I broadly agree with TSE's article, although @MaxPB is also right to point out that Zac was on the wrong side of the argument for many Tories and others who might have voted for him. How much of the problem was Zac himself and how much those advising on the campaign is hard to say.
Well the positions are the candidates, Zac was anti-Heathrow, he gave the comments about uber without taking advice and his general "a pox on profit" position has been his long term position rather than something he was told to say. The other problem with Zac is that he was inherited wealth and inherited property, he wasn't able to campaign easily on the single biggest issue facing London, the rise of the bastard private landlords and fall in homeownership. It is a long term problem facing the party and Zac is the wrong candidate to address that.
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer. But I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Mr Palmer's condescending comments related to washing powder which is overwhelmingly on TV. In that market our voters get to decide as often as once a week - not once every 5 years as with MPs - sell a product on a false prospectus and voters revenge occurs within days - not years.
I think the LD share was down in mostly no hope areas from a low base to an even lower base but up sometimes substantially so in areas where their results were already good for example Cheltenham and Watford .
That's probably true but no small number of the areas where the Lib Dems have gone from low to lower were ones that they were being elected in pre-2010.
For example, Mr Herdson?
One local to me is Baildon. The seat had always been a Lib Dem/Con contest. By 2008, the Conservatives had the upper hand, with two of the three seats but the other was held by a Lib Dem with a strong personal vote.
In 2008 (i.e. the last election before Labour was kicked out - there were no metro elections in 2009), the Lib Dems polled 3122 votes to win by a majority of 892.
Their councillor stood down in 2012 and they lost the seat to the Conservatives by 212 votes, polling 1632 votes.
This year, despite their former councillor coming out of retirement to recontest, they polled 866 to finish third behind Labour.
I could give similar examples from Wakefield (e.g. Horbury & South Ossett). I don't know the bigger picture in detail but you only have to look at where the Lib Dems finished at the 2015 GE in the seats they lost in 2010 to get a good idea of the trend.
Some examples, Mr Herdson - but you did say "no small number", so you haven`t quite lived up to your claim.
I would look, rather, to places like Manchester, Liverpool, Portsmouth, Winchester, which have seen Lib Dem progress. The fact that the Lib Dems have had a net gaiin of 44 seats so far, suggests that the tide is turning in their favour, even as the Tory tide starts to go out.
I stand by my comment from yesterday's thread that "considering the current Westminster VI as against that of 2012, they did well to record net gains at all. In that, Farron can be happy – but only really in that."
Fact is that the Lib Dems' progress is at best patchy. Sure, you can look at the places you made gains and feel good. On the other hand, you've just finished fifth in Scotland and on the London Assembly, were reduced to one seat in Wales and lost your deposit for the London mayoralty. It's basically bumping along the bottom.
Bumping along the bottom is better than sinking further.
And we thought that the LibDems were sinking further before the elections.
What the LibDems would like is a few byelections in Conservative constituencies where they finished second in 2015.
The LDs are down to a single seat on London Ass and Welsh Ass.
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
And a speech on Monday to kick it off. Then full-time 6 week tour public events.
'Disagree - all candidates should be subject to equal scrutiny. What on earth does 'as a Muslim' mean? Khan wax questioned about his past links and statement - one of which he admitted was racist and apologised for. Fine. He also won and can now prove his moderation and one wishes him well. But no ethnic group should be able to play the ethnic card to close down scrutiny - that has happened too often in the past ten years and is the main reason UKIP has flourished.'
Spot on, OK to question Corbyn,McDonnell & Livingstone about their past associations but off limits to ask the same questions of Khan because he's a Muslim and that would be racist.
What I find more reprehensible than any campaign is an individual who uses identity politics to quash legitimate scrutiny
"And what would you like to say about your policies, Mr Goldsmith?" "Err... erm... look, a photo of 7/7!"
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer. But I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Mr Palmer's condescending comments related to washing powder which is overwhelmingly on TV. In that market our voters get to decide as often as once a week - not once every 5 years as with MPs - sell a product on a false prospectus and voters revenge occurs within days - not years.
Have to disagree with you TSE. London is not the country and the results were literally in line with the party shares in London which just shows that both candidates were deeply unimpressive.
We needed a better candidate, one who can speak to ordinary Londoners not just a few wealthy West Londoners in Richmond and Twickenham. He was also in the wrong side of the argument for too many traditional Tories, anti-Heathrow, anti-Uber, anti-business. Khan may have taken all of the same positions but he wasn't fighting for the Tory party. There were too many examples of long time Tory voters just not bothering to campaign for Zac or even vote for him to dismiss as anecdotal for me, the most common reason was that "why is he in the Tory party if he's so anti-business".
Khan was not Ken and did not run a Ken-like campaign. As a result, he got the same vote as Labour got in the GLA election. Something that Ken failed to do.
Essentially, I agree. Additionally Zac was no where near a good candidate to sway any middle ground voters that he would be a good mayor. That's why the Tories need someone like Karren Brady to run next time, hopefully she can be convinced.
It doesn't matter who the Conservatives have as candidate next time as they wont win.
To win in London the Conservatives need one or both of these:
1) A deeply unpopular Labour government (2008) 2) A successful incumbent against a dreadful Labour candidate (2012)
3) An mayoral election not on the same day as the general election (2020).
As an example, I've just put Karren Brady forwards in a WhatsApp group, 8 responses so far, 3 people who voted for Khan as first or second preference would vote for Brady vs Khan. 7/8 responses in favour overall, only one who has done business with her personally has said no (lol).
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer. But I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Mr Palmer's condescending comments related to washing powder which is overwhelmingly on TV. In that market our voters get to decide as often as once a week - not once every 5 years as with MPs - sell a product on a false prospectus and voters revenge occurs within days - not years.
Actually it was your post the other day when you correctly pointed out the relative scrutiny politicians get with washing powders/hair products that prompted my slightly acid reply to Nick earlier on. Poliiticians don't know they're born!
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
David Cameron has said all along he will not do blue on blue and as Corbyn is going on holiday for the last 10 days or so of campaigning I would not be at all surprised if Sadiq Khan took on Boris in the big debate on the eve of the poll. That would be really interesting
From what I understand, Khan vs Goldsmith numbers were broadly the same as the GE last year. I think a more interesting snapshot of Project Corbyn was Bristol. Faced with the choice of another term of the left leaning independent, the public voted in Corbyn's man (and unlike Khan is he a Corbynite) for a massive margin.
There are two aspects to this. Southam Observer is quite right to note that Labour is not making significant progress in winning over people who voted Tory last time. But it's also true that Corbyn is mobilising people who didn't vote or voted for a minor party last time, typically in middle-class areas. Achieving both at once is an interesting task.
Traditionally, successful Labour leaders have presented themselves as a bit left-wing (Wilson, Callaghan, even Blair at first), without backing it up with anything difficult that can be distorted by the Tories, but the left-wing punters have noticed and want a bit more steak with their sizzle. The trick, therefore, is to find left-wing policies that are actually popular, such as seriously cracking down on tax avoidance. People would absolutely trust Corbyn and McDonnell not to be up for a deal with the Virgin Islands, who have just cocked a snook at Osborne's latest summit on tax avoidance. Would they trust Cameron and Osborne to do anything much?
Khan is tomhated by some on the right. No matter what he does it will be taken as evidence as his extremism "look see we were right, see". He won't be able to take a shit without someone saying it's proff he support I.S. smh.
They would be very stupid to continue. This man is clearly not an ISIS supporter or a fundamentalist:
Anyone else notice that Obama's approval ratings have kind of surged since Trump started winning primaries? I examine the national opinion polls for Clinton v Trump so far and I see him hovering around a band between 36 and 43. The recorded Hillary vote is much more volatile, between 38 and 54. The latter figures tend to determine the polling lead rather than Trump's stable 39-40 per cent. Obviously, there are still many undecided respondents.
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
Khan is tomhated by some on the right. No matter what he does it will be taken as evidence as his extremism "look see we were right, see". He won't be able to take a shit without someone saying it's proff he support I.S. smh.
He's only been in the job a day and you're casting him as a victim.
Just predicting what will happen if the campaign was anything to go by.
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
It's good, but there is still that attitude of handling these people with rubber gloves like they are specimens in a lab type mentality.
From what I understand, Khan vs Goldsmith numbers were broadly the same as the GE last year. I think a more interesting snapshot of Project Corbyn was Bristol. Faced with the choice of another term of the left leaning independent, the public voted in Corbyn's man (and unlike Khan is he a Corbynite) for a massive margin.
There are two aspects to this. Southam Observer is quite right to note that Labour is not making significant progress in winning over people who voted Tory last time. But it's also true that Corbyn is mobilising people who didn't vote or voted for a minor party last time, typically in middle-class areas. Achieving both at once is an interesting task.
Traditionally, successful Labour leaders have presented themselves as a bit left-wing (Wilson, Callaghan, even Blair at first), without backing it up with anything difficult that can be distorted by the Tories, but the left-wing punters have noticed and want a bit more steak with their sizzle. The trick, therefore, is to find left-wing policies that are actually popular, such as seriously cracking down on tax avoidance. People would absolutely trust Corbyn and McDonnell not to be up for a deal with the Virgin Islands, who have just cocked a snook at Osborne's latest summit on tax avoidance. Would they trust Cameron and Osborne to do anything much?
I agree with Charles Falconer. People (at least those who might vote Labour) want a leader who will challenges elites whilst being trusted to run the country. Labour may be doing okay on the first but not the second.
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer but I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Nick, I think you're missing the point slightly - that's a standard disclaimer for any offer. The fact is that the offer won't be withdrawn because it's a sales promotion - they want people to take it up. The extra person will have been priced in to the package.
What I find a lot more dubious is the massive trend of trying to play on people's emotions. Kwikfit rescuing a hamster and all that shite.
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
Pity the evidence doesn't quite back the story up: "compared with most Americans, Trump’s voters are better off. The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000" ... "higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both." (Source: Nate Silver, http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/)
A lot of non-struggling whites are fine with Trump's brand of "identity politics". It's not classist to speak out against it.
Louise Brown, Welsh Conservatives = 50,985 (30.75 per cent) Jeff Cuthbert, Welsh Labour = 76,893 (46.38 per cent) Darren Jones, Plaid Cymru = 37,916 (22.87 per cent)
Lab and Con to second round.
In 2012 it was by an Independent. Labour should gain it this time.
I broadly agree with TSE's article, although @MaxPB is also right to point out that Zac was on the wrong side of the argument for many Tories and others who might have voted for him. How much of the problem was Zac himself and how much those advising on the campaign is hard to say.
I would like to think - looking at his history and previous statements - that it was not Zac and was his campaign team.
But in the end he is the one who is responsible for his own campaign and whether he was badly advised or not, it still reflects badly on him. Prior to this election I was a very big Zac fan. Now I simply no longer trust his judgement.
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer but I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Nick, I think you're missing the point slightly - that's a standard disclaimer for any offer. The fact is that the offer won't be withdrawn because it's a sales promotion - they want people to take it up. The extra person will have been priced in to the package.
What I find a lot more dubious is the massive trend of trying to play on people's emotions. Kwikfit rescuing a hamster and all that shite.
The current fashion for cute animal based advertising is remarkable - I can barely see a TV ad break without kittens or puppies emerging from biscuit packets or promoting doorstep loans, seagulls/beagles selling insurance, cats selling mobile phone packages, tortoises as estate agents, Shetland ponies/three legged dogs for Amazon dogflaps/baby carriers - and on and on.
EDIT FFS, another one 118188 loans for dog needing an operation...
If you persist in these kind of views Labour is simply heading to a 2020 defeat to learn it's lessons.
Southam and myself both repeatedly warned against Ed Miliband who cost you the chance of reclaiming your seat at 2015. I warned previously against Gordon Brown who cost you your seat in 2010.
I am sick and fed up with Labour having unelectable leaders- it is keeping Labour out of power during a period where there is still little public affection for the Tory party. And who suffers for the failure in the Labour party to get its act together...the poor, the NHS, our institutions like the BBC, local authorities.....none of these would have happened under a Labour Govt.
And if people like you continue to softly support Corbyn, we are at least another decade from power.
From what I understand, Khan vs Goldsmith numbers were broadly the same as the GE last year. I think a more interesting snapshot of Project Corbyn was Bristol. Faced with the choice of another term of the left leaning independent, the public voted in Corbyn's man (and unlike Khan is he a Corbynite) for a massive margin.
There are two aspects to this. Southam Observer is quite right to note that Labour is not making significant progress in winning over people who voted Tory last time. But it's also true that Corbyn is mobilising people who didn't vote or voted for a minor party last time, typically in middle-class areas. Achieving both at once is an interesting task.
Traditionally, successful Labour leaders have presented themselves as a bit left-wing (Wilson, Callaghan, even Blair at first), without backing it up with anything difficult that can be distorted by the Tories, but the left-wing punters have noticed and want a bit more steak with their sizzle. The trick, therefore, is to find left-wing policies that are actually popular, such as seriously cracking down on tax avoidance. People would absolutely trust Corbyn and McDonnell not to be up for a deal with the Virgin Islands, who have just cocked a snook at Osborne's latest summit on tax avoidance. Would they trust Cameron and Osborne to do anything much?
The final England local authority seat count was as follows: Lab 950 (-18) Con 563 (-47) LD 237 (+31) UKIP 34 (+25) Green 19 (=) Others 81 (-45)
In the final result, the Conservatives were a lot further down in seats than it appeared they would be in the earlier tallies. So in terms of seats, Lab down about 2%, Con down about 8%, measured against the results of previous elections in the same seats, the time of nearly all of those previous contests being the Lab high water mark of 2012.
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
It's good, but there is still that attitude of handling these people with rubber gloves like they are specimens in a lab type mentality.
Nothing symbolised this more than the reaction to this moment from a Trump rally earlier this year. The very fact that Trump would risk giving the mic to people like that shows his respect for his voters, and implicitly the mistrust that his opponents have for ordinary working-class whites.
Tyson - I know what you mean but it's worth remembering that Labour hasn't exactly done a good job of bringing through the next generation. Only the prince across the water, David Miliband, is an obvious choice and he blew his chance of becoming leader in 2010 largely due to a lack of humility. Where are the others?
The English Council election figures for 2016 are all done now except Bristol. After 123 of 124 councils counted, the totals are NOTHING LIKE what wulfun_Phil quoted. The correct current tallies are
Labour 1,291 −23 Conservative 828 −46 Liberal Democrat 370 +44 Independent 77 −3 UKIP 58 +26 Residents 39 +8 Green Party 34 0 Liberal 4 −1 Respect 0 −5 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
David Cameron has said all along he will not do blue on blue and as Corbyn is going on holiday for the last 10 days or so of campaigning I would not be at all surprised if Sadiq Khan took on Boris in the big debate on the eve of the poll. That would be really interesting
The only person Leave should be seriously thinking of putting up is Daniel Hannan.
Mr. Surbiton, are you not counting London in England?
London is the heart and brain and the other organs of Britain. London exists because it does, for millennia.
Piffle, Mr. Surbiton. If London were, God forbid, to be nuked the rest of us would still be here. A little poorer, for sure, but we would still be here, and probably better governed.
Please don't get me wrong, I was born and grew-up in London and in many ways I still love the place, but it is not the "heart and brain" of England let alone Britain.
I don't like London, but I fear it is. It's a 1/4 of the total population of the British Isles for heaven's sake! (taking the urban conurbation as a whole)
1/4 of the total population of the British Isles? Seriously? 4 times 8 is 32. What are you classing as the "urban conurbation", the whole of the South East of England?
The London Metropolitan area (defined as the Greater London built up area plus commuter belt) was estimated at just over 14 million in 2014 by Eurostat. That is not the whole of SE England, just the population of London and the commuter belt.
Ok, Mr. Tyndall, let us for the sake of this discussion accept that definition of the commuter belt, 4 * 14 = 56. Still nowhere near the 1/4 of the population of the British Isles, which was the comment that I originally objected to.
London is big, in some parts wonderful (in others ghastly beyond measure), but it is not as vital to the productive UK economy as some people seem to think. As a thought what does London's GDP per capita look like if you strip out all the public sector (i.e. taxpayer funded) jobs? Dunno, but might be interesting.
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
David Cameron has said all along he will not do blue on blue and as Corbyn is going on holiday for the last 10 days or so of campaigning I would not be at all surprised if Sadiq Khan took on Boris in the big debate on the eve of the poll. That would be really interesting
The only person Leave should be seriously thinking of putting up is Daniel Hannan.
Not at all convinced by that. He struggles not to come across as a zealot. And there's nothing the British people like less than a zealot.
' A bit more hope and a little less fear please. '
No chance of that.
Politics is now a zero sum game, namely "take it from them and give it to me".
If you want hope then there needs to be enough increasing wealth creation to allow everyone to become richer and happier.
And in a globalised world economy where we're competing against peoples who are as intelligent and educated as us but who are willing to work harder at lower cost and under fewer restrictions that isn't going to happen.
Just because the developing world sees its gdp increase that does not mean our gdp will decrease but it does mean the gap will likely erode if their gdp grows faster. As nations like China see their middle class expand their willingness to accept harsher working conditions may also begin to decline too
Take a look at GDP per capita or at real wages or at home ownership or at rising inequality in the developed world and then another look at all those unfunded spending promises.
Well gdp per capita and wages are still a lot higher in the developed world than the developing world and the developing world has even more inequality, the gap is closing but is still there
My point is that gdp per capita growth is nowhere near enough to fund all the promises the politicians have made.
So to fund some of them others will have to lose out - the 'take it from them and give it to me' endgame.
Meanwhile real wages and home ownership have been stagnant for a decade.
It is in the Tory party's best interests to lose the forthcoming Tooting by-election. Discuss.
The afternoon thread is on the Tooting by election.
Dang! I was was hoping for a AV thread.
I've got a thread written and will probably use next weekend which discusses the AV referendum and the lessons Leave can learn from it for the EU referendum
Ah another thread telling LEAVE what they need to do... TSE, why not write about what REMAIN need to do as that is something you are closer to and could be of interest to your chums at CCHQ?
The people at the top of LEAVE are the same people who won the AV referendum and turned around a massive gap behind the YES group. I think they know what lessons should be drawn? They also defeated the Govt backed northern referendum vote in a Labour dominated area.
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Have to disagree with you TSE. London is not the country and the results were literally in line with the party shares in London which just shows that both candidates were deeply unimpressive.
We needed a better candidate, one who can speak to ordinary Londoners not just a few wealthy West Londoners in Richmond and Twickenham. He was also in the wrong side of the argument for too many traditional Tories, anti-Heathrow, anti-Uber, anti-business. Khan may have taken all of the same positions but he wasn't fighting for the Tory party. There were too many examples of long time Tory voters just not bothering to campaign for Zac or even vote for him to dismiss as anecdotal for me, the most common reason was that "why is he in the Tory party if he's so anti-business".
Khan was not Ken and did not run a Ken-like campaign. As a result, he got the same vote as Labour got in the GLA election. Something that Ken failed to do.
Essentially, I agree. Additionally Zac was no where near a good candidate to sway any middle ground voters that he would be a good mayor. That's why the Tories need someone like Karren Brady to run next time, hopefully she can be convinced.
I can see Lord Sugar running as an independent in 2020 after his constant tweets urging his followers to vote against Khan. If Trump can do it, why not Sugar? He could fund his campaign and has huge name recognition, perhaps Brady could be his deputy
Also need to add that only a few councils changed control in England.
Cons lost Worcester and Elmbridge to NOC, but Peterborough went from NOC to Con. Labour lost Dudley to NOC. (edited sp.) Lib Dems gained Watford from NOC. Bristol still to declare.
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
David Cameron has said all along he will not do blue on blue and as Corbyn is going on holiday for the last 10 days or so of campaigning I would not be at all surprised if Sadiq Khan took on Boris in the big debate on the eve of the poll. That would be really interesting
The only person Leave should be seriously thinking of putting up is Daniel Hannan.
Not at all convinced by that. He struggles not to come across as a zealot. And there's nothing the British people like less than a zealot.
Interesting point but is there any polling on him after an appearance, just from those who watched it?
Anyone else notice that Obama's approval ratings have kind of surged since Trump started winning primaries? I examine the national opinion polls for Clinton v Trump so far and I see him hovering around a band between 36 and 43. The recorded Hillary vote is much more volatile, between 38 and 54. The latter figures tend to determine the polling lead rather than Trump's stable 39-40 per cent. Obviously, there are still many undecided respondents.
Obama is currently more popular than Regan was at this point in his Presidency.
The whole "Obmaa is incredibly unpopular so the Democrats are doomed" line is really hard to push at the moment.
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Mr. Surbiton, are you not counting London in England?
London is the heart and brain and the other organs of Britain. London exists because it does, for millennia.
Piffle, Mr. Surbiton. If London were, God forbid, to be nuked the rest of us would still be here. A little poorer, for sure, but we would still be here, and probably better governed.
Please don't get me wrong, I was born and grew-up in London and in many ways I still love the place, but it is not the "heart and brain" of England let alone Britain.
I don't like London, but I fear it is. It's a 1/4 of the total population of the British Isles for heaven's sake! (taking the urban conurbation as a whole)
1/4 of the total population of the British Isles? Seriously? 4 times 8 is 32. What are you classing as the "urban conurbation", the whole of the South East of England?
The London Metropolitan area (defined as the Greater London built up area plus commuter belt) was estimated at just over 14 million in 2014 by Eurostat. That is not the whole of SE England, just the population of London and the commuter belt.
Ok, Mr. Tyndall, let us for the sake of this discussion accept that definition of the commuter belt, 4 * 14 = 56. Still nowhere near the 1/4 of the population of the British Isles, which was the comment that I originally objected to.
London is big, in some parts wonderful (in others ghastly beyond measure), but it is not as vital to the productive UK economy as some people seem to think. As a thought what does London's GDP per capita look like if you strip out all the public sector (i.e. taxpayer funded) jobs? Dunno, but might be interesting.
I think that you also need to allow that a lot of London's GDP is derived from workers who live well outside the M25. Market Harborough is increasingly a commuter town for example (and a very pleasant one too). In addition a large number of the wealth creators in London retire elsewhere, particularly in the South West or East Anglia.
A very high percentage of Britons live for part of their life in London, but not all of it. Quite possibly a quarter or more of Britons are Londoners for part of their lives, and equally likely that a quarter of Londoners feel that they are really Scottish etc.
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
Pity the evidence doesn't quite back the story up: "compared with most Americans, Trump’s voters are better off. The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000" ... "higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both." (Source: Nate Silver, http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/)
A lot of non-struggling whites are fine with Trump's brand of "identity politics". It's not classist to speak out against it.
Roger on ads - I accept that advertisers try not to lie, but a requirement that ads told a meaningful truth would sweep away a huge section of the advertising that we see. I've just opened a paper to look for an example, and the first ad I see is for a cruise. The headline in big letters is "Introducing Columbus 2nd passenger travels free cruise offers". When I got over the lack of punctuation, I worked out that this appears to mean that if I book a cruise, I can take a friend free. How nice. But then I noticed a tiny, almost invisible, asterisk at the end. I spent some time looking for the footnote, and eventually tracked it down tucked away in a paragraph of microscopic print which is otherwise about call charges. It says "Offer subject to availability and may be withdrawn at any time". So I might get a free partner ticket, but equally I might not.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer but I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Nick, I think you're missing the point slightly - that's a standard disclaimer for any offer. The fact is that the offer won't be withdrawn because it's a sales promotion - they want people to take it up. The extra person will have been priced in to the package.
What I find a lot more dubious is the massive trend of trying to play on people's emotions. Kwikfit rescuing a hamster and all that shite.
The current fashion for cute animal based advertising is remarkable - I can barely see a TV ad break without kittens or puppies emerging from biscuit packets or promoting doorstep loans, seagulls/beagles selling insurance, cats selling mobile phone packages, tortoises as estate agents, Shetland ponies/three legged dogs for Amazon dogflaps/baby carriers - and on and on.
EDIT FFS, another one 118188 loans for dog needing an operation...
I see that in the Sunday Times we have a good kick-off for the Remain "grid" this week:
Big speech from Cameron tomorrow. Gordon Brown laying down the case on Wednesday. And an "independent" Bank of England forecast by Carney (on interest rates v. inflation if we Leave v. we Stay) too A few big firms and CEOs reinforcing the message as well
All entirely predictable, but very well-organised.
I hope Leave have a few tricks of their own up their sleeve.
Same old, same old.
Boris is doing a battle-bus tour, isn’t he?
Don't know... I read something in MOS about Boris Vs Jezza on telly which has the potential to be car crash TV, loooool!
David Cameron has said all along he will not do blue on blue and as Corbyn is going on holiday for the last 10 days or so of campaigning I would not be at all surprised if Sadiq Khan took on Boris in the big debate on the eve of the poll. That would be really interesting
The only person Leave should be seriously thinking of putting up is Daniel Hannan.
Not at all convinced by that. He struggles not to come across as a zealot. And there's nothing the British people like less than a zealot.
CHURCH, Richard Wilfred – Welsh Liberal Democrats: 20,725 DAVIES, William Edmund Vincent John – Independent: 11,561 LLYWELYN, Dafydd – Plaid Cymru: 52,469 MADGE, Kevin – Welsh Labour: 34,799 PARKINSON, Desmond Cecil – UKIP Wales: 20,870 SALMON, Christopher Tangye Robert – Welsh Conservative Party: 47,093
Run off between Plaid and Con. It is a Conservative defence
I broadly agree with TSE's article, although @MaxPB is also right to point out that Zac was on the wrong side of the argument for many Tories and others who might have voted for him. How much of the problem was Zac himself and how much those advising on the campaign is hard to say.
I would like to think - looking at his history and previous statements - that it was not Zac and was his campaign team.
But in the end he is the one who is responsible for his own campaign and whether he was badly advised or not, it still reflects badly on him. Prior to this election I was a very big Zac fan. Now I simply no longer trust his judgement.
Anyone who claims to be fan of Bollywood and is then unable to answer the question "What is your favourite film?" must be a bit useless as a politician. The question was eminently forseeable. I suspect he's a bit thick.. :-)
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
Isn't this awfully like a political party saying it has an aspiration to transform the NHS or double new housing? People don't believe it, because they're used to there being actual or unspoken small print that renders it potentially meaningless. And aren't people cynical about both, for the same reason?
Ha! I bet the sun was shining and it had blue skies too! It was probably a compulsory disclaimer but I don't know much about the rules on press ads. For commercials the evidence you need to back up a claim has to be watertight. Any disclaimer like the one you describe has to be on screen for a ridiculous length of time and at a size that a blind man can read!
In the US they just need a signature from the client and the agency representative and if any claim is false or a disclaimer can't be read the signatories are held personally responsible and can be sued.
Nick, I think you're missing the point slightly - that's a standard disclaimer for any offer. The fact is that the offer won't be withdrawn because it's a sales promotion - they want people to take it up. The extra person will have been priced in to the package.
What I find a lot more dubious is the massive trend of trying to play on people's emotions. Kwikfit rescuing a hamster and all that shite.
The current fashion for cute animal based advertising is remarkable - I can barely see a TV ad break without kittens or puppies emerging from biscuit packets or promoting doorstep loans, seagulls/beagles selling insurance, cats selling mobile phone packages, tortoises as estate agents, Shetland ponies/three legged dogs for Amazon dogflaps/baby carriers - and on and on.
EDIT FFS, another one 118188 loans for dog needing an operation...
Platypus for First Direct
I can't help wondering if Thinkbox that promotes TV advertising has been taken rather too literally.
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
That is represented in Corbynism, the scepticism of migrants in UKIP, there is a lot of phobia about
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
Remember: Only white people and Jews can be racist!
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
Remember: Only white people and Jews can be racist!
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
The LDs are down to a single seat on London Ass and Welsh Ass.
If I were a libdem, I'd be quite happy with these results. Aggregate all the votes together, and they comfortably outpolled UKIP, they gained two constituency seats in Scotland (and racked up massive majorities in O&S). They gained control of a council for the first time in about eight years.
Sure, it's a long, long way back for them. But they did comfortably better- in aggregate- than they did in 2012. And 2012 was the high point for the libdems last parliamentary cycle.
TSE's post supports Owen Jones in his belief that there is such a thing as a decent Tory.I would certainly include Peter Oborne too.There needs to be an enquiry,just as vigorous as the anti-semitism enquiry in Labour,into islamophobia and anti-traveller racism in the Tory party.A Tory PCC referring to one of his electorate as a "pikey" is unacceptable too.
Thing is there are a lot of voters who are Islamaphobic and traveller phobic, most of them backing UKIP but some on the right of the Tories and a few in Labour. Zac and Crosby's campaign did not work in multicultural London, it may well have done in Lincolnshire or other less urban parts of the UK
Talking about 'isms' and 'phobes', the only true hatred I see spewing out in society today is the Left's visceral and unqualified hatred of any Tory, or anyone they perceive to be a Tory. That could be someone who is a private employee, or a business owner, or someone who is self employed, or is a home owner, maybe even a car owner, or someone who believes in the nation state, or the rule of law, or a decent education, or personal responsibility. If a political or social phobia even exists in a real world sense, then it is Toryphobia.
So there's zero hatred on your Team and universal hatred spewing out of the other Team. After your Team used PMQs and the Russian oligarch media to associate Khan with the 7/7 bombers. Right.
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Across Europe, EU referendum have had comfortably higher turnouts than general elections. Now, we are different, but 45% was AV turnout. I'd reckon 60-65% for referendum turnout.
The LDs are down to a single seat on London Ass and Welsh Ass.
If I were a libdem, I'd be quite happy with these results. Aggregate all the votes together, and they comfortably outpolled UKIP, they gained two constituency seats in Scotland (and racked up massive majorities in O&S). They gained control of a council for the first time in about eight years.
Sure, it's a long, long way back for them. But they did comfortably better- in aggregate- than they did in 2012. And 2012 was the high point for the libdems last parliamentary cycle.
Some people thought 2016 Orkney and Shetland By-election SNP Nailed On. Well, no.
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Across Europe, EU referendum have had comfortably higher turnouts than general elections. Now, we are different, but 45% was AV turnout. I'd reckon 60-65% for referendum turnout.
The 45% AV happened on same day as a lot of local elections with approx half of all councillors elected at that time.
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Across Europe, EU referendum have had comfortably higher turnouts than general elections. Now, we are different, but 45% was AV turnout. I'd reckon 60-65% for referendum turnout.
The 45% AV happened on same day as a lot of local elections with approx half of all councillors elected at that time.
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Across Europe, EU referendum have had comfortably higher turnouts than general elections. Now, we are different, but 45% was AV turnout. I'd reckon 60-65% for referendum turnout.
The 45% AV happened on same day as a lot of local elections with approx half of all councillors elected at that time.
And remember: anyone who votes REMAIN is a foul and vicious traitor, richly deserving of death. Slow death, by torture...
Anyone who votes LEAVE because they have used their reason is little better. We must all vote with the heart, our hearts filled with fear & loathing for all those who differ from us in any way whatsoever, however slightly...
The final England local authority seat count was as follows: Lab 950 (-18) Con 563 (-47) LD 237 (+31) UKIP 34 (+25) Green 19 (=) Others 81 (-45)
In the final result, the Conservatives were a lot further down in seats than it appeared they would be in the earlier tallies. So in terms of seats, Lab down about 2%, Con down about 8%, measured against the results of previous elections in the same seats, the time of nearly all of those previous contests being the Lab high water mark of 2012.
Many thanks for that. These figures usually get lost because by the time they are collated everyone has moved on. That is a much poorer result for the Tories than I think the media have portrayed. Maybe civil war and refusing to help people in the opposite camp on Europe is not the way forward after all.
Not quite the final figures, of course. They are still counting in Bristol. As of this morning, according to the BBC, the figures are
Lab 1291 (-23) Con 828 (-46) LD 370 (+44) UKIP 58 (+26) Green 34 (=)
But the gist of your comments holds good.
That would suggest the share of Tory losses is down from 8% to roughly 5%. Still not good but most governing parties would be pretty happy with that, especially those busy tearing each other apart.
The key point ,though, that seems to be being missed here is that these Tory losses are on top of the 500+ losses suffered back in 2012. Normally when such a heavy defeat occurs at local elections, it is at least partially reversed 4 years later. That has not happened this time - the 2012 Tory losses have been extended.
Is there a reliable figure for turnout in this year's council elections? Turnouts elsewhere were 45.60% London Assembly 45.30% wales 55.60% scotland 54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Across Europe, EU referendum have had comfortably higher turnouts than general elections. Now, we are different, but 45% was AV turnout. I'd reckon 60-65% for referendum turnout.
The 45% AV happened on same day as a lot of local elections with approx half of all councillors elected at that time.
And remember: anyone who votes REMAIN is a foul and vicious traitor, richly deserving of death. Slow death, by torture...
Anyone who votes LEAVE because they have used their reason is little better. We must all vote with the heart, our hearts filled with fear & loathing for all those who differ from us in any way whatsoever, however slightly...
Comments
"Err... erm... look, a photo of 7/7!"
Traditionally, successful Labour leaders have presented themselves as a bit left-wing (Wilson, Callaghan, even Blair at first), without backing it up with anything difficult that can be distorted by the Tories, but the left-wing punters have noticed and want a bit more steak with their sizzle. The trick, therefore, is to find left-wing policies that are actually popular, such as seriously cracking down on tax avoidance. People would absolutely trust Corbyn and McDonnell not to be up for a deal with the Virgin Islands, who have just cocked a snook at Osborne's latest summit on tax avoidance. Would they trust Cameron and Osborne to do anything much?
I examine the national opinion polls for Clinton v Trump so far and I see him hovering around a band between 36 and 43. The recorded Hillary vote is much more volatile, between 38 and 54. The latter figures tend to determine the polling lead rather than Trump's stable 39-40 per cent. Obviously, there are still many undecided respondents.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/16/how-donald-trump-appeals-to-the-white-working-class
"Identity politics, of a different brand from Trump’s, is also gaining strength among progressives. In some cases, it comes with an aversion toward, even contempt for, their fellow-Americans who are white and sinking.
Abstract sympathy with the working class as an economic entity is easy, but the feeling can vanish on contact with actual members of the group, who often arrive with disturbing beliefs and powerful resentments—who might not sound or look like people urban progressives want to know.
White male privilege remains alive in America, but the phrase would seem odd, if not infuriating, to a sixty-year-old man working as a Walmart greeter in southern Ohio. The growing strain of identity politics on the left is pushing working-class whites, chastised for various types of bigotry (and sometimes justifiably), all the more decisively toward Trump."
What I find a lot more dubious is the massive trend of trying to play on people's emotions. Kwikfit rescuing a hamster and all that shite.
(Source: Nate Silver, http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/)
A lot of non-struggling whites are fine with Trump's brand of "identity politics". It's not classist to speak out against it.
Louise Brown, Welsh Conservatives = 50,985 (30.75 per cent)
Jeff Cuthbert, Welsh Labour = 76,893 (46.38 per cent)
Darren Jones, Plaid Cymru = 37,916 (22.87 per cent)
Lab and Con to second round.
In 2012 it was by an Independent. Labour should gain it this time.
But in the end he is the one who is responsible for his own campaign and whether he was badly advised or not, it still reflects badly on him. Prior to this election I was a very big Zac fan. Now I simply no longer trust his judgement.
EDIT FFS, another one 118188 loans for dog needing an operation...
http://www.bristol.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/223205
http://www.theguardian.com/global/commentisfree/2016/may/08/jeremy-corbyn-local-election-results-labour-leadership
If you persist in these kind of views Labour is simply heading to a 2020 defeat to learn it's lessons.
Southam and myself both repeatedly warned against Ed Miliband who cost you the chance of reclaiming your seat at 2015. I warned previously against Gordon Brown who cost you your seat in 2010.
I am sick and fed up with Labour having unelectable leaders- it is keeping Labour out of power during a period where there is still little public affection for the Tory party. And who suffers for the failure in the Labour party to get its act together...the poor, the NHS, our institutions like the BBC, local authorities.....none of these would have happened under a Labour Govt.
And if people like you continue to softly support Corbyn, we are at least another decade from power.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1mv0Y-3GL8
The correct current tallies are
Labour 1,291 −23
Conservative 828 −46
Liberal Democrat 370 +44
Independent 77 −3
UKIP 58 +26
Residents 39 +8
Green Party 34 0
Liberal 4 −1
Respect 0 −5
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/councils
London is big, in some parts wonderful (in others ghastly beyond measure), but it is not as vital to the productive UK economy as some people seem to think. As a thought what does London's GDP per capita look like if you strip out all the public sector (i.e. taxpayer funded) jobs? Dunno, but might be interesting.
The people at the top of LEAVE are the same people who won the AV referendum and turned around a massive gap behind the YES group. I think they know what lessons should be drawn? They also defeated the Govt backed northern referendum vote in a Labour dominated area.
Cons lost Worcester and Elmbridge to NOC, but Peterborough went from NOC to Con.
Labour lost Dudley to NOC. (edited sp.)
Lib Dems gained Watford from NOC.
Bristol still to declare.
The whole "Obmaa is incredibly unpopular so the Democrats are doomed" line is really hard to push at the moment.
A very high percentage of Britons live for part of their life in London, but not all of it. Quite possibly a quarter or more of Britons are Londoners for part of their lives, and equally likely that a quarter of Londoners feel that they are really Scottish etc.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/
Turnout in Lab wards 45% in Lib Dem ward an astonishing 61.47%
Ruth should've taught Zac how to hold a pint. lol
Naught but Islamist Propaganda from TSE
(only kidding!)
CHURCH, Richard Wilfred – Welsh Liberal Democrats: 20,725
DAVIES, William Edmund Vincent John – Independent: 11,561
LLYWELYN, Dafydd – Plaid Cymru: 52,469
MADGE, Kevin – Welsh Labour: 34,799
PARKINSON, Desmond Cecil – UKIP Wales: 20,870
SALMON, Christopher Tangye Robert – Welsh Conservative Party: 47,093
Run off between Plaid and Con. It is a Conservative defence
I suspect he's a bit thick.. :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ga7eVrqTrAw
Lab 161529
Con 70799
Plaid 70770
Ind 67434
LD 24438
Turnouts elsewhere were
45.60% London Assembly
45.30% wales
55.60% scotland
54.20% Northern Ire
Reasons why turnout in referendum will be so much higher without a GOTV operation on the ground that these had are.....?
Sure, it's a long, long way back for them. But they did comfortably better- in aggregate- than they did in 2012. And 2012 was the high point for the libdems last parliamentary cycle.
Plaid 67179
Labour 54892
Con 42005
UKIP 25943
independent 23487
Plaid vs Lab in final round. Plaid lead is healthy given many second preferences won't be used like all those UKIP-Con or Con-UKIP
Anyone who votes LEAVE because they have used their reason is little better. We must all vote with the heart, our hearts filled with fear & loathing for all those who differ from us in any way whatsoever, however slightly...
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD