I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
I'd get him to have his supporters start making exhaustive enquiries as to the number of people living in each house in certain areas and infiltrate the Labour GOTV machine.
Also: if voting is at polling stations, I would have such monitored in certain areas for undue pressure being put on voters.
Good points although the Tories are very civilised and not good on this. I was involved in a fracas with Labour when they were pressuring voters inside a polling station. My Tory Chairman said don't get involved. Labour had posters and supporters inside the bloody station.
I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
Given the apparent hardening, not weakening, support for Labour in London since the election of Corbyn, how does he intend to go about challenging Khan in those stronger Labour areas? What does he offer those areas which feel tempted by the Corbyn type of politics?
He was involved in an interesting discussion on C4 news last night about gang culture and knife crime. I thought he did OK, and clearly his participation is evidence that he knows he needs to involve himself with issues that affect Londoners who don't live in Richmond or Twickenham. But he will need to do a lot more of that kind of thing if he's to win.
Thank you, really helpful.
Zac needs to show is right behind the living wage, and the getting of the lowest paid out of the income tax net. He needs to be making the case that he and his Govt. are helping the poorest in London.
And yes, he also needs to be very happy that London is the destination of choice for the Uber-rich. Proud that the top 1% pay 27% of all income tax. That London is attracting the rich - the rich who pay for our NHS. If we attract even more, then we can have the best health service in the world..... Of course, they have to pay their fair share of tax. And this Govt. has been more wealth redistributive than Labour have ever dreamt.
He also needs a message on housing - frankly, a message which I don't have any suggestions about!
Home ownership and increasing the availability of affordable homes for rent and to buy. Trumpet London HtB, a lot of people are unaware that they will soon be eligible for a 40% interest free loan for new builds in London. When I mentioned it to a friend who is a first time buyer she was blown away by how much easier it would make it for her to get a mortgage.
Yes, it is a complex message to sell it seems for Zac.
I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
When Lab reorganises to become an effective political force, or even now, do you think it will help or hinder the Conservatives, who arguably suffer from a perception that they govern for the elite, to have yet another priveleged, male, OE posho in a key position of power?
Thank you. He does need to be a man of the people, I accept.
A man of the people is a bonus. A man for the people is an essential.
Khan comes with none of the baggage that Ken did (a brief mention of Al Qaradawi brought votes to Boris from a demographic that historically has been split Lab/Con).
Londoners can also be mulish, if not impish, and it might amuse them to snub Zac in favour of Khan.
You might want to check up on your baggage claims.
ah!
well actually I have no idea about his baggage (never an impediment for me to post...).
'It is, of course, still an authoritarian; it's one born of running scared of the past but implicitly it still betrays a lack of confidence in the present: that were such thoughts or observations allowed, the people would descend as before.'
Indeed. It is understandable to an extent in the German context - but the Germans do not have the right to project their guilt on to other countries, as they frequently do. For example by suggesting that people opposed to EU integration are by definition xenophobes/racists.
@JoeMurphyLondon: Sadiq Khan ahead by seven points in mayoral race - up five pts since November. Source: New @YouGov poll coming out on LBC
Khan is going to walk it. Goldsmith just doesn't seem o have wide appeal, and what is he going to do to get it? If it falls back on party support, he's toast.
In as much as Labour is a London Party, London is a Labour city - and the Tories need an exceptional candidate (like a Boris) to win it - what possessed them to think Goldsmith had that 'star quality' is beyond me.....
While I think Khan is ahead, it's far from being a certainty. We shouldn't confuse London Labour activists with London Labour voters. The allegiance of the latter group is a lot softer than that of the former. A lot will depend on what happens in the immediate run-up to May, but I see no prospect of the party coming to its senses before then.
That said, Khan is quite adept at avoiding being identified with the more lunatic statements of Corbyn and McDonnell. And he'll probably be able to suggest enough distance between himself and them to prevent himself from being too damaged by the Corbynite chaos.
Two points: Khan has indeed tried to distance himself from Corbyn. I'm not sure the Tories will let him get away with this. He nominated him after all. He has said that he will accept help from Livingstone, who is toxic, and he is vulnerable if there is another attack, God forbid, in London or elsewhere and we get more nonsense from Corbyn, Livingstone et al.
Also, re Goldsmith: his team have been for the last couple of months at least, leafleting in the outer boroughs - , Hendon a few weeks back, they're doing Pinner, Harrow and round there this weekend. Anecdotal I realise and doesn't hit the press but, possibly, evidence of more activity and, possibly, more focused activity than some may be assuming.
Thank you. Livingstone is more toxic these days but he was the Londoner's favourite, twice in 2000 and 2004.
And his vote in 2012 actually went up from 2008 IIRC. Not enough to win, and there is the LD collapse to consider, but even he is not as toxic to some as people think. Nevertheless, he seems to have become more aggressive and bitter in recent years, it might be an opening, with Khan as Livingstone proxy or something.
I wonder if photos of Diane Abbot, Lee Jasper and Ken along with Jezza maybe the answer? Vote Khan got this lot!
It is. But the evidence from Germany is that what was happening to the women was not being shouted at but men touching them, trying to put their hands between their legs, squeezing their breasts etc. So actual assault - a crime.
Whereas writing that all Muslims should be rounded up in camps on a chat room is not a crime, disgusting as such a sentiment might be.
A crime is worse than a bad thought or a thought you don't agree with. If we don't understand that distinction, then we have no hope of either understanding or dealing with the problem.
The mess we have got ourselves into arises in very large part because we behave as if a bad thought or a thought that the majority might find a bit horrible is treated as worse than actions. It is a very medieval mindset. We are behaving like the Inquisitors of the 16th century: punishing people for their thoughts.
One of the German politicians was quoted as saying that it was "impermissible" to talk about the ethic make up of those assaulting women. "Impermissible" indeed. That is the voice of the authoritarian ruler or cleric throughout the ages. It is that attitude which is wrong, which needs to be buried in a deep vault with a stake through its heart.
[my bold]
Yes, but not in the usual sense. It's the voice of someone who still feels deep guilt and shame for his country's and his country-folks' history re race relations, and who is so terrified of the subject - presumably on the basis that mentioning it might resurrect those ghosts - that to even mention it is to create dangerous echoes (though whether he is worried about whether a taint on himself should he mention it, or a taint on his city is open to question).
It is, of course, still an authoritarian; it's one born of running scared of the past but implicitly it still betrays a lack of confidence in the present: that were such thoughts or observations allowed, the people would descend as before.
The irony is that people will have made the observations anyway but it's only those not scared of being called racists who will voice them, which inevitably includes those who are racist. And that will increase their credibility while diminishing the likes of that politician quoted.
The irony is that this WW2 guilt has led Germany to invite in a group of people who are more likely than others to bring with them the anti-Semitic views which politicians such as him are scared of. To try and appease your own historical anti-Semitism by importing people with a culture which can be and very often is pretty racist about others is pretty bizarre. It shows, as you say, a misunderstanding both of your own past and the present.
On an information point, the full phrase is "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."
I believe there is a lot of difference between being angry and writing silly things, and carrying out an act of violence. Otherwise we'd have a jail in every street.
Ralf may think that it's more important to investigate some spotty seventeen-year-old who posts on-line than stop rape and sexual assault taking place in the middle of his city.
Perhaps some of the Rotherham officials had the same opinion. I prefer to think Ralf is trying to muddy the waters and deflect attention from his own inadequacies.
Both are wrong. The actions in Germany are criminal in two ways the harassment and molestation (1) were the shield for organised robbery (2). There is a long history of organised robbery at this place at that time. The German police do seem quite culpable, so perhaps they are happy to see all sorts of blame go elsewhere. As far as I can see there is no official sanction for a so called code of conduct for women, only a crass remark from the Mayor of Cologne, which has been shouted down.
I am interested by this claim of a "long history" of robbery in this location. I have been to Cologne on a number of occasions, but not for the past 3 years. It never struck me as a dangerous place after dark, never seen large gangs of dodgy people hanging around and none of those yellow signs warning of such.
In comparison, if this had been Las Ramblas in Barcelona, I would agree with the statement. My whole adult life that has been an area where tourists are warned of potential issues after dark.
FYI. Next PB/Polling Matters podcast will be with Damian McBride. Thoughts on questions to @keiranpedley
Would be interesting to get DMcB's thoughts on Corbyn's relationships with Brownites, Watson especially. Is Watson a long term threat to Corbyn. What about Dugher? Would be very interested in any insights into Labour machine politics.
I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
Given the apparent hardening, not weakening, support for Labour in London since the election of Corbyn, how does he intend to go about challenging Khan in those stronger Labour areas? What does he offer those areas which feel tempted by the Corbyn type of politics?
He was involved in an interesting discussion on C4 news last night about gang culture and knife crime. I thought he did OK, and clearly his participation is evidence that he knows he needs to involve himself with issues that affect Londoners who don't live in Richmond or Twickenham. But he will need to do a lot more of that kind of thing if he's to win.
Thank you, really helpful.
Zac needs to show is right behind the living wage, and the getting of the lowest paid out of the income tax net. He needs to be making the case that he and his Govt. are helping the poorest in London.
And yes, he also needs to be very happy that London is the destination of choice for the Uber-rich. Proud that the top 1% pay 27% of all income tax. That London is attracting the rich - the rich who pay for our NHS. If we attract even more, then we can have the best health service in the world..... Of course, they have to pay their fair share of tax. And this Govt. has been more wealth redistributive than Labour have ever dreamt.
He also needs a message on housing - frankly, a message which I don't have any suggestions about!
Yes, he needs to be bolder and clearer. Boris is such a genius, that Zac must learn from him.
Mr. Runnymede, indeed, it's a perverse side-effect that Germany's desperation to atone for the distant past is leading it to try and dictate migration policy to the (supposedly) sovereign nations of Europe.
Presumably the Govt will schedule several votes between now and May that will force a 3 line whip and thus see Khan vote with Corbo. Any indication yet what these might be?
I imagine they'd be very outer-London friendly....
I hope so. Individual Voter Registration wil hurt Labour a bit, how much we don't know.
Damian McBride predicts a coup around conference time
The combined weight of the Brownite and Blairite machines, together with the authority that the centrist neutrals give them, could bring down even the most powerful of leaders, and Jeremy Corbyn is certainly not that.
When the coup comes, it will not be the hapless Hoon and Hewitt waving a letter of protest. It will be Dugher and McFadden in a pair of tanks, with a 200-strong army of MPs behind them. Get ready for your October Revolution, Mr Corbyn.
Khan comes with none of the baggage that Ken did (a brief mention of Al Qaradawi brought votes to Boris from a demographic that historically has been split Lab/Con).
Londoners can also be mulish, if not impish, and it might amuse them to snub Zac in favour of Khan.
Google Babar Ahmed. Khan does have some baggage. He is trying to shed it.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
You re fully entitled to your opinion, but as an old git, I hold to the old-fashioned "Sticks and Stones" axiom. What some loon on a website writes is of almost supreme indifference to me.
What next? Writing nasty things is the same as murder? Let's equate Polly Toynbee and Genghis Khan. Hitler was a nice man but his greatest crime was writing Mein Kampf?
Thanks for allowing me an opinion.
We're back to categorisation. Are wolf whistles and 'want a bit of this luv' molestation? Is an online exhortation to revenge rape 'Muslim bitches' just sticks & stones?
Do you actually not know the difference between rude comments and physical gropping that leaves bruises on breasts and buttocks?
We should always look to Trump fanboys for insights into sexual politics.
I'm not an american and don't have the vote and as a libertarian I don't exactly agree with Trumps policies, after all, he isn't going to abolish the welfare system, is he.
OTOH, you don't know the difference between rude comments and actual, physical, sexual assault.
Does your mother know this about you. Do you have a wife*, sister or daughter you could sure your insight and judgement with.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
* probably not, with such a bizarre viewpoint you are unlikely to have a quality partner.
On topic: We need to understand the rules for translating votes into delegates in NH. It's basically a proportional system, with a 10% threshold. In summary:
- There are 20 delegates elected in the primary (and 'bound' to their candidate), plus 3 ex-officio delegates not bound to any particular candidate - If a candidate withdraws between the primary and the convention, the delegates pledged to him or her can vote for any of the other candidates - Delegates are allocated based on the 20 × candidate's vote ÷ total statewide vote, rounded to the nearest whole number. - There's one rule I don't quite understand: "Any delegate positions that remain open are awarded to the candidate with the highest statewide vote total.". Does that mean that, if the leading candidate picks up (say) 30% and the also-rans who don't individually make 10% collectively get between them (say) 20%, that the leading candidate gets half of the total? If so, that is potentially a big factor.
Note that, even if Trump 'wins' against a crowded field, that doesn't necessarily mean he gets a commanding share of the available delegates; as the establishment figures drop out of the race, it is likely that the remaining leading establishment figure will pick up the non-Trump delegates.
Would be interesting to get DMcB's thoughts on Corbyn's relationships with Brownites, Watson especially. Is Watson a long term threat to Corbyn. What about Dugher? Would be very interested in any insights into Labour machine politics.
Already posted in The Times
For the last few days, the angry voices flooding the news channels, radio and Twitter have left an old, retired Brownite like me wiping a nostalgic tear from my eye: Michael Dugher, Kevan Jones, Ian Austin, and – of course – the silence that speaks volumes from Tom Watson, the deputy leader.
I’m no Star Wars fan, but I know a force awakening when I see one.
But this time it’s different. Jeremy Corbyn – or more accurately, the wild-eyed zealots around him – have pulled off a unique feat.
For the first time in two decades, the Blairites, Brownites and neutrals within the parliamentary Labour party are fully as one.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
As a point of reference regarding the London Mayoral contest:
London Votes - 2015
Labour 1.545m (43.7%) Tory 1.233m (34.9%) UKIP 0.287m (8.1%) Lib Dems 0.273m (7.7%) Green 0.172m (4.9%)
UKIP supporters are highly unlikely to back Khan, which leaves the main two fairly closely matched. It's the LD/Greens who hold the balance.
Comres polled London late in March and had 46-32 (so they were out by 2.6 swing) and the divide between various groups was:
White: Con 40 Lab 31 BAME: Lab 68 Con 21 Homeowner: Con 46 Lab 34 Social Rent: Lab 65 Con 11 Private Rent: Lab 60 Con 17
Long term, the Tories need to change the housing mix from rent to ownership, and the bloated, expensive and excessive housing benefit bill for London is reasonable justification.
Dividing London into a set of regions shows that N, S and W were closely matched. Labour's core is to the East.
Note: YG and Comres were between 4-6 points out at the GE with London specific polling. Any reported lead for Khan in that ball-park area could easily be a tie.
Would be interesting to get DMcB's thoughts on Corbyn's relationships with Brownites, Watson especially. Is Watson a long term threat to Corbyn. What about Dugher? Would be very interested in any insights into Labour machine politics.
Already posted in The Times
For the last few days, the angry voices flooding the news channels, radio and Twitter have left an old, retired Brownite like me wiping a nostalgic tear from my eye: Michael Dugher, Kevan Jones, Ian Austin, and – of course – the silence that speaks volumes from Tom Watson, the deputy leader.
I’m no Star Wars fan, but I know a force awakening when I see one.
But this time it’s different. Jeremy Corbyn – or more accurately, the wild-eyed zealots around him – have pulled off a unique feat.
For the first time in two decades, the Blairites, Brownites and neutrals within the parliamentary Labour party are fully as one.
Mr. Eagles, was going to submit a question, but couldn't find a way to phrase it without using ungentlemanly language.
McBride's filth. What he was doing was despicable. I don't think it's wrong for Mr. Pedley to interview him, but I shan't be listening, even though I'm sure the podcast will be absolutely, bloody brilliant.
On Corbyn and the Corbynistas: He's got the sanity of Caligula, the morals of Nero, the strength of Arcadius and the competence of Jovian.
Labour must hope he has the longevity of the latter.
It disgusts me that McBride, Maguire, etc have managed to basically just carry on as if they didn't really do anything and now can provide sage like advice. What they were up to went far beyond the usual political scandal.
Absolutely agree.
I'd ask how he feels that his actions have, to some degree, led to the mess that Labour's in today. Not just in foisting Gordon Brown on us, but in creating an atmosphere within Labour that has allowed the Corbynites to split the party asunder. It's hard for the centrists to call for unity when they spent five years fighting amongst themselves, and ended up subverting internal party democracy by ensuring there was no rival to Brown.
As an example, the "forces of hell" that bedevilled Alistair Darling were led by McBride.
I'd ask why we should believe anything he says, and why anything he says is worth listening to.
Sky News Newsdesk @SkyNewsBreak 59s59 seconds ago Update - French police sources say man has been shot after reportedly trying to enter police station in northern #Paris brandishing a knife
Mr. Runnymede, indeed, it's a perverse side-effect that Germany's desperation to atone for the distant past is leading it to try and dictate migration policy to the (supposedly) sovereign nations of Europe.
I simply don't understand why Germany would seek to atone for its war guilt by keeping out Poles and letting in people from countries where a proportion believe that the only thing wrong with the Holocaust is that it did not go far enough, where the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is on sale and treated as fact and which have done a fair amount of their own ethnic and religious cleansing.
As a point of reference regarding the London Mayoral contest:
London Votes - 2015
Labour 1.545m (43.7%) Tory 1.233m (34.9%) UKIP 0.287m (8.1%) Lib Dems 0.273m (7.7%) Green 0.172m (4.9%)
UKIP supporters are highly unlikely to back Khan, which leaves the main two fairly closely matched. It's the LD/Greens who hold the balance.
Comres polled London late in March and had 46-32 (so they were out by 2.6 swing) and the divide between various groups was:
White: Con 40 Lab 31 BAME: Lab 68 Con 21 Homeowner: Con 46 Lab 34 Social Rent: Lab 65 Con 11 Private Rent: Lab 60 Con 17
Long term, the Tories need to change the housing mix from rent to ownership, and the bloated, expensive and excessive housing benefit bill for London is reasonable justification.
Dividing London into a set of regions shows that N, S and W were closely matched. Labour's core is to the East.
Note: YG and Comres were between 4-6 points out at the GE. Any reported lead for Khan in that ball-park area could easily be a tie.
Very useful. You can see why Cameron believes in home ownership.
Individual Voter Registration and shy Tories in opinion polls might mean if Zac is 5 points behind on election day, he could win. Neck and neck he is highly likely to win.
I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
Given the apparent hardening, not weakening, support for Labour in London since the election of Corbyn, how does he intend to go about challenging Khan in those stronger Labour areas? What does he offer those areas which feel tempted by the Corbyn type of politics?
He was involved in an interesting discussion on C4 news last night about gang culture and knife crime. I thought he did OK, and clearly his participation is evidence that he knows he needs to involve himself with issues that affect Londoners who don't live in Richmond or Twickenham. But he will need to do a lot more of that kind of thing if he's to win.
Thank you, really helpful.
Zac needs to show is right behind the living wage, and the getting of the lowest paid out of the income tax net. He needs to be making the case that he and his Govt. are helping the poorest in London.
And yes, he also needs to be very happy that London is the destination of choice for the Uber-rich. Proud that the top 1% pay 27% of all income tax. That London is attracting the rich - the rich who pay for our NHS. If we attract even more, then we can have the best health service in the world..... Of course, they have to pay their fair share of tax. And this Govt. has been more wealth redistributive than Labour have ever dreamt.
He also needs a message on housing - frankly, a message which I don't have any suggestions about!
Home ownership and increasing the availability of affordable homes for rent and to buy. Trumpet London HtB, a lot of people are unaware that they will soon be eligible for a 40% interest free loan for new builds in London. When I mentioned it to a friend who is a first time buyer she was blown away by how much easier it would make it for her to get a mortgage.
HtB is keeping prices high. A better name is help to sell.
If NOBODY can get a mortgage, what happens to prices? Not enough oligarchs and cash buyers to sustain it
Prices are insane and HtB is desperately pumping air into a leaky balloon. Currently the pumping is winning, but it can't last forever. I feel genuinely sorry for those who will at some point in the near future buy at the top of the market which potentially has a long way to fall. She may not agree but your friend will likely be better off sticking to renting
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
That's reassuring, although he didn't have a Labour party to fight.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
Plus the Tories are going to be able to tap into the fabulous effort they ran in the May 2015 election campaign. That resource is not to be underestimated. Rafts of Londoners will again be getting very targeted messages, designed to play on their fears of Corbyn and a politically changing London....
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Would be interesting to get DMcB's thoughts on Corbyn's relationships with Brownites, Watson especially. Is Watson a long term threat to Corbyn. What about Dugher? Would be very interested in any insights into Labour machine politics.
Already posted in The Times
For the last few days, the angry voices flooding the news channels, radio and Twitter have left an old, retired Brownite like me wiping a nostalgic tear from my eye: Michael Dugher, Kevan Jones, Ian Austin, and – of course – the silence that speaks volumes from Tom Watson, the deputy leader.
I’m no Star Wars fan, but I know a force awakening when I see one.
But this time it’s different. Jeremy Corbyn – or more accurately, the wild-eyed zealots around him – have pulled off a unique feat.
For the first time in two decades, the Blairites, Brownites and neutrals within the parliamentary Labour party are fully as one.
Would be interesting to get DMcB's thoughts on Corbyn's relationships with Brownites, Watson especially. Is Watson a long term threat to Corbyn. What about Dugher? Would be very interested in any insights into Labour machine politics.
Already posted in The Times
For the last few days, the angry voices flooding the news channels, radio and Twitter have left an old, retired Brownite like me wiping a nostalgic tear from my eye: Michael Dugher, Kevan Jones, Ian Austin, and – of course – the silence that speaks volumes from Tom Watson, the deputy leader.
I’m no Star Wars fan, but I know a force awakening when I see one.
But this time it’s different. Jeremy Corbyn – or more accurately, the wild-eyed zealots around him – have pulled off a unique feat.
For the first time in two decades, the Blairites, Brownites and neutrals within the parliamentary Labour party are fully as one.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
On topic: We need to understand the rules for translating votes into delegates in NH. It's basically a proportional system, with a 10% threshold. In summary:
- There are 20 delegates elected in the primary (and 'bound' to their candidate), plus 3 ex-officio delegates not bound to any particular candidate - If a candidate withdraws between the primary and the convention, the delegates pledged to him or her can vote for any of the other candidates - Delegates are allocated based on the 20 × candidate's vote ÷ total statewide vote, rounded to the nearest whole number. - There's one rule I don't quite understand: "Any delegate positions that remain open are awarded to the candidate with the highest statewide vote total.". Does that mean that, if the leading candidate picks up (say) 30% and the also-rans who don't individually make 10% collectively get between them (say) 20%, that the leading candidate gets half of the total? If so, that is potentially a big factor.
Note that, even if Trump 'wins' against a crowded field, that doesn't necessarily mean he gets a commanding share of the available delegates; as the establishment figures drop out of the race, it is likely that the remaining leading establishment figure will pick up the non-Trump delegates.
But it's a small number of delegates in any case; the value of a win isn't in the delegate it delivers but rather in the momentum it delivers. Sure, this race could, maybe, get to the convention an the odd delegate here and there might make a difference, but the likelihood is that it won't. Winning is all that matters for Trump - every time he wins a state with 25% or 30%, he's a winner again.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
That's reassuring, although he didn't have a Labour party to fight.
No, but the LibDems were very well dug in.
Of course, the obvious caveat is that Richmond is far from typical of London as a whole.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
Plus the Tories are going to be able to tap into the fabulous effort they ran in the May 2015 election campaign. That resource is not to be underestimated. Rafts of Londoners will again be getting very targeted messages, designed to play on their fears of Corbyn and a politically changing London....
The Tories will certainly mention Corbyn more than Khan does.
Khan comes with none of the baggage that Ken did (a brief mention of Al Qaradawi brought votes to Boris from a demographic that historically has been split Lab/Con).
Londoners can also be mulish, if not impish, and it might amuse them to snub Zac in favour of Khan.
Google Babar Ahmed. Khan does have some baggage. He is trying to shed it.
Now I wonder why Khan has screamed racist so loudly and so early on in this campaign (over attacks that aren't in any way racist). I think we here lots more cries of it to e.g. those claims against a Zac supporting canvasser, who just happened to say something inappropriate to a Labourite with good media connections...but it being only him and them, nobody can prove one way or another.
I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
I assume you mean as an intellectual exercise rather than implying a prevailing bias on the site.
Either/both. I realise not everyone is a blue but intellectually, wouldn't it be good to say 'it was politicalbetting.com wot won it!'
OGH is not a Tory. So why would he "intellectually" go with Goldsmith?
I was asking the crowd. With all this political knowledge, PB.com could become a brand to match Lynton Crosby and co! We could collectively fight elections around the world, whatever the political slant.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
Plus the Tories are going to be able to tap into the fabulous effort they ran in the May 2015 election campaign. That resource is not to be underestimated. Rafts of Londoners will again be getting very targeted messages, designed to play on their fears of Corbyn and a politically changing London....
The Tories will certainly mention Corbyn more than Khan does.
If the 2015 Tory success is repeated in London, Khan will win.
Khan comes with none of the baggage that Ken did (a brief mention of Al Qaradawi brought votes to Boris from a demographic that historically has been split Lab/Con).
Londoners can also be mulish, if not impish, and it might amuse them to snub Zac in favour of Khan.
Google Babar Ahmed. Khan does have some baggage. He is trying to shed it.
Khan has baggage, I am trying to get Zac to focus very precisely on dodgy Khan. It's no good saying Khan plays the race card in my opinion. Saying he hangs around with murderers is the key.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Hmm. Zac?
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
As a dilattente, Zac is unlikely to inspire the aspirational and will therefore probably lose to the racist muslim.
Still, nevermind, it's the tories fault for picking such a bad candidate.
I am meeting Zac Goldsmith today for a chat. Anybody got any questions or points of view on his Mayoral strategy. What should he do? He will have his own views, clearly, but I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
When Lab reorganises to become an effective political force, or even now, do you think it will help or hinder the Conservatives, who arguably suffer from a perception that they govern for the elite, to have yet another priveleged, male, OE posho in a key position of power?
Thank you. He does need to be a man of the people, I accept.
A man of the people is a bonus. A man for the people is an essential.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
I wonder if we can have a politicalbetting.com strategy to win the London Mayoralty.
I assume you mean as an intellectual exercise rather than implying a prevailing bias on the site.
Either/both. I realise not everyone is a blue but intellectually, wouldn't it be good to say 'it was politicalbetting.com wot won it!'
OGH is not a Tory. So why would he "intellectually" go with Goldsmith?
I was asking the crowd. With all this political knowledge, PB.com could become a brand to match Lynton Crosby and co! We could collectively fight elections around the world, whatever the political slant.
Don't know about that but I think the best two or three posters here (mentioning no names) have a higher level of understanding of electoral politics than almost any MSM pundit.
On topic: We need to understand the rules for translating votes into delegates in NH. It's basically a proportional system, with a 10% threshold. In summary:
- There are 20 delegates elected in the primary (and 'bound' to their candidate), plus 3 ex-officio delegates not bound to any particular candidate - If a candidate withdraws between the primary and the convention, the delegates pledged to him or her can vote for any of the other candidates - Delegates are allocated based on the 20 × candidate's vote ÷ total statewide vote, rounded to the nearest whole number. - There's one rule I don't quite understand: "Any delegate positions that remain open are awarded to the candidate with the highest statewide vote total.". Does that mean that, if the leading candidate picks up (say) 30% and the also-rans who don't individually make 10% collectively get between them (say) 20%, that the leading candidate gets half of the total? If so, that is potentially a big factor.
Note that, even if Trump 'wins' against a crowded field, that doesn't necessarily mean he gets a commanding share of the available delegates; as the establishment figures drop out of the race, it is likely that the remaining leading establishment figure will pick up the non-Trump delegates.
I wouldn't worry about the delegate count early on. What matters are victories and the momentum that comes with them (and conversely, the deadening effect that a lack of victories brings). It's unlikely that there's be more than one serious candidate left long after Super Tuesday but if there are, that's what the winner-take-all states are there for.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Zac gives off the impression of only being a Tory by virtue of his social background.
I wouldn't worry about the delegate count early on. What matters are victories and the momentum that comes with them (and conversely, the deadening effect that a lack of victories brings). It's unlikely that there's be more than one serious candidate left long after Super Tuesday but if there are, that's what the winner-take-all states are there for.
Sure, but I think that we might be misled into thinking that Trump's lead (assuming he remains in the lead) is bigger than it appears because of the fragmentation of the establishment vote. Both in terms of transfers of delegates from the early states, and later on as the big winner-takes-all states come into play, the eventual establishment leader might do better than looks likely early on.
Of course this assumes that Trump doesn't win the big winner-takes-all states. Basically the GOP establishment needs to whittle down the field PDQ.
On an information point, the full phrase is "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."
I believe there is a lot of difference between being angry and writing silly things, and carrying out an act of violence. Otherwise we'd have a jail in every street.
Ralf may think that it's more important to investigate some spotty seventeen-year-old who posts on-line than stop rape and sexual assault taking place in the middle of his city.
Perhaps some of the Rotherham officials had the same opinion. I prefer to think Ralf is trying to muddy the waters and deflect attention from his own inadequacies.
Both are wrong. The actions in Germany are criminal in two ways the harassment and molestation (1) were the shield for organised robbery (2). There is a long history of organised robbery at this place at that time. The German police do seem quite culpable, so perhaps they are happy to see all sorts of blame go elsewhere. As far as I can see there is no official sanction for a so called code of conduct for women, only a crass remark from the Mayor of Cologne, which has been shouted down.
I am interested by this claim of a "long history" of robbery in this location. I have been to Cologne on a number of occasions, but not for the past 3 years. It never struck me as a dangerous place after dark, never seen large gangs of dodgy people hanging around and none of those yellow signs warning of such.
In comparison, if this had been Las Ramblas in Barcelona, I would agree with the statement. My whole adult life that has been an area where tourists are warned of potential issues after dark.
Well if I am wrong then the BBC is wrong. It says that similar organised gangs of robbers have been active at this location on new years eve for at least the last 5 years. Its something the police were aware of. The Mayor of Cologne, who made the stupid remarks, I now realise is a woman BTW. Frankly if you cannot see these very serious issues being used to ferment a witchhunt then you need to look again. These are serious events, very serious, in their own right, there have been similar happenings in Dusseldorf apparently over the last 3 years, but the accusations of thousands of attackers and the implications of multiple rape are not at all clear
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
But the second preference of Waitrose shoppers and Indy readers could well determine who is Mayor.... (I'm assuming UKIP voters aren't going for Labour.)
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Hmm. Zac?
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
You might want to change your version of google...
He fought as a Jihadi. He distributed extremist material over the course of many many years. He got sentenced to 12 years. But yes the judge didn't think he wanted to go around harming people personally.
As for Khan. I can't remember which version of the story he likes to say is the truth these days. The one he told of Ahmad being a very close childhood friend or the one where he virtually knew nothing about him other than when called upon as his constituency MP.
You know its bad for Labour, when even the Mirror are taking a pop every day.
The Daily Mirror has always struck me as an old-school, working class, Labour paper.
It's never been like the Guardian or the Indy.
Don't disagree with that. But normally if it is bad for Labour they just stay quiet, not go out of their way to stick the boot in. I don't remember them kicking Miliband in the nuts very often.
I quite agree. I just think there's a chance of regional outrage developing towards the North London leadership, much akin to the Scottish 'branch office' episode, and the Mirror and Maguire have started to voice it.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Damian McBride predicts a coup around conference time
The combined weight of the Brownite and Blairite machines, together with the authority that the centrist neutrals give them, could bring down even the most powerful of leaders, and Jeremy Corbyn is certainly not that.
When the coup comes, it will not be the hapless Hoon and Hewitt waving a letter of protest. It will be Dugher and McFadden in a pair of tanks, with a 200-strong army of MPs behind them. Get ready for your October Revolution, Mr Corbyn.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Hmm. Zac?
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
You forgot this key fact: Ahmed pleaded guilty to "conspiracy and providing material to support terrorism".
The issues around Khan are that at various times he has given a number of evasive and/or inconsistent answers about his relationship with Ahmed. The issue is therefore whether he has been entirely straightforward and honest in his answers, which I think is a relevant consideration for any Mayoral candidate. One would like to think that a Mayoral candidate for a city which is at high risk of terrorism would want to be utterly straightforward about his links with someone who has been convicted as a result of his own guilty plea of terrorism related offences - even if the judge thought he was less culpable than others. Especially given how Labour is being portrayed as the terrorists' party as a result of Corbyn, McDonnell and Livingstone.
To be fair, I think Khan realises that this is a potential weakness and has tried to address it - in a speech he made shortly after the Paris attacks. But in these last few days we have learnt that saying what might seem like the bleeding obvious - terrorists are bad people and should be held responsible for their actions - is apparently a Bad Thing in Corbyn's Labour.
I do not want to give any support at all to this idea by supporting a Labour candidate, I'm afraid. Those who seek to excuse terrorists are despicable. It's up to Labour if they want to be tainted by the Corbyn-view.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
Plus the Tories are going to be able to tap into the fabulous effort they ran in the May 2015 election campaign. That resource is not to be underestimated. Rafts of Londoners will again be getting very targeted messages, designed to play on their fears of Corbyn and a politically changing London....
The Tories will certainly mention Corbyn more than Khan does.
If the 2015 Tory success is repeated in London, Khan will win.
*If*.
At the GE the Conservatives saw a 0.4% increase in the capital; Labour a 7.1%. (1) Whilst Corbynism is abhorrent to many, that factor might be counteracted in the mayoral election by the fact the Labour leadership is very heavily Londoncentric. Livinsgstone lost by much less than Labour's gain at the 2015 GE. (2)
But mayoral elections are odd things. If you look at the 2012 mayoral elections (2) against the 2010 London GE results (3), then there seems little correlation. The same can be seen in the 2008 mayoral elections (4) and the 2005 GE (5)
The fact it is a supplementary vote election will also have an effect. Turnout will be important; it's easy to argue that whoever has the best gotv system will win.
Try as I might, I just cannot see which way it'll go.
I simply don't trust him to back his own side when the chips are down. It's a terrible perception. I expected Boris to be his own PR machine as it suited him, but I feel Zac is using the Mayoralty as a vehicle for his personal hobby horse.
A very different kettle of fish and not too different to Saqid and ethnic quotas in terms of ideology.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't know what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Zac gives off the impression of only being a Tory by virtue of his social background.
On an information point, the full phrase is "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me."
I believe there is a lot of difference between being angry and writing silly things, and carrying out an act of violence. Otherwise we'd have a jail in every street.
Ralf may think that it's more important to investigate some spotty seventeen-year-old who posts on-line than stop rape and sexual assault taking place in the middle of his city.
Perhaps some of the Rotherham officials had the same opinion. I prefer to think Ralf is trying to muddy the waters and deflect attention from his own inadequacies.
Both are wrong. The actions in Germany are criminal in two ways the harassment and molestation (1) were the shield for organised robbery (2). There is a long history of organised robbery at this place at that time. The German police do seem quite culpable, so perhaps they are happy to see all sorts of blame go elsewhere. As far as I can see there is no official sanction for a so called code of conduct for women, only a crass remark from the Mayor of Cologne, which has been shouted down.
I am interested by this claim of a "long history" of robbery in this location. I have been to Cologne on a number of occasions, but not for the past 3 years. It never struck me as a dangerous place after dark, never seen large gangs of dodgy people hanging around and none of those yellow signs warning of such.
In comparison, if this had been Las Ramblas in Barcelona, I would agree with the statement. My whole adult life that has been an area where tourists are warned of potential issues after dark.
Well if I am wrong then the BBC is wrong. It says that similar organised gangs of robbers have been active at this location on new years eve for at least the last 5 years. Its something the police were aware of. The Mayor of Cologne, who made the stupid remarks, I now realise is a woman BTW. Frankly if you cannot see these very serious issues being used to ferment a witchhunt then you need to look again. These are serious events, very serious, in their own right, there have been similar happenings in Dusseldorf apparently over the last 3 years, but the accusations of thousands of attackers and the implications of multiple rape are not at all clear
Foment. Fermenting is something altogether different.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Hmm. Zac?
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
You might want to change your version of google...
He fought as a Jihadi. He distributed extremist material over the course of many many years. He got sentenced to 12 years. But yes the judge didn't think he wanted to go around harming people personally.
As for Khan. I can't remember which version of the story he likes to say is the truth these days. The one he told of Ahmad being a very close childhood friend or the one where he virtually knew nothing about him other than when called upon as his constituency MP.
It seems he supported the Taliban up to and then, crucially, including post 9/11 and OBL's move to Afghan (one of the US prosecutors said his activities included while OBL was "planning" 9/11).
From the DT:
"In a statement to the court, he admitted that for a period of months after the Sept 2001 terror attacks he continued use his websites to enlist support for the Taliban from Muslims around the world. But he said that he now realised he was naive and misunderstood the relationship between the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Ahmad’s lawyers argued that he deeply regretted his support for the Taliban and publicly condemned the 9/11 atrocities."
Well of course he would say that wouldn't he. And yes, prior to 9/11 he supported Jihad (he fought in Chechnya).
But the impression I got from the various (expanded googling) reports is that he was also sinned against.
Whether pre-9/11 to support the Taliban was a good or bad thing I am not up enough on my recent Afghan history to know.
French President Francois Hollande has promised 5,000 extra police posts in an "unprecedented" strengthening of French security, a year after the attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine by jihadists. Soon after he spoke, Paris police shot and killed a suspect who allegedly tried to break into a police station.
As a point of reference regarding the London Mayoral contest:
London Votes - 2015
Labour 1.545m (43.7%) Tory 1.233m (34.9%) UKIP 0.287m (8.1%) Lib Dems 0.273m (7.7%) Green 0.172m (4.9%)
UKIP supporters are highly unlikely to back Khan, which leaves the main two fairly closely matched. It's the LD/Greens who hold the balance.
Comres polled London late in March and had 46-32 (so they were out by 2.6 swing) and the divide between various groups was:
White: Con 40 Lab 31 BAME: Lab 68 Con 21 Homeowner: Con 46 Lab 34 Social Rent: Lab 65 Con 11 Private Rent: Lab 60 Con 17
Long term, the Tories need to change the housing mix from rent to ownership, and the bloated, expensive and excessive housing benefit bill for London is reasonable justification.
Dividing London into a set of regions shows that N, S and W were closely matched. Labour's core is to the East.
Note: YG and Comres were between 4-6 points out at the GE. Any reported lead for Khan in that ball-park area could easily be a tie.
Very useful. You can see why Cameron believes in home ownership.
Individual Voter Registration and shy Tories in opinion polls might mean if Zac is 5 points behind on election day, he could win. Neck and neck he is highly likely to win.
One of the key things will be turnout.
2000 - 34% 2004 - 37% 2008 - 45% 2012 - 38%
I'm not sure why 2008 was so much higher than the rest - maybe it was seen as closer.
Looking at 2012, Boris had 972k and Ken 890k in the first round, which shows how much differential turnout helps the Tories. The key is the candidates need to find issues to get their supporters motivated to vote. I'm not seeing much so far as they both agree about Heathrow
Damian McBride predicts a coup around conference time
The combined weight of the Brownite and Blairite machines, together with the authority that the centrist neutrals give them, could bring down even the most powerful of leaders, and Jeremy Corbyn is certainly not that.
When the coup comes, it will not be the hapless Hoon and Hewitt waving a letter of protest. It will be Dugher and McFadden in a pair of tanks, with a 200-strong army of MPs behind them. Get ready for your October Revolution, Mr Corbyn.
So we could have simultaneous elections for Labour and the Conservatives in October. Has Mike booked a holiday or something?
What the McBride piece says to me is that for next Labour leader one should be looking at the kind of figure that a machine operation would unite around. Definitely not Benn. Maybe Watson himself? Not sure.
That piece and Henry G Manson yesterday have got me thinking that Corbyn may not last that long after all. Yes, Labour has no history of ousting leaders but it has also never had a leader so extreme and inept.
I don't like Zac. I think he's a TINO and he's looking for another rich man's play thing. He's like Prince Charles.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
Thank you. I don't what a TINO is but I will tell him he is one.
Hmm. Zac?
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
You forgot this key fact: Ahmed pleaded guilty to "conspiracy and providing material to support terrorism".
The issues around Khan are that at various times he has given a number of evasive and/or inconsistent answers about his relationship with Ahmed. The issue is therefore whether he has been entirely straightforward and honest in his answers, which I think is a relevant consideration for any Mayoral candidate. One would like to think that a Mayoral candidate for a city which is at high risk of terrorism would want to be utterly straightforward about his links with someone who has been convicted as a result of his own guilty plea of terrorism related offences - even if the judge thought he was less culpable than others. Especially given how Labour is being portrayed as the terrorists' party as a result of Corbyn, McDonnell and Livingstone.
To be fair, I think Khan realises that this is a potential weakness and has tried to address it - in a speech he made shortly after the Paris attacks. But in these last few days we have learnt that saying what might seem like the bleeding obvious - terrorists are bad people and should be held responsible for their actions - is apparently a Bad Thing in Corbyn's Labour.
I do not want to give any support at all to this idea by supporting a Labour candidate, I'm afraid. Those who seek to excuse terrorists are despicable. It's up to Labour if they want to be tainted by the Corbyn-view.
Makes a lot of sense.
I will keep a close eye on him and his pronouncements.
As a point of reference regarding the London Mayoral contest:
London Votes - 2015
Labour 1.545m (43.7%) Tory 1.233m (34.9%) UKIP 0.287m (8.1%) Lib Dems 0.273m (7.7%) Green 0.172m (4.9%)
UKIP supporters are highly unlikely to back Khan, which leaves the main two fairly closely matched. It's the LD/Greens who hold the balance.
Comres polled London late in March and had 46-32 (so they were out by 2.6 swing) and the divide between various groups was:
White: Con 40 Lab 31 BAME: Lab 68 Con 21 Homeowner: Con 46 Lab 34 Social Rent: Lab 65 Con 11 Private Rent: Lab 60 Con 17
Long term, the Tories need to change the housing mix from rent to ownership, and the bloated, expensive and excessive housing benefit bill for London is reasonable justification.
Dividing London into a set of regions shows that N, S and W were closely matched. Labour's core is to the East.
Note: YG and Comres were between 4-6 points out at the GE. Any reported lead for Khan in that ball-park area could easily be a tie.
Very useful. You can see why Cameron believes in home ownership.
Individual Voter Registration and shy Tories in opinion polls might mean if Zac is 5 points behind on election day, he could win. Neck and neck he is highly likely to win.
One of the key things will be turnout.
2000 - 34% 2004 - 37% 2008 - 45% 2012 - 38%
I'm not sure why 2008 was so much higher than the rest - maybe it was seen as closer.
Looking at 2012, Boris had 972k and Ken 890k in the first round, which shows how much differential turnout helps the Tories. The key is the candidates need to find issues to get their supporters motivated to vote. I'm not seeing much so far as they both agree about Heathrow
Yes, turnout will be more crucial than changing voter's voting choice. Half of those who voted in GE won't vote! Get an extra 20% of your GE voters to turn out then you win. Issues will be housing, transport, crime but a clear message seems to be the hardest part at the moment. Thank you for the information.
That isn't the only baggage on Khan BTW. Like many politicians there is plenty of normal stuff to be going at. But then there is on Zac too e.g. I am sure we will here all about his non-dom'ing again (even though he gave it up) and his personal life.
That piece and Henry G Manson yesterday have got me thinking that Corbyn may not last that long after all. Yes, Labour has no history of ousting leaders but it has also never had a leader so extreme and inept.
Has it ever had a PLP so supine?
David Cameron openly mocking Hilary Benn and others for agreeing to sit in Jezza's shadow cabinet at PMQs, as they tacitly support his entire lunatic agenda.
On the London mayoral election: don't underestimate Zac. He's a canny campaigner. His 2010 Richmond campaign was very smart and largely below the radar.
Plus the Tories are going to be able to tap into the fabulous effort they ran in the May 2015 election campaign. That resource is not to be underestimated. Rafts of Londoners will again be getting very targeted messages, designed to play on their fears of Corbyn and a politically changing London....
The Tories will certainly mention Corbyn more than Khan does.
If the 2015 Tory success is repeated in London, Khan will win.
*If*.
At the GE the Conservatives saw a 0.4% increase in the capital; Labour a 7.1%. (1) Whilst Corbynism is abhorrent to many, that factor might be counteracted in the mayoral election by the fact the Labour leadership is very heavily Londoncentric. Livinsgstone lost by much less than Labour's gain at the 2015 GE. (2)
But mayoral elections are odd things. If you look at the 2012 mayoral elections (2) against the 2010 London GE results (3), then there seems little correlation. The same can be seen in the 2008 mayoral elections (4) and the 2005 GE (5)
The fact it is a supplementary vote election will also have an effect. Turnout will be important; it's easy to argue that whoever has the best gotv system will win.
Try as I might, I just cannot see which way it'll go.
French President Francois Hollande has promised 5,000 extra police posts in an "unprecedented" strengthening of French security, a year after the attack on Charlie Hebdo magazine by jihadists. Soon after he spoke, Paris police shot and killed a suspect who allegedly tried to break into a police station.
I expect to hear JJ on the media exclaiming disgust at the police. They should have asked his gentleman to go for a nice goat's milk latte to discuss his issues.
Comments
well actually I have no idea about his baggage (never an impediment for me to post...).
What is it?
Indeed. It is understandable to an extent in the German context - but the Germans do not have the right to project their guilt on to other countries, as they frequently do. For example by suggesting that people opposed to EU integration are by definition xenophobes/racists.
In comparison, if this had been Las Ramblas in Barcelona, I would agree with the statement. My whole adult life that has been an area where tourists are warned of potential issues after dark.
In my humble opinion that is ...
I expect so. He missed the last one. This was the convo last time.
Mike: I'm going on holiday from the 3rd of September until the 21st. That OK with you ?
Me: Sure, but you know you'll be missing the Labour leadership election ?
Mike: So Corbyn's going to win.
Me: Not even your holiday can do that.
He needs to talk to the aspirational voters, not just the soulmate recycling Twickers. What's he going to do to give them a more successful place to live and educate their kids. Take lessons from Boris and Cameron style.
I'm sick of his green hobby horses.
OTOH, you don't know the difference between rude comments and actual, physical, sexual assault.
Does your mother know this about you. Do you have a wife*, sister or daughter you could sure your insight and judgement with.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
* probably not, with such a bizarre viewpoint you are unlikely to have a quality partner.
- There are 20 delegates elected in the primary (and 'bound' to their candidate), plus 3 ex-officio delegates not bound to any particular candidate
- If a candidate withdraws between the primary and the convention, the delegates pledged to him or her can vote for any of the other candidates
- Delegates are allocated based on the 20 × candidate's vote ÷ total statewide vote, rounded to the nearest whole number.
- There's one rule I don't quite understand: "Any delegate positions that remain open are awarded to the candidate with the highest statewide vote total.". Does that mean that, if the leading candidate picks up (say) 30% and the also-rans who don't individually make 10% collectively get between them (say) 20%, that the leading candidate gets half of the total? If so, that is potentially a big factor.
Note that, even if Trump 'wins' against a crowded field, that doesn't necessarily mean he gets a commanding share of the available delegates; as the establishment figures drop out of the race, it is likely that the remaining leading establishment figure will pick up the non-Trump delegates.
More details here:
http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/NH-R
London Votes - 2015
Labour 1.545m (43.7%)
Tory 1.233m (34.9%)
UKIP 0.287m (8.1%)
Lib Dems 0.273m (7.7%)
Green 0.172m (4.9%)
UKIP supporters are highly unlikely to back Khan, which leaves the main two fairly closely matched. It's the LD/Greens who hold the balance.
Comres polled London late in March and had 46-32 (so they were out by 2.6 swing) and the divide between various groups was:
White: Con 40 Lab 31
BAME: Lab 68 Con 21
Homeowner: Con 46 Lab 34
Social Rent: Lab 65 Con 11
Private Rent: Lab 60 Con 17
Long term, the Tories need to change the housing mix from rent to ownership, and the bloated, expensive and excessive housing benefit bill for London is reasonable justification.
Dividing London into a set of regions shows that N, S and W were closely matched. Labour's core is to the East.
Note: YG and Comres were between 4-6 points out at the GE with London specific polling. Any reported lead for Khan in that ball-park area could easily be a tie.
Oooh, I missed that. Thanks.
1. Does being a filthy lying scumbag come naturally to you, or do you have to work hard at it?
2. Will you apologise to those women you smeared?
3. Are there any circumstances where the ends might not justify the means?
I'd ask how he feels that his actions have, to some degree, led to the mess that Labour's in today. Not just in foisting Gordon Brown on us, but in creating an atmosphere within Labour that has allowed the Corbynites to split the party asunder. It's hard for the centrists to call for unity when they spent five years fighting amongst themselves, and ended up subverting internal party democracy by ensuring there was no rival to Brown.
As an example, the "forces of hell" that bedevilled Alistair Darling were led by McBride.
I'd ask why we should believe anything he says, and why anything he says is worth listening to.
Update - French police sources say man has been shot after reportedly trying to enter police station in northern #Paris brandishing a knife
Individual Voter Registration and shy Tories in opinion polls might mean if Zac is 5 points behind on election day, he could win. Neck and neck he is highly likely to win.
If NOBODY can get a mortgage, what happens to prices? Not enough oligarchs and cash buyers to sustain it
Prices are insane and HtB is desperately pumping air into a leaky balloon. Currently the pumping is winning, but it can't last forever. I feel genuinely sorry for those who will at some point in the near future buy at the top of the market which potentially has a long way to fall. She may not agree but your friend will likely be better off sticking to renting
That's a very interesting article actually. And the final paragraph is like a horse's head on Corbyn's pillow.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/oct/29/london-house-prices-most-overvalued-world-ubs
Of course, the obvious caveat is that Richmond is far from typical of London as a whole.
Just seen that posted by Harry Cole.
On which note
https://www.the-pool.com/life/life-honestly/2016/1/why-everyone-needs-a-f-ck-budget
Things on Jezza's budget
the PLP
winning elections
Amusing to see people who voted for Blair telling the rest of us who are and aren't real Tories.
Anyway to @Cyclefree and @FrancisUrquhart - I googled and used Wiki for Babar Ahmad and Sadiq Khan. I failed to find the smoking gun.
I read what US federal judge Janet Hall said: "Neither of these two defendants [Ahmad and another] were interested in what is commonly known as terrorism".
Khan went to see him in prison, and was bugged.
Is there a whole different side to the Ahmad story which proves he was all the things the US courts found him not to be?
Still, nevermind, it's the tories fault for picking such a bad candidate.
The race card line is a valid one to take.
That I feel he's more interested in Waitrose shoppers and Indy readers is a worry. My world doesn't revolve around green issues. His seems to.
I doubt Plato is the only Tory inclined voter to think that about Zac - as well as the rest of what's he wrote about him.
Tourists have been attacked by suspected gunmen in Cairo as they boarded a bus near the city's ancient pyramids.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/cairo-bus-attack-gunmen-on-motorbike-shoot-at-tourists-in-egyptian-capital-city-a6800386.html
Of course this assumes that Trump doesn't win the big winner-takes-all states. Basically the GOP establishment needs to whittle down the field PDQ.
The Mayor of Cologne, who made the stupid remarks, I now realise is a woman BTW.
Frankly if you cannot see these very serious issues being used to ferment a witchhunt then you need to look again. These are serious events, very serious, in their own right, there have been similar happenings in Dusseldorf apparently over the last 3 years, but the accusations of thousands of attackers and the implications of multiple rape are not at all clear
He fought as a Jihadi.
He distributed extremist material over the course of many many years.
He got sentenced to 12 years.
But yes the judge didn't think he wanted to go around harming people personally.
As for Khan. I can't remember which version of the story he likes to say is the truth these days. The one he told of Ahmad being a very close childhood friend or the one where he virtually knew nothing about him other than when called upon as his constituency MP.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/paris-police-station-shooting-man-7132984#ICID=sharebar_twitter
Wishful thinking from McBride.
The issues around Khan are that at various times he has given a number of evasive and/or inconsistent answers about his relationship with Ahmed. The issue is therefore whether he has been entirely straightforward and honest in his answers, which I think is a relevant consideration for any Mayoral candidate. One would like to think that a Mayoral candidate for a city which is at high risk of terrorism would want to be utterly straightforward about his links with someone who has been convicted as a result of his own guilty plea of terrorism related offences - even if the judge thought he was less culpable than others. Especially given how Labour is being portrayed as the terrorists' party as a result of Corbyn, McDonnell and Livingstone.
To be fair, I think Khan realises that this is a potential weakness and has tried to address it - in a speech he made shortly after the Paris attacks. But in these last few days we have learnt that saying what might seem like the bleeding obvious - terrorists are bad people and should be held responsible for their actions - is apparently a Bad Thing in Corbyn's Labour.
I do not want to give any support at all to this idea by supporting a Labour candidate, I'm afraid. Those who seek to excuse terrorists are despicable. It's up to Labour if they want to be tainted by the Corbyn-view.
At the GE the Conservatives saw a 0.4% increase in the capital; Labour a 7.1%. (1) Whilst Corbynism is abhorrent to many, that factor might be counteracted in the mayoral election by the fact the Labour leadership is very heavily Londoncentric. Livinsgstone lost by much less than Labour's gain at the 2015 GE. (2)
But mayoral elections are odd things. If you look at the 2012 mayoral elections (2) against the 2010 London GE results (3), then there seems little correlation. The same can be seen in the 2008 mayoral elections (4) and the 2005 GE (5)
The fact it is a supplementary vote election will also have an effect. Turnout will be important; it's easy to argue that whoever has the best gotv system will win.
Try as I might, I just cannot see which way it'll go.
(1): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2015_(London)
(2): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2012
(3): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010_(London)
(4): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_mayoral_election,_2008
(5): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2005_(London)
A very different kettle of fish and not too different to Saqid and ethnic quotas in terms of ideology.
Perception ? Maybe. But candidates will let their voters know the rules. So Jeb Bush can hang in there.
From the DT:
"In a statement to the court, he admitted that for a period of months after the Sept 2001 terror attacks he continued use his websites to enlist support for the Taliban from Muslims around the world. But he said that he now realised he was naive and misunderstood the relationship between the Taliban and al-Qaeda.
Ahmad’s lawyers argued that he deeply regretted his support for the Taliban and publicly condemned the 9/11 atrocities."
Well of course he would say that wouldn't he. And yes, prior to 9/11 he supported Jihad (he fought in Chechnya).
But the impression I got from the various (expanded googling) reports is that he was also sinned against.
Whether pre-9/11 to support the Taliban was a good or bad thing I am not up enough on my recent Afghan history to know.
Soon after he spoke, Paris police shot and killed a suspect who allegedly tried to break into a police station.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35250344
2000 - 34%
2004 - 37%
2008 - 45%
2012 - 38%
I'm not sure why 2008 was so much higher than the rest - maybe it was seen as closer.
Looking at 2012, Boris had 972k and Ken 890k in the first round, which shows how much differential turnout helps the Tories. The key is the candidates need to find issues to get their supporters motivated to vote. I'm not seeing much so far as they both agree about Heathrow
What the McBride piece says to me is that for next Labour leader one should be looking at the kind of figure that a machine operation would unite around. Definitely not Benn. Maybe Watson himself? Not sure.
That piece and Henry G Manson yesterday have got me thinking that Corbyn may not last that long after all. Yes, Labour has no history of ousting leaders but it has also never had a leader so extreme and inept.
I will keep a close eye on him and his pronouncements.
Thank you (and @FrancisUrquhart )
David Cameron openly mocking Hilary Benn and others for agreeing to sit in Jezza's shadow cabinet at PMQs, as they tacitly support his entire lunatic agenda.
Cue PB Tory meltdown.