@Pulpstar There is never any such thing as a completely independent analysis. I think the best you can do is try to work out what are the more lunatic positions of each side. The truth on the EU is probably messy, it has merits and pitfalls, neither perfectly good nor perfectly bad. We could survive outside but there are also sound reasons for staying in. This is one where it comes down to the persuasiveness of those arguing each case. I'm broadly ambivalent, neither fanatically pro nor blindly anti. I want to see what reforms and reneg we get before making a decision.
Didn't Hague commission just such an analysis in 2010? OK it was to be done by the Civil Service, but it was supposed to provide the basis on which a sensible debate could be had. That initiative seems to have sunk without trace. I wonder why?
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
That's why Labour won the Euros and finished lots of points ahead of the Tories.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
Xena starred in Battlestar Galactica too
O/T I did enjoy your reworking of The Hunt For Red October into UKIP and Newark the other day. Wasn't able to comment at the time as was using my phone and commenting via that is a pita.
Stevenage doesn't seem like fertile ground for the EDL or am I missing something.
Must say I was surprised to see that they were marching there too. Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
Perhaps the EDL just fancied a trip out to a nice place for a change.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
Labour also lost. If the next GE was done by merely counting the votes, Labour would most likely be heading to defeat. Labour supporters are about as enthusiastic over Ed Miliband as a cup of warm piss.
The Conservatives have problems, but Labour has alot too.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
Stevenage doesn't seem like fertile ground for the EDL or am I missing something.
Must say I was surprised to see that they were marching there too. Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
Stevenage doesn't seem like fertile ground for the EDL or am I missing something.
Must say I was surprised to see that they were marching there too. Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
They should try Radlett.
Any particular reason for Radlett? Full disclosure. I work in the Radlett area.
The reason for the Tory Toffs' Humuliating Defeat in the European Elections is because they Sit in the European Parliament with Polish Homophobes and Latvians who Commemmorate the Waffen SS. When the British Public heard of this they were Rightly Horrified; they Punished Camera-On for it. Labour is the party of the Many; the Tories are a party of the Füh.
Stevenage doesn't seem like fertile ground for the EDL or am I missing something.
Must say I was surprised to see that they were marching there too. Although anywhere else in Herts would be even less fertile with possible exception of Borehamwood.
They should try Radlett.
Any particular reason for Radlett? Full disclosure. I work in the Radlett area.
Been to Radlett station twice, in 2000, and in 2009. Only because it's the last station on the former Midland Main Line inside the M25
@Pulpstar There is never any such thing as a completely independent analysis. I think the best you can do is try to work out what are the more lunatic positions of each side. The truth on the EU is probably messy, it has merits and pitfalls, neither perfectly good nor perfectly bad. We could survive outside but there are also sound reasons for staying in. This is one where it comes down to the persuasiveness of those arguing each case. I'm broadly ambivalent, neither fanatically pro nor blindly anti. I want to see what reforms and reneg we get before making a decision.
Didn't Hague commission just such an analysis in 2010? OK it was to be done by the Civil Service, but it was supposed to provide the basis on which a sensible debate could be had. That initiative seems to have sunk without trace. I wonder why?
'Review of the Balances of Competences'.
Everything his just lovely the way it is, seems to have been the conclusion.
I think you are wrong because of 2 reasons. Firstly. lib dem voters are more cerebral than most other voters and do vote differently on different issues so the European vote isn't really a surprise especially as Clegg nailed his colours to the mast on that and gave euro sceptic LibDems nowhere to turn.
LOL. I have to say that I would not exactly call South Somerset cerebral. You are right that in places like oxford Bath and Cambridge, but south somerset is a low tourism rural area with several manufacturing towns and a large white rural working class that voted libdem to avoid voting for the tories and has now decamped wholesale from Libdem to UKIP.
Sure there are places like Crewkerne with real liberals but with the former liberal vote split between the Liberals in Ilminster and UKIP in Chard the tories will come through without gaining any votes, just holding onto their votes in places like Hinton St George.
Secondly in their heartlands the LibDems are just pumped up residents associations.. They are not LibDems..in fact if the libdem brand really does start to fracture then I can see many lib dem councils going RA just to detoxify themselves from the Libdem tag
South Somerset council elections 2011:
Lib 31 (-6) Tory 17 (+8), others 4 (-2)
2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 7 Libdem: 7 UKIP: 2
Tory Majorities in their 7 seats: 11, 54, 363, 404, 662, 745, 1006 Libdem Majorities in their 7 seats: 20, 107, 202, 243, 293, 360, 613 UKIP Majorities in their 2 seats: 106, 17
Total Votes in 2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 14,970 (34%) Liberals: 14,030 (32%) UKIP: 9,962 (23%) Labour: 3,027 (7%) Green: 2,072 (stood in 11/16 wards) (5%) Eng Dem 42 (stood in 1/16 wards) (0%)
Turnout 44,103 (as against 50,020 in 2014 Euros)
Total Votes in Euro 2014 elections, South Somerset Wards:
UKIP: 16786: (33%) Conservative: 14,526 (29%) Liberals: 9,736 (19%) Green 4156 (8%) Labour 3,321 (7%) An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%) English Dems: 460 (1%) BNP: 294 (0.5%)
So torys have lost a few votes, labour much the same, green much the same and UKIP have built on their creditable 2013 council election result (0% in 2009, to 23% in 2013) to take a further slew of votes of the Libdems in 2014.
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
If the Conservatives lose the female vote, they lose. If they win the female vote, they win. And this is now arguably THE decisive shift that is taking place. Thread leader I suggest? Look at this:
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
Xena starred in Battlestar Galactica too
O/T I did enjoy your reworking of The Hunt For Red October into UKIP and Newark the other day. Wasn't able to comment at the time as was using my phone and commenting via that is a pita.
Cheers!
But if TSE is to be believed, I've promptly defected back to Tories, like Sean Connery's sub-boat character to the Americans
Mr. kle4, yeah, it could sometimes be a bit too mental, but on the whole Farscape got things right.
I also like the fact it takes the 'crew' about a series to not hate one another, and even then they have a tendency to put themselves first.
If I ever write a sci-fi comedy one thing I'll be sure to include is a line about the female first officer somehow reaching a position of great authority and importance, for which the uniform is a catsuit.
Sounds...promising. Have to agree about Farscape - the dynamic of a group who under other circumstances would never have worked together, being forced to and developing a deeper bond and attaining near legendary status despite, well, still getting on each others' nerves and having their own aims made even stock plots more interesting. It actually allowed them to really develop singly and as a group.
Sigh, we need another good space sci-fi series.
I quite liked the first series of Defiance. (Bit of a space-western)
Aand I'm back (waiting for France to finish being thrashed by Australia before I head out). Defiance was promising I thought, and the first season of Orphan Black (haven't seen the second yet) was brilliant, with draw dropping acting from the lead. Continuum is another great show, also earth bound with some time travel. I just miss space ships since Battlestar ended I guess.
Many thanks for that link btw TSE!
What we need is a sci-fi Charlies Angels.
Proposed cast: Bridget Regan (Legend of the Seeker), Claudia Black (Farscape), Jewel Staite (Firefly), and Lexa Doig (Andromeda).
The first episode would have to somehow keep them in their original characters, but zap them to the new series-universe. It Must Be Done!
This must happen indeed.
Legend of the Seeker was great, and Regan kicked a lot of ass in it. It was like a modern day Xena.
Xena starred in Battlestar Galactica too
O/T I did enjoy your reworking of The Hunt For Red October into UKIP and Newark the other day. Wasn't able to comment at the time as was using my phone and commenting via that is a pita.
Cheers!
But if TSE is to be believed, I've promptly defected back to Tories, like Sean Connery's sub-boat character to the Americans
Ratted and re-ratted? How very Churchillian of you
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
If the Conservatives lose the female vote, they lose. If they win the female vote, they win. And this is now arguably THE decisive shift that is taking place. Thread leader I suggest? Look at this:
UKIP may be returning women to the Conservative fold.
Win women, and you win.*
*A comment about General Elections, not SeanT
The gender gap is down to right wing women over 60 sticking with the Conservatives, while men are much more likely to have switched to UKIP. If women aged over 60 lose patience with the Conservatives, then the party is in a lot of trouble.
Just catching up with last nights Any Questions from Monikie in rural Angus - the audience seem pretty dismissive of the pro-independence speakers.......
The zeitgeist today is that UKIP is not for 'normal' people.
If you go to a meeting of any of the parties, the similarities are much greater than the differences. 85% of the people in the country drop litter. The other 15% pick up litter. ALL political activists are in the minority 15%.
The sensations are slightly different---there is an air of complacency at tory meeting, certainty at labour ones, a smugness at LD ones, and a collection of UKIP activists is a 'frustration'.
I think you are wrong because of 2 reasons. Firstly. lib dem voters are more cerebral than most other voters and do vote differently on different issues so the European vote isn't really a surprise especially as Clegg nailed his colours to the mast on that and gave euro sceptic LibDems nowhere to turn.
LOL. I have to say that I would not exactly call South Somerset cerebral. You are right that in places like oxford Bath and Cambridge, but south somerset is a low tourism rural area with several manufacturing towns and a large white rural working class that voted libdem to avoid voting for the tories and has now decamped wholesale from Libdem to UKIP.
Sure there are places like Crewkerne with real liberals but with the former liberal vote split between the Liberals in Ilminster and UKIP in Chard the tories will come through without gaining any votes, just holding onto their votes in places like Hinton St George.
Secondly in their heartlands the LibDems are just pumped up residents associations.. They are not LibDems..in fact if the libdem brand really does start to fracture then I can see many lib dem councils going RA just to detoxify themselves from the Libdem tag
South Somerset council elections 2011:
Lib 31 (-6) Tory 17 (+8), others 4 (-2)
2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 7 Libdem: 7 UKIP: 2
Tory Majorities in their 7 seats: 11, 54, 363, 404, 662, 745, 1006 Libdem Majorities in their 7 seats: 20, 107, 202, 243, 293, 360, 613 UKIP Majorities in their 2 seats: 106, 17
Total Votes in 2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 14,970 (34%) Liberals: 14,030 (32%) UKIP: 9,962 (23%) Labour: 3,027 (7%) Green: 2,072 (stood in 11/16 wards) (5%) Eng Dem 42 (stood in 1/16 wards) (0%)
Turnout 44,103 (as against 50,020 in 2014 Euros)
Total Votes in Euro 2014 elections, South Somerset Wards:
UKIP: 16786: (33%) Conservative: 14,526 (29%) Liberals: 9,736 (19%) Green 4156 (8%) Labour 3,321 (7%) An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%) English Dems: 460 (1%) BNP: 294 (0.5%)
So torys have lost a few votes, labour much the same, green much the same and UKIP have built on their creditable 2013 council election result (0% in 2009, to 23% in 2013) to take a further slew of votes of the Libdems in 2014.
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
Newark showed that the UKIP EU vote was 10% froth not repeatable even in a parliamentary by election let alone a GE . That 33% you quote above is much froth . You are simply deluded if you think Laws will not win Yeovil next May .
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
If the Conservatives lose the female vote, they lose. If they win the female vote, they win. And this is now arguably THE decisive shift that is taking place. Thread leader I suggest? Look at this:
The winning Conservative majority (7403) was the largest majority achieved by any governing party at a by-election since the Beaconsfield by-election in May 1982.
I think you are wrong because of 2 reasons. Firstly. lib dem voters are more cerebral than most other voters and do vote differently on different issues so the European vote isn't really a surprise especially as Clegg nailed his colours to the mast on that and gave euro sceptic LibDems nowhere to turn.
LOL. I have to say that I would not exactly call South Somerset cerebral. You are right that in places like oxford Bath and Cambridge, but south somerset is a low tourism rural area with several manufacturing towns and a large white rural working class that voted libdem to avoid voting for the tories and has now decamped wholesale from Libdem to UKIP.
Sure there are places like Crewkerne with real liberals but with the former liberal vote split between the Liberals in Ilminster and UKIP in Chard the tories will come through without gaining any votes, just holding onto their votes in places like Hinton St George.
Secondly in their heartlands the LibDems are just pumped up residents associations.. They are not LibDems..in fact if the libdem brand really does start to fracture then I can see many lib dem councils going RA just to detoxify themselves from the Libdem tag
South Somerset council elections 2011:
Lib 31 (-6) Tory 17 (+8), others 4 (-2)
2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 7 Libdem: 7 UKIP: 2
Tory Majorities in their 7 seats: 11, 54, 363, 404, 662, 745, 1006 Libdem Majorities in their 7 seats: 20, 107, 202, 243, 293, 360, 613 UKIP Majorities in their 2 seats: 106, 17
Total Votes in 2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 14,970 (34%) Liberals: 14,030 (32%) UKIP: 9,962 (23%) Labour: 3,027 (7%) Green: 2,072 (stood in 11/16 wards) (5%) Eng Dem 42 (stood in 1/16 wards) (0%)
Turnout 44,103 (as against 50,020 in 2014 Euros)
Total Votes in Euro 2014 elections, South Somerset Wards:
UKIP: 16786: (33%) Conservative: 14,526 (29%) Liberals: 9,736 (19%) Green 4156 (8%) Labour 3,321 (7%) An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%) English Dems: 460 (1%) BNP: 294 (0.5%)
So torys have lost a few votes, labour much the same, green much the same and UKIP have built on their creditable 2013 council election result (0% in 2009, to 23% in 2013) to take a further slew of votes of the Libdems in 2014.
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
Newark showed that the UKIP EU vote was 10% froth not repeatable even in a parliamentary by election let alone a GE . That 33% you quote above is much froth . You are simply deluded if you think Laws will not win Yeovil next May .
It's always nice to come on here and read the usual suspects not wanting just to bury the LDs but dance on the grave too. Ho hum...
David H posits his usual argument from a broadly Conservative perspective but forgets Labour played this game in Newbury and Christchurch in the 1990s and it did them no harm ultimately. Labour can win a majority without Newark - the truth is none of the parties are "national" in any sense. The Conservatives won't be trying to win East Ham next year any more than Labour will try to win Beaconsfield.
Using limited resources effectively is the thing parties have to do and if that means ducking fights they can't win so be it.
Those who think every party should fight every seat to win have very little idea how politics works.
The winning Conservative majority (7403) was the largest majority achieved by any governing party at a by-election since the Beaconsfield by-election in May 1982.
I wonder what became of the defeated Lab candidate from Beaconsfield
It's always nice to come on here and read the usual suspects not wanting just to bury the LDs but dance on the grave too. Ho hum...
David H posits his usual argument from a broadly Conservative perspective but forgets Labour played this game in Newbury and Christchurch in the 1990s and it did them no harm ultimately. Labour can win a majority without Newark - the truth is none of the parties are "national" in any sense. The Conservatives won't be trying to win East Ham next year any more than Labour will try to win Beaconsfield.
Using limited resources effectively is the thing parties have to do and if that means ducking fights they can't win so be it.
Those who think every party should fight every seat to win have very little idea how politics works.
Labour could play that game in Newbury and Christchurch (1) because the Lib Dems and Labour were genuinely working closely together 'The Project' and all that, and (2) because poor performances there were clearly the exception and didn't feed in to a narrative of weak results elsewhere.
Neither of those two things is true in relation to UKIP beating Labour to second for Newark.
I could also add that the big strategy in the 90s worked: the Lib Dems won the seats, handsomely. By contrast, the Tories held Newark by the biggest by-election majority in a government-held seat for 32 years.
Those who think every party should fight every seat to win have very little idea how politics works.
Nor, does it appear, those who dismiss a by-election within 11 months of the GE, and quite possibly the last one of this parliament, as being of no import and without consequence......
It's always nice to come on here and read the usual suspects not wanting just to bury the LDs but dance on the grave too. Ho hum...
David H posits his usual argument from a broadly Conservative perspective but forgets Labour played this game in Newbury and Christchurch in the 1990s and it did them no harm ultimately. Labour can win a majority without Newark - the truth is none of the parties are "national" in any sense. The Conservatives won't be trying to win East Ham next year any more than Labour will try to win Beaconsfield.
Using limited resources effectively is the thing parties have to do and if that means ducking fights they can't win so be it.
Those who think every party should fight every seat to win have very little idea how politics works.
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
Anything Yeovil specific? Colour me leery of translating Euro scores.
Not that I am aware of anymore than anywhere else in the southwest, although the expenses business would not have helped Laws. The point is it has happened in the 2013 county council elections as well as the 2014 Euro elections.
If Laws, with a 13,000 majority in Ashdowns old seat is going to struggle, what chance to the Libdems have of holding off the tories in these seats (figures are majority over 2nd placed Conservatives in 2010 Westminster elections).
Solihull: 175 Mid Dorset and Poole North: 269 Wells: 800 St Austell and Newquay: 1,312 St Ives: 1,719 Somerton and Frome: 1,817 Chippenham: 2,470 Berwick upon tweed 2,690 Cornwall North: 2,981 Cheadle: 3,272 Argyle and Bute: 3,431 Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine: 3,684 Brecon and Radnorshire: 3,747 Eastbourne: 3,435 Taunton Deane: 3,993: Torbay: 4,078 Carshalton and Wallington: 5,260 Berwickshire, Roxborough and Selkirk: 5,675 Devon North: 5,821 Southport: 6,024 Hazel Grove: 6,731 Colchester: 6,982 Thornbury and Yate: 7,116 Kingston and Surbiton: 7,560 Lewes: 7,647
If the tories had won those seats in 2010 they would have had a small but workable majority of 14 (in reality 19 as Sinn Fein dont attend) With a supply and confidence from the DUP that goes up to 30 (35).
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
If the Conservatives lose the female vote, they lose. If they win the female vote, they win. And this is now arguably THE decisive shift that is taking place. Thread leader I suggest? Look at this:
On Labour's soft-pedalling in Newark, I agree with Jack W and our other distinguished posters that it was a big tactical mistake - in fact, incomprehensible. I just want to add one extra consideration: this by-election wasn't a surprise. Labour will have known for about a year that it was a distinct possibility. The Conservative candidate and his team have been quietly working away for months. What were Labour doing during this time, long before UKIP was sniffing around here? Were they working to grab a good chunk of that 20% LibDem share?
Come down a bucket load from last year - 3 & 7 point drivers are viewed massively differently by the Insurance companies.
3 is unfortunate, 7 is carelessness. At my previous employer. I looked after a fleet of 180 LGV drivers 7 points or more, we had to notify the insurance company and the excess was doubled.
With the other side of the coin being "only UKIP can beat the Tories".
While middle class LibDem voters might be willing to vote tactically anti-UKIP, working class LibDem voters would be likewise happy to vote tactically anti-Conservative - after all that's what they've been doing in Yeovil and similar places for decades.
So on the general point its possible that the LibDem strongholds could collapse like a house of cards.
Certainly possible. My assumption, though, is the LD voter base is more middle class and that such WC support as they have is mainly protest, so will have already deserted them
The winning Conservative majority (7403) was the largest majority achieved by any governing party at a by-election since the Beaconsfield by-election in May 1982.
There appear to be lots of interesting 'factoids' concerning Newark - I’m going to miss those endless thread headers, tweets and comments of the “Tories terrible record of losing every by-election defence while in office over the past 25 years” – Oh well, C'est la vie.
So what you're saying is that it is not that we have the wrong type of governing parties, which is obvious no doubt, but that we have the wrong type of people, because they will fall for lies?
Falling for lies is a normal human trait. We all do it to a greater or lesser extent. The extent depends on a lot of things including whether you have fallen for lies before, whether the outcome really bothers you either way and how much you trust the person telling the lies. I don't hold to the idea that there is any shame in falling for a masterful lie and if there is one thing that politicians are really, really good at it is lying.
Of course we do have history to help us here. Heath lied about the nature of the EEC and the terms of entry and then those lies were repeated in the 1975 referendum. This is why we get people saying they want to 'return to the way the EU/EEC was meant to be', just as a trading body. You get lots of people saying that was what they voted for. Wrong. If you voted yes in 1975 then you voted for exactly what we have now and exactly what has been planned for the future which is a single political entity
That does not mean we have 'the wrong sort of people' at all. It is just a fact of life.
You just don't get it do you Sean? UKIP in its current form, isn't just failing to attract Conservative female voters or otherwise, it is in fact repelling women voters of all ages! You and few other former Tories may have left the party and moved to UKIP in the hope of shifting the Conservatives towards you as a voters from the outside on the right. I doubt it was in the script that rather than move to the right, that vacuum created within the Conservative party is now being filled by those that don't share your views. And meanwhile, the immigration focus behind UKIP's current rise is now undermining and damaging its original purpose as a movement for leaving the EU.
As I pointed out a while back, the combination of Coalition Government, the Independence Referendum and the rise of UKIP is turning out to be an extremely successful detox strategy for the Conservative Party in the run up to next years GE. As a female Conservative living at the other end of the UK up here in Scotland, can I just say cheers.
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
UKIP may be returning women to the Conservative fold.
Win women, and you win.*
*A comment about General Elections, not SeanT
The gender gap is down to right wing women over 60 sticking with the Conservatives, while men are much more likely to have switched to UKIP. If women aged over 60 lose patience with the Conservatives, then the party is in a lot of trouble.
So what you're saying is that it is not that we have the wrong type of governing parties, which is obvious no doubt, but that we have the wrong type of people, because they will fall for lies?
Falling for lies is a normal human trait. We all do it to a greater or lesser extent. The extent depends on a lot of things including whether you have fallen for lies before, whether the outcome really bothers you either way and how much you trust the person telling the lies. I don't hold to the idea that there is any shame in falling for a masterful lie and if there is one thing that politicians are really, really good at it is lying.
Of course we do have history to help us here. Heath lied about the nature of the EEC and the terms of entry and then those lies were repeated in the 1975 referendum. This is why we get people saying they want to 'return to the way the EU/EEC was meant to be', just as a trading body. You get lots of people saying that was what they voted for. Wrong. If you voted yes in 1975 then you voted for exactly what we have now and exactly what has been planned for the future which is a single political entity
That does not mean we have 'the wrong sort of people' at all. It is just a fact of life.
I see. I still think you are being unduly pessimistic about what the outcome might be in a such a scenario however,though I accept the indication is that if people believe there has been a meaningful return of powers, they probably would vote for In.
Matthew Parris is likely to upset some people with this today
Imagine, then, that Mr Cameron navigates five years of successful coalition, saves the union, with his chancellor steers Britain off the economic rocks, wins another election outright for his party and gets the boundary changes it sorely needs, then finally negotiates a settlement within the EU that, for the first time in 40 years, gets the clear endorsement of the British people . . . then imagine trying to argue that this is not the record of a purposeful man.
In case anyone is wondering, I am not Matthew Parris. But maybe he reads PB?
With the other side of the coin being "only UKIP can beat the Tories".
While middle class LibDem voters might be willing to vote tactically anti-UKIP, working class LibDem voters would be likewise happy to vote tactically anti-Conservative - after all that's what they've been doing in Yeovil and similar places for decades.
So on the general point its possible that the LibDem strongholds could collapse like a house of cards.
Certainly possible. My assumption, though, is the LD voter base is more middle class and that such WC support as they have is mainly protest, so will have already deserted them
A statement supported by the stats that I put up from South Somerset. The WC support has decamped en masse to UKIP in 2013 council elections as well as 2014 Euros
The winning Conservative majority (7403) was the largest majority achieved by any governing party at a by-election since the Beaconsfield by-election in May 1982.
There appear to be lots of interesting 'factoids' concerning Newark - I’m going to miss those endless thread headers, tweets and comments of the “Tories terrible record of losing every by-election defence while in office over the past 25 years” – Oh well, C'est la vie.
I must admit, that one about the 25-year Tory defence record in government is one that's particularly misleading, even for a Lib Dem bar chart. Newark was only the second such election in over 17 years. I don't recall people talking about the Lib Dems' dreadful record before Eastleigh of not having successfully defended a seat in government since the War.
Matthew Parris is likely to upset some people with this today
Imagine, then, that Mr Cameron navigates five years of successful coalition, saves the union, with his chancellor steers Britain off the economic rocks, wins another election outright for his party and gets the boundary changes it sorely needs, then finally negotiates a settlement within the EU that, for the first time in 40 years, gets the clear endorsement of the British people . . . then imagine trying to argue that this is not the record of a purposeful man.
In case anyone is wondering, I am not Matthew Parris. But maybe he reads PB? An awful lot of if's in the Parris piece. As a gambling man RN, what odds would you reckon for DC to pull that lot off?
Excellent post Southam. I agree with every word. I am also hopeful that the toxicity of UKIP will eventually repel several of the best posters on here such as Richard Tyndall and Sean F.
Hopefully exasperation with real world compromises will not be enough.
Morning David,
I think part of the problem there though (in so far as hoping that supporters like myself and Sean will abandon UKIP) is that there is a disconnect between the perception that you are trying to portray of UKIP and the reality.
I do not believe that the Tories were ever the baby eating toxic party that their opponents made them out to be. The held positions that the vocal left could use to try and project that image but in the end the reality was a long way from that. Those who remained loyal to the Tory party throughout that period (and even those who left because of the rise of UKIP) saw from the inside that the Tory party as not the way it was portrayed by some in the media and no matter how much the left tried to push that image in the end they could not persuade supporters that it was a true reflection of the party. Basically those who always hated the Tories had their views reinforced whilst those who were supporters or even ambivalent ignored the hype as normal politicking.
The same applies to UKIP. Whilst I do not generally like parties and make no exception for UKIP, I recognise that the attempts by their opponents to portray the as the 'nasty party' are a very long way from the truth. There are certainly elements of their public positioning that I don't like - opposition to gay marriage being the most obvious - but given that they will do nothing to reverse it and that I believe there is scope to change the basic position within the party, just as there was in the Tory party, then I am happy to continue to support UKIP for the positive reasons that I first joined them./
I see far more hope of the current UKIP leadership coming round to my position on social affairs than I do for the current Tory leadership coming round to my position on EU membership.
Richard I have been out keeping our coffee shop economy going. Thanks for the considered reply. Clearly there are many people of good will in all parties along with a sprinkling of nutters.
I worry that UKIP can slip easily from being anti immigration to anti immigrant. I like the fact that the modern tory party is more tolerant and inclusive than it used to be. It would be excellent if UKIP went the same way. The EU is undoubtedly a major issue (despite Mike's repeated observations about its saliency) but there is so much more on what the centre right can agree for the good of the country.
If the papers are to be believed he doesn't seem to have any woman problem at all - except perhaps his wife when he gets home.
Unfortunately they are not. Those stories about him "holding hands" in Malta when he was helping a disabled lady on crutches really did represent the lowest of the low of the anti UKIP smearing.
On Labour's soft-pedalling in Newark, I agree with Jack W and our other distinguished posters that it was a big tactical mistake - in fact, incomprehensible. I just want to add one extra consideration: this by-election wasn't a surprise. Labour will have known for about a year that it was a distinct possibility. The Conservative candidate and his team have been quietly working away for months. What were Labour doing during this time, long before UKIP was sniffing around here? Were they working to grab a good chunk of that 20% LibDem share?
As I have mentioned before I don't think you should underestimate the fractured nature of the Labour party in Newark. The internecine warfare that has grumbled on for more than a decade leaves the party fatally wounded in the town itself which is where Labour draws much of its support. I get the impression this won't change until the individuals concerned on both sides have left the political scene.
If the papers are to be believed he doesn't seem to have any woman problem at all - except perhaps his wife when he gets home.
Yes but that 'is' a problem. I mentioned earlier this morning how significant it is that the Tories are now outscoring against amongst females, and how it is women who have led them to power. Women don't generally like politicians to be womanisers, at least not as party leaders. This is a massive seismic shift, of far greater significance for example than OGH's 2010 LibDem'ers. Why? Because they represent half the electorate.
An example, in Thanet south the sitting Tory is standing down, no ppc announced, the labour candidate is a 24 year old lad, there's a good chance Farage will stand. What price ukip winning that seat? I'd fill my boots at odds on.
how much do you want?
Well considering ukip are around evens to win a seat I might have been rash, my point is he should be odds on if he stands in Thanet south and ill bet accordingly when the market is formed.
What price will you give me ukip winning in Dover & Deal?
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
Anything Yeovil specific? Colour me leery of translating Euro scores.
Not that I am aware of anymore than anywhere else in the southwest, although the expenses business would not have helped Laws. The point is it has happened in the 2013 county council elections as well as the 2014 Euro elections.
If Laws, with a 13,000 majority in Ashdowns old seat is going to struggle, what chance to the Libdems have of holding off the tories in these seats (figures are majority over 2nd placed Conservatives in 2010 Westminster elections).
Solihull: 175 Mid Dorset and Poole North: 269 Wells: 800 St Austell and Newquay: 1,312 St Ives: 1,719 Somerton and Frome: 1,817 Chippenham: 2,470 Berwick upon tweed 2,690 Cornwall North: 2,981 Cheadle: 3,272 Argyle and Bute: 3,431 Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine: 3,684 Brecon and Radnorshire: 3,747 Eastbourne: 3,435 Taunton Deane: 3,993: Torbay: 4,078 Carshalton and Wallington: 5,260 Berwickshire, Roxborough and Selkirk: 5,675 Devon North: 5,821 Southport: 6,024 Hazel Grove: 6,731 Colchester: 6,982 Thornbury and Yate: 7,116 Kingston and Surbiton: 7,560 Lewes: 7,647
If the tories had won those seats in 2010 they would have had a small but workable majority of 14 (in reality 19 as Sinn Fein dont attend) With a supply and confidence from the DUP that goes up to 30 (35).
Well we had local elections in some of those places only 3 weeks ago .
Carshalton - despite Timmo's forecast of Lib Dem wipe out and losses to both Conservative and Labour - result was LD gains from Conservative Southport = almost a clean sweep for Lib Dems in the Southport wards Colchester - almost a clean sweep for Lib Dems in the Colchester parliamentary seat wards Kingston/Surbiton - a small Lib Dem plurality in those wards Hazel Grove and Cheadle - Lib Dems well ahead of Conservatives
An awful lot of if's in the Parris piece. As a gambling man RN, what odds would you reckon for DC to pull that lot off?
The odds are reasonably good, because they are related contingencies. If we assume that an IndyRef No is pretty much in the bag, which I think is a reasonable working assumption, then everything depends on getting a majority. If he does, the rest probably follows. So maybe something like a 4/1 or 5/1 shot on the accumulator?
I suspect the Conservative campaign machine could hardly believe its luck, especially when UKIP put up Helmer as their candidate at the last minute while the Labour party decided to sit this one out despite the collapse of the Libdems in the polls. I didn't realise until after the Newark by-election that Bryant was the man in charge of the Labour campaign, they might have been better sticking up an MP in a more marginal seat who is more used to a Con/Lab scrape?
On Labour's soft-pedalling in Newark, I agree with Jack W and our other distinguished posters that it was a big tactical mistake - in fact, incomprehensible. I just want to add one extra consideration: this by-election wasn't a surprise. Labour will have known for about a year that it was a distinct possibility. The Conservative candidate and his team have been quietly working away for months. What were Labour doing during this time, long before UKIP was sniffing around here? Were they working to grab a good chunk of that 20% LibDem share?
On Labour's soft-pedalling in Newark, I agree with Jack W and our other distinguished posters that it was a big tactical mistake - in fact, incomprehensible. I just want to add one extra consideration: this by-election wasn't a surprise. Labour will have known for about a year that it was a distinct possibility. The Conservative candidate and his team have been quietly working away for months. What were Labour doing during this time, long before UKIP was sniffing around here? Were they working to grab a good chunk of that 20% LibDem share?
As I have mentioned before I don't think you should underestimate the fractured nature of the Labour party in Newark. The internecine warfare that has grumbled on for more than a decade leaves the party fatally wounded in the town itself which is where Labour draws much of its support. I get the impression this won't change until the individuals concerned on both sides have left the political scene.
A fair point. But what would have stopped the national Labour party parachuting in whatever people were needed to deal with this by-election?
Conservatives did it. UKIP managed it. Why not Labour?
"It’s a distinct possibility that UKIP are succeeding in detoxifying the Conservatives in a way that David Cameron could not do, bringing new voters into the fold who would not previously have considered voting Tory."
This is a very interesting suggestion. I do think the European election result may have done the Tories a massive favour. UKIP winning will have scared the heebie jeebies out of a lot of normal people (yep, I use the word normal) and particularly women. Anecdotally a relative of mine (sister) voted UKIP but said she would never do so for the General Election: it was a protest. I'm particularly interested in the latest gender divide. Women voters, like readers, matter far more than men. for the Tories.
If the Conservatives lose the female vote, they lose. If they win the female vote, they win. And this is now arguably THE decisive shift that is taking place. Thread leader I suggest? Look at this:
As I have mentioned before I don't think you should underestimate the fractured nature of the Labour party in Newark. The internecine warfare that has grumbled on for more than a decade leaves the party fatally wounded in the town itself which is where Labour draws much of its support. I get the impression this won't change until the individuals concerned on both sides have left the political scene.
Fair point, Richard. Even so, though, shouldn't the central Labour Party have taken a closer grip on things in that case? I can understand it not being a priority when Newark was seen as just a Con safe seat, but, as I said, they've had plenty of warning of the by-election.
If the papers are to be believed he doesn't seem to have any woman problem at all - except perhaps his wife when he gets home.
Unfortunately they are not. Those stories about him "holding hands" in Malta when he was helping a disabled lady on crutches really did represent the lowest of the low of the anti UKIP smearing.
The next day's front page was "Farage:I wont help the disabled again"
An example, in Thanet south the sitting Tory is standing down, no ppc announced, the labour candidate is a 24 year old lad, there's a good chance Farage will stand. What price ukip winning that seat? I'd fill my boots at odds on.
how much do you want?
Well considering ukip are around evens to win a seat I might have been rash, my point is he should be odds on if he stands in Thanet south and ill bet accordingly when the market is formed.
What price will you give me ukip winning in Dover & Deal?
If I were you Id just back UKIP to win South Thanet at the current odds
Bang on the money with that post audreyanne! And its worth pointing out that while Boris is popular as a maverick Tory London Mayor outside of Westminster, this is also one of the reasons why he will never lead the Conservative party and he knows it.
If the papers are to be believed he doesn't seem to have any woman problem at all - except perhaps his wife when he gets home.
Yes but that 'is' a problem. I mentioned earlier this morning how significant it is that the Tories are now outscoring against amongst females, and how it is women who have led them to power. Women don't generally like politicians to be womanisers, at least not as party leaders. This is a massive seismic shift, of far greater significance for example than OGH's 2010 LibDem'ers. Why? Because they represent half the electorate.
If the papers are to be believed he doesn't seem to have any woman problem at all - except perhaps his wife when he gets home.
Unfortunately they are not. Those stories about him "holding hands" in Malta when he was helping a disabled lady on crutches really did represent the lowest of the low of the anti UKIP smearing.
Nah - the point is, it was believable - even if grossly unfair - now imagine the same story with Miliband - the reaction would be "No! Really? Are you sure there isn't another explanation?' With Farage its 'naughty Nigel - what a card!' Tory matrons purse lips and frown......
Trade deficits are fun, They are a measure of an economy "growing" by consumer spending, and one growing by manufacturing increases. The transition between the two states will be the measure of Ozzie's "genius" because any idiot can manage consumer spending growth.
Good heavens I thought Mr. AlanBrooke and I were the only people on this site who cared about trade figures. Good to have you with us, Comrade. However, I am not sure what being allied to two revanchist, capitalist running-dogs on a matter of economics will do for your communist credentials
Not quite. I was lamenting the latest trade figures yesterday and commenting on how difficult it was to make progress when we are growing so much faster than our main market and have a government pumping more demand into the economy by the size of the deficit than any comparable economy in the EU.
We have a long, long way to go to repair that idiot who thought that the trade balance did not matter and it will take a long time.
An example, in Thanet south the sitting Tory is standing down, no ppc announced, the labour candidate is a 24 year old lad, there's a good chance Farage will stand. What price ukip winning that seat? I'd fill my boots at odds on.
how much do you want?
Well considering ukip are around evens to win a seat I might have been rash, my point is he should be odds on if he stands in Thanet south and ill bet accordingly when the market is formed.
What price will you give me ukip winning in Dover & Deal?
If I were you Id just back UKIP to win South Thanet at the current odds
Yes but I'm interested in a price on the neighbouring constituency
On Labour's soft-pedalling in Newark, I agree with Jack W and our other distinguished posters that it was a big tactical mistake - in fact, incomprehensible. I just want to add one extra consideration: this by-election wasn't a surprise. Labour will have known for about a year that it was a distinct possibility. The Conservative candidate and his team have been quietly working away for months. What were Labour doing during this time, long before UKIP was sniffing around here? Were they working to grab a good chunk of that 20% LibDem share?
This was not the Tories' 144th safest seat. It was the 44th safest seat.
Problem with you lot is that you have so much money, more than common sense, that you cannot comprehend how the rest of Britain live. In this case, how other political parties survive.
We do not have money to burn. Where needed, like Corby, we thrashed you !!
How much time and effort do you give to an election in the Rhondda ? And, please be brief.
An awful lot of if's in the Parris piece. As a gambling man RN, what odds would you reckon for DC to pull that lot off?
The odds are reasonably good, because they are related contingencies. If we assume that an IndyRef No is pretty much in the bag, which I think is a reasonable working assumption, then everything depends on getting a majority. If he does, the rest probably follows. So maybe something like a 4/1 or 5/1 shot on the accumulator?
Thanks Agree on the IndyRef, gloomy on chances of workable majority. If DC does get a majority, horrendously doubtful of being able to get anything meaningful back from the EU. The UK officials have all gone native and will at best get a few pointless baubles which will get spun as a wonderful victory. My canaries in the EU coal mine will be Dan Hannan and Doug Carswell
How much time and effort do you give to an election in the Rhondda ? And, please be brief.
As has repeatedly been pointed out, the swing you needed to win Newark was not at all exceptional for an opposition party in a by-election. You had a 20% LibDem vote share going begging. You had UKIP helping you by potentially eating into the Tory vote. You had a year to organise yourselves. A Labour win was by no means out of the question, or at least a chunky swing in your favour.
So the answer to your question is: none. But this was more the equivalent of Crewe & Nantwich than the Rhondda.
My canaries in the EU coal mine will be Dan Hannan and Doug Carswell
They will be campaigning for Out, whatever the result of the renegotiation. And fair enough - I've got a lot of time for them, especially Hannan. To my mind he is the best advocate of the Out side - he's passionate, well-informed, always polite to those who disagree with him, engages with the arguments, and doesn't make silly and facile claims.
As for how much substance there will be in the renegotiation, it certainly won't be enough to satisfy Richard Tyndall. Nothing possibly would. Personally I don't see things in such black and white terms; I see it more as a change of direction and avoiding the worst aspects of the EU from the UK's point of view, whilst accepting that we can't have full access to the Single Market without some compromises, and we'd have to make many of those compromises even if we leave and negotiate a new trade treaty with the EU. One of those compromises, realistically, is freedom of movement for workers, which even Switzerland has had to accept but is now trying to get out of - I don't think they'll succeed.
Down town and delighted to see Scottish Labour out campaigning for together we can. Seems much more distinctively Labour than Better Together and even has a token pop at the Tories (as usual Labour ignore their real opponent in the SNP ) . Still I can cope with that if Labour finally start to get their act together .
Are Scottish Labour not really working well with Better Together then? Still, the Union needs their support no matter how they give it I suppose.
You have to remember that the sole purpose of the Scottish labour party is to stop the tories. It is all they agree about. All of the leaflets from Labour I received in 2010 went on and on about it in a constituency where the tories deposit is safeish.
The SNP, who were threatening to take the seat, never got a mention. Scottish Labour really cannot focus on anything else and thinks this is the only way to get their vote out. In 2010, n fairness, they were broadly right. In the Scottish Parliamentary elections not so much.
With the other side of the coin being "only UKIP can beat the Tories".
While middle class LibDem voters might be willing to vote tactically anti-UKIP, working class LibDem voters would be likewise happy to vote tactically anti-Conservative - after all that's what they've been doing in Yeovil and similar places for decades.
So on the general point its possible that the LibDem strongholds could collapse like a house of cards.
Certainly possible. My assumption, though, is the LD voter base is more middle class and that such WC support as they have is mainly protest, so will have already deserted them
The LibDem base in the West Country, rural Wales and the Scottish Highlands was always working class. But because of the lack of industrialisation and unionisation in those areas was while not Labour inclined was still strongly anti-Tory.
If constituencies in those areas become Con-UKIP battles then those working class LibDem voters are likely to switch to UKIP.
The middle class LibDem voters tend to be in urban areas where Labour is dominant. There are some LibDem middle class constituencies where the Conservatives are their main opponent in SW London, Solihull and Cheadle for example. But in both groups there is no reason for LibDem supporters to vote tactically for the Conservatives.
You just don't get it do you Sean? UKIP in its current form, isn't just failing to attract Conservative female voters or otherwise, it is in fact repelling women voters of all ages! You and few other former Tories may have left the party and moved to UKIP in the hope of shifting the Conservatives towards you as a voters from the outside on the right. I doubt it was in the script that rather than move to the right, that vacuum created within the Conservative party is now being filled by those that don't share your views. And meanwhile, the immigration focus behind UKIP's current rise is now undermining and damaging its original purpose as a movement for leaving the EU.
As I pointed out a while back, the combination of Coalition Government, the Independence Referendum and the rise of UKIP is turning out to be an extremely successful detox strategy for the Conservative Party in the run up to next years GE. As a female Conservative living at the other end of the UK up here in Scotland, can I just say cheers.
Your reasoning is flawed.
The Conservatives have made themselves more toxic in the eyes of rightwingers who have often voted Conservative.
They may have made themselves less toxic in they eyes of Labour and LibDem voters who will continue to vote Labour and LibDem in Con-Lab and Con-LibDem constituencies.
Losing former Conservative voters to UKIP in those constituencies is a direct loss where it matters.
Possibly gaining former Labour and LibDem voters in Con-UKIP constituencies is irrelevant.
I do not know how you can say Labour soft peddled the by election because it is not true Many MPs and supporters turned up to lend a hand. What we did not do was spend money on extra leafleting. Please check your facts before writing such rubbish
Comments
Oh.
The Conservatives have problems, but Labour has alot too.
Full disclosure. I work in the Radlett area.
Everything his just lovely the way it is, seems to have been the conclusion.
Sure there are places like Crewkerne with real liberals but with the former liberal vote split between the Liberals in Ilminster and UKIP in Chard the tories will come through without gaining any votes, just holding onto their votes in places like Hinton St George.
South Somerset council elections 2011:
Lib 31 (-6) Tory 17 (+8), others 4 (-2)
2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 7
Libdem: 7
UKIP: 2
Tory Majorities in their 7 seats: 11, 54, 363, 404, 662, 745, 1006
Libdem Majorities in their 7 seats: 20, 107, 202, 243, 293, 360, 613
UKIP Majorities in their 2 seats: 106, 17
Total Votes in 2013 Somerset County Council elections, South Somerset Wards:
Conservative: 14,970 (34%)
Liberals: 14,030 (32%)
UKIP: 9,962 (23%)
Labour: 3,027 (7%)
Green: 2,072 (stood in 11/16 wards) (5%)
Eng Dem 42 (stood in 1/16 wards) (0%)
Turnout 44,103 (as against 50,020 in 2014 Euros)
Total Votes in Euro 2014 elections, South Somerset Wards:
UKIP: 16786: (33%)
Conservative: 14,526 (29%)
Liberals: 9,736 (19%)
Green 4156 (8%)
Labour 3,321 (7%)
An Indepenence From Europe 741 (1%)
English Dems: 460 (1%)
BNP: 294 (0.5%)
So torys have lost a few votes, labour much the same, green much the same and UKIP have built on their creditable 2013 council election result (0% in 2009, to 23% in 2013) to take a further slew of votes of the Libdems in 2014.
As I said libdems are in big big trouble and face a massacre
But if TSE is to be believed, I've promptly defected back to Tories, like Sean Connery's sub-boat character to the Americans
http://www.populus.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/140607-Populus_FT_ScottishIndependence.pdf
What do you hope result will be (excl DK): yes/no
Scot: 46:54
EW; 79:21
What do you think the results will be : yes/no
Scot: 35 : 65
EW: 31: 69
SIndy keeps the pound (net):
Scot: +39
EW: -51
If you go to a meeting of any of the parties, the similarities are much greater than the differences. 85% of the people in the country drop litter. The other 15% pick up litter. ALL political activists are in the minority 15%.
The sensations are slightly different---there is an air of complacency at tory meeting, certainty at labour ones, a smugness at LD ones, and a collection of UKIP activists is a 'frustration'.
The winning Conservative majority (7403) was the largest majority achieved by any governing party at a by-election since the Beaconsfield by-election in May 1982.
EU poll 27%
Newark 26%
It's always nice to come on here and read the usual suspects not wanting just to bury the LDs but dance on the grave too. Ho hum...
David H posits his usual argument from a broadly Conservative perspective but forgets Labour played this game in Newbury and Christchurch in the 1990s and it did them no harm ultimately. Labour can win a majority without Newark - the truth is none of the parties are "national" in any sense. The Conservatives won't be trying to win East Ham next year any more than Labour will try to win Beaconsfield.
Using limited resources effectively is the thing parties have to do and if that means ducking fights they can't win so be it.
Those who think every party should fight every seat to win have very little idea how politics works.
Neither of those two things is true in relation to UKIP beating Labour to second for Newark.
I could also add that the big strategy in the 90s worked: the Lib Dems won the seats, handsomely. By contrast, the Tories held Newark by the biggest by-election majority in a government-held seat for 32 years.
Goes up at 3.
Is my finest thread ever.
I even talk about shoes.
Come down a bucket load from last year - 3 & 7 point drivers are viewed massively differently by the Insurance companies.
If Laws, with a 13,000 majority in Ashdowns old seat is going to struggle, what chance to the Libdems have of holding off the tories in these seats (figures are majority over 2nd placed Conservatives in 2010 Westminster elections).
Solihull: 175
Mid Dorset and Poole North: 269
Wells: 800
St Austell and Newquay: 1,312
St Ives: 1,719
Somerton and Frome: 1,817
Chippenham: 2,470
Berwick upon tweed 2,690
Cornwall North: 2,981
Cheadle: 3,272
Argyle and Bute: 3,431
Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine: 3,684
Brecon and Radnorshire: 3,747
Eastbourne: 3,435
Taunton Deane: 3,993:
Torbay: 4,078
Carshalton and Wallington: 5,260
Berwickshire, Roxborough and Selkirk: 5,675
Devon North: 5,821
Southport: 6,024
Hazel Grove: 6,731
Colchester: 6,982
Thornbury and Yate: 7,116
Kingston and Surbiton: 7,560
Lewes: 7,647
If the tories had won those seats in 2010 they would have had a small but workable majority of 14 (in reality 19 as Sinn Fein dont attend) With a supply and confidence from the DUP that goes up to 30 (35).
At my previous employer. I looked after a fleet of 180 LGV drivers
7 points or more, we had to notify the insurance company and the excess was doubled.
Of course we do have history to help us here. Heath lied about the nature of the EEC and the terms of entry and then those lies were repeated in the 1975 referendum. This is why we get people saying they want to 'return to the way the EU/EEC was meant to be', just as a trading body. You get lots of people saying that was what they voted for. Wrong. If you voted yes in 1975 then you voted for exactly what we have now and exactly what has been planned for the future which is a single political entity
That does not mean we have 'the wrong sort of people' at all. It is just a fact of life.
As I pointed out a while back, the combination of Coalition Government, the Independence Referendum and the rise of UKIP is turning out to be an extremely successful detox strategy for the Conservative Party in the run up to next years GE. As a female Conservative living at the other end of the UK up here in Scotland, can I just say cheers.
An awful lot of if's in the Parris piece.
As a gambling man RN, what odds would you reckon for DC to pull that lot off?
I worry that UKIP can slip easily from being anti immigration to anti immigrant. I like the fact that the modern tory party is more tolerant and inclusive than it used to be. It would be excellent if UKIP went the same way. The EU is undoubtedly a major issue (despite Mike's repeated observations about its saliency) but there is so much more on what the centre right can agree for the good of the country.
What price will you give me ukip winning in Dover & Deal?
Carshalton - despite Timmo's forecast of Lib Dem wipe out and losses to both Conservative and Labour - result was LD gains from Conservative
Southport = almost a clean sweep for Lib Dems in the Southport wards
Colchester - almost a clean sweep for Lib Dems in the Colchester parliamentary seat wards
Kingston/Surbiton - a small Lib Dem plurality in those wards
Hazel Grove and Cheadle - Lib Dems well ahead of Conservatives
Conservatives did it. UKIP managed it. Why not Labour?
We have a long, long way to go to repair that idiot who thought that the trade balance did not matter and it will take a long time.
Problem with you lot is that you have so much money, more than common sense, that you cannot comprehend how the rest of Britain live. In this case, how other political parties survive.
We do not have money to burn. Where needed, like Corby, we thrashed you !!
How much time and effort do you give to an election in the Rhondda ? And, please be brief.
Agree on the IndyRef, gloomy on chances of workable majority.
If DC does get a majority, horrendously doubtful of being able to get anything meaningful back from the EU.
The UK officials have all gone native and will at best get a few pointless baubles which will get spun as a wonderful victory.
My canaries in the EU coal mine will be Dan Hannan and Doug Carswell
So the answer to your question is: none. But this was more the equivalent of Crewe & Nantwich than the Rhondda.
Anyway it's not me you need to convince.
As for how much substance there will be in the renegotiation, it certainly won't be enough to satisfy Richard Tyndall. Nothing possibly would. Personally I don't see things in such black and white terms; I see it more as a change of direction and avoiding the worst aspects of the EU from the UK's point of view, whilst accepting that we can't have full access to the Single Market without some compromises, and we'd have to make many of those compromises even if we leave and negotiate a new trade treaty with the EU. One of those compromises, realistically, is freedom of movement for workers, which even Switzerland has had to accept but is now trying to get out of - I don't think they'll succeed.
The SNP, who were threatening to take the seat, never got a mention. Scottish Labour really cannot focus on anything else and thinks this is the only way to get their vote out. In 2010, n fairness, they were broadly right. In the Scottish Parliamentary elections not so much.
If constituencies in those areas become Con-UKIP battles then those working class LibDem voters are likely to switch to UKIP.
The middle class LibDem voters tend to be in urban areas where Labour is dominant. There are some LibDem middle class constituencies where the Conservatives are their main opponent in SW London, Solihull and Cheadle for example. But in both groups there is no reason for LibDem supporters to vote tactically for the Conservatives.
Your reasoning is flawed.
The Conservatives have made themselves more toxic in the eyes of rightwingers who have often voted Conservative.
They may have made themselves less toxic in they eyes of Labour and LibDem voters who will continue to vote Labour and LibDem in Con-Lab and Con-LibDem constituencies.
Losing former Conservative voters to UKIP in those constituencies is a direct loss where it matters.
Possibly gaining former Labour and LibDem voters in Con-UKIP constituencies is irrelevant.