities and in Arab (including non-Muslim Arab) communities. It is a phrase said billions of times a day around the world. Over 99.9999% of the time it has nothing to do with terrorism and extremism.
Somehow, I don’t think that the Green councillor (given his record), intended it innocently.
It was being used in celebration of his election victory, wasn't it? It's about as offensive as a christian saying something like "thank god" as an expression of relief.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Do you think that maybe Boris Johnson is regretting quitting the Commons? If he had stayed then yes he would have been suspended from the House, maybe even expelled outright but would surely have won the resulting by-election and would be still a viable leadership/PM candidate. The press would have been camped around his house all weekend looking for the white smoke of a challenge to Rishi Sunak? Would he be the reborn Cincinnatus, reluctantly returning from his farm? Instead he's an afterthought, only living on in the dreams of Nadine Dorries, yesterday's man.
He chickened out once before, though, after the Referendum.
SNP Leader John Swinney says the party is now "back on the front foot" - describing his leadership as the "beginning of a new chapter in our party’s history"
If I heard his speech right the history of the SNP now has a non barking dog where the giant names of Salmond and Sturgeon once shone in bright lights. Salmond Who? Sturgeon Who?
Since 22 September 1990, when Gordon Wilson stood down, the SNP has been led by Alex Salmond, someone who was Alex Salmond’s deputy, or someone who was Alex Salmond’s assistant.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Going for gains (other than perhaps trying to recapture some of the by-election losses, ans even then) given the circumstances, and when there isn’t any demographic shift to justify it, does seem like lunacy. If they end up in opposition for multiple terms it would be a long long time before any work in opposition held seats paid off.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Going for gains (other than perhaps trying to recapture some of the by-election losses, ans even then) given the circumstances, and when there isn’t any demographic shift to justify it, does seem like lunacy. If they end up in opposition for multiple terms it would be a long long time before any work in opposition held seats paid off.
It's inane. They are totally clueless. Edit - any 'gains' require full retention of the Boris coalition and then some extra support. Bon chance
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
The Tories are more likely to end up on 80 or fewer seats in total than to lose 80 or fewer seats.
The defence line should be around the 180-200 mark.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
This is staggeringly ignorant. The takbir is used in many social contexts as well as its liturgical primacy. It's the first line of both the adhan and iqama.
It's ludicrously and offensively reductive to characterise it as a "rallying call for terrorists and extremists".
No it’s not. At a time when white people can be cancelled for “micro aggressions” like using the wrong pronoun or asking “where do you come from” or wearing a sombrero it’s really not much to ask Muslims to stop shouting a phrase which is indelibly associated with live streamed beheadings and the burning alive of captured prisoners. Just stop saying it. Thanks
But were we to admit mere "indelible associations" in one person's head, as opposed to common use in public life, then Islam itself would be cause to send people to internment camps, or deportation to Rwanda.
This all seems a slightly strange discussion when the big problem - which has been complained about by serious groups rather than what looks a bit intimidating on the front of the Daily Mail - is not that this new Green councillor has said "Allahu Akbar". But that his alleged response to Hamas slaughtering huge numbers of innocent Israelis in the biggest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, an action that was not only abhorrent in itself but guaranteed death for thousands of Palestinians, was to tweet: "White supremacist settler colonialism must end" (most Israelis are not white even if you count Ashkenazi Jews as such - as they fled Arab countries) and shared a TikTok praising the "Fight Back".
Personally, I couldn't give a monkeys if you shout "Allahu Akbar" even if it is a bit odd in that context. But if you think mad things that wouldn't look out of place in the BNP, and which if you had power over something more than bin collection would lead to genocidal violence, then yeah, one does have a problem. As should the Green Party.
So arguing about that phrase is rather a red herring. If it's bad it's because he thinks the other things which provides a context which is rather more sinister than simple religious devotion.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
In London, Finchley Everywhere else - maybe 10,000 majority and up? 12,000?
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
The Tories are more likely to end up on 80 or fewer seats in total than to lose 80 or fewer seats.
The defence line should be around the 180-200 mark.
Put a gun to my head, Bart, and I'd agree - that's about where I would draw the line - but to be honest, if I had to make that decision, I might appreciate a gun to my head.
Do you think that maybe Boris Johnson is regretting quitting the Commons? If he had stayed then yes he would have been suspended from the House, maybe even expelled outright but would surely have won the resulting by-election and would be still a viable leadership/PM candidate. The press would have been camped around his house all weekend looking for the white smoke of a challenge to Rishi Sunak? Would he be the reborn Cincinnatus, reluctantly returning from his farm? Instead he's an afterthought, only living on in the dreams of Nadine Dorries, yesterday's man.
I don't think Johnson would have won the ensuing by-election as it would have been a very different campaign to the one that in fact took place.
As it transpired, the Uxbridge by-election came just a month before ULEZ was expanded, so everyone could be convinced that they'd be personally affected (part of the story of the Mayoral election just gone is the salience reduced a lot once most people realised they had compliant vehicles). A recall petition would've pushed it well into late 2023, and the campaign would have been so full of Partygate that it wouldn't really have got on to other issues.
Steve Tuckwell was a solid, local, credible Tory candidate with a good issue that fell into his lap at just the right time. Even then, he won by less than 500 votes. My view is Johnson would've done quite a bit worse.
I wonder what inducement was proffered / promised for the other candidate to pull out.
I should say, I think Kate Forbes was played by Sturgeon et al.
First, you have to understand why Humza got the boot. It wasn't because he was "useless" - that was factored in when he became leader. Nor was it because he dumped the Greens - he was pressured to do that. It was because he was talking to Salmond, via Ash Regan, in order to survive the no-confidence vote. That was intolerable to Sturgeon and her friends.
However, equally intolerable was Forbes taking over. Hence Swinney being dragged out of retirement with the threat to Forbes that the party would be ungovernable if she challenged and won.
When Swinney steps down, probably after the next Holyrood election, Stephen Flynn will be levered in as the next Continuity/Unity leader. Forbes will be marginalised.
You'd be annoyed if you were 81st most vulnerable Tory MP. Seeing all resources going into the one's above whilst not having a bollock of a chance of hanging on yourself.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
But he can't do otherwise. If the Conservatives move their resources into the actual front line (say seats 100 - 200, roughly Chichester to Thurrock) then it's conceding defeat before the beginning and annoying a lot of his current MPs.
Yes, sticking with 80/20 probably invisibly causes more pain. But causing invisible pain (stealth tax rises) to create visible joy (NI rates cut) is very Rishi.
(If you're interested, the other seats around 200 on the Conservative bit of the swingometer under new boundaries are places like Swindon North, Plymouth Moor View, Tunbridge Wells, Worthing West, Selby. They look like the sort of places that are worth fighting, but likely to have gone already.)
"Conservative support fell more heavily where Reform did stand. In the BBC's sample of key wards the party's support fell by 19 points in these wards - compared with 11 points in wards where Reform did not stand. Labour, in contrast, did rather better where Reform stood.
That 19-point drop matches the 19-point fall in the average level of Conservative support in the polls since May 2021. That figure may represent a better guide to the Conservatives' immediate prospects in a general election."
Opinion polling backed up by real votes in real elections.
About the same thing as is wrong with drawing a swastika.
It is a rallying call for terrorists and extremists, even if it may have once previously had innocent meanings.
It is a very commonly used phrase in Muslim communities and in Arab (including non-Muslim Arab) communities. It is a phrase said billions of times a day around the world. Over 99.9999% of the time it has nothing to do with terrorism and extremism.
Somehow, I don’t think that the Green councillor (given his record), intended it innocently.
It was being used in celebration of his election victory, wasn't it? It's about as offensive as a christian saying something like "thank god" as an expression of relief.
I would have thought an exclamation of "Save the Planet!" would have been more appropriate for a candidate purporting to be standing on an environmentalist ticket. O
I am not sure I understand your obsession with Trans issues. I remember as a late teenager standing behind a short dark haired person wearing a red and white Gingham summer dress and Mary Jane shoes in the dry cleaners in Priory Street in Great Malvern. I thought nothing of it until this person turned around and had a nearly tripped Tom Selleck moustache. Bloody hell was I shocked, genuinely stunned and not a little outraged. Forty years on, I couldn't really care less , whatever floats your boat!
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Going for gains (other than perhaps trying to recapture some of the by-election losses, ans even then) given the circumstances, and when there isn’t any demographic shift to justify it, does seem like lunacy. If they end up in opposition for multiple terms it would be a long long time before any work in opposition held seats paid off.
A couple of SNP seats might be in range if SNP also do badly I suppose, but even then it's a stretch.
An issue for the Tories is that it's really hard to cut held seats adrift without causing a huge amount of resentment that may break out into public and cause further damage. The Lib Dems found this in 2015 - I think the only seat they really cut adrift was Norwich South, which was an unusual one anyway as he'd got in on under 30% in 2010 on a four way split so it was very clearly doomed in a tough election. But they may have saved a handful more than they did if they'd been more brutal and realistic about it.
Excellent header, @Cyclefree. More fundamental than serving a client's interest is the professional duty for lawyers to do the right thing. That precedence applies to everyone else. It should apply to lawyers too.
I am not sure I understand your obsession with Trans issues. I remember as a late teenager standing behind a short dark haired person wearing a red and white Gingham summer dress and Mary Jane shoes in the dry cleaners in Priory Street in Great Malvern. I thought nothing of it until this person turned around and had a nearly tripped Tom Selleck moustache. Bloody hell was I shocked, genuinely stunned and not a little outraged. Forty years on, I couldn't really care less , whatever floats your boat!
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
I don't think you need to be "obsessed" with trans issues to see that there is a pretty obvious tension in the Green Party coalition.
OT Government spokesman on sky just mentioned earmarking asylum seekers for the Rwanda. Unfortunate use of words. My greyhounds have earmarks. Will they be foot shackled at the airport?
I don't really see why any earmarking is needed - they are disembarking from boats nearly every day. Far better to send the message of the channel journey being a one way round trip to Rwanda.
Erm... About that...
The one (1) person the government paid to voluntarily go to Rwanda seems to have been lost. This bodes well. (Via LouCalvey).
Rwanda clearly will only keep the refugees for as long as it gets paid. It will push them out the moment it gets its money. They did that for Israel and they will do the same for the United Kingdom.
It has nothing to do with what Rwanda will or won't do. The migrants didn't want to be in Rwanda; they wanted to be in the UK. If the opportunities were in Rwanda, they'd be there already. They will be moved to Rwanda, and abscond extremely fast, freeing up space and going back to their home countries, or trying somewhere else, or, if really determined, the UK again. The system needs to be off the boat, on a flight. Then the boats will stop coming, the gangs will die out, a great evil will have been stopped, and a huge public policy problem will have been solved.
It has everything to do with what Rwanda will or will not do. Rwanda forced refugees under the Israeli scheme to leave the country once it had collected the cash.It will presumably do the same under the UK scheme. It is only interested in the money and has no intention of providing asylum. The Rwanda scheme is built on a lie.
It won't need to force them. The only lie is that the vast majority of these people are legitimately seeking asylum. They are economic migrants. Nothing wrong with that, good for them for wanting to better themselves, but we are absolutely not obliged morally to let them into the country or pay for their upkeep. It would be better and safer for everyone concerned if they stopped trying to come.
Nevertheless Rwanda did have to force the refugees on the Israeli scheme out of the country according to the article I linked. Also these people are overwhelmingly genuine asylum seekers. This is the reason for sending them to Rwanda. Otherwise the UK could just repatriate them. As they are looking for a safe place they don't have any reason to take their chances back on the people smuggling trail. At least they are safe in Rwanda, provided it keeps to its contract, which is the only basis the Supreme Court accepted the scheme as lawful.
The point is, if Rwanda doesn't accept these people permanently, and there is zero sign it will, the UK will have to keep paying Rwanda forever or it will have to take them back. Neither is a sustainable deterrent for people crossing the Channel.
I am not sure I can really offer a meaningful response to a claim that the boat people are 'overwhelmingly genuine asylum seekers'. 'Wilfully ignorant' doesn’t seem to cover it.
I wonder what inducement was proffered / promised for the other candidate to pull out.
I should say, I think Kate Forbes was played by Sturgeon et al.
First, you have to understand why Humza got the boot. It wasn't because he was "useless" - that was factored in when he became leader. Nor was it because he dumped the Greens - he was pressured to do that. It was because he was talking to Salmond, via Ash Regan, in order to survive the no-confidence vote. That was intolerable to Sturgeon and her friends.
However, equally intolerable was Forbes taking over. Hence Swinney being dragged out of retirement with the threat to Forbes that the party would be ungovernable if she challenged and won.
When Swinney steps down, probably after the next Holyrood election, Stephen Flynn will be levered in as the next Continuity/Unity leader. Forbes will be marginalised.
QED.
100% correct , only good thing is they will be significantly smaller , if they manage not to go bankrupt when the short money stops, they have taken all the branches funds so nowhere else othe rthan bank robberies to get any decent cash. Only morons will donate to them. Perhaps we will get a real independence party one day , certainly not one led by devolution John for sure. At some point the penny will drop that they are just grifters milking it for all it is worth.
I am not sure I understand your obsession with Trans issues. I remember as a late teenager standing behind a short dark haired person wearing a red and white Gingham summer dress and Mary Jane shoes in the dry cleaners in Priory Street in Great Malvern. I thought nothing of it until this person turned around and had a nearly tripped Tom Selleck moustache. Bloody hell was I shocked, genuinely stunned and not a little outraged. Forty years on, I couldn't really care less , whatever floats your boat!
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
Unfortunately Pete 95%+ don't book in for it at all, therein lies the issue.
Bless ! Sunak has been out chopping vegetables in a soup kitchen and packing charity boxes .
Real man of the people ! Don’t his aides really not think this sort of photo op is an own goal .
Damned if he does, etc.
He shouldn’t bother . It looks ridiculous . Everyone knows he couldn’t give a fig and has zero understanding of what life is like for most people . And given his disgusting hate filled government is now going after the disabled and sick he should just not bother with these vomit inducing photo ops .
Bless ! Sunak has been out chopping vegetables in a soup kitchen and packing charity boxes .
Real man of the people ! Don’t his aides really not think this sort of photo op is an own goal .
Damned if he does, etc.
He shouldn’t bother . It looks ridiculous . Everyone knows he couldn’t give a fig and has zero understanding of what life is like for most people . And given his disgusting hate filled government is now going after the disabled and sick he should just not bother with these vomit inducing photo ops .
So you are simultaneously criticising him for being out of touch, and for trying to do something about it.
Joe has had a phone call with Bibi to try and dissuade him from action in Rafah. Going in tonight then........
Bibi has been pissweak on Hamas for years and is being pissweak taking the fight to Rafah now. Should have been done months ago.
He is Israel's Chamberlain. They need to replace him and find their Churchill who can win the war.
The problem is that Hamas has been very useful to Bibi: he wants (or wanted) an implacable opponent in Gaza, so that it was clear that compromise would never be possible. And it's why Israel secretly funded Hamas via the Qataris.
Bless ! Sunak has been out chopping vegetables in a soup kitchen and packing charity boxes .
Real man of the people ! Don’t his aides really not think this sort of photo op is an own goal .
Damned if he does, etc.
He shouldn’t bother . It looks ridiculous . Everyone knows he couldn’t give a fig and has zero understanding of what life is like for most people . And given his disgusting hate filled government is now going after the disabled and sick he should just not bother with these vomit inducing photo ops .
So you are simultaneously criticising him for being out of touch, and for trying to do something about it.
You mean turning up for a photo op is doing something about it ! Doing something about it is reducing poverty and not terrifying the disabled that you’re going to force them into destitution! Sunak should just fxck off back to California .
Joe has had a phone call with Bibi to try and dissuade him from action in Rafah. Going in tonight then........
Bibi has been pissweak on Hamas for years and is being pissweak taking the fight to Rafah now. Should have been done months ago.
He is Israel's Chamberlain. They need to replace him and find their Churchill who can win the war.
The problem is that Hamas has been very useful to Bibi: he wants (or wanted) an implacable opponent in Gaza, so that it was clear that compromise would never be possible. And it's why Israel secretly funded Hamas via the Qataris.
Indeed. Which is why both Bibi and Hamas need to go.
Bless ! Sunak has been out chopping vegetables in a soup kitchen and packing charity boxes .
Real man of the people ! Don’t his aides really not think this sort of photo op is an own goal .
Damned if he does, etc.
He shouldn’t bother . It looks ridiculous . Everyone knows he couldn’t give a fig and has zero understanding of what life is like for most people . And given his disgusting hate filled government is now going after the disabled and sick he should just not bother with these vomit inducing photo ops .
So you are simultaneously criticising him for being out of touch, and for trying to do something about it.
You mean turning up for a photo op is doing something about it ! Doing something about it is reducing poverty and not terrifying the disabled that you’re going to force them into destitution! Sunak should just fxck off back to California .
The first step to no longer being out of touch is surely doing exactly the kind of thing he is doing, speaking directly to people to gain that experience. Criticising him for that seems low.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
The Tories are more likely to end up on 80 or fewer seats in total than to lose 80 or fewer seats.
The defence line should be around the 180-200 mark.
Put a gun to my head, Bart, and I'd agree - that's about where I would draw the line - but to be honest, if I had to make that decision, I might appreciate a gun to my head.
It's an interesting dynamic.
In theory we could have a scenario where only the Lib Dems are targeting the 'right' seats insofar as the ones they will just about win.
The Tories are lost spending time and resources on lost causes.
Labour will presumably focus on winning a solid majority and not the more speculative landslide seats that will be closest on the night.
I am not sure I understand your obsession with Trans issues. I remember as a late teenager standing behind a short dark haired person wearing a red and white Gingham summer dress and Mary Jane shoes in the dry cleaners in Priory Street in Great Malvern. I thought nothing of it until this person turned around and had a nearly tripped Tom Selleck moustache. Bloody hell was I shocked, genuinely stunned and not a little outraged. Forty years on, I couldn't really care less , whatever floats your boat!
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
Unfortunately Pete 95%+ don't book in for it at all, therein lies the issue.
The Cass report will delay any hormonal treatment to post 18 except outside trials, and as several years of hormonal treatment generally preceed any surgical treatment, there will be more hormonal unchanged social transitions rather than fewer.
Add in the effective cessation of juvenile gender services with the closure of the Tavistock and delays in other provision and we have a further increase in the intact socially transitioned.
Cass is going to sharpen the debate over access for the socially transitioned rather than diminish it.
I am not sure I understand your obsession with Trans issues. I remember as a late teenager standing behind a short dark haired person wearing a red and white Gingham summer dress and Mary Jane shoes in the dry cleaners in Priory Street in Great Malvern. I thought nothing of it until this person turned around and had a nearly tripped Tom Selleck moustache. Bloody hell was I shocked, genuinely stunned and not a little outraged. Forty years on, I couldn't really care less , whatever floats your boat!
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
I don't think you need to be "obsessed" with trans issues to see that there is a pretty obvious tension in the Green Party coalition.
I think the Greens are OK with such strange Combinations. They are a very grassroots, bottom up sort of party with very little central control. Congregationalist rather than Episcopalian or Anarcho-Syndacalist rather than Stalinist if you prefer. The nature of local Green parties varies tremendously, and that is a strength. No one expects them to form a government any time soon so it isn't really a problem.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
Handily Defence 80 is in my patch, Norwich North. Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Seriously, where would you draw the defence line?
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
In London, Finchley Everywhere else - maybe 10,000 majority and up? 12,000?
Wouldn't Finchley see a larger than usual Tory to Labour swing in the next general election due to the removal of the Corbyn effect? Mike Freer only got 44% in 2019, he's not standing at the next election, even if there was no national swing to Labour, surely Finchley is nailed on Labour gain?
Comments
My comment assumes it was FPTP.
THE DRAKE
Saying it in prayer in a Mosque may be different but when it comes to politics, it is a violent threat. Context matters.
Religion shouldn't be mixed in with politics anyway.
Trump Diapers ... for when you are losing your sh*t.
(Does the ridicule principle work in USA politics as here ... when most people have stopped listening and are laughing, you have lost.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_KsI_wkKgI
(Sorry if this has already been featured. Once is arguably enough.)
(from Seattle Times story) - Chris Loftis, a spokesman for the State Patrol, said in a statement that the dash-camera video was likely erased due to “miscoding” combined with a “cascading procedural mishandling of the same case in the public disclosure office.”
“Neither situation meets our standards of service as the penalty would suggest,” he said.
“We accept the court’s criticisms and recognize that the performance of some of our personnel was not in keeping” with WSP standards, Loftis said. . . .
SSI - That may NOT go far enough, but it's LIGHTYEARS ahead of the PO. Which IIRC has yet to come anywhere near fessing up?
If your central calculation is, let's say, an 80 seat labour majority then using 2019s results as a very rough guide to how tight the top x defences for either party would be, losing 40 of those seats would be about a 4% swing, so a 4% swing takes a central forecast of 80 to HP (just), 100 majority central forecast you might need about a 5% swing.
Apropos of nothing but it suggests that if you are not expecting the tsunami style results then it's not a massive swingback to bring HP into your 'best case' scenario.
Obviously if the tsunami is on its all totally moot and thanks for playing.
I am not, by the way, expecting swingback of 4%. My central forecast is 90 majority (for clarity)
https://x.com/ArchRose90/status/1787095495279509801
Conference is going to be fun
"Allahu Akbar!!"
Yep, you're right.
For months, there has been speculation that a rout in the local elections would lead to an attempt to oust Rishi Sunak. Yet so far, at least, there is no sign of it. “There’s a defeatism to the party,” offered one minister by way of explanation.
The prime minister has the ultimate job security: that none of his would-be successors want his job now. Various leadership campaigns are already running, behind the scenes, but all with an eye to a contest after the general election. Nobody is keen to be the face attached to what is shaping up to be a historic defeat.
We have been spared, at least, the panic that might have resulted had [Reform] actually beaten the Conservatives into second place in Blackpool South. But it got very close, and where it stood candidates the Tories palpably suffered for it, a grim preview of the role it could play at the general election.
CCHQ remains committed to an 80/20 approach: defending the 80 most vulnerable seats while pressing the attack in a score of targets. This might have been a reasonable posture in 2021, but it is madness now, a recipe for throwing away seats the party might otherwise hold by squandering resources on unwinnable contests. Yet that would mean telling an awful lot of Conservative MPs that their seats are beyond saving – and those MPs might suddenly start feeling differently about the electoral risks of trying to dethrone the prime minister.
As it is, he looks set to carry on, unloved but unchallenged, while the various wings of his party gird themselves for an almighty battle to explain a defeat that almost all think is coming, but none can think of a way to avoid.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-024-02931-w
The genetic variant isn't just a risk factor - it means you will develop Alzheimer's.
A desperately grim finding - but it also suggests that we should be trying clinical trials of potential therapies on much younger individuals than us currently the case.
However, as a word to the wise, if you ever see a heavy-set gentleman in the pub with one tattooed on his forehead, just take a bit of care about going up to him and warmly wishing him a happy Diwali.
Tories won't be within 10%. And that's their 'easiest' defence on 80/20
Edit - any 'gains' require full retention of the Boris coalition and then some extra support. Bon chance
I follow these things closer than most, and I couldn't even begin to say where defensible seats might begin.
The defence line should be around the 180-200 mark.
Note that German soldiers in both WWI and WWI, had "Gott Mit Uns" on their belt buckles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gott_mit_uns
Personally, I couldn't give a monkeys if you shout "Allahu Akbar" even if it is a bit odd in that context. But if you think mad things that wouldn't look out of place in the BNP, and which if you had power over something more than bin collection would lead to genocidal violence, then yeah, one does have a problem. As should the Green Party.
So arguing about that phrase is rather a red herring. If it's bad it's because he thinks the other things which provides a context which is rather more sinister than simple religious devotion.
Everywhere else - maybe 10,000 majority and up? 12,000?
As it transpired, the Uxbridge by-election came just a month before ULEZ was expanded, so everyone could be convinced that they'd be personally affected (part of the story of the Mayoral election just gone is the salience reduced a lot once most people realised they had compliant vehicles). A recall petition would've pushed it well into late 2023, and the campaign would have been so full of Partygate that it wouldn't really have got on to other issues.
Steve Tuckwell was a solid, local, credible Tory candidate with a good issue that fell into his lap at just the right time. Even then, he won by less than 500 votes. My view is Johnson would've done quite a bit worse.
First, you have to understand why Humza got the boot. It wasn't because he was "useless" - that was factored in when he became leader. Nor was it because he dumped the Greens - he was pressured to do that. It was because he was talking to Salmond, via Ash Regan, in order to survive the no-confidence vote. That was intolerable to Sturgeon and her friends.
However, equally intolerable was Forbes taking over. Hence Swinney being dragged out of retirement with the threat to Forbes that the party would be ungovernable if she challenged and won.
When Swinney steps down, probably after the next Holyrood election, Stephen Flynn will be levered in as the next Continuity/Unity leader. Forbes will be marginalised.
QED.
Westminster VI (5 May):
Labour 44% (-1)
Conservative 21% (-1)
Reform UK 15% (+1)
Liberal Democrat 9% (–)
Green 5% (-1)
Scottish National Party 3% (–)
Other 1% (-1)
Changes +/- 28 April
redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-gb-voti…
NOTHING HAS CHANGED!
Edit - Reform 15% when they got 16.9% in a leave constituency in perfect conditions. My arse.
NEW THREAD
Seeing all resources going into the one's above whilst not having a bollock of a chance of hanging on yourself.
Yes, sticking with 80/20 probably invisibly causes more pain. But causing invisible pain (stealth tax rises) to create visible joy (NI rates cut) is very Rishi.
(If you're interested, the other seats around 200 on the Conservative bit of the swingometer under new boundaries are places like Swindon North, Plymouth Moor View, Tunbridge Wells, Worthing West, Selby. They look like the sort of places that are worth fighting, but likely to have gone already.)
Proper Bank Holiday weather.
"Conservative support fell more heavily where Reform did stand. In the BBC's sample of key wards the party's support fell by 19 points in these wards - compared with 11 points in wards where Reform did not stand. Labour, in contrast, did rather better where Reform stood.
That 19-point drop matches the 19-point fall in the average level of Conservative support in the polls since May 2021. That figure may represent a better guide to the Conservatives' immediate prospects in a general election."
Opinion polling backed up by real votes in real elections.
Now I understand the issues surrounding private spaces and the assumption that every c*** in a frock must be a male sex pest. That is a serious issue for woman and I see your point. The rapist in Scotland who demanded they were installed in a women's prison and not A wing in Barlinnie was taking the p***, and anyone who agreed with them was also delusional.
Secondly, I also share your concern that puberty blockers are administered to children. Utterly outrageous and I agree with you that the promotion of such procedures is nothing short of child abuse.
But if an adult man wants to dress like Kylie, call himself Kylie and books himself into surgery and after said surgery wants to gender define themselves as a she, I can't see a problem with that.
An issue for the Tories is that it's really hard to cut held seats adrift without causing a huge amount of resentment that may break out into public and cause further damage. The Lib Dems found this in 2015 - I think the only seat they really cut adrift was Norwich South, which was an unusual one anyway as he'd got in on under 30% in 2010 on a four way split so it was very clearly doomed in a tough election. But they may have saved a handful more than they did if they'd been more brutal and realistic about it.
Real man of the people ! Don’t his aides really not think this sort of photo op is an own goal .
Only morons will donate to them.
Perhaps we will get a real independence party one day , certainly not one led by devolution John for sure. At some point the penny will drop that they are just grifters milking it for all it is worth.
As for your second comment. He's from Hampshire.
In theory we could have a scenario where only the Lib Dems are targeting the 'right' seats insofar as the ones they will just about win.
The Tories are lost spending time and resources on lost causes.
Labour will presumably focus on winning a solid majority and not the more speculative landslide seats that will be closest on the night.
Add in the effective cessation of juvenile gender services with the closure of the Tavistock and delays in other provision and we have a further increase in the intact socially transitioned.
Cass is going to sharpen the debate over access for the socially transitioned rather than diminish it.