If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron isn't going to be promoting anybody.
I might be unusual but i'm actually more favourably disposed to Cameron if Leave win than if Remain do.
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
I agree with your last para. Time to go back to East of Suez? While China does have an abysmal human rights record, I can't see fostering good relations and trade with them as a bad thing.
We can do that already. Our business has grown hugely in greater China over the last five years. We meet lots of Germans, French, Swedes, Dutch and US company reps in places like Taiwan, Guangdong, Shanghai and Beijing; but very few Brits.
To be fair, I think that's in part the characteristics of the UK economy.
Germany and Sweden, for instance, are much more focused on engineering - which is a strong need of China at the moment - while Britain is more service based. Additionally, many of our most successful companies are now viewed as Asian - e.g. Hutch, Jardine Matheson, Swire Pacific - rather than British per se.
Separately, we have a much stronger focus on the US, partly because of cultural affinity and language, than many of our European compatriots.
It's simplistic to say X is doing more in Y market than us and therefore we are doing badly overall. It's just a question of priorities and opportunity.
Well in the aggregate it's clearly nonsense; the UK export sector is much less EU focused and much more ROW focused than that of other large EU states.
But the point being missed here is that it could be even more so; protectionist barriers in the EU distort our trade (inefficiently) towards the EU countries.
And the regulatory cost of EU membership damages the competitiveness of UK business in the round - as exporters to the EU and ROW and as competitors to imports.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Labour voters split 59 to 13 (UK worse off post Brexit to better off) p6 of the tables, the split is 37 to 6 when asked if they would personally be worse off.
Labour voters also split 70/30 in the forced choice between free trade and free movement question, so it does look like economic factors are more important than immigration to them.
Turnout is by far the biggest issue with Labour voters. Those that do vote will mainly go for Remain, but a lot will just stay at home. And practically speaking, every non-voter is a Leave voter.
And every Labour Remain voter is a vote to prop up that that nice Tory Mr Cameron and that very nice Tory Mr Osborne......
As opposed to putting even more right wing Tories in charge. Dave v Boris; Osborne v Gove; May v Grayling etc. Either way it's a big lose.
In the other hand, a Labour voter might calculate that an unpopular Tory leader increases their chance of being ejected from office in GE2020, by which time the UK Government might have the full breadth of powers it needs to implement a fully Labour manifesto.
Although if they calculated that they are probably posting on here already...
So I count just two Labour voters for Brexit then! ;-)
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
Yes, that's struck me too as a possibility though I've not done the maths. I suspect the spin doctors on both sides have a reason not to play it up - Labour doesn't want to issue total panic warnings, Tories want to be able to say they did far better than expected.
Certainly the Sunday Times is in full cry "Save Labour by not voting for them" (their pro-Labour concern is touching ) - they argue on one page that electing Khan won't help Corbyn, and in the editorial that it will.
I'm mostly offline at the moment due to private preoccupations (not least a fun Thursday with two extractions and five dental implants in a half-day session), so apologies for absence from the field of battle. My personal view is that Livingstone's political retirement to be a Clarkson-style shock jock/columnist is overdue, and that there are miscellaneous less prominent characters who need to be chucked out, but the idea that Corbyn can instantly expel people ignores the legal process and his actual comments are perfectly reasonable. A portion of the storm is actually about trying to get rid of Corbyn.
Livingstone was a slightly embarrassing old has been before Corbyn was elected with no obvious role in the party. Corbyn made him very important again although that has cooled since January or so. Forcing him out the party is undoubtedly a vicarious attack on Corbyn who has very few natural supporters anywhere near the top of the party. And with one of them being McDonnell bad results will make him vulnerable.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
What you're missing is that the gains / losses of the 2012 local elections were based upon the change since the 2008 local elections:
I'm thinking of Turkey getting salami slices of access - all forced through as necessarily. Then it becoming impossible to undo. They've already got a bunch without being a member either.
Quite.
With another summer of migrant movement Turkey will have 4m penned up inside it's borders possibly 5m, as time goes on its negotiating hand gets stronger and stronger.
There is a feeling in German that Turkey is about to export its Kurdish 'problem' to Germany as soon as they get visa free travel, because, the thing about a Schengen Visa, often trumpeted about around here, is it is far from automatic, you need a job back home (employers reference) and three years of bank statements for one thing to even make the application. Visa free travel means ANYONE with Turkish citizenship can come to the EU, lots of which (5m kurds) are not welcome in Turkey, and German legal opinion is that they would have a strong claim for asylum on the basis of persecution if they reach the EU.
The choice could come down to 4m economic migrants, or 4m kurdish asylum seekers.
Turkey is a very, very big black hole. Essentially, Turkey = all arabs, rich and poor, terrorist or not, homophobic or...actually homophobic, sexist etc. And shit coffee. Europe will be engulfed by Arabs. A completely stupid thing top do, to let in the people that most hate our way of life.
Turks are not arabs.
Good point, I was too generic. Their borders are porous and many Arab types live there. I'm starting to sound like a Labour politician now...what I mean is...our life..their life, different strokes/folks
Kurds are not arabs either, and are amongst the most secular of muslim peoples.
Too much hanging out with Zac can blur the lines..
Yesterday there was a story doing the rounds about Cameron sounding out the EU opponents in the Tory party about whether shifting/knifing Osborne would save the PM's job.
Presumably he wouldn't be doing that if he thought the referendum was in the bag.
Good. If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
UK Plc will do well and we'll wonder what all the fuss was about within a few years.
O/T I was giving my flat mate a lift to Wood Green yesterday evening. Driving through Bounds Green I saw a Lib Dem yard sign. First sign I have seen in yonks.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron isn't going to be promoting anybody.
I might be unusual but i'm actually more favourably disposed to Cameron if Leave win than if Remain do.
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
Farage said on Marr if Leave he expects a new PM and UKIP will stay to push for completion of the exit process
We are told that Dave reads this site, well Dave read the link and get busy.
interesting exchange in the comments too
"Andrea Collins Armaros • 11 hours ago Interestingly our polling station is the Gollancz Hall, next to the synagogue. I was going to abstain but think I will just have to vote Conservative. For the first time ever 15 • Reply•Share › Avatar Jurek Molnar Andrea Collins • 10 hours ago It may not comforting you, but you are not the only one who has to make such hard decisions. 6 • Reply•Share › Avatar Andrea Collins Jurek Molnar • 10 hours ago Thank you Jurek. It won't make mush difference - mine is a safe Labour Ward - but it is a protest. 3 • Reply•Share › Avatar Armaros Andrea Collins • 9 hours ago Think about it this way:
This is not the Labour Party anymore (or temporarily) .
This is the "Evil Captain Kirk" with an alien parasite having conquered his brain.
Your party suffered a coup by the communists within it, whom it should have purged earlier to save itself from just this."
It concerns me that pensioners who are more disposed to xenophobia (casual racism) are going to vote in droves and it will be immigration that sees leave home.
Are you defining xenophobia as "casual racism"? I would define it very differently and closer to the etymology: fear and unease in respect of newcomer outsiders who have a different and foreign culture. That does not make someone a racist.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
Britain is more service based. Additionally, many of our most successful companies are now viewed as Asian - e.g. Hutch, Jardine Matheson, Swire Pacific - rather than British per se.
At least Swire is still run by Brits, Hutchison Whampoa, not so much
Even that is a swing of 4.5% from 2012. According to the Wiki page there should be a lot more LG elections than you listed unless some have got out of sync.
Overall your list makes it clear that Thursday will be the most important election day until the next GE. And Labour really aren't in a good place. There has to be a real chance that by the referendum Labour will be embroiled in another leadership election. Really not sure how that will play.
If Khan wins on Friday that will instantly take the focus away from the LG elections and Corbyn will be safe
That may or may not be so, but I'm engaging more with the argument that economic issues will determine the outcome of this Referendum. I'm not convinced that they will (they'll be an important factor, of course). But, I think there's a grid of issues that will influence how people vote.
If Leave could convince people that Brexit would make them better off, then they'd win this Referendum handily, given the leads they enjoy on the NHS, immigration, and sovereignty. But, I don't think they have to do that. They only need to convince people it would make little difference to them financially.
The trouble is its very difficult to conclusively prove there's no financial risk to leaving. As a homeowner with a young family there's just no way it's worth taking the chance everything will turn out OK. Im no lover of what the EU stands for but I'm assuming Cameron has a reason for backing stay.
It concerns me that pensioners who are more disposed to xenophobia (casual racism) are going to vote in droves and it will be immigration that sees leave home. Part of the problem of successive governments pandering to oaps and sheltering them from the worst effects of recession/cutbacks etc.
It seems sad that a group who will be largely unaffected by Brexit or otherwise will have such an influence. Particularly as the young who will feel any repercussions are predominantly in favour of staying.
I'm a homeowner (well, I occupy a home with a big mortgage, so I guess the bank really owns it) and have a young family.
But in NW8 .... Oh the shame !! ....
No shame. I always fancied living out of town
Never be late in NW8. But you will, there's lousy parking in NW8.
Ultimately increasing the value of the company benefits the UK more than anything else: increased remittances will lead to increased capital formation and investment and/or personal expenditure. Meanwhile, labour resources will be allocated to more productive sectors in the UK economic base.
Of course there will be an element of personal disruption, but I have no doubt that your employee base is highly talented and will be in a position to find attractive work with relative ease.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
It's correct if you allow the assumption that there are "more productive sectors in the UK" where skilled employees can find jobs. If only we hadn't had 37 years of governments ideologically opposed to taking any responsibility for building that kind of economy it would all be peachy.
"productive" was arguably too technical a term - I wasn't really referring to productivity.
However, there must by definition be some segments where we have a competitive advantage as there are people in private sector employment in the country
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
The problem with BHS is that the owners were making INdecent money while it was commercially UNsuccessful.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
Ultimately increasing the value of the company benefits the UK more than anything else: increased remittances will lead to increased capital formation and investment and/or personal expenditure. Meanwhile, labour resources will be allocated to more productive sectors in the UK economic base.
Of course there will be an element of personal disruption, but I have no doubt that your employee base is highly talented and will be in a position to find attractive work with relative ease.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
What happened in Wales and the North was merely an element of personal disruption.
If you are talking about the decline of heavy industry then it was a sad inevitability. Where successive governments failed was in not assisting effectively enough in retooling the economy and, instead, supporting meager lifestyles through handouts.
If leave wants to win they have to drum home that eventually Turkey is going to join- because if we ote to remain we won't get this vote for atleast another generation.
Also Cameron et al are Turkeys biggest supporters.
But we can then follow the lead of the SNP and redefine a generation to something like we want it to mean (ie 2 decent polls for out).
I think this thread is important, but its advise to Leave (as if 'Leave' really exists in any sentient form that can be advised), is wrong imo.
The opposite of Brexit costing you money isn't Brexit making you money, it's Bremain costing you money. The antidote to dire warnings about your income should we vote to Leave, is therefore dire warnings about your income should we vote to remain.
The Vote Leave campaign have been utterly useless in this, as they have been in everything else.
As I've said before, this campaign is Remain's to win or lose. This thread is quite a powerful argument that they're winning. However, we'll see if they manage to get the turn out they need.
The result of the exit poll following @7oaksChamber EU debate as follows 53% OUT , 33% IN, 14% undecided pic.twitter.com/BqyouJkBE5 11:59am - 30 Apr 16
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
What you're missing is that the gains / losses of the 2012 local elections were based upon the change since the 2008 local elections:
So the swing in 2012 was 13% to Labour not the 2.5% you thought.
Right, I am not sure what the swing figures on the Wiki page for 2011 refer to but it is clearly not 2008. Possibly the 2010 election. So this will be a much smaller swing with fewer Labour losses. Still looks bad though.
It is a thought that in 2011 the Lib Dems were still on 16%. They could be in for another bad night.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Labour voters split 59 to 13 (UK worse off post Brexit to better off) p6 of the tables, the split is 37 to 6 when asked if they would personally be worse off.
Labour voters also split 70/30 in the forced choice between free trade and free movement question, so it does look like economic factors are more important than immigration to them.
Turnout is by far the biggest issue with Labour voters. Those that do vote will mainly go for Remain, but a lot will just stay at home. And practically speaking, every non-voter is a Leave voter.
And every Labour Remain voter is a vote to prop up that that nice Tory Mr Cameron and that very nice Tory Mr Osborne......
I know. We should be propping up IDS GOVE JOHNSON FARAGE PATEL and GRAYLING.
(Did you get to see Eye in the Sky yet)
Roger, you rather miss the point that sitting out the Referendum watching the telly instead means they don't have to take sides from (what they would no doubt consider) two equally unappealing lists of competing clowns. But Labour voters sitting it out is a huge boon for Leave.
Alternatively, we could just see the more Leave-orientated Tories have their poll numbers rise and the more Leave-orientated yet self-immolating Labour have their poll numbers tank to give an active boost to Leave.
(And life is a bit hectic at the moment, so still not seen Eye in the Sky. Should be coming to the local mini-cinema screens in the next few days though...)
Ah, she's going with the classic, 'we've done good things in the past, therefore it's impossible for us to do bad now' approach. Diane, people and groups may be mostly good and do good, but that doesn't mean there cannot be problems now where they do bad.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron isn't going to be promoting anybody.
I might be unusual but i'm actually more favourably disposed to Cameron if Leave win than if Remain do.
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
Farage said on Marr if Leave he expects a new PM and UKIP will stay to push for completion of the exit process
Ultimately increasing the value of the company benefits the UK more than anything else: increased remittances will lead to increased capital formation and investment and/or personal expenditure. Meanwhile, labour resources will be allocated to more productive sectors in the UK economic base.
Of course there will be an element of personal disruption, but I have no doubt that your employee base is highly talented and will be in a position to find attractive work with relative ease.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
What happened in Wales and the North was merely an element of personal disruption.
If you are talking about the decline of heavy industry then it was a sad inevitability. Where successive governments failed was in not assisting effectively enough in retooling the economy and, instead, supporting meager lifestyles through handouts.
It wasn't inevitable in North Rhine-Westphalia... Maybe there were geographic reasons (typo corrected from regions!). But the strong-pound policy from the 80s to 2007 helped finance and hurt industry. There's no two ways about it.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
But they didn't invest in giving it a purpose. Personally I thought their 'home' stuff was always better than their God-awful polyester jumpers. I'd have tried to make them more about 'British -Home- Stores' and limited the clothes stuff to a few suitable concessions. Not sure it would have worked though. Could have been money down the drain.
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
I agree with your last para. Time to go back to East of Suez? While China does have an abysmal human rights record, I can't see fostering good relations and trade with them as a bad thing.
We can do that already. Our business has grown hugely in greater China over the last five years. We meet lots of Germans, French, Swedes, Dutch and US company reps in places like Taiwan, Guangdong, Shanghai and Beijing; but very few Brits.
To be fair, I think that's in part the characteristics of the UK economy.
Germany and Sweden, for instance, are much more focused on engineering - which is a strong need of China at the moment - while Britain is more service based. Additionally, many of our most successful companies are now viewed as Asian - e.g. Hutch, Jardine Matheson, Swire Pacific - rather than British per se.
Separately, we have a much stronger focus on the US, partly because of cultural affinity and language, than many of our European compatriots.
It's simplistic to say X is doing more in Y market than us and therefore we are doing badly overall. It's just a question of priorities and opportunity.
Well in the aggregate it's clearly nonsense; the UK export sector is much less EU focused and much more ROW focused than that of other large EU states.
But the point being missed here is that it could be even more so; protectionist barriers in the EU distort our trade (inefficiently) towards the EU countries.
And the regulatory cost of EU membership damages the competitiveness of UK business in the round - as exporters to the EU and ROW and as competitors to imports.
What regulatory costs are holding us back?
We can export to the world while retaining full, unfettered access to the single market. Giving that up for nothing in return - and there is absolutely nothing right now - makes no sense to me whatsoever.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
I think this is true. I work off the assumption that anyone remaining in Labour's vote bank is not inclined to prefer Boris or Nigel to Dave. Re council elections I also think the Lib Dems may recover in some areas of London now it is clear that even some of the nice new Labour people shared hateful posts on Facebook.
Ah, she's going with the classic, 'we've done good things in the past, therefore it's impossible for us to do bad now' approach. Diane, people and groups may be mostly good and do good, but that doesn't mean there cannot be problems now where they do bad.
The odd Labour loyalist commentator seems to have popped up saying Labour's problems with antisemitism can't be too bad, since their last leader was Jewish.
That seems willful blindness to me: have left-wingers ever been dissuaded from accusing some within the Tory party of holding backwards views about women - even outright misogyny - just because Maggie was a woman? As far as I can see, no they haven't, and logically they've been quite correct to.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
When did any Brits last buy their home from British Home Stores?
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The reason why Labour gained 800+ seats in 2012 was that there was a 13% Con->Lab swing since they had been previously contested in 2008.
Labour should lose approximately 60 councillors for every 1% swing there is to the Conservatives since 2012.
So if the Conservatives and Labour are approximately level in the national equivalent vote then Labour will lose 150-200 councillors.
Ultimately increasing the value of the company benefits the UK more than anything else: increased remittances will lead to increased capital formation and investment and/or personal expenditure. Meanwhile, labour resources will be allocated to more productive sectors in the UK economic base.
Of course there will be an element of personal disruption, but I have no doubt that your employee base is highly talented and will be in a position to find attractive work with relative ease.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
It's correct if you allow the assumption that there are "more productive sectors in the UK" where skilled employees can find jobs. If only we hadn't had 37 years of governments ideologically opposed to taking any responsibility for building that kind of economy it would all be peachy.
"productive" was arguably too technical a term - I wasn't really referring to productivity.
However, there must by definition be some segments where we have a competitive advantage as there are people in private sector employment in the country
True, but it's not exactly binary - we can compete well enough at a certain wage level, but then so can the Far East and India at far lower wage levels. It's not much comfort to be reassured you can find work, but potentially at a declining real wage level due to short term capital returns being prioritised over investment and long term value building. (As I think you are agreeing in relation to heavy industry and investment in reply to @epg)
She would know a smear if she saw one, you'd hope, given her use of them.
Labour, and probably others, has a problem with anti semitism is no smear, there is evidence to support it and the question is how much if one. Labour as a whole is antisemitic would count as a smear, as it is clearly false.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
It only had no purpose because the owners were bleeding it dry , no investment only removing capital and then passed to a vulture to pick the bones and leave 11000 on the dole and the pension bill for 21000 to the UK tax payers.
Alternatively, we could just see the more Leave-orientated Tories have their poll numbers rise and the more Remain-orientated yet self-immolating Labour have their poll numbers tank to give an active boost to Leave.
Mr. kle4, it was said here the other day Khan was using the race card to avoid criticism of sharing platforms (or hiring ) dubious persons, and Nicky Morgan yesterday played the sexism card when asked a question about whether she or a deputy minister ran her department.
No need to trouble oneself with arguments or defending oneself when you can throw ism at the questioner.
I agree with your last para. Time to go back to East of Suez? While China does have an abysmal human rights record, I can't see fostering good relations and trade with them as a bad thing.
We can do that already. Our business has grown hugely in greater China over the last five years. We meet lots of Germans, French, Swedes, Dutch and US company reps in places like Taiwan, Guangdong, Shanghai and Beijing; but very few Brits.
To be fair, I think that's in part the characteristics of the UK economy.
Germany and Sweden, for instance, are much more focused on engineering - which is a strong need of China at the moment - while Britain is more service based. Additionally, many of our most successful companies are now viewed as Asian - e.g. Hutch, Jardine Matheson, Swire Pacific - rather than British per se.
Separately, we have a much stronger focus on the US, partly because of cultural affinity and language, than many of our European compatriots.
It's simplistic to say X is doing more in Y market than us and therefore we are doing badly overall. It's just a question of priorities and opportunity.
Businesses in the services industries - and as a publisher and conference company we are one such, I guess - are much more transportable than others. Thus, as we expand in Asia and the US that's where we'll hire and where our employees will pay tax, buy stuff etc. We need a European market to justify similar expansion in our London office. Right now, the single market allows us to put on an event in Barcelona as easily as in London. If that changes - if it takes more time and costs more - we'll do fewer. But we may well do more elsewhere.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
Ah, she's going with the classic, 'we've done good things in the past, therefore it's impossible for us to do bad now' approach. Diane, people and groups may be mostly good and do good, but that doesn't mean there cannot be problems now where they do bad.
Abbott's main argument on anti-semites was that anti-semitism started way back in the19th century. Her ignorance on the subject is lamentable. Anti-semitism started in the Roman empire and increased ten fold with the conversion of Constantine and even more so with the consolidation of Catholicism. It was rampant throughout the medieval period in Europe and reached a peek with the Expulsion of the Jews from England by Edward I.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Quite - what an interesting thread that would be.
Those GE2015 Labour voters rejected Cameron and Osborne and the economic argument did not sway them. It did sway others, but that is not the electoral group that is in play. If voters can choose Labour at GE2015 after all the economic arguments, why would the economic argument sway those voters in 2016? It is of course difficult for those who are Cameron Conservatives, or Labour metrosexuals or Lib Dems to understand. This is about Labour voters outside London. Also, voters that are not young.
In this poll Lab voters were 68% absolutely certain to vote, compared to 73% of kippers. The highest certainty to vote was in the London and Scotland. 60% of Remainers and 62% of Leavers were absolutely certain to vote.
The tables do not back up your assertions.
Young voters overstate their intention to vote. It is part of their attitude to such matters. Does anyone on here seriously believe that UKIP voters will only have a turnout 5% higher than Labour ......... Kippers are the most determined of any group to vote. Just ask them on the doorstep.
Kippers are even more working class than Labour and working-class voters vote less often
Not true for kippers. Look at the european elections when turnout plummets, UKIP comes out on top. I know of Conservative activists that will typically agree to deliver on average 100 leaflets. The kipper activists will do many many times that number.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
What you're missing is that the gains / losses of the 2012 local elections were based upon the change since the 2008 local elections:
So the swing in 2012 was 13% to Labour not the 2.5% you thought.
Right, I am not sure what the swing figures on the Wiki page for 2011 refer to but it is clearly not 2008. Possibly the 2010 election. So this will be a much smaller swing with fewer Labour losses. Still looks bad though.
It is a thought that in 2011 the Lib Dems were still on 16%. They could be in for another bad night.
The 2012 wikipedia page refers to the last election as 2011.
The national equivalent vote numbers it gives for 2011 are wrong in any case - they should be Con 38 Lab 37 not Lab 37 Con 35.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Quite - what an interesting thread that would be.
Those GE2015 Labour voters rejected Cameron and Osborne and the economic argument did not sway them. It did sway others, but that is not the electoral group that is in play. If voters can choose Labour at GE2015 after all the economic arguments, why would the economic argument sway those voters in 2016? It is of course difficult for those who are Cameron Conservatives, or Labour metrosexuals or Lib Dems to understand. This is about Labour voters outside London. Also, voters that are not young.
In this poll Lab voters were 68% absolutely certain to vote, compared to 73% of kippers. The highest certainty to vote was in the London and Scotland. 60% of Remainers and 62% of Leavers were absolutely certain to vote.
The tables do not back up your assertions.
Young voters overstate their intention to vote. It is part of their attitude to such matters. Does anyone on here seriously believe that UKIP voters will only have a turnout 5% higher than Labour ......... Kippers are the most determined of any group to vote. Just ask them on the doorstep.
Kippers are even more working class than Labour and working-class voters vote less often
Not true for kippers. Look at the european elections when turnout plummets, UKIP comes out on top. I know of Conservative activists that will typically agree to deliver on average 100 leaflets. The kipper activists will do many many times that number.
That is activists not voters and there are fewer of them so they have to do more, at the european elections many Tory voters 'lend' their vote to UKIP but vote Tory at the general election
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
The problem with BHS is that the owners were making INdecent money while it was commercially UNsuccessful.
Amusingly the owner of BHS Tina Green the wife of Sir Philip has a daughter called 'Stasha'
The Labour party (as well as other parties to a greater or lesser degree) does have this problem and needs to sort it out fast.
PS - I am not a great fan of Diane - she's not the brightest pea in the pod...
Good smear there. If you can't defend your own parties abhorrent views then make sure the other parties are included?
As we were all told to "feck off" yesterday by you may I now suggest you do the same and sort out your own party before tarring the rest of us moderate and civilised people with your increasing rabid rants and your parties extreme racist views.
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
Did you see the Israeli ambassador on Marr? Ouch. And the letter from the Israeli Labour leader? Treble ouch. The killer point was - if you wouldn't share a platform with anti-black or anti-gay campaigners - why would you share one with anti-Semites?
Have to say, John Ashworth isn't at all convincing on BBC or Sky re anti-Semitism. He looks like a political smoothy in a sharp suit wheeled out for the cameras. He's cutting no ice with me.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron isn't going to be promoting anybody.
I might be unusual but i'm actually more favourably disposed to Cameron if Leave win than if Remain do.
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
Farage said on Marr if Leave he expects a new PM and UKIP will stay to push for completion of the exit process
Farage can say what he likes.
UKIP may not even have 1 MP after a June 23rd LEAVE vote.
The Labour party (as well as other parties to a greater or lesser degree) does have this problem and needs to sort it out fast.
PS - I am not a great fan of Diane - she's not the brightest pea in the pod...
Coming in the week of the Hillsborough inquest, there are certain striking similarities between the mindsets of some in or near the Labour leadership, and South Yorkshire Police.
Them losing can only be a good thing for everyone involved (even Labour).
Certainly will be good for the NHS in Wales
Funny, in a place like Wales where Labour really is trashing the NHS the usual suspects don't seem that bothered about the state of the NHS.
Some parts of the NHS apparently matter more than others, like racism in today's Labour Party.
Didn't Labour set out to weaponise the NHS which we all know they have done for years. The NHS only matters if they are not in charge. It fails catastrophically when they are despite their increasingly hysterical screams about xxx days/ hours/ minutes to save the NHS from the Tories.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
What you're missing is that the gains / losses of the 2012 local elections were based upon the change since the 2008 local elections:
So the swing in 2012 was 13% to Labour not the 2.5% you thought.
Right, I am not sure what the swing figures on the Wiki page for 2011 refer to but it is clearly not 2008. Possibly the 2010 election. So this will be a much smaller swing with fewer Labour losses. Still looks bad though.
It is a thought that in 2011 the Lib Dems were still on 16%. They could be in for another bad night.
Apart from in Scotland, won't 2012 be the baseline?
If there is a Brexit, Cameron promotes the sensible Leavers, ditches Osborne, and stays as PM we might get both a sensible exit strategy and retain a noted election winner for the Party.
If there is a Brexit, Cameron isn't going to be promoting anybody.
I might be unusual but i'm actually more favourably disposed to Cameron if Leave win than if Remain do.
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
Farage said on Marr if Leave he expects a new PM and UKIP will stay to push for completion of the exit process
Farage can say what he likes.
UKIP may not even have 1 MP after a June 23rd LEAVE vote.
Or if a narrow Remain they could start cleaning up in by-elections, if a Leave vote Farage has already said they will become more of a pressure group than a political party anyway
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
Did you see the Israeli ambassador on Marr? Ouch. And the letter from the Israeli Labour leader? Treble ouch. The killer point was - if you wouldn't share a platform with anti-black or anti-gay campaigners - why would you share one with anti-Semites?
No missed that and it sounds bad but well deserved.
Some are more equal than others of course with Labour. Hodge said this morning on Murnaghan that the Labour Party are founded on anti racism and supports equality and you know I actually believe her sincerity on this. However it only works if you are not a Jew or anyone that has a different view to you in which case you get threatened with violence. ( John Mann reports abuse and threats of violence to police mentioned up thread)
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
Ultimately increasing the value of the company benefits the UK more than anything else: increased remittances will lead to increased capital formation and investment and/or personal expenditure. Meanwhile, labour resources will be allocated to more productive sectors in the UK economic base.
Of course there will be an element of personal disruption, but I have no doubt that your employee base is highly talented and will be in a position to find attractive work with relative ease.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
It's correct if you allow the assumption that there are "more productive sectors in the UK" where skilled employees can find jobs. If only we hadn't had 37 years of governments ideologically opposed to taking any responsibility for building that kind of economy it would all be peachy.
"productive" was arguably too technical a term - I wasn't really referring to productivity.
However, there must by definition be some segments where we have a competitive advantage as there are people in private sector employment in the country
True, but it's not exactly binary - we can compete well enough at a certain wage level, but then so can the Far East and India at far lower wage levels. It's not much comfort to be reassured you can find work, but potentially at a declining real wage level due to short term capital returns being prioritised over investment and long term value building. (As I think you are agreeing in relation to heavy industry and investment in reply to @epg)
When we vote Leave we will be voting to reduce our current access to the single market. There are no compensatory trading arrangements in place. These may appear in the coming years, they may not. In the meantime, companies will still have to function. And a lot of them will wait and see. That is not going to be good news for the wider UK economy. So, if we are going to Leave it's best done on the grounds of reducing immigration and regaining some sovereignty - that may make the undoubted economic headwinds we'll face more palatable.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
No the key focus group finding was that Labour voters did not want to give Cameron a kicking if it saw him replaced by a rightwing Brexiteer who was even worse!
The Labour party (as well as other parties to a greater or lesser degree) does have this problem and needs to sort it out fast.
PS - I am not a great fan of Diane - she's not the brightest pea in the pod...
Good smear there. If you can't defend your own parties abhorrent views then make sure the other parties are included?
As we were all told to "feck off" yesterday by you may I now suggest you do the same and sort out your own party before tarring the rest of us moderate and civilised people with your increasing rabid rants and your parties extreme racist views.
Oh dear! Have I touched a nerve my friend?
With a name like Moses, you should rise above all this surely? Anyway, I will continue to post here - not having the likes of you drive me off...
For the record I told the right-wing nutters who want to meddle with our BBC to f*ck off. I think that sentiment resonates with the great British public.
"If Leave wants to win they need to show that Brexit is the better option for the economy and the financial wellbeing of voters."
This analysis is wrong.
"We’ve been here before. We see the headline voting intention figures showing it neck and neck, yet the supplementaries on the economy show one side extending their clear lead further. (...) (T)his referendum campaign, with the supplementaries showing more and more voters saying Brexit would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their personal financial situation, with Remain being the best option, is all very reminiscent of the polling we saw at the 2015 general election, the Tories and Labour tied but the Tories significantly ahead on the economy."
The analogy doesn't hold. Try applying it to the EU election of 2014, won by UKIP. What did people think of UKIP's politics where "jobs" were concerned"? Sorry. Wrong question.
This isn't a general election. Imagine a general election. Then imagine moving towards what an EU election is like. Now imagine moving further on in the same direction. Eventually you will get to what this referendum is like.
The result of the EU referendum like the general election will have an impact on the economy, jobs, and the economic wellbeing of voters.
Important as the European elections are, they will never have an impact on the economy, jobs, and the economic wellbeing of voters in the same way.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
So the idea is hopeful but baseless speculation.
It doesn't as yet merit the incessant repetition the idea is getting.
LOL, I have read some bollox in my time but that management speak is just. Is BHS a good example of your theory, boss makes fortune , workers in UK all dumped hey tehy will get highly paid jobs no problem. Only an obscenely rich Tory could come out with such fantasy.
BHS was a shop without a commercial purpose. Ultimately companies without a purpose will only last so long. But yes, while it was commercially successful, the owners made decent money.
When did any Brits last buy their home from British Home Stores?
I think @Charles bought his NW8 mobile home in a fire sale at BHS last week .... he should have waited apparently BHS are throwing in the Labour party this week with every tent sold.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
It's hard to think that this row won't hurt Labour next week, but the Conservatives won't finish 20% clear of Labour, which they'd need to, to regain all the seats they lost to Labour in 2012. But, any lead for the governing party over the Opposition, in terms of NEV, is bad news for the Opposition.
Ken appears to handed over his shovel to Diane Abbott, - keep on digging loopy.
Diane was really very grumpy and rattled. I haven't seen her like that in a very long time. McDonnell isn't getting anywhere near this. He's marked his territory by saying they all have to be thrown out. I'm guessing he's hoping all of Jezza's and Diane's Muslim/anti-Semite mates are defenestrated - leaving his intact ... ready for a leadership takeover.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
What you're missing is that the gains / losses of the 2012 local elections were based upon the change since the 2008 local elections:
So the swing in 2012 was 13% to Labour not the 2.5% you thought.
Right, I am not sure what the swing figures on the Wiki page for 2011 refer to but it is clearly not 2008. Possibly the 2010 election. So this will be a much smaller swing with fewer Labour losses. Still looks bad though.
It is a thought that in 2011 the Lib Dems were still on 16%. They could be in for another bad night.
Apart from in Scotland, won't 2012 be the baseline?
Sorry, according to Wiki the Lib Dem vote in 2012 was 16%. As Another_Richard has pointed out Wales does not have the LG elections either so there are fewer seats in play but it does seem to me that the Lib Dems are very likely to continue their trend of losing half to a third of all the seats they have up for grabs.
If he is right with his estimate of 60 seats a per cent then 200 losses looks very likely with more possible depending on whether or not the Tories are ahead in the popular vote or not. I suspect Labour are going to seriously struggle with differential turnout with some seriously demotivated supporters.
OT If anyone is a fan of the dark arts of political persuasion practiced by Australian Lynton Crosby they'll be delighted to know that the new Israeli ambassador to the Uk is none other than Mark Regev. This former Australian in his work as head of the Israeli propaganda ministry during the Gaza conflict and beyond makes Crosby seem like a first year amateur.
Tony Blair & Gordon Brown both recognised that Diane Abbott was unfit to hold any Ministerial Office. Her performance today, reinforces their judgement.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Quite - what an interesting thread that would be.
Those GE2015 Labour voters rejected Cameron and Osborne and the economic argument did not sway them. It did sway others, but that is not the electoral group that is in play. If voters can choose Labour at GE2015 after all the economic arguments, why would the economic argument sway those voters in 2016? It is of course difficult for those who are Cameron Conservatives, or Labour metrosexuals or Lib Dems to understand. This is about Labour voters outside London. Also, voters that are not young.
In this poll Lab voters were 68% absolutely certain to vote, compared to 73% of kippers. The highest certainty to vote was in the London and Scotland. 60% of Remainers and 62% of Leavers were absolutely certain to vote.
The tables do not back up your assertions.
Young voters overstate their intention to vote. It is part of their attitude to such matters. Does anyone on here seriously believe that UKIP voters will only have a turnout 5% higher than Labour ......... Kippers are the most determined of any group to vote. Just ask them on the doorstep.
Kippers are even more working class than Labour and working-class voters vote less often
Not true for kippers. Look at the european elections when turnout plummets, UKIP comes out on top. I know of Conservative activists that will typically agree to deliver on average 100 leaflets. The kipper activists will do many many times that number.
We shouldn't assume that the UKIP vote at a GE is the same as that at an EP election. UKIP poll plenty of lent support at the Europeans; it's not simply GE voting with low-motivation voters stripped out.
The demographic breakdown between the two elections will differ. Not that that necessarily means that Labour's vote isn't more working class in either or both (I don't know); just that we shouldn't assume that if it is for one (or for that matter, if it isn't), then that will read across to the other.
John Mann Apparently some people have seen no Labour Party anti Semitism ever. I will publish crap I have, with names, with no hold barred . Lots.
I'm not sure John Mann is going to come out of this smelling of roses. Why would you sit on a pile of "crap", knowing the names of these Labour Party anti-Semites and having enough to go after them, when his previous silence just gave a refuge in Labour to these people? Were you just embarrassed to be sharing a party with them, Mr Mann?
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
Did you see the Israeli ambassador on Marr? Ouch. And the letter from the Israeli Labour leader? Treble ouch. The killer point was - if you wouldn't share a platform with anti-black or anti-gay campaigners - why would you share one with anti-Semites?
No missed that and it sounds bad but well deserved.
Some are more equal than others of course with Labour. Hodge said this morning on Murnaghan that the Labour Party are founded on anti racism and supports equality and you know I actually believe her sincerity on this. However it only works if you are not a Jew or anyone that has a different view to you in which case you get threatened with violence. ( John Mann reports abuse and threats of violence to police mentioned up thread)
Comments
Cameron is a Conservative by instinct, and conservative by temperament: he doesn't have particularly strong views on anything policy-wise and has done complete volte-faces in the past, and indeed, rather shamelessly. Once the status quo has changed he will adjust to that new status quo.
If by staying he reassures both the public, and the markets, and allows a good team to get on with the job of Brexit, prior to standing down in 2018-2019; I'm all for it.
But the point being missed here is that it could be even more so; protectionist barriers in the EU distort our trade (inefficiently) towards the EU countries.
And the regulatory cost of EU membership damages the competitiveness of UK business in the round - as exporters to the EU and ROW and as competitors to imports.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2008
2008
Con 44
Lab 24
2012
Lab 38 +14
Con 31 -13
So the swing in 2012 was 13% to Labour not the 2.5% you thought.
Driving through Bounds Green I saw a Lib Dem yard sign.
First sign I have seen in yonks.
Not some weird fantasy.
We are told that Dave reads this site, well Dave read the link and get busy.
interesting exchange in the comments too
"Andrea Collins Armaros • 11 hours ago
Interestingly our polling station is the Gollancz Hall, next to the synagogue. I was going to abstain but think I will just have to vote Conservative. For the first time ever
15 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Jurek Molnar Andrea Collins • 10 hours ago
It may not comforting you, but you are not the only one who has to make such hard decisions.
6 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Andrea Collins Jurek Molnar • 10 hours ago
Thank you Jurek. It won't make mush difference - mine is a safe Labour Ward - but it is a protest.
3 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Armaros Andrea Collins • 9 hours ago
Think about it this way:
This is not the Labour Party anymore (or temporarily) .
This is the "Evil Captain Kirk" with an alien parasite having conquered his brain.
Your party suffered a coup by the communists within it, whom it should have purged earlier to save itself from just this."
It is all fisticuffs in Parliament = very 17th Century. That two-sword length's tradition is perhaps one they will need to adopt in Brussels. I spotted the Lesbian and Transgender in that list.
Could you help me with the others?
However, there must by definition be some segments where we have a competitive advantage as there are people in private sector employment in the country
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The opposite of Brexit costing you money isn't Brexit making you money, it's Bremain costing you money. The antidote to dire warnings about your income should we vote to Leave, is therefore dire warnings about your income should we vote to remain.
The Vote Leave campaign have been utterly useless in this, as they have been in everything else.
As I've said before, this campaign is Remain's to win or lose. This thread is quite a powerful argument that they're winning. However, we'll see if they manage to get the turn out they need.
Paul Andrews@vanillaweb
The result of the exit poll following @7oaksChamber EU debate as follows 53% OUT , 33% IN, 14% undecided pic.twitter.com/BqyouJkBE5
11:59am - 30 Apr 16
It is a thought that in 2011 the Lib Dems were still on 16%. They could be in for another bad night.
Alternatively, we could just see the more Leave-orientated Tories have their poll numbers rise and the more Leave-orientated yet self-immolating Labour have their poll numbers tank to give an active boost to Leave.
(And life is a bit hectic at the moment, so still not seen Eye in the Sky. Should be coming to the local mini-cinema screens in the next few days though...)
Diane, people and groups may be mostly good and do good, but that doesn't mean there cannot be problems now where they do bad.
Maybe there were geographic reasons (typo corrected from regions!). But the strong-pound policy from the 80s to 2007 helped finance and hurt industry. There's no two ways about it.
Labour's antisemitism crisis: Israel fights back
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
We can export to the world while retaining full, unfettered access to the single market. Giving that up for nothing in return - and there is absolutely nothing right now - makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Re council elections I also think the Lib Dems may recover in some areas of London now it is clear that even some of the nice new Labour people shared hateful posts on Facebook.
PS - I am not a great fan of Diane - she's not the brightest pea in the pod...
The odd Labour loyalist commentator seems to have popped up saying Labour's problems with antisemitism can't be too bad, since their last leader was Jewish.
That seems willful blindness to me: have left-wingers ever been dissuaded from accusing some within the Tory party of holding backwards views about women - even outright misogyny - just because Maggie was a woman? As far as I can see, no they haven't, and logically they've been quite correct to.
Labour should lose approximately 60 councillors for every 1% swing there is to the Conservatives since 2012.
So if the Conservatives and Labour are approximately level in the national equivalent vote then Labour will lose 150-200 councillors.
Labour, and probably others, has a problem with anti semitism is no smear, there is evidence to support it and the question is how much if one. Labour as a whole is antisemitic would count as a smear, as it is clearly false.
Funny, in a place like Wales where Labour really is trashing the NHS the usual suspects don't seem that bothered about the state of the NHS.
Some parts of the NHS apparently matter more than others, like racism in today's Labour Party.
Alternatively, we could just see the more Leave-orientated Tories have their poll numbers rise and the more Remain-orientated yet self-immolating Labour have their poll numbers tank to give an active boost to Leave.
No need to trouble oneself with arguments or defending oneself when you can throw ism at the questioner.
*sighs*
Apparently some people have seen no Labour Party anti Semitism ever. I will publish crap I have, with names, with no hold barred . Lots.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
The national equivalent vote numbers it gives for 2011 are wrong in any case - they should be Con 38 Lab 37 not Lab 37 Con 35.
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP11-43/RP11-43.pdf
As we were all told to "feck off" yesterday by you may I now suggest you do the same and sort out your own party before tarring the rest of us moderate and civilised people with your increasing rabid rants and your parties extreme racist views.
Labour voters on strike?
Some are more equal than others of course with Labour. Hodge said this morning on Murnaghan that the Labour Party are founded on anti racism and supports equality and you know I actually believe her sincerity on this. However it only works if you are not a Jew or anyone that has a different view to you in which case you get threatened with violence. ( John Mann reports abuse and threats of violence to police mentioned up thread)
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
1980 Opp 42 Gov 40 - Gov subsequently re-elected
1984 Gov 38 Opp 37 - Gov subsequently re-elected
1988 Gov 39 Opp 38 - Gov subsequently re-elected
1993 Opp 39 Gov 31 - Opp subsequently elected
1998 Gov 37 Opp 33 - Gov subsequently re-elected
2002 Opp 34 Gov 33 - Gov subsequently re-elected
2006 Opp 39 Gov 26 - Opp subsequently elected
2011 Gov 38 Opp 37 - Gov subsequently re-elected
http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/RP11-43/RP11-43.pdf
Further back the Oppositions all had big wins in 1975, 1971 and 1967 and subsequently went on to win the following general election.
With a name like Moses, you should rise above all this surely? Anyway, I will continue to post here - not having the likes of you drive me off...
For the record I told the right-wing nutters who want to meddle with our BBC to f*ck off. I think that sentiment resonates with the great British public.
Important as the European elections are, they will never have an impact on the economy, jobs, and the economic wellbeing of voters in the same way.
It doesn't as yet merit the incessant repetition the idea is getting.
If he is right with his estimate of 60 seats a per cent then 200 losses looks very likely with more possible depending on whether or not the Tories are ahead in the popular vote or not. I suspect Labour are going to seriously struggle with differential turnout with some seriously demotivated supporters.
And I can see precisely why leave may well win.
The demographic breakdown between the two elections will differ. Not that that necessarily means that Labour's vote isn't more working class in either or both (I don't know); just that we shouldn't assume that if it is for one (or for that matter, if it isn't), then that will read across to the other.
"Mr Corbyn has been invited to lead a delegation to visit The Holocaust memorial in Isarel" [yes the Indy can't spell Israel] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/israeli-labor-party-leader-isaac-herzog-writes-to-jeremy-corbyn-about-sickening-anti-semitism-row-a7007966.html