I love this Guardianista comment on CiF, liked by a fellow 86 nincompoops:
"Ikonoclast
The 'great British public' weren't given a chance to judge him, or Labours superb and fully costed manifesto. The Tories never won, Lynton Crosby never won, the tiniest of majorities was secured by the BBC, Sky, ITV and Murdoch and Dacre."
When are they going to get over it?
I doubt if they will.
It is 'victimhood' which is deployed as a Münchausen syndrome.
Just watched the Jack Warner speech on Sky...extraordinary...I wonder who he has handed the info to..
This is going to be more fun than watching the World Cup! They are tripping over themselves now to join Chuck Blazer as informants, hoping to get in slightly less trouble as a result. I can't believe that Blatter walked out of the boardroom whenever a dodgy payment was discussed over 15 years, so someone must have something on him.
Apparently the papers have been given to his lawyer in case of his death or disappearance. It is quite easy to make someone disappear in the Caribbean as sharks etc remove a lot of evidence.
"During a House of Commons debate last night on devolution, he stopped his speech and scolded Soubry for her behaviour in the chamber:
‘The Treasury bench should behave better in these debates, she should be setting an example to your new members not cavorting about like some demented junior minister – behave yourself, woman.’"
Listening to the radio, on the drive in, that HMG are no longer going to subsidise on-shore Wind energy. Apparently Scotland may get a bit upset as they plan to be all -Green energy in the foreseeable future. Makes sense as our industry cannot afford more expensive energy than its competition.
Our industry has got bigger problems than whether offshore wind or nuclear is subsidised in preference to cheaper onshore wind, but if you are happy to increase business costs then by all means...
In all the analysis of Lab's defeat one reason which I don't think has been covered is the problem of trust. This to me is the core of how Lab came to be seen as too left wing in England but Red Tories in Scotland
In his first year as leader, Lab railed against all the cuts and Miliband went on the anti-cuts rally. Then Balls turned around and said Labour would not reverse any of the cuts. That shot their credibility to pieces and made it hard for voters on either the left or the centre to trust them.
Then we turn to immigration. Labour spent a lot of time attacking UKIP as racists. he said "he wouldn't out-UKIP UKIP". Then when the election came round he suddenly said he would cut immigration. Again how credible was that?
if you compare with the Tories, their message on the economy and the deficit was very consistent all the way through the parliament. You can say that they in fact moved to plan B and increased spending but how many voters would be aware of that?
It's such a great realtime read. I've bookmarked it.
Another one was brilliant
Tim_B Posts: 2,380 Ignore Favourite May 7 Perfect timing - As David Dimbleby opens his exit poll,the crawler along the bottom of the screen says "Captain Kidd's treasure found"
FrancisUrquhart Posts: 4,155 Ignore Favourite May 7 YouGov still think it is neck and neck.
Somebody is going to look like a right tw@t come when the morning comes.
and this
TheScreamingEagles Posts: 25,079 Ignore Favourite May 7 I don't believe this exit poll
Well I wasn't wrong :-) .....Seemed to remeber that comment was to do with the fact that BBC had Kellner on within minutes of the exit poll news and Kellner was not having any of it, claiming YouGov polling said neck and neck and was confident that he was right.
Even more brilliant - I've only had four posts since then!
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.
If I were Warner those files would be out of the country Fire bombing a lawyers office would be very easy..I would also have a piece of paper from the investigators that gives me clemency for information provided.
The Guardian piece also seems at odds with that very negative Labour Uncut piece which said Labour was about to lose which I think was the weekeend before... and that internally they knew it.
It might be worth revisiting that Uncut piece to see how wrong they were (or actually weren't)
I put a small bet on a Con majority based on that Labour article about postal votes and the Brand meeting. I just regret not trusting it more.
What is unclear from the Guardian articles is who was in charge of Labour's polling and who analysed all the data that they had. Some people clearly f***ed up big time. or was the Labour problem that they had no one and the late Philip Gould had not been replaced?
Even as a Trident opponent, my advice during the campaign fed through a couple of channels was to make an issue of it with the SNP, when the SNP briefly said it was one of their red lines. I suggested that Ed, given that his position was to keep it, should say, "We're going to keep Trident because we think it's vital for national security. You say that's a red line, Nicola. What are you going to do about it - put the Tories in?" If she said yes it would have undermined her Scottish position, if she said no or just evaded the question it would have shown the SNP threat was a paper tiger. The response was that it would have "extended the story" about the SNP - yeah, well, it was extending itself.
Danish update for punters: the polling average has now shifted further to put Thorning 0.1% ahead and she clearly has the momentum. She's now 6/5 on Betfair, probably still value, though DYOR. For entertainment, a campaigner for the DF (UKIP counterpart) has proposed levying a tax on advertising that uses English words (don't undermine our language etc.). He was squashed within hours by the party leadership, but the media are amused anyway.
It's such a great realtime read. I've bookmarked it.
Another one was brilliant
Tim_B Posts: 2,380 Ignore Favourite May 7 Perfect timing - As David Dimbleby opens his exit poll,the crawler along the bottom of the screen says "Captain Kidd's treasure found"
FrancisUrquhart Posts: 4,155 Ignore Favourite May 7 YouGov still think it is neck and neck.
Somebody is going to look like a right tw@t come when the morning comes.
and this
TheScreamingEagles Posts: 25,079 Ignore Favourite May 7 I don't believe this exit poll
Well I wasn't wrong :-) .....Seemed to remeber that comment was to do with the fact that BBC had Kellner on within minutes of the exit poll news and Kellner was not having any of it, claiming YouGov polling said neck and neck and was confident that he was right.
Even more brilliant - I've only had four posts since then!
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.
As I noted last night, it was appreciated by some at the time what Michael Fallon was doing:
Listening to the radio, on the drive in, that HMG are no longer going to subsidise on-shore Wind energy. Apparently Scotland may get a bit upset as they plan to be all -Green energy in the foreseeable future. Makes sense as our industry cannot afford more expensive energy than its competition.
Our industry has got bigger problems than whether offshore wind or nuclear is subsidised in preference to cheaper onshore wind, but if you are happy to increase business costs then by all means...
I'm more bothered about the insane dash for onshore wind destroying precious wilderness. Still, I guess our high moors are the wrong sort of "environment".
Interesting that Labour had not really done a risk analysis on all potential election outcomes. BTW, did any PBer suffer any serious losses with the bookies that night or were they able to minimise them?
My NOM position was fairly poor, wiped out quite a few gains elsewhere.
I had no idea in the end how the Lib Dems would do in the end and lost all conevidence with my only band being 0-10 as profit. Ashleigh and Cambridge were the two losers for about a ton fifty between them, but overall the Lib Dems were nice earners
I agree that the account of Labour's defeat is great, but it is absent on Scotland. There is one tantalising paragraph:
More significantly, the rush from Scotland to the conference meant that the party put very little thought into how to re-engage with defeated independence supporters. “It was an astonishing collective failure,” another of Miliband’s closest advisers said. “We never foresaw how much we would get the blame for the defeat.”
Then, like the Labour campaign I suppose, it is passed over. Perhaps it needs an entirely separate investigation.
This is one of the things that seemed to me to exemplify what went wrong:
But the planned week-long assault sputtered out after a single signed article by Miliband in the Times, on 6 January 2011, which accused the Tories of deceit, citing “evidence from around the world” to argue that “a global credit crunch caused deficits to rise on every continent”.
There are many other examples in the article of token efforts, of not properly following through on an otherwise arguably correct analysis. It gives the impression of a bizarre drift to defeat, a massive missed opportunity.
Of course one can not change the past, and politics is changed by those missed opportunities and the Cameron majority that resulted as a consequence. The 2020 GE will be fought on different terrain, probably less favourable to Labour
I thought the Tories were sleepwalking during the long campaign. I thought EM was strolling into No. 10 and said so on pb. I thought they were losing the argument over the state of hospitals even in Staffordshire. I was nonplussed when I was not asked to deliver leaflets during the election and uneasy when I did not see any tellers at the polling station where I voted in the Stafford constituency, one of the so-called battleground Midland marginals. I suspected that Crosby was a loud-mouthed Aussie politician behind the crude personal attacks on Milliband which seemed to be back firing during the campaign.
How wrong I was. It was not until I followed a link on pb to a seminar held by Crosby on campaigning strategy that I realised how amazingly sophisticated modern campaigns are. I'm jolly fortunate not to be a better.
It's such a great realtime read. I've bookmarked it.
Another one was brilliant
Tim_B Posts: 2,380 Ignore Favourite May 7 Perfect timing - As David Dimbleby opens his exit poll,the crawler along the bottom of the screen says "Captain Kidd's treasure found"
FrancisUrquhart Posts: 4,155 Ignore Favourite May 7 YouGov still think it is neck and neck.
Somebody is going to look like a right tw@t come when the morning comes.
and this
TheScreamingEagles Posts: 25,079 Ignore Favourite May 7 I don't believe this exit poll
Well I wasn't wrong :-) .....Seemed to remeber that comment was to do with the fact that BBC had Kellner on within minutes of the exit poll news and Kellner was not having any of it, claiming YouGov polling said neck and neck and was confident that he was right.
Even more brilliant - I've only had four posts since then!
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.As I noted last night, it was appreciated by some at the time what Michael Fallon was doing:
Salmond is.......embarrassing the Tories about the farce of their apparent intention of having the Scottish Select Committee dominated by English Tories
Oh I dunno....Mark Menzies did a pretty good job of embarrassing the SNP:
SNP Members cannot come to the Chamber and demand a majority. In the last Parliament, when they had a seat on the Committee, they did not exercise that right to speak for Scotland. They cannot have their cake and eat it. If they wanted to be on that Committee in the last Parliament, why did they not exercise their right to take up their seat?......
.......I say to SNP Members: please do not come here and give us the heavy guilt trip, and say, “If you don’t have amajority of Scots on the Committee, you’re letting Scotland down.” In the last Parliament, they had a seat and did not take it up. Perhaps they were letting Scotland down. I will leave that point to rest.
Listening to the radio, on the drive in, that HMG are no longer going to subsidise on-shore Wind energy. Apparently Scotland may get a bit upset as they plan to be all -Green energy in the foreseeable future. Makes sense as our industry cannot afford more expensive energy than its competition.
Our industry has got bigger problems than whether offshore wind or nuclear is subsidised in preference to cheaper onshore wind, but if you are happy to increase business costs then by all means...
I'm more bothered about the insane dash for onshore wind destroying precious wilderness. Still, I guess our high moors are the wrong sort of "environment".
I don't think that wind turbines destroy the environment, and I think there are some activities - such as those of grouse gamekeepers, for example, which do more damage to the high moors and the wildlife that lives there.
If I were Warner those files would be out of the country Fire bombing a lawyers office would be very easy..I would also have a piece of paper from the investigators that gives me clemency for information provided.
I don't think that he said in which country/s his lawyer's office/s are based. Usually most good lawyers have fireproof safes.
I thought the Tories were sleepwalking during the long campaign. I thought EM was strolling into No. 10 and said so on pb. I thought they were losing the argument over the state of hospitals even in Staffordshire. I was nonplussed when I was not asked to deliver leaflets during the election and uneasy when I did not see any tellers at the polling station where I voted in the Stafford constituency, one of the so-called battleground Midland marginals. I suspected that Crosby was a loud-mouthed Aussie politician behind the crude personal attacks on Milliband which seemed to be back firing during the campaign.
How wrong I was. It was not until I followed a link on pb to a seminar held by Crosby on campaigning strategy that I realised how amazingly sophisticated modern campaigns are. I'm jolly fortunate not to be a better.
I never thought Labour were strolling to victory. I thought they were limping to victory, and that they'd form a weak government with SNP support, albeit, with the Tories as largest party.
So, like Labour, when I saw the headline about the Exit poll showing the Conservatives as largest party, I assumed that would be 280-5 seats.
I guess one assessment is that Labour were using electioneering methodology, tactics and systems (algorithms?) that were effective from 1997 to 2010, with tweeks and minor tuning to incorporate a bit more social networking giving them the comfort that they were developing a modern strategy. They were fighting with the tools from the past.
The Conservatives had leapt much further ahead with electioneering strategy and methodology than hardly anyone realised. They hit the voters they needed successfully.
Very high percentage for the SNP (still). Useful as a baseline for later on.
Labour on 29% is just post-defeat blues, not helped by those seemingly unwilling to accept a democratic decision by the electorate. It'll bounce upwards fairly easily once they elect someone to lead them.
Not sure why it's necessary to label good old-fashioned political spin as "a dead cat strategy". When you've got a compliant press and a dumb electorate, the Lab-SNP line was a killer. It was apparent straight away how damaging it was, and I was willing EdM to come out all guns blazing and call bullshit. One reason for the success of Wilson and Blair was that you almost didn't dare pull stunts like this on them, you knew you'd get it back twice as bad.
Listening to the radio, on the drive in, that HMG are no longer going to subsidise on-shore Wind energy. Apparently Scotland may get a bit upset as they plan to be all -Green energy in the foreseeable future. Makes sense as our industry cannot afford more expensive energy than its competition.
Our industry has got bigger problems than whether offshore wind or nuclear is subsidised in preference to cheaper onshore wind, but if you are happy to increase business costs then by all means...
I'm more bothered about the insane dash for onshore wind destroying precious wilderness. Still, I guess our high moors are the wrong sort of "environment".
I don't think that wind turbines destroy the environment, and I think there are some activities - such as those of grouse gamekeepers, for example, which do more damage to the high moors and the wildlife that lives there.
Then you know f'all about moorland windfarms. Seriously, you are clueless. Absolutely, hopelessly clueless. Utterly beyond help.
Firstly, there are the tracks needed to service them, which cut permanent scars through the landscape, and the related power distribution system. But worse are the tracks that have to be made to get the massive turbines up there in the first place: zig-zag scars up hillsides.
Over the last decade it has been realised that a massive mistake has been made in the amount of land given over to vast acres of forestry in our wild areas. Over the next few decades, we will start realising the same for the windfarms.
You remind me of the Scottish Labour local politician who went to a proposed windfarm site, looked at the wilderness and said: "But there's nothing here!"
And before you say, I'm not necessarily anti-windfarm. There's a large one very near me (I can see it out of my window) on an old airfield site that I've got zero problems with. It's the foul mistreatment of our wilderness that gets my goat.
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
"During a House of Commons debate last night on devolution, he stopped his speech and scolded Soubry for her behaviour in the chamber:
‘The Treasury bench should behave better in these debates, she should be setting an example to your new members not cavorting about like some demented junior minister – behave yourself, woman.’"
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Very high percentage for the SNP (still). Useful as a baseline for later on.
Labour on 29% is just post-defeat blues, not helped by those seemingly unwilling to accept a democratic decision by the electorate. It'll bounce upwards fairly easily once they elect someone to lead them.
12 points or so is a damned good starting point for the Tories though with presumably a consistently improving economic situation to 2020 and Labour probably going to install a Continuity Miliband Scouser as leader...
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
"During a House of Commons debate last night on devolution, he stopped his speech and scolded Soubry for her behaviour in the chamber:
‘The Treasury bench should behave better in these debates, she should be setting an example to your new members not cavorting about like some demented junior minister – behave yourself, woman.’"
Calm down, hun.
I'm just waiting for Anna Soubry's response.
I think she might go all Farage on him
“I always think he looks like somebody has put their finger up his bottom and he really rather likes it”.
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Labour have recovered from worse.
Maybe but their problem is that they have lost the centre ground and David Cameron will only consolidate it. They can go left but that is not supported in England nor is it feasible within the labour party as a whole. Dark days for labour
Beware hubris, my fellow blue lovelies, we all know what that leads to.
Yup, we will be fighting the 2020 election without our strongest asset, David Cameron, and I'm not entirely sure the party will survive the in/out referendum
Alex Salmond Brave ..and very stupid He might get away with that sexist nonsense in Holyrood..but not in the HOC...
Absolutely.
'Ms Dorries previously hit the headlines when she denounced Mr Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne as 'arrogant posh boys who don't know the price of milk'. In her latest onslaught, she said the Prime Minister was a liberal Tory who should spend more of his time being a Conservative". She indicated that she is still angry at his put-down of her at Prime Minister's Question's when he called her "frustrated". She said: "It was a patronising, sexist thing to do, and that's not the act of a statesman or someone worthy of the position of Prime Minister." '
Labour has accused David Cameron of sexism after he told a female MP to "calm down dear" during a Commons exchange. The prime minister borrowed the catchphrase made famous by Michael Winner, during a row about NHS reforms. Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Angela Eagle, at whom the comment was aimed, said "a modern man" would not have "expressed himself that way". But a Downing Street spokesman said it was just "a humorous remark".'
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
Loving the Grauniad article. The funniest bit, to me, is Lucy Powell's email to the head of BBC news where she basically complains that he's not attacking the Tories or shilling for Labour hard enough.
“The BBC’s relentless focus on Scotland is potentially of huge political benefit not only to the SNP but also to the Conservative party. Indeed, it is becoming apparent that this has become the main Tory message in this election and you have regularly shown images from their posters and advertising designed to reinforce this attack. But the BBC has a responsibility not only to reflect what the Conservatives are saying but also to reflect on it.
“For instance, if the BBC has ever asked David Cameron and his colleagues why they are spending most of the energy talking up the SNP, I have missed it … The BBC includes growing amounts of commentary in its news bulletins. But you have barely ever reflected our view – and that of many commentators from across the political spectrum – that the Conservatives want the SNP to win seats from Labour in Scotland because that represents their best chance of remaining in Downing Street.”
The sense of being entitled to instruct the BBC to broadcast Labour attack stories is nauseating, but revealing of how used Labour has got to the BBC being its own creature.
Despite the length a really rather dull article. Yes, some mistakes admitted, but the tone remains one ofa tragedy bringing a good man down. Wholly inaccurate. A more simple article might say: A poor and deluded campaign, a crap leader, a muddled and essentially wrong message, much more focussed opponents with a believable message and a much more competent leader.
The bad news for Labour is that Miliband is still there, along with many of his apologists. The prospective leaders are dealing with a fractious party, which yesterday began PMQs moaning about cuts as if nothing had happened in the meantime. All good news for Cameron
As always read between the lines with Labour and their leftie media apologists.
The article and even that £&@£& Campbell makes a really big thing of the fact that the Tories blamed the world wide crash on Labour. NO THEY DIDN'T !!!!! NO,!
They and the LibDems blamed labour for not fixing the roof when the sun was shining. Labours group failure to protect us against this in the bad times and regulatory structures they were warned about by Lilley in 1997 and the EU and IMF for years after. Basically all this article does is what Labour have tried to do throughout. Move the argument onto what they can easily defend and away from blowing all the cash in the good times which they can't defend. It's typical Labour lefties trickery and no different than a dog on a tightrope.
If you can't defend something move the narratives onto something you can. FFS Why this is not blatantly apparent is stunning.
I love this Guardianista comment on CiF, liked by a fellow 86 nincompoops:
"Ikonoclast
The 'great British public' weren't given a chance to judge him, or Labours superb and fully costed manifesto. The Tories never won, Lynton Crosby never won, the tiniest of majorities was secured by the BBC, Sky, ITV and Murdoch and Dacre."
When are they going to get over it?
I do love, on a purely entertainment basis, when something goes against the Left and you get criticisms of BBC bias from that direction - makes for a pleasant change from the repetitive refrains from the Right.
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Labour have recovered from worse.
Nothing last forever but how quickly will it be?
If this election was 1983 redux then I'm very OK with Labour being lost in opposition until a Blair-like relatively right wing Labour leader takes them to victory three more elections from now in 2030 (due to Fixed Term Parliament lengths).
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
If the UK votes to leave the EU, then UKIP will fade away. I can't see it happening otherwise. In many constituencies now, UKIP are the obvious choice for protest voters.
Salmond is.......embarrassing the Tories about the farce of their apparent intention of having the Scottish Select Committee dominated by English Tories
Oh I dunno....Mark Menzies did a pretty good job of embarrassing the SNP:
SNP Members cannot come to the Chamber and demand a majority. In the last Parliament, when they had a seat on the Committee, they did not exercise that right to speak for Scotland. They cannot have their cake and eat it. If they wanted to be on that Committee in the last Parliament, why did they not exercise their right to take up their seat?......
.......I say to SNP Members: please do not come here and give us the heavy guilt trip, and say, “If you don’t have amajority of Scots on the Committee, you’re letting Scotland down.” In the last Parliament, they had a seat and did not take it up. Perhaps they were letting Scotland down. I will leave that point to rest.
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Labour have recovered from worse.
Nothing last forever but how quickly will it be?
If this election was 1983 redux then I'm very OK with Labour being lost in opposition until a Blair-like relatively right wing Labour leader takes them to victory three more elections from now in 2030 (due to Fixed Term Parliament lengths).
Labour only need 35 gains from the Conservatives to be back in government. This isn't 1983.
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
Good news for Labour then...
No good news for Labour would be protest votes going to the opposition party rather than swirling between protest parties.
Despite the length a really rather dull article. Yes, some mistakes admitted, but the tone remains one ofa tragedy bringing a good man down. Wholly inaccurate. A more simple article might say: A poor and deluded campaign, a crap leader, a muddled and essentially wrong message, much more focussed opponents with a believable message and a much more competent leader.
The bad news for Labour is that Miliband is still there, along with many of his apologists. The prospective leaders are dealing with a fractious party, which yesterday began PMQs moaning about cuts as if nothing had happened in the meantime. All good news for Cameron
As always read between the lines with Labour and their leftie media apologists.
The article and even that £&@£& Campbell makes a really big thing of the fact that the Tories blamed the world wide crash on Labour. NO THEY DIDN'T !!!!! NO,!
I
I don't recall the exact content of Tory attacks in that direction, but the same thought had occured to me - that they blamed Labour for making it worse, not for being the sole cause, which was the implication of the Labour response of saying it was ridiculous to blame Labour for Lehman and so on - and as far back as 2010 Cameron said, as I linked to last night, inhis conference speech that Labour did not solely cause this.
Even if that point was overshadowed in years to come by vehemence of attack, I do worry for Labour that they are missing the nuance of what the line was and focusing on those who took it too far (to blame it entirely on Labour). They can refute the latter in dignantly, and not learn anything about addressing the more nuanced attack, which they needed to.
ComRes's new voter turnout model looks quite good...And generally ComRes came out of the general election better than most of the other pollsters (ComRes' Con/Dem marginals polls were great, unlike silly Lord Ashcroft...)
ICM in danger of losing their "gold standard" reputation...
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
Good news for Labour then...
No good news for Labour would be protest votes going to the opposition party rather than swirling between protest parties.
Labour are the only serious alternative to the Tories. If people really want rid of the Tories, they'll vote Labour.
But there's still a danger for Labour. It's not yet existential, but if the SNP stay strong in Scotland it'll be hard for Labour to do well either there or in England. That gives UKIP the opportunity to try and snatch northern areas the Conservatives cannot hope to gain.
It's possible Labour will lose seats next time as well.
However, if the voters tire of the Conservatives in 2020, Labour will get in.
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
If the UK votes to leave the EU, then UKIP will fade away. I can't see it happening otherwise. In many constituencies now, UKIP are the obvious choice for protest voters.
UKIP's best outcome as a party is In by 50-55%. A clear In or any Out close the issue down. I think the result will be more clear than that and will kill the "we haven't had a say" line. But its not obvious that all UKIP voters are as exercised about Europe as their main cheerleaders are.
I suspect UKIP have three strands of voters: 1: Fervent anti-European "core Kipper" voters. 2: Racist ex-BNP/Labour anti-immigration voters. 3: Generally disgruntled protest voters unhappy with the two main parties.
1 & 2 make upto 10% at a push. The BNP/UKIP voters of 2010. UKIP have gained a lot from being the only protest party last term. Now Labour have five years as an opposition to try and recover as do the Lib Dems. I don't think UKIP will continue to rise from here. Though the Lib Dems being relegated to "Others" may make things much easier for UKIP to avoid protest voters returning to Lib Dems.
Nice to see so many PB.com sages acknowledging how clueless they were about the GE.
As we seem to be running our very own truth and reconciliation committee, I will own up to my part in the great polling calamity.
I lost a serious stash (by my modest betting standards) following the polls and believing that the maths for Ed meant he would stagger across the line in some form or other. I still pretty annoyed with myself, because my guts had been telling me for months it was a Tory win along the lines of 1992 (with a very late swing) and I overruled them in favour of the so-called data.
Mr Dancer, it's very difficult to predict where things will go over the next five years. I'm half tempted to make some predictions and put them in an envelope and not open it again until the day after the next election.
Whilst I actually wanted them to do very well, my bacon was saved on election night by the poor return of MPs for UKIP - I only had small sums on various bets, but I lost them all apart from that one, but it was a PB one which actually put me marginally in the black in terms of my GE bets.
Looking at Com Res Regional Summary it is devastating for labour. The conservatives lead in every region except the North which is a narrow 41-38 to labour. The conservatives even lead in Scotland 22-16. How can labour ever recover from this. Amazing
Labour have recovered from worse.
Nothing last forever but how quickly will it be?
If this election was 1983 redux then I'm very OK with Labour being lost in opposition until a Blair-like relatively right wing Labour leader takes them to victory three more elections from now in 2030 (due to Fixed Term Parliament lengths).
Labour only need 35 gains from the Conservatives to be back in government. This isn't 1983.
The boundaries next time though will not be in their favour, that 35 will effectively be a lot more.
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
Lib Dems will crossover ahead of UKIP within 12 months. UKIP have lost their mantle as the sole party of protest and will melt away like snow in the summer.
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
Good news for Labour then...
No good news for Labour would be protest votes going to the opposition party rather than swirling between protest parties.
Labour are the only serious alternative to the Tories. If people really want rid of the Tories, they'll vote Labour.
Yes but people switching between UKIP and Lib Dem as protest voters (which is what I said) isn't good for Labour.
People switching from protest (UKIP/LD) to opposition (Labour) would be.
On the Salmond/Soubry exchange, I have to admit she's one of my favourite Tories. The far right despise her too which makes me like her more. She's the new Ken Clarke.
Has the SNP robbed SLAB of its raison d'être for good?
Things are grim down south too - only in the North are Labour ahead of Con - but not by much: 41 vs 38......
Edit:
Has the Nicola Sturgeon's SNP robbed SLAB of its raison d'être for good?
The sad thing is that the SNP robbed them of their raison d'être back in 2011 and nobody in SLAB noticed.
I think SLAB is it's own worst enemy at the moment, the upcoming leadership battle will likely descend into a farce, already Ken is talking about dark forces at work.
The other big problem SLAB are facing is that they are likely going to lose most of their constituency seats and this will result in infighting for regional list seats. My understanding is that the regional list MSPs who are not retiring would normally retain their list position, with any new candidates coming in below. As well as the existing MSPs, some of the outgoing MPs may try and muscle in on the act. The group who are going to be frozen out completely are the next generation. I wouldn't be surprized if this ends up in court as list MSPs fight to stay on top.
Things are going to get worse for SLAB and SLID before getting better, the Scottish Tories if they can detoxify the Tory brand under Ruth Davidson's leadership could yet make head way in Scotland.
Even as a Trident opponent, my advice during the campaign fed through a couple of channels was to make an issue of it with the SNP, when the SNP briefly said it was one of their red lines. I suggested that Ed, given that his position was to keep it, should say, "We're going to keep Trident because we think it's vital for national security. You say that's a red line, Nicola. What are you going to do about it - put the Tories in?" If she said yes it would have undermined her Scottish position, if she said no or just evaded the question it would have shown the SNP threat was a paper tiger. The response was that it would have "extended the story" about the SNP - yeah, well, it was extending itself.
That's interesting, Nick, but I don't see how it would have worked. Labour's problem was that the SNP were in a 'Heads we win, Tails you lose' position. If the numbers had worked out to give Lab+SNP enough MPs, they would have voted for Labour in a confidence vote - thus keeping the evil Tories out - but against specific measures where they thought there was advantage to be had by opposing Labour proposals. On the specific issue of Trident, they would have voted against, thus forcing Ed M to rely on Tory support to get it through: "See? Labour are just Red Tories who trample all over the democratic rights of Scotland". On spending cuts they would voted for increased profligacy, either forcing Ed to go along with their view ("See? The SNP are forcing Labout to listen to Scotland"), or to rely on Tory votes or abstentions to get the cuts through: "See? We told you that Labour were just Red Tories who trample all over the democratic rights of Scotland"
I don't think there was anything much that Labour could have done to protect itself from the attack line that they would have been in the SNP's pocket, for the very good reason that it was true. Admittedly Labour were slow and clumsy in responding, but I'm not sure that even a well-crafted response on that particular issue would have made much difference.
While the cost of college education in the US has reached record highs, Germany has abandoned tuition fees altogether for German and international students alike. An increasing number of Americans are taking advantage and saving tens of thousands of dollars to get their degrees.
All credit to the Tory pollsters or the people who interpreted the results. I thought it was a waste of effort sending Cameron round Libdem seats in an effort to dislodge sitting MPs who had clung on like limpets for two or three elections. Those of us old sweats in Cornwall expected to hold the seats we had and were reasonably certain of taking St Austell and Newquay. The famed and feared Libdem incumbency factor meant many of us doubted whether Andrew George and Dan Rogerson could be unseated. In the event HQ knew better than those of us on the ground. The ‘any-one-but-the Tory’ coalition faded away and we cleaned up against a divided opposition.
I don't think there was anything much that Labour could have done to protect itself from the attack line that they would have been in the SNP's pocket, for the very good reason that it was true.
I agree with Nick
Your critique of Nick's suggestion seems to be that it wouldn't work after the election, but of course it needed to work before the election.
If Ed had made support for Trident a red line for any post election negotiations, then a vote for the SNP in Scotland would have been explicitly for a Tory government, which is of course what happened.
If that tactic had saved enough votes to get Ed over the line, the post election deals would have been done as you suggest, but at that point Ed wouldn't care
Burnham says he will only help other candidates get the magic 35, if they are short by one or two. Looks like Creagh wont make the running at this rate.
Comments
It is 'victimhood' which is deployed as a Münchausen syndrome.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/06/alex-salmond-tells-anna-soubry-to-behave-yourself-woman/
"During a House of Commons debate last night on devolution, he stopped his speech and scolded Soubry for her behaviour in the chamber:
‘The Treasury bench should behave better in these debates, she should be setting an example to your new members not cavorting about like some demented junior minister – behave yourself, woman.’"
In his first year as leader, Lab railed against all the cuts and Miliband went on the anti-cuts rally. Then Balls turned around and said Labour would not reverse any of the cuts. That shot their credibility to pieces and made it hard for voters on either the left or the centre to trust them.
Then we turn to immigration. Labour spent a lot of time attacking UKIP as racists. he said "he wouldn't out-UKIP UKIP". Then when the election came round he suddenly said he would cut immigration. Again how credible was that?
if you compare with the Tories, their message on the economy and the deficit was very consistent all the way through the parliament. You can say that they in fact moved to plan B and increased spending but how many voters would be aware of that?
Even more brilliant - I've only had four posts since then!
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.
What is unclear from the Guardian articles is who was in charge of Labour's polling and who analysed all the data that they had. Some people clearly f***ed up big time. or was the Labour problem that they had no one and the late Philip Gould had not been replaced?
Danish update for punters: the polling average has now shifted further to put Thorning 0.1% ahead and she clearly has the momentum. She's now 6/5 on Betfair, probably still value, though DYOR. For entertainment, a campaigner for the DF (UKIP counterpart) has proposed levying a tax on advertising that uses English words (don't undermine our language etc.). He was squashed within hours by the party leadership, but the media are amused anyway.
Even more brilliant - I've only had four posts since then!
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.
As I noted last night, it was appreciated by some at the time what Michael Fallon was doing:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/is-the-tory-trident-row-an-example-of-a-dead-cat-strategy/
More significantly, the rush from Scotland to the conference meant that the party put very little thought into how to re-engage with defeated independence supporters. “It was an astonishing collective failure,” another of Miliband’s closest advisers said. “We never foresaw how much we would get the blame for the defeat.”
Then, like the Labour campaign I suppose, it is passed over. Perhaps it needs an entirely separate investigation.
This is one of the things that seemed to me to exemplify what went wrong:
But the planned week-long assault sputtered out after a single signed article by Miliband in the Times, on 6 January 2011, which accused the Tories of deceit, citing “evidence from around the world” to argue that “a global credit crunch caused deficits to rise on every continent”.
There are many other examples in the article of token efforts, of not properly following through on an otherwise arguably correct analysis. It gives the impression of a bizarre drift to defeat, a massive missed opportunity.
Of course one can not change the past, and politics is changed by those missed opportunities and the Cameron majority that resulted as a consequence. The 2020 GE will be fought on different terrain, probably less favourable to Labour
It will work - eventually - but will take hard work.
How wrong I was. It was not until I followed a link on pb to a seminar held by Crosby on campaigning strategy that I realised how amazingly sophisticated modern campaigns are. I'm jolly fortunate not to be a better.
I must have re read that thread a dozen times since 8th may!
I made a later comment that the exit poll was the final crushing blow for us Tories when it transpired that it was all a massive f-up.
Then we had Swindon, Nuneaton etc and we knew the exit poll actually understated it for the Tories.
I believed the polls. Most of us did, to be fair!
Plus they seemed to chime with what at the time seemed a hopeless Tory campaign. After the event, it has become clear that it was a tightly focused masterstroke of genius. I didn't know that a month ago.
The Guardian pieces are fascinating too. Even the Fallon fuck up seemingly wasn't.As I noted last night, it was appreciated by some at the time what Michael Fallon was doing:
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/is-the-tory-trident-row-an-example-of-a-dead-cat-strategy/I think the media have serious questions to answer over the Fallon episode. We don't really want to encourage such tactics in public debate, and so the media should ensure - somehow - that they aren't successful. Otherwise we end up with a series of unedifying dead cats used to obfuscate public debate.
SNP Members cannot come to the Chamber and demand a majority. In the last Parliament, when they had a seat on the Committee, they did not exercise that right to speak for Scotland. They cannot have their cake and eat it. If they wanted to be on that Committee in the last Parliament, why did they not exercise their right to take up their seat?......
.......I say to SNP Members: please do not come here and give us the heavy guilt trip, and say, “If you don’t have amajority of Scots on the Committee, you’re letting Scotland down.” In the last Parliament, they had a seat and did not take it up. Perhaps they were letting Scotland down. I will leave that point to rest.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmhansrd/chan10.pdf
So, like Labour, when I saw the headline about the Exit poll showing the Conservatives as largest party, I assumed that would be 280-5 seats.
The Conservatives had leapt much further ahead with electioneering strategy and methodology than hardly anyone realised. They hit the voters they needed successfully.
http://t.co/kSYmB8hvuu http://t.co/FCm4FAWWSB
Con 41% (+3)
Lab 29% (-2)
Lib Dem 8% (NC)
UKIP 10% (-3)
SNP 5% (NC)
Green 5% (+1)
Others 3% (+1)
Changes in brackets from the General Election result.
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/daily-mail-political-poll-4th-june-2015/
Labour on 29% is just post-defeat blues, not helped by those seemingly unwilling to accept a democratic decision by the electorate. It'll bounce upwards fairly easily once they elect someone to lead them.
What a political pygmy EdM was.
Firstly, there are the tracks needed to service them, which cut permanent scars through the landscape, and the related power distribution system. But worse are the tracks that have to be made to get the massive turbines up there in the first place: zig-zag scars up hillsides.
For instance look at the following link and tell me it is in any way good:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Carfraemill+Hotel/@55.8287603,-2.6663452,4050m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x48879f208e2de629:0x59c0c9655d1252d9
Over the last decade it has been realised that a massive mistake has been made in the amount of land given over to vast acres of forestry in our wild areas. Over the next few decades, we will start realising the same for the windfarms.
You remind me of the Scottish Labour local politician who went to a proposed windfarm site, looked at the wilderness and said: "But there's nothing here!"
And before you say, I'm not necessarily anti-windfarm. There's a large one very near me (I can see it out of my window) on an old airfield site that I've got zero problems with. It's the foul mistreatment of our wilderness that gets my goat.
(vs GE2015 vote share)
Con: 22 (+7)
Lab: 16 (-8)
LibD: 9 (+1)
UKIP: -
Green: 3
SNP: 47 (-3)
Has the SNP robbed SLAB of its raison d'être for good?
Things are grim down south too - only in the North are Labour ahead of Con - but not by much: 41 vs 38......
I must admit that my first thought was: "How long before there is crossover ...
... between Labour and the Lib Dems."
;-)
I think she might go all Farage on him
“I always think he looks like somebody has put their finger up his bottom and he really rather likes it”.
The Tories the second party in Scotland at the next general election.
'Ms Dorries previously hit the headlines when she denounced Mr Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne as 'arrogant posh boys who don't know the price of milk'.
In her latest onslaught, she said the Prime Minister was a liberal Tory who should spend more of his time being a Conservative".
She indicated that she is still angry at his put-down of her at Prime Minister's Question's when he called her "frustrated".
She said: "It was a patronising, sexist thing to do, and that's not the act of a statesman or someone worthy of the position of Prime Minister." '
http://tinyurl.com/b4xhfuz
Labour has accused David Cameron of sexism after he told a female MP to "calm down dear" during a Commons exchange.
The prime minister borrowed the catchphrase made famous by Michael Winner, during a row about NHS reforms.
Shadow chief secretary to the Treasury Angela Eagle, at whom the comment was aimed, said "a modern man" would not have "expressed himself that way".
But a Downing Street spokesman said it was just "a humorous remark".'
http://tinyurl.com/5sfmygj
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/shoo-in
UKIP will score less votes in 2020 than 2015 and probably zero seats.
Has the Nicola Sturgeon's SNP robbed SLAB of its raison d'être for good?
Think BR&S was the 2015 result that most disappointed.
“The BBC’s relentless focus on Scotland is potentially of huge political benefit not only to the SNP but also to the Conservative party. Indeed, it is becoming apparent that this has become the main Tory message in this election and you have regularly shown images from their posters and advertising designed to reinforce this attack. But the BBC has a responsibility not only to reflect what the Conservatives are saying but also to reflect on it.
“For instance, if the BBC has ever asked David Cameron and his colleagues why they are spending most of the energy talking up the SNP, I have missed it … The BBC includes growing amounts of commentary in its news bulletins. But you have barely ever reflected our view – and that of many commentators from across the political spectrum – that the Conservatives want the SNP to win seats from Labour in Scotland because that represents their best chance of remaining in Downing Street.”
The sense of being entitled to instruct the BBC to broadcast Labour attack stories is nauseating, but revealing of how used Labour has got to the BBC being its own creature.
The article and even that £&@£& Campbell makes a really big thing of the fact that the Tories blamed the world wide crash on Labour. NO THEY DIDN'T !!!!! NO,!
They and the LibDems blamed labour for not fixing the roof when the sun was shining. Labours group failure to protect us against this in the bad times and regulatory structures they were warned about by Lilley in 1997 and the EU and IMF for years after. Basically all this article does is what Labour have tried to do throughout. Move the argument onto what they can easily defend and away from blowing all the cash in the good times which they can't defend. It's typical Labour lefties trickery and no different than a dog on a tightrope.
If you can't defend something move the narratives onto something you can. FFS Why this is not blatantly apparent is stunning.
If this election was 1983 redux then I'm very OK with Labour being lost in opposition until a Blair-like relatively right wing Labour leader takes them to victory three more elections from now in 2030 (due to Fixed Term Parliament lengths).
I was really really gutted at not winning that.
Even if that point was overshadowed in years to come by vehemence of attack, I do worry for Labour that they are missing the nuance of what the line was and focusing on those who took it too far (to blame it entirely on Labour). They can refute the latter in dignantly, and not learn anything about addressing the more nuanced attack, which they needed to.
Scotland was my most profitable part of election night, I really shouldn't grumble when I had lots of winners in the 25/1 to 66/1 range.
Credit to Corals for putting up an interesting market.
ICM in danger of losing their "gold standard" reputation...
Cameron: "Calm down, dear" - terrible sexism.
Salmond: "Behave yourself, woman" - hilarious banter.
No, I don't know why.
"Weighted chaverage" ?
But there's still a danger for Labour. It's not yet existential, but if the SNP stay strong in Scotland it'll be hard for Labour to do well either there or in England. That gives UKIP the opportunity to try and snatch northern areas the Conservatives cannot hope to gain.
It's possible Labour will lose seats next time as well.
However, if the voters tire of the Conservatives in 2020, Labour will get in.
I suspect UKIP have three strands of voters:
1: Fervent anti-European "core Kipper" voters.
2: Racist ex-BNP/Labour anti-immigration voters.
3: Generally disgruntled protest voters unhappy with the two main parties.
1 & 2 make upto 10% at a push. The BNP/UKIP voters of 2010. UKIP have gained a lot from being the only protest party last term. Now Labour have five years as an opposition to try and recover as do the Lib Dems. I don't think UKIP will continue to rise from here. Though the Lib Dems being relegated to "Others" may make things much easier for UKIP to avoid protest voters returning to Lib Dems.
I also think lots of WWC socially conservative voters support UKIP.
I lost a serious stash (by my modest betting standards) following the polls and believing that the maths for Ed meant he would stagger across the line in some form or other. I still pretty annoyed with myself, because my guts had been telling me for months it was a Tory win along the lines of 1992 (with a very late swing) and I overruled them in favour of the so-called data.
People switching from protest (UKIP/LD) to opposition (Labour) would be.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-bradley/election-result-losing-seat_b_7257526.html?utm_hp_ref=uk
I think SLAB is it's own worst enemy at the moment, the upcoming leadership battle will likely descend into a farce, already Ken is talking about dark forces at work.
The other big problem SLAB are facing is that they are likely going to lose most of their constituency seats and this will result in infighting for regional list seats. My understanding is that the regional list MSPs who are not retiring would normally retain their list position, with any new candidates coming in below. As well as the existing MSPs, some of the outgoing MPs may try and muscle in on the act. The group who are going to be frozen out completely are the next generation. I wouldn't be surprized if this ends up in court as list MSPs fight to stay on top.
Things are going to get worse for SLAB and SLID before getting better, the Scottish Tories if they can detoxify the Tory brand under Ruth Davidson's leadership could yet make head way in Scotland.
I don't think there was anything much that Labour could have done to protect itself from the attack line that they would have been in the SNP's pocket, for the very good reason that it was true. Admittedly Labour were slow and clumsy in responding, but I'm not sure that even a well-crafted response on that particular issue would have made much difference.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32821678
Your critique of Nick's suggestion seems to be that it wouldn't work after the election, but of course it needed to work before the election.
If Ed had made support for Trident a red line for any post election negotiations, then a vote for the SNP in Scotland would have been explicitly for a Tory government, which is of course what happened.
If that tactic had saved enough votes to get Ed over the line, the post election deals would have been done as you suggest, but at that point Ed wouldn't care
Its an absurd system if there is a matter of law involved.