politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election and Westminster By-Election Results : Dec

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election and Westminster By-Election Results : December 3rd 2015

Ash South and Tongham on Guildford (Con defence)
Result: Conservative 540 (43% unchanged), Liberal Democrat 286 (23% +6%), United Kingdom Independence Party 153 (12%, no candidate in 2015), Guildford Greenbelt 145 (12% -7%), Labour 125 (10% -11%)
Conservative HOLD with a majority of 254 (17%) on a swing of 3% from Conservative to Liberal Democrat

Read the full story here

Danny565

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Pulpstar

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Leads to same government, bit less socially liberal.

Speedy

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

Danny565

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

Pulpstar

Christ on a bike, just watching Trump's videos.

Pulpstar

Danny565 said:

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

Labour will increase it's vote in places where it has thumping great majorities (Inner cities), so the seat effect will be less. A 2% swing to Labour would end up with a minority Tory Gov't given c&s by the DUP.

OldKingCole

Danny565 said:

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

Have you corrected for the new boundaries?

Sean_F

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

The problem was there were strong swings to the Conservatives in safe Conservative and Labour seats, but a swing to Labour in marginals.

Danny565

Pulpstar said:

Danny565 said:

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

Labour will increase it's vote in places where it has thumping great majorities (Inner cities)

I'm not convinced by that, not least because they really are at the ceiling in a lot of their inner city seats (how are they going to climb even further than the 83% they got this year in Liverpool Walton?!?). Even in the most inner-city seat there will be SOME bankers and big-businessmen, there's just no room left for Labour to grow further in a lot of their safest seats.

Mortimer

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Labour need to do a bit better than that. Barring disaster (or SNP implosion) I don't see how we can have anything other than Conservative or C-led government until 2030. The numbers don't stack up as the once marginal seats we Tories won at the last election are now rock solid safe; and demographically becoming safer.

MP_SE

JohnO said:

MP_SE said:

Has anyone else encountered a party getting 100% of the postal votes within a particular area of a constituency? Maybe it is more common in those one party state constituencies.

NIGEL Farage called for an investigation into the Oldham West byelection today after Labour scooped an unprecedented 100 PER CENT of the votes in one area

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/624160/Nigel-Farage-John-Bickley-Jim-McMahon-Ukip-Labour-Oldham-West-Royton

How can he possibly know that? All postal votes are validated together but not counted and not by individual areas before polling day and then all are added to and mixed in with those cast during the day. Farage is talking rubbish.
Thanks for explaining. What a sore loser.

Mortimer

Danny565 said:

Pulpstar said:

Danny565 said:

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

Labour will increase it's vote in places where it has thumping great majorities (Inner cities)

I'm not convinced by that, not least because they really are at the ceiling in a lot of their inner city seats (how are they going to climb even further than the 83% they got this year in Liverpool Walton?!?). Even in the most inner-city seat there will be SOME bankers and big-businessmen, there's just no room left for Labour to grow further in a lot of their safest seats.

These seats probably become safer because the minority voting for other parties don't bother...

kle4

Hold Hold Hold. Boring Boring Boring.

stodge

Mortimer said:

Labour need to do a bit better than that. Barring disaster (or SNP implosion) I don't see how we can have anything other than Conservative or C-led government until 2030. The numbers don't stack up as the once marginal seats we Tories won at the last election are now rock solid safe; and demographically becoming safer.

This was the argument "you Tories" used after 1992. You'd won a fourth victory in the teeth of a recession, against the odds. You were the Natural Party of Government. Once the economy was fixed, you'd be in for ever.

Remind me what happened in 1997....

FrancisUrquhart

Pulpstar said:

Christ on a bike, just watching Trump's videos.

What's he said now?

Danny565

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Mortimer

stodge said:

Mortimer said:

Labour need to do a bit better than that. Barring disaster (or SNP implosion) I don't see how we can have anything other than Conservative or C-led government until 2030. The numbers don't stack up as the once marginal seats we Tories won at the last election are now rock solid safe; and demographically becoming safer.

This was the argument "you Tories" used after 1992. You'd won a fourth victory in the teeth of a recession, against the odds. You were the Natural Party of Government. Once the economy was fixed, you'd be in for ever.

Remind me what happened in 1997....

New leader - innit.

AlastairMeeks

Danny565 said:

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Quite. Last night taught us one thing above all: no one knows anything.

kle4

AlastairMeeks said:

Danny565 said:

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Quite. Last night taught us one thing above all: no one knows anything.

I'm confident that having called 2015 so wrong, I'm due a good performance in 2020.

RobD

SeanT said:

Bloody hell. Muslim refugees allegedly unfurl banner at Macedonian border, while chanting Allahu Akhbar.

Have a look what it says.

http://nyheteridag.se/oppna-gransen-eller-do-har-ar-flyktingarnas-hot-mot-europa/

Could be "open or we will die". I'm ever the optimist....

FrancisUrquhart

Looks like "Tommy Robinson" is making a comeback..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/12031679/Across-Europe-with-Tommy-Robinson-inside-the-new-wave-of-anti-immigration-protest-coming-soon-to-Britain.html

JosiasJessop

AlastairMeeks said:

Danny565 said:

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Quite. Last night taught us one thing above all: no one knows anything.

Phew. I was thinking it was only me who doesn't know anything.

richardDodd

Why was it in English..

kle4

richardDodd said:

Why was it in English..

If it is real and not photoshopped, English signs play better for international coverage.

viewcode

AlastairMeeks said:

Danny565 said:

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Quite. Last night taught us one thing above all: no one knows anything.

I really wish I knew something. I could earn money from betting. Godsdammit! I need a reliable predictor!

Richard_Tyndall

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

Speedy

RobD said:

SeanT said:

Bloody hell. Muslim refugees allegedly unfurl banner at Macedonian border, while chanting Allahu Akhbar.

Have a look what it says.

http://nyheteridag.se/oppna-gransen-eller-do-har-ar-flyktingarnas-hot-mot-europa/

Could be "open or we will die". I'm ever the optimist....

I think we are approaching some ridiculous panic levels, like in america where now the recommendation from the media is that "If Somebody Named Syed Leaves Your Party Call the Cops" :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUNOMeB1t6s

Alistair

Jaw dropping stuff from America

The shooters' landlord opened up their apartment to the media and MSNBC and CNN did live pieces to camera from inside their apartment, casually flashing id documents of killer's parents

http://gawker.com/msnbc-reporter-rifles-through-san-bernardino-shooters-a-1746220523

Richard_Tyndall

Speedy said:

RobD said:

SeanT said:

Bloody hell. Muslim refugees allegedly unfurl banner at Macedonian border, while chanting Allahu Akhbar.

Have a look what it says.

http://nyheteridag.se/oppna-gransen-eller-do-har-ar-flyktingarnas-hot-mot-europa/

Could be "open or we will die". I'm ever the optimist....

I think we are approaching some ridiculous panic levels, like in america where now the recommendation from the media is that "If Somebody Named Syed Leaves Your Party Call the Cops" :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUNOMeB1t6s

I wish someone would sit down and work how infinitesimally small the chances are of actually being caught up in a terrorist incident. Even now after Paris and the US attack. I assume someone must have done maths and I would suggest it is so utterly tiny it is not actually worth worrying about.

Scott_P

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

JosiasJessop

Alistair said:

Jaw dropping stuff from America

The shooters' landlord opened up their apartment to the media and MSNBC and CNN did live pieces to camera from inside their apartment, casually flashing id documents of killer's parents

http://gawker.com/msnbc-reporter-rifles-through-san-bernardino-shooters-a-1746220523

I listened to a segment of that on Radio 5, and it was uncomfortable listening. Should the journalists really have been there?

Alistair

JosiasJessop said:

Alistair said:

Jaw dropping stuff from America

The shooters' landlord opened up their apartment to the media and MSNBC and CNN did live pieces to camera from inside their apartment, casually flashing id documents of killer's parents

http://gawker.com/msnbc-reporter-rifles-through-san-bernardino-shooters-a-1746220523

I listened to a segment of that on Radio 5, and it was uncomfortable listening. Should the journalists really have been there?

There is some confusion as to whether it is a sealed crime scene or not so they may or may not have been committing a felony.

Speedy

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

Next, Martians land on Parliament Square.

SandyRentool

AlastairMeeks said:

Danny565 said:

For full disclosure, I was one of the ones who called Labour's vote increase in 2015 being disproportionately concentrated in their inner-city safe seats, mainly because it was forecast by the European elections.

However, people seem to be making the assumption that because that's what happened this time, it will automatically happen next time too, which....doesn't make any sense.

Quite. Last night taught us one thing above all: no one knows anything.

Quite right - I thought we would only get 55.55%!

AlastairMeeks

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

And Father Christmas might exist.

Speedy

Alistair said:

Jaw dropping stuff from America

The shooters' landlord opened up their apartment to the media and MSNBC and CNN did live pieces to camera from inside their apartment, casually flashing id documents of killer's parents

http://gawker.com/msnbc-reporter-rifles-through-san-bernardino-shooters-a-1746220523

The media at it's best.
"and here in a worldwide exclusive we bring you the contents of the garbage bag"

flightpath01

AlastairMeeks said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

And Father Christmas might exist.

An exit leading to the EEA would be quite plausible.

richardDodd

Sandy Rentool ... You actually got 4000 less... a stunning victory...

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

OGH and myself will have long flowing locks before that happens.

Speedy

While we are sticking on America, a case of dogs not liking the dog food:

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/04/458181398/why-isnt-ad-spending-buying-gop-candidates-better-poll-numbers?

Jeb Bush has spent almost 30$ million on TV ads to poll just 3%.
Marco Rubio has spent more than 10$ million to poll around 12%.
Cruz has spent less than a million and is polling as much as Rubio.
Not to mention Trump who has spent nothing on TV ads and has 10 times the numbers of Bush and 3 times that of Rubio.

So far the more money the candidates spend on advertising the more they drop in the polls.

SandyRentool

richardDodd said:

Sandy Rentool ... You actually got 4000 less... a stunning victory...

I thought you'd been put in your place for that nonsense already.

richardDodd

If Cameron did that then we would leave..no doubt about it..

richardDodd

SR Except is is not nonsense..you got 4000 less votes than last time..in a red rosette on a donkey area..where is the nonsense..

MarkHopkins

Speedy said:

While we are sticking on America, a case of dogs not liking the dog food:

http://www.npr.org/2015/12/04/458181398/why-isnt-ad-spending-buying-gop-candidates-better-poll-numbers?

Jeb Bush has spent almost 30$ million on TV ads to poll just 3%.
Marco Rubio has spent more than 10$ million to poll around 12%.
Cruz has spent less than a million and is polling as much as Rubio.
Not to mention Trump who has spent nothing on TV ads and has 10 times the numbers of Bush and 3 times that of Rubio.

So far the more money the candidates spend on advertising the more they drop in the polls.

Or the more they drop in the polls, the more desperate they get.

ReggieCide

Richard_Tyndall said:

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

As a generalisation and apropos of nothing, why have postal voting except where there is a bona fide reason for needing one? If you can't be arsed to get yourself to a polling station then you don't deserve a vote.

Philip_Thompson

Richard_Tyndall said:

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

Agreed completely. I had to reread it a couple of times to check I wasn't missing something as it is so obviously an absurd and illogical comment.

The much better comment is that even if 100% of postal votes were for Labour and even if 100% were deducted from the tally then Labour would have still won comfortably. UKIP lost pure and simple.

MP_SE

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

Toms

Mildly on topic:

If the fecundity of my distant ancestors who emigrated from Royton in the 18th century, and my political inclinations, are typical of their relatives who remained, then that would help explain the current resounding outcome for Labour.

Philip_Thompson

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

Because there is 0% chance the Europeans won't give us what we demand.

viewcode

flightpath01 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

And Father Christmas might exist.

An exit leading to the EEA would be quite plausible.

Anything is plausible What I want is likely. Unfortunately, it t'aint on sale...:(:

Tim_B

Speedy said:

Alistair said:

Jaw dropping stuff from America

The shooters' landlord opened up their apartment to the media and MSNBC and CNN did live pieces to camera from inside their apartment, casually flashing id documents of killer's parents

http://gawker.com/msnbc-reporter-rifles-through-san-bernardino-shooters-a-1746220523

The media at it's best.
"and here in a worldwide exclusive we bring you the contents of the garbage bag"

Speaking of the media at its best, BBC World Service yesterday ran an extended report about a Yoga instructor from England who went to India to buy a machine that makes sanitary napkins for women and delivered it to a refugee camp in Jordan. Apparently they are not delivered by the relief agencies. The report included too much information on what ladies use in the absence of sanitary napkins.

Speedy

Toms said:

Mildly on topic:

If the fecundity of my distant ancestors who emigrated from Royton in the 18th century, and my political inclinations, are typical of their relatives who remained, then that would help explain the current resounding outcome for Labour.

If that were true, the south would become increasingly left wing with all those northern immigrants.
I'm not betting on it yet.

MP_SE

Philip_Thompson said:

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

Because there is 0% chance the Europeans won't give us what we demand.

There is a chance that Cameron's plan to come back with associate membership falls through, however, I have no doubt that the man with the EU cufflinks will campaign to stay in regardless.

Speedy

This is ridiculous, even the BBC reporter is allowed to leave his fingerprints on everything inside the house.

"oh look a credit card, lets touch it, oh look a computer screen lets touch it too"

Have those police officers any idea of a proper police investigation?
That property should be cordoned off.

midwinter

Philip_Thompson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

Agreed completely. I had to reread it a couple of times to check I wasn't missing something as it is so obviously an absurd and illogical comment.

The much better comment is that even if 100% of postal votes were for Labour and even if 100% were deducted from the tally then Labour would have still won comfortably. UKIP lost pure and simple.

Regardless of whether Labour would have won comfortably without postal votes it's important that questions are asked about why large groups off people find it necessary to use this option.

There may well be a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why so so many Oldham residents were unable to find their way to the polling station but I've yet to hear it.

Tim_B

Speedy said:

This is ridiculous, even the BBC reporter is allowed to leave his fingerprints on everything inside the house.

"oh look a credit card, lets touch it, oh look a computer screen lets touch it too"

Have those police officers any idea of a proper police investigation?

Yes and they had completed it in the apartment. It doesn't take an evidence team long to do a forensic sweep of an apartment, taking away what they need to.

TCPoliticalBetting

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

I agree 0% chance now. Ha Ha. Best laugh of the day.

Carnyx

FPT for @JosiasJessop and others interested - the report on the Forth Road Bridge's current condition and problems (well, apart from the new crack specifically):

http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/report/j8512a-03.htm

Sunil_Prasannan

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

But 2015 was the second Labour loss at a General Election - so Miliband = Hague, Corbyn = Howard.

Speedy

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

But 2015 was the second Labour loss at a General Election - so Miliband = Hague, Corbyn = Howard.

31 to 33% is not a long way.

HYUFD

“They want to blow up our country. They want to blow up our cities. They want to knock down our buildings, and [Pres. Barack Obama’s] worried about global warming. We have somebody that’s not in touch.” – Donald Trump
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10153881724431336/?fref=nf

tlg86

Philip_Thompson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

Agreed completely. I had to reread it a couple of times to check I wasn't missing something as it is so obviously an absurd and illogical comment.

The much better comment is that even if 100% of postal votes were for Labour and even if 100% were deducted from the tally then Labour would have still won comfortably. UKIP lost pure and simple.

I suspect Ukip were upset at the scale of the defeat rather than the defeat itself. But it's not about that, it's about right and wrong. If Ukip have gained from illicit postal votes then that's just as bad, but I suspect they haven't and Harry knows that full well.

HYUFD

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

But 2015 was the second Labour loss at a General Election - so Miliband = Hague, Corbyn = Howard.

No, Corbyn =IDS, IDS came after Hague, Benn perhaps = Howard

Sunil_Prasannan

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

But 2015 was the second Labour loss at a General Election - so Miliband = Hague, Corbyn = Howard.

No, Corbyn =IDS, IDS came after Hague, Benn perhaps = Howard

Ah, yes

runnymede

There is a chance that Cameron's plan to come back with associate membership falls through, however

No there isn't. The 'associate membership' deal is already done -it's just a name change for the status quo.

HYUFD

Danny565 said:

Speedy said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

Hague didn't do worse that Major.
Major got 31%, Hague got 31%, and logically Corbyn will get 31%.

I know, there was a 2% swing from Labour to the Tories in 2001. That would put the Tories 14 seats below the majority line in 2020 on such a swing.

So what, the Tories did not get a majority in 2010 and Cameron became PM and the Tories are now more likely to do a confidence and supply deal with UKIP and the DUP than the LDs if there is a hung parliament making an even more rightwing government than a majority Tory one would be

Speedy

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

I agree 0% chance now. Ha Ha. Best laugh of the day.

The problem as to why no one believes Cameron on this issue, is that he spent most of his political career portraying himself as a pro-european.

So when he makes demands such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaLFbSWEAEBddw.jpg

Or making threats such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaasBDWoAE2Grn.jpg

No side believes his demands or his threats are serious, whether it's Brussels or euroskeptics.

Casino_Royale

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

Yeah. And I might join Stop The War.

Sunil_Prasannan

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

And the LibDems will win the 2020 Election

HYUFD

Sunil_Prasannan said:

HYUFD said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Danny565 said:

HYUFD said:

Danny565 said:

Jonathan said:

richardDodd said:

Amazing that Labour can drop their majority by around 4000 and claim it is a stupendous victory

It's probably because they know something about politics that you seem not to. Turnout goes down in by-elections, doubly so for by-elections in December.

Labour did very well yesterday.

Does that mean a huge amount? Not really. But to argue that it was not a good result is either ignorant or wilfully daft.

Much better than David Cameron's first byelection as Tory leader, too.

William Hague increased the Tory vote by almost 8% in Uxbridge in 1997 again with a good local candidate, he was trounced in the general election

If Labour in 2020 were to replicate the swing Hague got in 2001, the Tories would lose their majority.

But 2015 was the second Labour loss at a General Election - so Miliband = Hague, Corbyn = Howard.

No, Corbyn =IDS, IDS came after Hague, Benn perhaps = Howard

Ah, yes

Indeed, if the Tories are a guide more than one more leader to get through before Labour get a future PM

KentRising

We are quickly finding out in the West that we have been importing a fifth column for years now and that perhaps, perhaps, these terrorist attacks might have something to do with Islam?

Sunil_Prasannan

KentRising said:

We are quickly finding out in the West that we have been importing a fifth column for years now and that perhaps, perhaps, these terrorist attacks might have something to do with Islam?

Nonsense! You should know by now that even Islam itself has nothing to do with Islam!

FrancisUrquhart

I see the Corbyn Terrorist Sympathiser line got an outing on HIGNFY...Lyton Crosby is probably at home in Oz, with a lager on his hand, saying something like "their learning, their learning"...

Pulpstar

Tim_B said:

Speedy said:

This is ridiculous, even the BBC reporter is allowed to leave his fingerprints on everything inside the house.

"oh look a credit card, lets touch it, oh look a computer screen lets touch it too"

Have those police officers any idea of a proper police investigation?

Yes and they had completed it in the apartment. It doesn't take an evidence team long to do a forensic sweep of an apartment, taking away what they need to.

The video was bizarre and a bit ghoulish I thought still.

FrancisUrquhart

KentRising said:

We are quickly finding out in the West that we have been importing a fifth column for years now and that perhaps, perhaps, these terrorist attacks might have something to do with Islam?

You had me until the last line...then I thought well that is definitely bollocks.

Casino_Royale

Speedy said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

I agree 0% chance now. Ha Ha. Best laugh of the day.

The problem as to why no one believes Cameron on this issue, is that he spent most of his political career portraying himself as a pro-european.

So when he makes demands such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaLFbSWEAEBddw.jpg

Or making threats such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaasBDWoAE2Grn.jpg

No side believes his demands or his threats are serious, whether it's Brussels or euroskeptics.

We know it's certified bullshit for four reasons:

(a) his past form
(b) the fact his close allies and friends have consistently briefed that he sees Britain's membership of the EU as fundamental to the nation's interests, its global standing and its foreign policy
(c) continuing tangential statements on the value of the EU in his words and actions; citing the desirability of the future membership of Turkey being but one recent example
(d) the fact no.10 have made no contingency plans whatsoever for Brexit, and have no intention to do so

Thankfully, most people aren't fooled.

Pulpstar

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

Speedy

Casino_Royale said:

Speedy said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

MP_SE said:

Scott_P said:

@TelegraphNews: David Cameron may campaign for Brexit, allies say https://t.co/fJhtXSRQbf https://t.co/y5jcy2NS4z

There is 0% chance that Cameron will campaign for Brexit.

I agree 0% chance now. Ha Ha. Best laugh of the day.

The problem as to why no one believes Cameron on this issue, is that he spent most of his political career portraying himself as a pro-european.

So when he makes demands such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaLFbSWEAEBddw.jpg

Or making threats such as these:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVaasBDWoAE2Grn.jpg

No side believes his demands or his threats are serious, whether it's Brussels or euroskeptics.

We know it's certified bullshit for four reasons:

(a) his past form
(b) the fact his close allies and friends have consistently briefed that he sees Britain's membership of the EU as fundamental to the nation's interests, its global standing and its foreign policy
(c) continuing tangential statements on the value of the EU in his words and actions; citing the desirability of the future membership of Turkey being but one recent example
(d) the fact no.10 have made no contingency plans whatsoever for Brexit, and have no intention to do so

Thankfully, most people aren't fooled.

Precisely.
Everyone knows he's not serious and he's bluffing.

justin124

Just discovered that the new MP for Oldham West has two kids but is not married. Bit surprised UKIP did not try to make something of his 'living in sin ' - having kids out of wedlock etc. It does somewhat undermine his clean cut image and I would not have expected such moral standards to have gone down well with the Asian community - had UKIP tried to make it an issue.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

The square root of sod all.
Cameron will still campaign for Remain.
When it comes to the EU, Cameron is a complete Jellyfish

Speedy

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

Well according to the FT, Cameron is demanding to insert language in the EU treaty that the EU is a multicurrency union.

SandyRentool

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

In future the Eurocrats have agreed to use lubricant.

Tim_B

Pulpstar said:

Tim_B said:

Speedy said:

This is ridiculous, even the BBC reporter is allowed to leave his fingerprints on everything inside the house.

"oh look a credit card, lets touch it, oh look a computer screen lets touch it too"

Have those police officers any idea of a proper police investigation?

Yes and they had completed it in the apartment. It doesn't take an evidence team long to do a forensic sweep of an apartment, taking away what they need to.

The video was bizarre and a bit ghoulish I thought still.

Bizarre is a good word to describe it.

Pulpstar

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

The square root of sod all.
Cameron will still campaign for Remain.
When it comes to the EU, Cameron is a complete Jellyfish

Found some stuff:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34803222

Donald Tusk - "Dave, we're going to boot you into the long grass"

https://www.rt.com/uk/324751-cameron-eu-reform-retreat/

Dave - "The grass is growing longer"

They have utter contempt for his "renegotiations" !, I expect Junker wants to make Dave look like a prize plonker in particular.

Pulpstar

Speedy said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

Well according to the FT, Cameron is demanding to insert language in the EU treaty that the EU is a multicurrency union.

That'll be the February concession.

Sunil_Prasannan

justin124 said:

Just discovered that the new MP for Oldham West has two kids but is not married. Bit surprised UKIP did not try to make something of his 'living in sin ' - having kids out of wedlock etc. It does somewhat undermine his clean cut image and I would not have expected such moral standards to have gone down well with the Asian community - had UKIP tried to make it an issue.

What "moral standards"? Like Rotherham you mean?

Speedy

Pulpstar said:

Speedy said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

Well according to the FT, Cameron is demanding to insert language in the EU treaty that the EU is a multicurrency union.

That'll be the February concession.

What?
That Britain can keep the pound?
I thought Major got that opt out in 1991, 24 years ago.

Anyway Goodnight.

Sunil_Prasannan

SandyRentool said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

In future the Eurocrats have agreed to use lubricant.

"There's always time for lubricant!"

GeoffM

justin124 said:

Just discovered that the new MP for Oldham West has two kids but is not married. Bit surprised UKIP did not try to make something of his 'living in sin ' - having kids out of wedlock etc. It does somewhat undermine his clean cut image and I would not have expected such moral standards to have gone down well with the Asian community - had UKIP tried to make it an issue.

Interesting that it has only occurred to your bigoted small mind that it could be an issue.

It wouldn't have crossed the mind of any right thinking person. You are weird.

Richard_Nabavi

From the comments of the usual suspects, the naive would think that David Cameron gets to decide whether we stay in the EU.

Guys, this is a referendum. Look it up. If we don't like the deal, we can vote to leave. David Cameron has a say, of course - one vote in about 46 million.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer

Pulpstar said:

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

The square root of sod all.
Cameron will still campaign for Remain.
When it comes to the EU, Cameron is a complete Jellyfish

Found some stuff:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34803222

Donald Tusk - "Dave, we're going to boot you into the long grass"

https://www.rt.com/uk/324751-cameron-eu-reform-retreat/

Dave - "The grass is growing longer"

They have utter contempt for his "renegotiations" !, I expect Junker wants to make Dave look like a prize plonker in particular.

Cameron would let the EU arse rape him. Oh for a handbag wielding Maggie.

SandyRentool

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Pulpstar said:

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

The square root of sod all.
Cameron will still campaign for Remain.
When it comes to the EU, Cameron is a complete Jellyfish

Found some stuff:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34803222

Donald Tusk - "Dave, we're going to boot you into the long grass"

https://www.rt.com/uk/324751-cameron-eu-reform-retreat/

Dave - "The grass is growing longer"

They have utter contempt for his "renegotiations" !, I expect Junker wants to make Dave look like a prize plonker in particular.

Cameron would let the EU arse rape him. Oh for a handbag wielding Maggie.

That’s what I was inferring!

Richard_Tyndall

Philip_Thompson said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Harry's comment - if it is from Harry - to Nutall is, not to put too fine a point on it, utter bollocks.

UKIP have long campaigned about the problems with postal voting and have not changed their position now. Given that all elections in the UK are held using a system that allows postal voting what Harry is in effect saying is that the only way one could be justified in protesting about postal votes is if you never stood for an election.

Sorry Harry but your attack is crass, stupid and illogical.

Agreed completely. I had to reread it a couple of times to check I wasn't missing something as it is so obviously an absurd and illogical comment.

The much better comment is that even if 100% of postal votes were for Labour and even if 100% were deducted from the tally then Labour would have still won comfortably. UKIP lost pure and simple.

Agree 100% Phil. And as I said this morning, even if Farage did have concerns about fraud the way to deal with it was through the authorities rather than shouting it out across the media. But the point is well made. Even without postal voting UKIP got beaten and maybe Farage ought to consider that perhaps his reaction now is already contributing to their next by-election defeat.

MP_SE

Richard_Nabavi said:

From the comments of the usual suspects, the naive would think that David Cameron gets to decide whether we stay in the EU.

Guys, this is a referendum. Look it up. If we don't like the deal, we can vote to leave. David Cameron has a say, of course - one vote in about 46 million.

I think most people are amused with the games being played with the media. It is quite obvious what is going on.

Tim_B

Sunil_Prasannan said:

SandyRentool said:

Pulpstar said:

What's Dave renegotiated so far btw ?

Or indicated he might get ?

2016 has been tipped up on here as the referendum year, and this is a major deal so I'd expect the first shifts to be appearing about now...

In future the Eurocrats have agreed to use lubricant.

"There's always time for lubricant!"

Particularly if your name is Justin

Richard_Nabavi

MP_SE said:

I think most people are amused with the games being played with the media. It is quite obvious what is going on.

Is it? It seems to be 99% uninformed speculation or quotes from people uninvolved in the negotiations. Mind you, one can well understand that our EU friends, especially France, are not 100% focused on the UK's demands just at the moment.

Tom

Excellent result for Labour and a slight move to the centre in the PLP.

interesting for me is the inability of anyone to park their tanks on labour's pacifist lawn. In years gone by the Lib Dems would have been very competitive here but it looks a long road back for them now. It would appear that UKIP look both amateurish and extreme to a large amount of the voting public.

As for the Conservtaives this looks quite bad for Osborne to me. His two themes: northern powerhouse (and this is part of the g. Manc Devo deal) and the new workers party seem to have fallen flat. He has been front and centre of everything since the election. Obviously that is aimed at the stockports and crewes of this world but hasn't got any traction at all here where the Tories have got 20% in local elections.

Corbyn remains unelectable and McDonnell is mad enough to destroy the party but this election suggests labour may have a bit of space to screw up internally and it not be an extinction event like in Scotland. There is no snp in labour england.

runnymede

'I think most people are amused with the games being played with the media. It is quite obvious what is going on.'

Indeed it is - but the Danes yesterday have shown us the right way to respond to this kind of pathetic attempt at manipulation.Tell the political establishment to get stuffed.

Chris_A

So here's another million quid which could have gone on patient care gone to satisfy solely to satisfy the government's dogma. Bit of schadenfreude that it's Lansley's ex-constituents who will be the most shafted. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-35000421

Casino_Royale

Richard_Nabavi said:

MP_SE said:

I think most people are amused with the games being played with the media. It is quite obvious what is going on.

Is it? It seems to be 99% uninformed speculation or quotes from people uninvolved in the negotiations. Mind you, one can well understand that our EU friends, especially France, are not 100% focused on the UK's demands just at the moment.

Perhaps. But there'll always be an excuse to put Britain at the back of the queue.