Livingstone from BBC News "Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone comments on the anti-Semitism row that engulfed Labour. He claims others in Labour made an issue of it and tells these critics: "You've cost us seats all over the country."
They wouldn't have had the chance to fan the flames unless Livingstone had poured a great big can of petrol over an ember that seemed set to go out. He now accepts that the row cost Labour seats, yes is oblivious to his own role. The man is an utter liability to the party he purports to support.
@GerriPeev: Handing Ken Livingstone a mic is like giving an alcoholic a bottle of Jack Daniel's.They can't help themselves & it's not good for the kids
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
Khan ran a very good campaign and was a good choice for Labour, albeit a bit dull. But Zac was even more dull, so that didn't matter.
The 'friends with extremists' line never really caught on. Personally I was never convinced by it, the well-argued posts by Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding. I'm much more concerned about Sadiq's daft policies on housing and transport fares, but if Londoners want to vote for less housing and worse transport, who am I to complain?
As @anothernick and @FrancisUrquhart pointed out, Zac managed to be on the wrong side of some crucial issues. I'm surprised his campaign wasn't better; he never really made the leap from what works in Richmond to what would work in London as a whole.
Reason he couldn't make the leap out of Richmond...he got confused by the tube ;-)
No. His chauffer couldn't find Richmond Underground Station. I suppose he could have used the 65 bus, then he would have to find his local bus stop.
Livingstone from BBC News "Former London Mayor Ken Livingstone comments on the anti-Semitism row that engulfed Labour. He claims others in Labour made an issue of it and tells these critics: "You've cost us seats all over the country."
They wouldn't have had the chance to fan the flames unless Livingstone had poured a great big can of petrol over an ember that seemed set to go out. He now accepts that the row cost Labour seats, yes is oblivious to his own role. The man is an utter liability to the party he purports to support.
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
NEV opposition lead= -1. An identical start for Labour in England compared to Miliband 2011. Weaker in Wales (More so than the headline seat changes, and obviously weaker in Scotland.
Big picture is Labour heading to about the same defeat they were last time at this point
Isn't that simply because UKIP got a reasonable number of votes this time, having completely screwed up last time? I'd expect a substantial first-pref swing away from the Conservatives purely on that effect.
@katie_martin_fx: Ken says the Hitler controversy is fired up by Labour people "backed by the hedge funds".
Is he wrong ?
That depends what he means by 'fired up' (well not just on that, but particularly that). His other comments make clear he thinks there is no reason for people to be angry and it is all made up anger, and he is wrong about that. If he meant that other people are trying to make the most out of it, make it as angry and emotional as possible, that is true, but he is still the sole instigator. So yes, he is wrong.
Am I right in thinking that outside Scotland this is a pretty meh performance by the Tories too?
I think meh sums up results for everybody.
Good result for Khan though, as the numbers currently stand.
This does lead to one question. If Labour is doing just as well / just as badly as in 2012, why is Khan winning so easily when Livingstone lost ?
London has improved for Labour since 2012. The results in 2015 show that.
London won the GLA vote in 2012, having lost it in 2008. The mayoral vote was Boris v Ken and having seen Ken in action over recent weeks perhaps a few more people will begin to understand why a lot of Labour voters could not put their X's next to Ken's name.
To be precise, Labour had its best-ever result in London Assembly elections in 2012, but appears to have improved on it further this year, with a good shot at an absolute majority in the Assembly. It's plausible to ascribe this trend to cultural change, with London becoming gradually more like the Guardian, so to speak, while people who can't stand such stuff moving away to other areas.
My comment about corbyn 2020 GE campaign only talking to the BBC (if they promise to be nice) & press tv the other day looking like it will be spot on. He already doesn't do sky news, telegraph, Daily mail
IIRC Patrick Kidd in the Times has a great sketch today saying something like "Jeremy doesn't like politics, he's never done it before"
My comment about corbyn 2020 GE campaign only talking to the BBC (if they promise to be nice) & press tv the other day looking like it will be spot on. He already doesn't do sky news, telegraph, Daily mail
He does not have a contract like Premiership managers.
Over in Northern Ireland, both Sinn Fein and SDLP are losing 2-3% of the vote, and the DUP are down 2%. The gainers are minor Unionist parties, Greens, and People Before Profit.
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
Thanks. Are the London mayoral election results available at ward level then before being aggregated? Because if not Curtice can't have used any results from London as his base data before extrapolating.
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
Thanks. Are the London mayoral election results available at ward level then before being aggregated? Because if not Curtice can't have used any results from London as his base data before extrapolating.
I believe the ENS is only calculated from local election data, not any other parliament/assembly/mayoral position.
@katie_martin_fx: Ken says the Hitler controversy is fired up by Labour people "backed by the hedge funds".
Is he wrong ?
Let us not go down this route again.
Talking about Hitler is foolish, bad for business and, increasingly, makes Ken look like he has lost even more of the political plot than he did in the 80s, 90s and 00s combined.
Whether he is right or wrong about who is gunning for him is matter of a opinion, saying the stupid things he said has no place in political discourse.
The other impressive part about the Tory gains in Scotland is that after the GE last year everyone was being assured that a majority Con government would lead to independence within 5 years. I think we've got to move on from the idea that the Tory brand is toxic in all of Scotland now. I think it is still toxic in some parts and among the more right on social media parts, but overall I don't think the public at large see the Tory brand as toxic any more, another of Ruth's achievements.
The SNP's immediate reaction to the Tories being the main opposition party might be to scream "tory scum" as loudly as possible but like Labour in 2015 it probably won't get much traction as people want to hear sensible arguments rather than reactionary rhetoric.
My comment about corbyn 2020 GE campaign only talking to the BBC (if they promise to be nice) & press tv the other day looking like it will be spot on. He already doesn't do sky news, telegraph, Daily mail
He does not have a contract like Premiership managers.
Premier league managers only need to vote of the chairman...jezza needs 10+ million.
Over in Northern Ireland, both Sinn Fein and SDLP are losing 2-3% of the vote, and the DUP are down 2%. The gainers are minor Unionist parties, Greens, and People Before Profit.
It's a sad day for democracy when people turn their backs on mindless tribalism
Constant u-turns is an inevitable feature of a government with a majority of 12 and a glittering array of would-be divas on its backbenches.
On schools though it was a bloody stupid idea, with no real upside.
Oh I completely agree. Sometimes the would-be divas are right.
Don't misunderestimate Osborne who might come out of this U-turn on academy schools smelling of roses.
Regression to the mean is Osborne's friend here. Even if turning schools into academies has no effect whatsoever -- good or bad -- then normal fluctuations would see some bad schools get better and some good schools get worse.
But the partial U-turn means the good schools which get worse by chance won't be academies, which "proves" Osborne was right in the first place, and the bad schools that by chance get better will be academies which also proves the government was right.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Plus we'd get to bulldoze the whole of Luton and pretend it never existed. It's a real win/win scenario.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Yes, it seems strange that Luton wasn't in the running.
Enjoy your olives de Nyons, appelation contrôlée. They really are very good.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Khan doesn't get his support from immigrants - he's got good support right across the board.
London is trending Labour, year-on-year. 50% by GE 2020 is possible. I'm sure you're proud of that fact being a Londoner?
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
Thanks. Are the London mayoral election results available at ward level then before being aggregated? Because if not Curtice can't have used any results from London as his base data before extrapolating.
I believe the ENS is only calculated from local election data, not any other parliament/assembly/mayoral position.
That means it totally ignores anything happening in London.
"As I said during the election campaign, the SNP manifesto does not give Nicola Sturgeon a mandate for a second independence referendum.
"Now that she has failed to win a majority, whatever claims the SNP were pursuing with regard to constitutional brinkmanship over the next five years have now been utterly shredded.
"No mandate, no majority, no cause - the SNP must now let Scotland move on.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Yes, it seems strange that Luton wasn't in the running.
Enjoy your olives de Nyons, appelation contrôlée. They really are very good.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is not as Tory as it was. There seems to be neither a big Khan personal vote or a big anti-Khan personal vote (except maybe in Brent and Harrow, but I think the difference there is Dismore's personal vote), as the Khan/Labour votes move in step. People have seemingly just shrugged off all the "you once met an Islamist" stuff and voted on a party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Pure snobbery? Remember those Campari ads from the 1970s starring (if that is the right word in this context) Lorraine Chase?
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Yes, it seems strange that Luton wasn't in the running.
Enjoy your olives de Nyons, appelation contrôlée. They really are very good.
Constant u-turns is an inevitable feature of a government with a majority of 12 and a glittering array of would-be divas on its backbenches.
On schools though it was a bloody stupid idea, with no real upside.
Oh I completely agree. Sometimes the would-be divas are right.
Don't misunderestimate Osborne who might come out of this U-turn on academy schools smelling of roses.
Regression to the mean is Osborne's friend here. Even if turning schools into academies has no effect whatsoever -- good or bad -- then normal fluctuations would see some bad schools get better and some good schools get worse.
But the partial U-turn means the good schools which get worse by chance won't be academies, which "proves" Osborne was right in the first place, and the bad schools that by chance get better will be academies which also proves the government was right.
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
Thanks. Are the London mayoral election results available at ward level then before being aggregated? Because if not Curtice can't have used any results from London as his base data before extrapolating.
I believe the ENS is only calculated from local election data, not any other parliament/assembly/mayoral position.
That means it totally ignores anything happening in London.
It does three years in four, since the London boroughs have all-out elections every fourth year.
Yes, I agree - there were plenty of pitfalls and he avoided them all with a careful, positive and disciplined effort. I thought his comment of regret that Goldsmith, who he knew as a liberal cosmopolitan, had allowed his campaign to slip into anti-Muslim stereotyping was far better than if he'd denounced Goldsmith personally. It pretty much defused the issue.
It's a lesson for Crosby and his mates - you can't win an election *only* by shouting "Islamist!" "friends with extremists!" and the like.
Khan ran a very good campaign and was a good choice for Labour, albeit a bit dull. But Zac was even more dull, so that didn't matter.
The 'friends with extremists' line never really caught on. Personally I was never convinced by it, the well-argued posts by Ms Cyclefree notwithstanding. I'm much more concerned about Sadiq's daft policies on housing and transport fares, but if Londoners want to vote for less housing and worse transport, who am I to complain?
As @anothernick and @FrancisUrquhart pointed out, Zac managed to be on the wrong side of some crucial issues. I'm surprised his campaign wasn't better; he never really made the leap from what works in Richmond to what would work in London as a whole.
Reason he couldn't make the leap out of Richmond...he got confused by the tube ;-)
No. His chauffer couldn't find Richmond Underground Station. I suppose he could have used the 65 bus, then he would have to find his local bus stop.
Probably because it's actually above ground, serving the main line railway as well?
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Yes, it seems strange that Luton wasn't in the running.
Enjoy your olives de Nyons, appelation contrôlée. They really are very good.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
And having a prominent Remainer as Mayor will certainly boost the already strong Remain vote in London and perhaps elsewhere - Khan will bring out voters who would otherwise have stayed at home.
Does anyone know how the BBC actually arrives at their ENS calculation?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
They look at key indicator wards & curtice has a model to extrapolate from them. Thrasher has a different model & so you sometimes see a slightly different numbers on sky.
Thanks. Are the London mayoral election results available at ward level then before being aggregated? Because if not Curtice can't have used any results from London as his base data before extrapolating.
I believe the ENS is only calculated from local election data, not any other parliament/assembly/mayoral position.
That means it totally ignores anything happening in London.
Dismore now comfortably ahead for Labour in Brent and Harrow. Merton and Wandsworth still looking like a Labour gain on a slim margin (about a 3,5-4% swing to Labour there), and Redbridge like a Tory hold on an even slimmer one. Basically the core of the doughnut turned out and the outer ring is party basis.
Anecdotally I did meet a few Labour voters on the doorstep yesterday in inner London who said they weren't voting for Khan.
However I also met a large number of very enthusiastic Khan supporters who hadn't always voted in the past and some who were splitting their vote - including one who said she has voted for Khan as Mayor and UKIP in the party list! In the event the two trends seem to have balanced each other, leaving Khan on roughly the same vote share as the Party.
Universal view was that Goldsmith had fought a poor campaign, completely failed to play to his strengths on the environment etc and recipients of the "family jewelry" letters felt insulted and angry.
It may also be the case that the Goldsmith vote energised dormant anti-Tory voters who were reminded of why they do not like the party. It sort of happened in Oldham East too to an extent: the UKIP campaign actually got Labour voters to come out and vote.
Agreed.
Coming out for Leave was another Goldsmith blunder - London leans heavily to Remain and going for Leave lost him any chance of vocal support from business or the City.
Anti-Eu, anti-heathrow, less than pro uber, wrong side of all those arguments for London.
I'm sitting in a sunny square in Nyons, Provence. I got here by Luton Airport.
The main London airport should be Luton. 20 minutes from St Pancras (and the Eurostar). Near the M25 and the M1. On the right side of Londom for the rest of the country. Surrounded by poor Labour-voting, Khan-supporting immigrants who won't complain about noise, and would welcome the extra work. It ticks every box and avoids every pitfall.
Why can't it be Luton??
Plus we'd get to bulldoze the whole of Luton and pretend it never existed. It's a real win/win scenario.
Isn't Luton Airport on top of a hill pretty close by the M1? I'd have thought that expansion to any great degree is constrained geographically. It would be handy though.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
How pathetic.
BBC probably scared they would have to report 150+ Labour losses.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
This is tricky for NICOLA. How can she placate her howling cybernats, desperate for indyref2, yet acknowledge political reality - that it's not going to happen in this parliament?
The Zoomers have moved passed anger and grief and are now trying bargaining
@Frasergrant: Now that the yoon has turned blue and Kezia is Ruthie's gimp- anyone reckon some slabs may see the value in Indy after all?
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
It would be a paradox if London is an area of Conservative outperformance, this time.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Apologies if this has already been remarked upon, but as the results of London's second biggest elections (after GE) become clear, today's West End Final edition of the Standard devotes its front page to... Boaty McBoatface. It seems you have to look a couple of pages in to see how their anointed one did, first seeing a story about calls for Corbyn to quit after "poor results". I guess you have to give some credit for brazening it out.
Over in Northern Ireland, both Sinn Fein and SDLP are losing 2-3% of the vote, and the DUP are down 2%. The gainers are minor Unionist parties, Greens, and People Before Profit.
I.am not sure Jezza is very wise to keep linking labour with extremists...surely he would be better saying Tories ran a very negative campaign etc etc etc, but he said numerous times in his speech about Tories claims of Sadiq connections to extremists.
I thought the advice was always never repeat your opponents allegations rather reframe them. Cameron going in about offshore tax.havens just makes people think he is a tax dodger.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
How pathetic.
BBC probably scared they would have to report 150+ Labour losses.
I.am not sure Jezza is very wise to keep linking labour with extremists...surely he would be better saying Tories ran a very negative campaign etc etc etc, but he said numerous times in his speech about Tories claims of Sadiq connections to extremists.
I think it’s the first rule of political interviews – don’t repeat the accusation levied against you.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
How pathetic.
BBC probably scared they would have to report 150+ Labour losses.
More like lack of resources.
Yet they are collating the results since you see them on the TV. The effort required to put them on the website would be small.
Always used to be able to see gains or losses by council, now all you get is a link to the relevant council's homepage! Most of these don;t have "gain" or "loss" just who won.
How pathetic.
BBC probably scared they would have to report 150+ Labour losses.
More like lack of resources.
Yet they are collating the results since you see them on the TV. The effort required to put them on the website would be small.
You would hope in this day & age that it would be automated.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Which was a big surprise for those of us who had expected him to be a much stronger opponent. He had never seemed shy before - when he was selected he seemed to be well outside the Tory mainstream - a committed environmental campaigner and photogenic to boot - it was easy to imagine his appeal encompassing many voters who did not consider themselves natural Tories.
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
I think the number of Tory voters in London who abstained, or switched votes, because of Zac's position on the EU is very small. The Leave vote still polls between 36-42% in London, above Scotland and NI. There may have been a few naturally centre-left Boris supporters for whom it reinforced their switch back to Khan but I doubt it was decisive.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Which was a big surprise for those of us who had expected him to be a much stronger opponent. He had never seemed shy before - when he was selected he seemed to be well outside the Tory mainstream - a committed environmental campaigner and photogenic to boot - it was easy to imagine his appeal encompassing many voters who did not consider themselves natural Tories.
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
This might be very unfair, but to me it looked like Zac's campaign never really started.
The only times I noticed him was when photographed out and about with Boris, where it was he who got all the attention and Zac looked like his sheepish bag carrier.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
I think the number of Tory voters in London who abstained, or switched votes, because of Zac's position on the EU is very small. The Leave vote still polls between 36-42% in London, above Scotland and NI. There may have been a few naturally centre-left Boris supporters for whom it reinforced their switch back to Khan but I doubt it was decisive.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
Having seen comments here and elsewhere - Tory apathy seems to be the key factor. Unless you really cared, why bother? IIRC the Merton/Wandsworth seat had 8k+ Kipper votes, that's another reason Zac missed the cut.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
I think the number of Tory voters in London who abstained, or switched votes, because of Zac's position on the EU is very small. The Leave vote still polls between 36-42% in London, above Scotland and NI. There may have been a few naturally centre-left Boris supporters for whom it reinforced their switch back to Khan but I doubt it was decisive.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
I doubt it was just eu, but he was on the wrong side of the argument (for London) on a number of issues. Doubt it made a massive difference for converting people against but won't have had people rushing to the polls either.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
I think the number of Tory voters in London who abstained, or switched votes, because of Zac's position on the EU is very small. The Leave vote still polls between 36-42% in London, above Scotland and NI. There may have been a few naturally centre-left Boris supporters for whom it reinforced their switch back to Khan but I doubt it was decisive.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
Having seen comments here and elsewhere - Tory apathy seems to be the key factor. Unless you really cared, why bother? IIRC the Merton/Wandsworth seat had 8k+ Kipper votes, that's another reason Zac missed the cut.
This Mayoral election is the first election I've sat out since the 1999 Euros...
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Which was a big surprise for those of us who had expected him to be a much stronger opponent. He had never seemed shy before - when he was selected he seemed to be well outside the Tory mainstream - a committed environmental campaigner and photogenic to boot - it was easy to imagine his appeal encompassing many voters who did not consider themselves natural Tories.
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
Ken Livingstone is asked about the impact the anti-Semitism row - and his comments about Hitler in a BBC radio interview - has had on the ability of Jewish Londoners to back Sadiq Khan.
Mr Livingston says Sadiq Khan "was 12 years old when Lenni Brenner published his book about the deal between the Zionist movement and the Nazis".
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Which was a big surprise for those of us who had expected him to be a much stronger opponent. He had never seemed shy before - when he was selected he seemed to be well outside the Tory mainstream - a committed environmental campaigner and photogenic to boot - it was easy to imagine his appeal encompassing many voters who did not consider themselves natural Tories.
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
I agree. Goldsmith was a candidate who simply didn't play to his strengths and was utterly inept at making much of Khan's weaknesses. In relation to the latter he focused on the wrong things and followed through in a crude way.
Let's see what Khan makes of the role. I remain to be convinced that he will do what he has promised re taking on extremists - I doubt he will do anything much, if at all. Doing nothing is not good enough IMO. Anything that does not push back hard against the extremists is a big missed opportunity.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
Which was a big surprise for those of us who had expected him to be a much stronger opponent. He had never seemed shy before - when he was selected he seemed to be well outside the Tory mainstream - a committed environmental campaigner and photogenic to boot - it was easy to imagine his appeal encompassing many voters who did not consider themselves natural Tories.
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
I agree. Goldsmith was a candidate who simply didn't play to his strengths and was utterly inept at making much of Khan's weaknesses. In relation to the latter he focused on the wrong things and followed through in a crude way.
Let's see what Khan makes of the role. I remain to be convinced that he will do what he has promised re taking on extremists - I doubt he will do anything much, if at all. Doing nothing is not good enough IMO. Anything that does not push back hard against the extremists is a big missed opportunity.
He isn't going to change the habit of a lifetime is he.
TIPPING Paddy Labour Party 80926 HARPER Tony The Conservative Party Candidate 48155 LOI Fran UK Independence Party (UKIP) 20030 BATES Tony Independent 14579 ZADROZNY Jason Bernard Independent 7164
Ken Livingstone is asked about the impact the anti-Semitism row - and his comments about Hitler in a BBC radio interview - has had on the ability of Jewish Londoners to back Sadiq Khan.
Mr Livingston says Sadiq Khan "was 12 years old when Lenni Brenner published his book about the deal between the Zionist movement and the Nazis".
I genuinely have no idea what point he even thinks he is making there. It's bizarre. It's like his brain is trying to get his mouth to chant "HitlerHITLERHitler" and it's all he can do to force some other words out regardless of how little sense they make.
Last year Nuneaton resident Clare Golby was interviewed by the BBC as a “Labour supporter” who “voted for Jeremy Corbyn”. Since then she decided to run for the local council and today she has been elected… as a Tory! Even worse, she won her seat off Labour.
Yup, being a Leaver was a 'courageous' choice in London.
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Combine that with the residual damage of Leavers in places like Bexley and Havering giving the Tory box a miss.
Personally, I think Goldsmith's position on the EU had little to do with the result.
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
I think there's perhaps a case for the general Tory position as epitomised by Cameron causing him some difficulties with people drifting to UKIP
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago London Mayoralty, provisional result so far: Khan: 44% Goldsmith: 35% Berry: 6% Pidgeon: 5% Whittle: 4% Walker: 2% (96.6% verified)
I think the number of Tory voters in London who abstained, or switched votes, because of Zac's position on the EU is very small. The Leave vote still polls between 36-42% in London, above Scotland and NI. There may have been a few naturally centre-left Boris supporters for whom it reinforced their switch back to Khan but I doubt it was decisive.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
Having seen comments here and elsewhere - Tory apathy seems to be the key factor. Unless you really cared, why bother? IIRC the Merton/Wandsworth seat had 8k+ Kipper votes, that's another reason Zac missed the cut.
This Mayoral election is the first election I've sat out since the 1999 Euros...
I'd probably too if I still lived up there. A greenie anti Uber blah blah TINO - nah.
Comments
Swing against Goldsmith in Bexley?
It deserves a bit of scrutiny - for one thing it seems to have pre-dated the counting of the London Assembly votes. Will they revise it or is that it?
Big picture is Labour heading to about the same defeat they were last time at this point
Zac 97528
Sadiq 48212
https://londonelects.org.uk/sites/default/files/Bexley and Bromley - Mayor 2016.pdf
Over in Northern Ireland, both Sinn Fein and SDLP are losing 2-3% of the vote, and the DUP are down 2%. The gainers are minor Unionist parties, Greens, and People Before Profit.
Boris 104944 Ken 37520
Talking about Hitler is foolish, bad for business and, increasingly, makes Ken look like he has lost even more of the political plot than he did in the 80s, 90s and 00s combined.
Whether he is right or wrong about who is gunning for him is matter of a opinion, saying the stupid things he said has no place in political discourse.
The SNP's immediate reaction to the Tories being the main opposition party might be to scream "tory scum" as loudly as possible but like Labour in 2015 it probably won't get much traction as people want to hear sensible arguments rather than reactionary rhetoric.
Regression to the mean is Osborne's friend here. Even if turning schools into academies has no effect whatsoever -- good or bad -- then normal fluctuations would see some bad schools get better and some good schools get worse.
But the partial U-turn means the good schools which get worse by chance won't be academies, which "proves" Osborne was right in the first place, and the bad schools that by chance get better will be academies which also proves the government was right.
Pure snake oil.
Paul Dennett Labour 24,209+ 4,123
Robin Garrido Conservative 11,810+2,674
Dennett is a Corbynista.
Enjoy your olives de Nyons, appelation contrôlée. They really are very good.
Leonie Cooper (Lab) 77,340 (41.71%, +5.17%)
David Dean (C) 73,039 (39.39%, -3.75%)
Esther Obiri-Darko (Green) 14,682 (7.92%, +0.44%)
Adrian Hyyrylainen-Trett (LD) 10,732 (5.79%, -2.09%)
Elizabeth Jones (UKIP) 8,478 (4.57%, +2.11%)
Thamilini Kulendran (Ind) 1,142 (0.62%, -0.99%)
Lab maj 4,301 (2.32%)
London is trending Labour, year-on-year. 50% by GE 2020 is possible. I'm sure you're proud of that fact being a Londoner?
Especially as EU citizens can vote in this, but not the referendum.
Cracking result for Labour - my vote did count after all!
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grattons#/media/File:Grattons_lyonnais.jpg
He was a shy, low-profile candidate who ran a lacklustre campaign with limited policy offerings for Londoners.
it's odd Richard, I could see you waxing lyrical about grattons de Lyons, pork scratchings not so much :-)
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/728602396188889088
I can also see the point TSE is making about pro-remain London not necessarily welcoming his position.
For all that this provisional result is basically a re-run of the 2015 GE so perhaps absolutely nothing of any substance or personal regard has made any difference?
Britain Elects @britainelects 7m7 minutes ago
London Mayoralty, provisional result so far:
Khan: 44%
Goldsmith: 35%
Berry: 6%
Pidgeon: 5%
Whittle: 4%
Walker: 2%
(96.6% verified)
It's hard to judge these things, to be fair - cf. Broxtowe 2015, blush.
@Frasergrant: Now that the yoon has turned blue and Kezia is Ruthie's gimp- anyone reckon some slabs may see the value in Indy after all?
@LadPolitics: Suppose it's about time to have some odds on the 2020 London Mayoral election.
100/1 Ken Livingstone, anyone? https://t.co/d1Sg33axVt
McCall (Con) 41,345
Watson (Lab) 30,437
Con hold
Ind hold Gloucestershire PCC
I thought the advice was always never repeat your opponents allegations rather reframe them. Cameron going in about offshore tax.havens just makes people think he is a tax dodger.
Con hold Hertfordshire PCC
But his campaign seems to have almost been designed to distance him from his past self and foster the idea that he was, in fact, just another rich Tory boy who had little understanding of ordinary Londoners. So it's hardly surprising that the voters took the same view.
Plenty of Tory leavers on here have been heavily critical and apathetic about Zac's campaign or voting for him.
The result is good for the pollsters, who got it pretty much bang on in London whether by luck or judgement.
The only times I noticed him was when photographed out and about with Boris, where it was he who got all the attention and Zac looked like his sheepish bag carrier.
Mr Livingston says Sadiq Khan "was 12 years old when Lenni Brenner published his book about the deal between the Zionist movement and the Nazis".
Let's see what Khan makes of the role. I remain to be convinced that he will do what he has promised re taking on extremists - I doubt he will do anything much, if at all. Doing nothing is not good enough IMO. Anything that does not push back hard against the extremists is a big missed opportunity.
Turnout 41% (2012:38%).
The biggest gainers in actual votes were UKIP - up nearly 20,000
Round 1
TIPPING Paddy Labour Party 80926
HARPER Tony The Conservative Party Candidate 48155
LOI Fran UK Independence Party (UKIP) 20030
BATES Tony Independent 14579
ZADROZNY Jason Bernard Independent 7164
Round 2
Tipping 89749
Harper 56105
Round 1 in Broxtowe was Lab 7882 Con 7378
Last year Nuneaton resident Clare Golby was interviewed by the BBC as a “Labour supporter” who “voted for Jeremy Corbyn”. Since then she decided to run for the local council and today she has been elected… as a Tory! Even worse, she won her seat off Labour.
http://order-order.com/2016/05/06/tory-for-corbyn-elected-in-nuneaton/
Lab vote up from 55k in 2012 to 77k.