Mr. Sandpit, surely this year? He's 11 on Ladbrokes.
Mr. Richard, I'd say 3,000 counts as a village.
Mind you, I was in China, and a 'village' had 200,000 residents, so it's all relative.
A couple of days ago I read a complaint by an American who was away from home visiting a city elsewhere in the US, during their visit the traffic was apparently too much for them, so I looked up the population of the metropolis in question as I didn't think it was a big place. 18,000 people lived in this "city" with horrendous traffic.
I am not convinced by David's view that "Even a series of terrorist attacks is unlikely to swing the European results (...) Fillon would play sufficiently to the same law, order and culture market as Le Pen to see her off".
James Connington at the Telegraph ("(e)ven if Ms Le Pen doesn’t win") and Matthew Doulton at the Wall Street Journal ("Mr. Fillon, however, is more likely to become president") seem to think she's got a good chance.
Like the last three presidents Fillon has been a senior government minister (in his case, prime minister), which gives him recognition, but although he is outperforming Le Pen in one-dimensional popularity polls the more important consideration may be whether he can come cross as "feeling people's pain". Hollande and Valls can't. If it's time for a change, will law and order packaging be enough?
France had serious terrorist attacks in 2015, and it didn't change Le Pen's polling.
Indeed, there were two sets of elections in 2015 in France and the Front National underperformed its polling in both cases. It also did very poorly in transfer votes in both. Even immediately after the Bataclan attack, in the most pro-FN region in France, and with Marine Le Pen herself standing against a colourless LR candidate, the FN still trailed by 10%.
I think it would have to be a very, very serious attack indeed for FN to get a look in. It would also have to be Syrians who have German asylum status. Maybe an attack on the Élysée or Notre-Dame. Even then I think it wouldn't happen and Fillon would tack to the right and win.
Shy Fascists ?
Two million voters that haven't voted before come out of the banlieues of Marseille to vote ?
I think it would have to be a very serious failing by the police/security that shook the faith in government, even Fillon's old one. Perhaps a double agent or similar, weaponry actually provided by the French government used on its own citizens.
and was associated with expensive champagne from his Bullingdon days but also convincingly drank beer in pubs.
Tim used to have a hilariously bad photo of Cameron supposedly drinking Guinness at home which he used to post regularly. I still miss his acerbic wit.
I think we know who is the pretend beer drinker out of these two
Is this the one DavidL is referring to?
It really is a delight of fakeness - Sam holding the baby up while Dave pretends to drink a Guinness (which was obviously poured about ten seconds before) with his shirt still buttoned to the top.
The reflection of the photographers in the mirror reminds me of this:
Philip_Thompson said: When was the last time either major party polled in the teens? Could Labour this Parliament?
I think the Tories hit 21% with Gallup after the Winchester by-election, but that's the lowest I remember."
Hard though it is to believe, it's actually as recent as 2009. Mark Pack's database shows a stunning 18% for Labour in the Ipsos-MORI May 2009 monitor, caused by a surge for other parties (not just UKIP, Greens and BNP too) presumably caused by the Euro elections.
and was associated with expensive champagne from his Bullingdon days but also convincingly drank beer in pubs.
Tim used to have a hilariously bad photo of Cameron supposedly drinking Guinness at home which he used to post regularly. I still miss his acerbic wit.
I think we know who is the pretend beer drinker out of these two
Is this the one DavidL is referring to?
Yep that's the one. The things PR people persuade otherwise sensible things to do.
malcolmg said : 'Only 180 degrees out there, they will be waiting a long time methinks. Labour a busted flush and Tories with NO chance of ever being in government. '
The SNP will eventually become unpopular as all parties in Government do. There are increasing signs that peak SNP was reached in 2015 as reflected in both Holyrood and council by elections. I suspect they will struggle to poll 45% at the next Westminster elections - 42/43% is probably more likely.
Will be a long long time till they are out of government
and was associated with expensive champagne from his Bullingdon days but also convincingly drank beer in pubs.
Tim used to have a hilariously bad photo of Cameron supposedly drinking Guinness at home which he used to post regularly. I still miss his acerbic wit.
I think we know who is the pretend beer drinker out of these two
Is this the one DavidL is referring to?
It really is a delight of fakeness - Sam holding the baby up while Dave pretends to drink a Guinness (which was obviously poured about ten seconds before) with his shirt still buttoned to the top.
The reflection of the photographers in the mirror reminds me of this:
I am not convinced by David's view that "Even a series of terrorist attacks is unlikely to swing the European results (...) Fillon would play sufficiently to the same law, order and culture market as Le Pen to see her off".
James Connington at the Telegraph ("(e)ven if Ms Le Pen doesn’t win") and Matthew Doulton at the Wall Street Journal ("Mr. Fillon, however, is more likely to become president") seem to think she's got a good chance.
Like the last three presidents Fillon has been a senior government minister (in his case, prime minister), which gives him recognition, but although he is outperforming Le Pen in one-dimensional popularity polls the more important consideration may be whether he can come cross as "feeling people's pain". Hollande and Valls can't. If it's time for a change, will law and order packaging be enough?
France had serious terrorist attacks in 2015, and it didn't change Le Pen's polling.
Indeed, there were two sets of elections in 2015 in France and the Front National underperformed its polling in both cases. It also did very poorly in transfer votes in both. Even immediately after the Bataclan attack, in the most pro-FN region in France, and with Marine Le Pen herself standing against a colourless LR candidate, the FN still trailed by 10%.
I think it would have to be a very, very serious attack indeed for FN to get a look in. It would also have to be Syrians who have German asylum status. Maybe an attack on the Élysée or Notre-Dame. Even then I think it wouldn't happen and Fillon would tack to the right and win.
To be honest, I think a more likely outcome would be if - in the first round - Green, Socialist and Left Front supporters held their noses and voted Macron to prevent a Fillon vs Le Pen second round.
(That being said, I'm all out my Macron position, having bought him in 20-23 range and sold him at 9s.)
I seem to have lost the ability to quote posts, anyone know what I've done and how to fix it?
It is a Vanilla forums bug. Click on the timestamp (top left under poster's name) which takes you to the Vanilla interface which still has the quote button. Note that posts are ordered the other way (oldest on top).
I am not convinced by David's view that "Even a series of terrorist attacks is unlikely to swing the European results (...) Fillon would play sufficiently to the same law, order and culture market as Le Pen to see her off".
James Connington at the Telegraph ("(e)ven if Ms Le Pen doesn’t win") and Matthew Doulton at the Wall Street Journal ("Mr. Fillon, however, is more likely to become president") seem to think she's got a good chance.
Like the last three presidents Fillon has been a senior government minister (in his case, prime minister), which gives him recognition, but although he is outperforming Le Pen in one-dimensional popularity polls the more important consideration may be whether he can come cross as "feeling people's pain". Hollande and Valls can't. If it's time for a change, will law and order packaging be enough?
France had serious terrorist attacks in 2015, and it didn't change Le Pen's polling.
Indeed, there were two sets of elections in 2015 in France and the Front National underperformed its polling in both cases. It also did very poorly in transfer votes in both. Even immediately after the Bataclan attack, in the most pro-FN region in France, and with Marine Le Pen herself standing against a colourless LR candidate, the FN still trailed by 10%.
I think it would have to be a very, very serious attack indeed for FN to get a look in. It would also have to be Syrians who have German asylum status. Maybe an attack on the Élysée or Notre-Dame. Even then I think it wouldn't happen and Fillon would tack to the right and win.
To be honest, I think a more likely outcome would be if - in the first round - Green, Socialist and Left Front supporters held their noses and voted Macron to prevent a Fillon vs Le Pen second round.
(That being said, I'm all out my Macron position, having bought him in 20-23 range and sold him at 9s.)
Has Bayrou announced he's not standing ? He's out to 550.
I seem to have lost the ability to quote posts, anyone know what I've done and how to fix it?
It is a Vanilla forums bug. Click on the timestamp (top left under poster's name) which takes you to the Vanilla interface which still has the quote button. Note that posts are ordered the other way (oldest on top).
And they still do not want immigrants ! Who will pay the taxes ?
I wasn't previously aware that non-immigrants don't pay taxes.
Still nice to know - I'll be off to the HMRC office tomorrow for a rebate on all those taxes I've mistakenly been paying.
A country with a roughly stable or slowly falling population should have no problems paying taxes.
Germany and Italy have fairly rapidly falling populations ... more of a problem. It apparently happened because Italians decided in one generation 'f*** the pope, we need birth control'.
Japan has a falling population I think. Immigrants make up only 2% of the population. But its pensioners look quite fit, so hopefully 68 year olds can pay some taxes *and* help caring for 98 year olds.
I am not convinced by David's view that "Even a series of terrorist attacks is unlikely to swing the European results (...) Fillon would play sufficiently to the same law, order and culture market as Le Pen to see her off".
James Connington at the Telegraph ("(e)ven if Ms Le Pen doesn’t win") and Matthew Doulton at the Wall Street Journal ("Mr. Fillon, however, is more likely to become president") seem to think she's got a good chance.
Like the last three presidents Fillon has been a senior government minister (in his case, prime minister), which gives him recognition, but although he is outperforming Le Pen in one-dimensional popularity polls the more important consideration may be whether he can come cross as "feeling people's pain". Hollande and Valls can't. If it's time for a change, will law and order packaging be enough?
France had serious terrorist attacks in 2015, and it didn't change Le Pen's polling.
Indeed, there were two sets of elections in 2015 in France and the Front National underperformed its polling in both cases. It also did very poorly in transfer votes in both. Even immediately after the Bataclan attack, in the most pro-FN region in France, and with Marine Le Pen herself standing against a colourless LR candidate, the FN still trailed by 10%.
I think it would have to be a very, very serious attack indeed for FN to get a look in. It would also have to be Syrians who have German asylum status. Maybe an attack on the Élysée or Notre-Dame. Even then I think it wouldn't happen and Fillon would tack to the right and win.
To be honest, I think a more likely outcome would be if - in the first round - Green, Socialist and Left Front supporters held their noses and voted Macron to prevent a Fillon vs Le Pen second round.
(That being said, I'm all out my Macron position, having bought him in 20-23 range and sold him at 9s.)
I think in the scenario of a major terror attack by "refugees" the left wouldn't even get a look in.
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required?
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
TWR So presumably if May wins Copeland when Cameron twice failed to do so that means she is heading for a better result than he got in 2010 and 2015!
She would be wise to go for a GE while Brexit still means Brexit (aka moon on a stick), if she waits until after the great betrayal / recession (depending on variety) she will see UKIP voters peel off
and was associated with expensive champagne from his Bullingdon days but also convincingly drank beer in pubs.
Tim used to have a hilariously bad photo of Cameron supposedly drinking Guinness at home which he used to post regularly. I still miss his acerbic wit.
I think we know who is the pretend beer drinker out of these two
Is this the one DavidL is referring to?
Yep that's the one. The things PR people persuade otherwise sensible things to do.
It's the third result if you type "David Cameron Guiness" into google image search with a link to a post by Tim no less.
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Mr. Sandpit, surely this year? He's 11 on Ladbrokes.
Mr. Richard, I'd say 3,000 counts as a village.
Mind you, I was in China, and a 'village' had 200,000 residents, so it's all relative.
A couple of days ago I read a complaint by an American who was away from home visiting a city elsewhere in the US, during their visit the traffic was apparently too much for them, so I looked up the population of the metropolis in question as I didn't think it was a big place. 18,000 people lived in this "city" with horrendous traffic.
America's road designers love affair with 4 way stop intersections rather than through roads with give way junctions or roundabouts curses their roads with static traffic.
Freggles Yes but she will still win a majority against Corbyn regardless given he is polling 6% behind Miliband, better to keep him in place for the post-negotiation general election
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Yes, so it's never been so low since Labour first came to prominence, a hundred years ago.
Sadly I think we are seeing the slow death of a once-great party, the party of the working man, the party of Attlee and Wilson (and Blair). I know political party deaths are anticipated more than they happen, but can anyone here really see Corbyn not lose several dozen seats at a 2019 election under the new boundaries?
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required? ---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Sandpit Corbyn looks likely to lead Labour to an even worse result than Foot did in 1983. Labour then either has a choice, it picks someone electable and survives and maybe returns to power in an election or 2 or it sticks with Corbyn or McDonnell and heads for oblivion with the LDs and UKIP feasting on the carcass
Sandpit Corbyn looks likely to lead Labour to an even worse result than Foot did in 1983. Labour then either has a choice, it picks someone electable and survives and maybe returns to power in an election or 2 or it sticks with Corbyn or McDonnell and heads for oblivion with the LDs and UKIP feasting on the carcass
Not the LibDems, except in seats like Richmond Park that Labour never won anyway. The Greens, very possibly.
IA The Liberals have the strength in depth to win over the centre left and of course won about 60 seats under FPTP a decade ago including a number Labour now hold, the Greens only have one
Interesting comparing this poll with the Yougov of 28/29 November (ie a couple of days before Richmond). Tories and UKIP are flat, but Lab -3% and LD +3% since then. Feels plausible that Richmond shone a national spotlight on LD's consistency on Brexit versus Labour's flannelling, and that's pulled some Remainers from red to yellow.
Interesting watching the likes of McCluskey suggesting Corbyn might not make it to 2020, it's almost like the penny's starting to drop that the polls have been grinding down since the leadership election, it's not division that's killing Labour but the lack of an alternative to Corbyn.
MrsB Indeed, not inevitable the main centre-left party is a socialist, social democratic one, in the US and Canada it is a Liberal Party, in Poland the main opposition to the centre-right is a populist UKIP, style party
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required? ---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Way off topic, but one for the train buffs "Flying Scotsman, from the footplate"
An hour's journey in the great train, in real time, narrated by the crew themselves and superbly filmed. No uninformed presenters, no 'human interest' back stories, just the train and its crew. Well done BBC.
IA The Liberals have the strength in depth to win over the centre left and of course won about 60 seats under FPTP a decade ago including a number Labour now hold, the Greens only have one
I doubt a significant number of Guardian/Indy readers are going to vote for a Party that was in co-alition with the Tories in the last Parliament.
Way off topic, but one for the train buffs "Flying Scotsman, from the footplate"
An hour's journey in the great train, in real time, narrated by the crew themselves and superbly filmed. No uninformed presenters, no 'human interest' back stories, just the train and its crew. Well done BBC.
Why would anyone want to watch that over-rated piece of LNER rubbish?
(Only joking. We watched it last night, and it actually distracted my son from playing with the Lego digger, which is now completed and utterly awesome.)
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required? ---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Developing property in Cyprus.
---- That doesn't sound very left wing....... has he become what he most despised?
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required? ---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Developing property in Cyprus.
---- That doesn't sound very left wing....... has he become what he most despised?
Way off topic, but one for the train buffs "Flying Scotsman, from the footplate"
An hour's journey in the great train, in real time, narrated by the crew themselves and superbly filmed. No uninformed presenters, no 'human interest' back stories, just the train and its crew. Well done BBC.
I wish Beeching had kept his hands off the SVR though; road congestion is now making some of these routes viable again, that is, if they haven't been built on
IA The Liberals have the strength in depth to win over the centre left and of course won about 60 seats under FPTP a decade ago including a number Labour now hold, the Greens only have one
The huge problem for the Lib Dems is they have very few tight marginals to target, after which the seats (a) require progressively larger swings to capture, and (b) are disproportionately concentrated in Tory-dominated, Leave-voting areas.
Forget the modest progress made in council by-elections. Imagine a scenario in which voters who have sitting Conservative MPs - and the preponderance of whom voted to Leave the EU - are being asked to replace those Tory MPs with Liberal Democrats. The yellows are not only Europhile, but - far more importantly - a large enough bloc of them might help a rainbow coalition dominated by a Far Left Labour Party and Scottish Nationalism into power. The Tories will certainly make sure that any remaining voters who have been living as hermits for the last ten years, and may therefore still as yet be unaware of this possibility, are enlightened.
In order for us to have a liberal Opposition, Labour must first be destroyed - and how this is supposed to happen God alone knows. Labour benefits from a surviving voter coalition which is going to be supremely difficult to crack in England in the way it was in Scotland; and gargantuan majorities in its core strongholds. We may be stuck with it for a very long time.
Labour benefits from a surviving voter coalition which is going to be supremely difficult to crack in England in the way it was in Scotland; and gargantuan majorities in its core strongholds. We may be stuck with it for a very long time.
The strongholds could crack when Labour aren't seen as being "the only game is town". If it's reduced to its city-centre bastions, with UKIP or the LibDems holding a similar number of seats, and PMQs on a rota ("opposition of the week"), then the appeal of an Islington-aligned party lead by an old, dim, commie terrorist-hugger will evaporate.
A cursory search of Twitter shows lots of reports of violence, sexual assaults, attacks on churches., etc
This could be random, and coincidental. I genuinely don't know. It needs a serious journalist to give an overview. But the German media doesn't do that.
A cursory search of Twitter shows lots of reports of violence, sexual assaults, attacks on churches., etc
This could be random, and coincidental. I genuinely don't know. It needs a serious journalist to give an overview. But the German media doesn't do that.
It's like Tesco value toilet paper, it just ends up pushing shit around.
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Yes, so it's never been so low since Labour first came to prominence, a hundred years ago.
Sadly I think we are seeing the slow death of a once-great party, the party of the working man, the party of Attlee and Wilson (and Blair). I know political party deaths are anticipated more than they happen, but can anyone here really see Corbyn not lose several dozen seats at a 2019 election under the new boundaries?
It's not out of the question that it could get this bad, although the natural pessimist in the Labour-phobe that is me finds it hard to credit. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Labour were to finish somewhere close (in terms of seats) to where the Tories did in 1997 if we had an early GE this year. They would then have to rebuild (if they're even capable of doing it) from a much lower position in terms both of political credibility and vote share, of course...
Way off topic, but one for the train buffs "Flying Scotsman, from the footplate"
An hour's journey in the great train, in real time, narrated by the crew themselves and superbly filmed. No uninformed presenters, no 'human interest' back stories, just the train and its crew. Well done BBC.
Why would anyone want to watch that over-rated piece of LNER rubbish?
(Only joking. We watched it last night, and it actually distracted my son from playing with the Lego digger, which is now completed and utterly awesome.)
I'm more of a planes guy than trains usually, but that was absolutely fascinating television and a great minimalist format although there must have been 40 or 50 cameras involved covering the route.
Hopefully the BBC will get good feedback about not trying to dumb things down all the time and let the pictures tell their own story.
Oh, and isn't Lego brilliant! My parents always said it was they best money they ever spent on me, and I do the same now with my nephews and hopefully will do with my own children when they arrive.
The huge problem for the Lib Dems is they have very few tight marginals to target, after which the seats (a) require progressively larger swings to capture, and (b) are disproportionately concentrated in Tory-dominated, Leave-voting areas.
Forget the modest progress made in council by-elections. Imagine a scenario in which voters who have sitting Conservative MPs - and the preponderance of whom voted to Leave the EU - are being asked to replace those Tory MPs with Liberal Democrats. The yellows are not only Europhile, but - far more importantly - a large enough bloc of them might help a rainbow coalition dominated by a Far Left Labour Party and Scottish Nationalism into power. The Tories will certainly make sure that any remaining voters who have been living as hermits for the last ten years, and may therefore still as yet be unaware of this possibility, are enlightened.
In order for us to have a liberal Opposition, Labour must first be destroyed - and how this is supposed to happen God alone knows. Labour benefits from a surviving voter coalition which is going to be supremely difficult to crack in England in the way it was in Scotland; and gargantuan majorities in its core strongholds. We may be stuck with it for a very long time.
There's absolutely no question of Farron "helping a rainbow coalition" (whatever that means) of the current parties. The Conservatives might try that as a weapon but it's not got any credibility.
As for "destroying" Labour, why should anyone want to see a political party destroyed ? Labour is currently in a bad way but it will recover - it has before. Once it becomes a credible alternative, the notion of an LD-Lab Coalition will become not only less fanciful within the parties but outside them too.
The Conservatives will, in 2020, have to defend their record not just on Brexit but on other aspects of Government. We are three years from that and not even halfway through the current parliament.
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Yes, so it's never been so low since Labour first came to prominence, a hundred years ago.
Sadly I think we are seeing the slow death of a once-great party, the party of the working man, the party of Attlee and Wilson (and Blair). I know political party deaths are anticipated more than they happen, but can anyone here really see Corbyn not lose several dozen seats at a 2019 election under the new boundaries?
It's not out of the question that it could get this bad, although the natural pessimist in the Labour-phobe that is me finds it hard to credit. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Labour were to finish somewhere close (in terms of seats) to where the Tories did in 1997 if we had an early GE this year. They would then have to rebuild (if they're even capable of doing it) from a much lower position in terms both of political credibility and vote share, of course...
They seem in need of a moderate left-wing version of Ken Clarke, i.e., a mirror image.
Livingstone would feel he's too old and worn out, although he's only a year older than Donald Trump. John Smith's dead. Anyone else?
Maybe the decades of low ratings for politicians by the public are now bringing about a vicious circle, with high-calibre individuals less likely to go into politics. Aaargh ...
A cursory search of Twitter shows lots of reports of violence, sexual assaults, attacks on churches., etc
This could be random, and coincidental. I genuinely don't know. It needs a serious journalist to give an overview. But the German media doesn't do that.
Not seeing a lot of women in those pictures / videos...doesn't look like a happy fun loving party where all genders, colours and creeds have come together to celebrate. You could easily be mistaken that as video from last years Cologne New Year.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
Where would turn Yellow under this scenario? Remain strongholds (SW London, perhaps Hornsey & Wood Green, Cambridge, OxWAb), plus two in Scotland thanks to Unionist tactical voting (NE Fife, Edinburgh West). There are other possibles: maybe Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Bath or Yeovil. Or you could theoretically see the LDs slip through in four way marginals, as happened so memorably in Inverness in the 1980s.
Nevertheless, absent a return to a 20% vote share (which I do not expect), I think it's very hard to see the LibDems doing better than 15 seats, and I maintain my 12 to 14 seat forecast.
@GoodwinMJ: 2017 will be another hard year for the left Latest poll (change since last election) Germany 20% (-5) France 12% (-17) Netherlands 10% (-28)
Sandpit Indeed 1918 was also the last general election when the Liberals outpolled Labour, Lloyd-George's Liberals and Asquith's Liberals got a combined 26% between them to Labour's 21.5%. As Labour declines the LDs are rising again a little amongst the centre left middle class while UKIP does best with the white working class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Yes, so it's never been so low since Labour first came to prominence, a hundred years ago.
Sadly I think we are seeing the slow death of a once-great party, the party of the working man, the party of Attlee and Wilson (and Blair). I know political party deaths are anticipated more than they happen, but can anyone here really see Corbyn not lose several dozen seats at a 2019 election under the new boundaries?
It's not out of the question that it could get this bad, although the natural pessimist in the Labour-phobe that is me finds it hard to credit. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Labour were to finish somewhere close (in terms of seats) to where the Tories did in 1997 if we had an early GE this year. They would then have to rebuild (if they're even capable of doing it) from a much lower position in terms both of political credibility and vote share, of course...
They seem in need of a moderate left-wing version of Ken Clarke, i.e., a mirror image.
Livingstone would feel he's too old and worn out, although he's only a year older than Donald Trump. John Smith's dead. Anyone else?
Maybe the decades of low ratings for politicians by the public are now bringing about a vicious circle, with high-calibre individuals less likely to go into politics. Aaargh ...
A very good point about the way the public and media look at our politicians having an effect on recruitment. If we treat politicians like sh1t, then we end up with sh1t politicians!
It takes a brave man or woman now to want to go into such public service now, and live out their lives under constant scrutiny by people who wish them to fall down.
There's absolutely no question of Farron "helping a rainbow coalition" (whatever that means) of the current parties. The Conservatives might try that as a weapon but it's not got any credibility.
As for "destroying" Labour, why should anyone want to see a political party destroyed ? Labour is currently in a bad way but it will recover - it has before. Once it becomes a credible alternative, the notion of an LD-Lab Coalition will become not only less fanciful within the parties but outside them too.
The Conservatives will, in 2020, have to defend their record not just on Brexit but on other aspects of Government. We are three years from that and not even halfway through the current parliament.
1. The Liberal Democrats are acutely vulnerable to taint by association with Labour. They've moved leftwards since the election, and now have an established record of building coalitions against the instincts of their activist base - so why would they not do so with a partner with which they would feel (or certainly appear) to be more comfortable? If the Liberal Democrat leadership were to repudiate - loudly, publicly and repeatedly - any accommodation with either the current, extreme form of Labour or with Celtic Nationalism at Westminster, then they might get a hearing. But they can't and they won't, because ultimately the whole progressive alliance thing's the only way they're ever getting a chance to have FPTP replaced with PR - which is their most cherished desire - unless or until they can get Labour out of the way and become a party of Government in their own right.
2. Labour - having already very nearly broken the Union through its catastrophically botched devolution plan - has been thoroughly infiltrated and poisoned by the Far Left. It's presently controlled by a terrorist-sympathising leadership that's kept in place by an extreme, pseudo-Marxist majority amongst the membership base, and is likely to remain so. It's not at all illogical to wish to be well rid of such an organisation. A credible Opposition is needed to make our democracy work. Labour no longer seems capable of providing it, and its recovery to a position of strength is far from assured - see the Liberal Party between the Wars.
3. Faced with a choice between Corbynite Labour and the Tories under virtually anybody, there's only ever going to be one winner.
Freggles Yes but she will still win a majority against Corbyn regardless given he is polling 6% behind Miliband, better to keep him in place for the post-negotiation general election
Absolutely, it's a choice between utterly annihilating Labour and merely giving them a beating.
Politics like economics works in cycles. We seem to be at the dark point in the cycle as their is no hope. Events are likely to present somebody, probably within the Labour Party to be propelled into No.10. First of all Corbyn needs to resign/ forced out by ill health / die. Second the beacon of hope candidate needs to emerge with an agenda of hope and positive change. In 1992 Labour was being written off as being in a death spiral, look how things changed in 5 years. Labour won with the biggest majority since the 1930s!
The Tories currently have a very beatable leader, things are going to go wrong big style with Brexit. I still don't see an early GE happening. Labour could surprise us all. I for one would not vote for May as PM if you paid me, she is useless/ clueless. I used to vote Tory but will not vote for May as she is the personification of a vacuum. I might vote Lib Dem if Corbyn is still leader but if he is no longer leader I would vote for a moderate Labour leader like Hunt, Umunna or somebody not even that well known like Kier Starmer.
Re the LDs (again)... As a 'base case' for 2020, I'm assuming that the LDs poll about 6% better than 2015 (i.e. 14%), Conservatives up 2% (37%), Labour about 5% worse (26%), and UKIP about 2% worse (12%). Other (SNP + Greens, mostly) drops a percent too.
On this scenario, anywhere with an 11% or less Labour lead over the LibDems is theoretically vulnerable as are Conservative majorities of 4% or under. I would add a caveat: I think I'd only want to play those places where there is a strong Remain vote for the LDs to tap into.
This gives us five London seats where they're competitive, two university seats, two Scottish seats, one West Country, two South East market towns, and two three/four way marginals where they might sneak through the middle.
Freggles Yes but she will still win a majority against Corbyn regardless given he is polling 6% behind Miliband, better to keep him in place for the post-negotiation general election
Absolutely, it's a choice between utterly annihilating Labour and merely giving them a beating.
It's not inconceivable that, under the new boundaries, we see the Tories come close to Blair's result in 1997, a replica of which would be a couple under 400 of the 600 seats. That gives Labour maybe 120 max, over a hundred down at the election. Vote shares of around 42/24 gives this result, which is only a 1% swing away from today's poll.
Mr. P, the value bets would seem to be on Labour doing really rather well (May is eminently beatable) or collapsing (Corbyn is atrocious), as someone else (Mr. Eagles?) said a while ago.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
There's absolutely no question of Farron "helping a rainbow coalition" (whatever that means) of the current parties. The Conservatives might try that as a weapon but it's not got any credibility.
As for "destroying" Labour, why should anyone want to see a political party destroyed ? Labour is currently in a bad way but it will recover - it has before. Once it becomes a credible alternative, the notion of an LD-Lab Coalition will become not only less fanciful within the parties but outside them too.
The Conservatives will, in 2020, have to defend their record not just on Brexit but on other aspects of Government. We are three years from that and not even halfway through the current parliament.
The Liberal Democrats are acutely vulnerable to taint by association with Labour. They've moved leftwards since the election, and now have an established record of building coalitions against the instincts of their activist base - so why would they not do so with a partner with which they would feel (or certainly appear) to be more comfortable? If the Liberal Democrat leadership were to repudiate - loudly, publicly and repeatedly - any accommodation with either the current, extreme form of Labour or with Celtic Nationalism at Westminster, then they might get a hearing. But they can't and they won't, because ultimately the whole progressive alliance thing's the only way they're ever getting a chance to have FPTP replaced with PR - which is their most cherished desire - unless or until they can get Labour out of the way and become a party of Government in their own right. ....
I hope the Lib Dems make it absolutely clear that they will not enter a coalition with anyone. No ifs or buts. No pacts. No ministerial cars.
They should promise to support legislation they agree with and oppose legislation they disagree with, and repeat this message endlessly until we're sick and tired of hearing it.
Clearly they would support legislation that provides PR because they agree with it.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
Le Pen says she has been pacing herself. She plans to "push the button" to unveil her programme on 4 Feb, after which she will appear at several large rallies.
What is the deal when someone is made a "Roles Applicant"? This renders them unable to post yet not obviously banned, is it the site's equivalent of the 28 day pre charge detention rule?
The NeverTrumps in the US have gone off the charts insane over Russia. Louise Mensch, previously of this parish, is now calling for the US to retake Crimea and start a war 'until they begged the USA to administer Moscow'.
It's hard to believe she used to be an MP with prospects.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
It's the constant wishing ill fortune on your fellow citizens just so you can say "told you so" which I find both sad and tedious. It may not have occurred to you that you're wishing penury on yourself and your family and your position does your cause no credit.
However if you want big events then the EU has as big a chance of a Black Wednesday event as the UK - Euro crisis, Itailan banks, Le Pen, Merkel out, Greece, Putin etc.
Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it , but not necessarily in the way you expected.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
It's the constant wishing ill fortune on your fellow citizens just so you can say "told you so" which I find both sad and tedious.
Then you badly misread me. Black Wednesday was the start of a 10 year period of pretty benign times for the UK, and I believe the failure of Brexit would be similarly positive for the country and its people.
The NeverTrumps in the US have gone off the charts insane over Russia. Louise Mensch, previously of this parish, is now calling for the US to retake Crimea and start a war 'until they begged the USA to administer Moscow'.
It's hard to believe she used to be an MP with prospects.
Don't start me on that woman. I knocked doors for her on Election Day 2010, only to see her quit and disappear across the pond half way through the Parliament. Grr...
Politics like economics works in cycles. We seem to be at the dark point in the cycle as their is no hope. Events are likely to present somebody, probably within the Labour Party to be propelled into No.10. First of all Corbyn needs to resign/ forced out by ill health / die. Second the beacon of hope candidate needs to emerge with an agenda of hope and positive change. In 1992 Labour was being written off as being in a death spiral, look how things changed in 5 years. Labour won with the biggest majority since the 1930s!
The Tories currently have a very beatable leader, things are going to go wrong big style with Brexit. I still don't see an early GE happening. Labour could surprise us all. I for one would not vote for May as PM if you paid me, she is useless/ clueless. I used to vote Tory but will not vote for May as she is the personification of a vacuum. I might vote Lib Dem if Corbyn is still leader but if he is no longer leader I would vote for a moderate Labour leader like Hunt, Umunna or somebody not even that well known like Kier Starmer.
This constituency has had Tory MPs since 1910. My vote is wasted! I haven't lived in a marginal for 40 years.
Looking at the national picture though, more worrying than Labour-Tory cycles to me is the longer cycle that proceeded from Old Labour and One Nation Tories 1940-79, if not earlier, to a 1970s coup that installed Thatcher and Successors 1980-2017. (They're still in office.)
Apparently one reason it was possible to build 300,000 to 500,000 homes per year in the past is that 1945-79 governments almost ignored public sector debt. It was ~2x higher than today at times. They also discussed how to increase materials output with industry, so that shortages were avoided. That degree of government intervention is ruled out if everyone recites daily: 'we worship the market; it will provide our needs'.
Whoever challenges and articulates today's orthodoxy could, one assumes, gain the support of well over 25% of the electorate. They can see the housing shortage, the NHS problems, the lack of social care and gas and electricity overcharges for themselves.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
It's the constant wishing ill fortune on your fellow citizens just so you can say "told you so" which I find both sad and tedious.
Then you badly misread me. Black Wednesday was the start of a 10 year period of pretty benign times for the UK, and I believe the failure of Brexit would be similarly positive for the country and its people.
No I dont think I have misread you, you post constantly wishing for bad times as a proof that Brexit wont work.
Brexit may not work, it's a risk, but wishing disaster on your own people just to say yadda isnt terribly edifying.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
It's the constant wishing ill fortune on your fellow citizens just so you can say "told you so" which I find both sad and tedious.
Then you badly misread me. Black Wednesday was the start of a 10 year period of pretty benign times for the UK, and I believe the failure of Brexit would be similarly positive for the country and its people.
No I dont think I have misread you, you post constantly wishing for bad times as a proof that Brexit wont work.
Brexit may not work, it's a risk, but wishing disaster on your own people just to say yadda isnt terribly edifying.
I've never knowingly wished for bad times for the country. Bad times for Brexiteers wrestling with intractable problems of their own making, yes, but I have confidence that our democracy will hold them to account before it is too late.
@Black_Rock is absolutely right that the LibDems are unlikely to stage more than a modest recovery in 2020: something like 12-14 seats (out of 600) on a similar vote share (i.e. 14%).
It depends on how event pan out over the next two years. In my view there is a greater than 50% chance of a Black Wednesday scale political earthquake that fundamentally shifts the picture so I wouldn't bet based on any incremental change from the current position.
That was last year, maybe you missed it, it's called Brexit
The vote itself was act 1. Act 2 will be when May visibly loses control of the process.
It's the constant wishing ill fortune on your fellow citizens just so you can say "told you so" which I find both sad and tedious.
Then you badly misread me. Black Wednesday was the start of a 10 year period of pretty benign times for the UK, and I believe the failure of Brexit would be similarly positive for the country and its people.
No I dont think I have misread you, you post constantly wishing for bad times as a proof that Brexit wont work.
Brexit may not work, it's a risk, but wishing disaster on your own people just to say yadda isnt terribly edifying.
I've never knowingly wished for bad times for the country. Bad times for Brexiteers wrestling with intractable problems of their own making, yes, but I have confidence that our democracy will hold them to account before it is too late.
While the Brexiteers will no doubt have given themselves problems, to claim they are all of their own making is disingenuous.
The referendum was called by a remain PM and the campaign was lost when remain couldnt advance a coherent argument for staying. Ive yet to see may PB remainers analyse why they lost.
Comments
Two million voters that haven't voted before come out of the banlieues of Marseille to vote ?
I think it would have to be a very serious failing by the police/security that shook the faith in government, even Fillon's old one. Perhaps a double agent or similar, weaponry actually provided by the French government used on its own citizens.
The reflection of the photographers in the mirror reminds me of this:
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/velazquez/velazquez.meninas.jpg
Philip_Thompson said:
When was the last time either major party polled in the teens? Could Labour this Parliament?
I think the Tories hit 21% with Gallup after the Winchester by-election, but that's the lowest I remember."
Hard though it is to believe, it's actually as recent as 2009. Mark Pack's database shows a stunning 18% for Labour in the Ipsos-MORI May 2009 monitor, caused by a surge for other parties (not just UKIP, Greens and BNP too) presumably caused by the Euro elections.
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oItemId=2321
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/uk-regions/scotland/news/82026/scots-do-not-want-independence-referendum-2017-poll
AlsoIndigo said:
FPT:
» show previous quotes
I think we know who is the pretend beer drinker out of these two
Is this the one DavidL is referring to?
---
Surely that's a latte, not a guiness?
(That being said, I'm all out my Macron position, having bought him in 20-23 range and sold him at 9s.)
https://twitter.com/HenryPryor/status/815143095960555521
Still nice to know - I'll be off to the HMRC office tomorrow for a rebate on all those taxes I've mistakenly been paying.
Germany and Italy have fairly rapidly falling populations ... more of a problem. It apparently happened because Italians decided in one generation 'f*** the pope, we need birth control'.
Japan has a falling population I think. Immigrants make up only 2% of the population. But its pensioners look quite fit, so hopefully 68 year olds can pay some taxes *and* help caring for 98 year olds.
Never believe anything until it's been officially denied...
I'm not !
http://www.ipsos.fr/sites/default/files/doc_associe/rapport_cevipof_-_eef2017_vague_9_decembre_2016_ipsos_le_monde.pdf
That poll is the 9 December! Not sure why we haven't had any more. There have been a few supplementaries, no VI.
But they will be mainly young city remainers anyways.....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1918
Afternoon all.Sorry, Prevening all...The poll numbers make this Tweet from NYE even funnier...
@jeremyforlab: A Tory MP tells us: "If Labour MPs rally behind Corbyn, we'd be in real trouble. We owe our survival to Blairites."
Sadly I think we are seeing the slow death of a once-great party, the party of the working man, the party of Attlee and Wilson (and Blair). I know political party deaths are anticipated more than they happen, but can anyone here really see Corbyn not lose several dozen seats at a 2019 election under the new boundaries?
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required?
---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Interesting watching the likes of McCluskey suggesting Corbyn might not make it to 2020, it's almost like the penny's starting to drop that the polls have been grinding down since the leadership election, it's not division that's killing Labour but the lack of an alternative to Corbyn.
An hour's journey in the great train, in real time, narrated by the crew themselves and superbly filmed. No uninformed presenters, no 'human interest' back stories, just the train and its crew. Well done BBC.
I think I may have been way too giddy on the Tory prospects the day Jamie Reed announced his intention to stand down.
(Only joking. We watched it last night, and it actually distracted my son from playing with the Lego digger, which is now completed and utterly awesome.)
Pulpstar
Pulpstar Posts: 33,842
5:14PM
MrsB said:
HYUFD said:
24% of the vote for Labour would be the lowest Labour score at a general election since 1918
Ouch! For how long does the polling have to stay at or below 25%, and how many poor performances in by-elections or local elections need to happen, before enough members and MPs understand that a change in leadership is required?
---
They will assume the problem is that they were not left wing enough. Where's Derek Hatton these days?
Developing property in Cyprus.
----
That doesn't sound very left wing....... has he become what he most despised?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severn_Valley_Railway#Former_stations
Forget the modest progress made in council by-elections. Imagine a scenario in which voters who have sitting Conservative MPs - and the preponderance of whom voted to Leave the EU - are being asked to replace those Tory MPs with Liberal Democrats. The yellows are not only Europhile, but - far more importantly - a large enough bloc of them might help a rainbow coalition dominated by a Far Left Labour Party and Scottish Nationalism into power. The Tories will certainly make sure that any remaining voters who have been living as hermits for the last ten years, and may therefore still as yet be unaware of this possibility, are enlightened.
In order for us to have a liberal Opposition, Labour must first be destroyed - and how this is supposed to happen God alone knows. Labour benefits from a surviving voter coalition which is going to be supremely difficult to crack in England in the way it was in Scotland; and gargantuan majorities in its core strongholds. We may be stuck with it for a very long time.
Labour benefits from a surviving voter coalition which is going to be supremely difficult to crack in England in the way it was in Scotland; and gargantuan majorities in its core strongholds. We may be stuck with it for a very long time.
The strongholds could crack when Labour aren't seen as being "the only game is town". If it's reduced to its city-centre bastions, with UKIP or the LibDems holding a similar number of seats, and PMQs on a rota ("opposition of the week"), then the appeal of an Islington-aligned party lead by an old, dim, commie terrorist-hugger will evaporate.
It's not out of the question that it could get this bad, although the natural pessimist in the Labour-phobe that is me finds it hard to credit. However, I wouldn't be surprised if Labour were to finish somewhere close (in terms of seats) to where the Tories did in 1997 if we had an early GE this year. They would then have to rebuild (if they're even capable of doing it) from a much lower position in terms both of political credibility and vote share, of course...
Of course, journalism here will take a serious knock if the Government ends up muzzling the press to placate Hacked Off et al.
Hopefully the BBC will get good feedback about not trying to dumb things down all the time and let the pictures tell their own story.
Oh, and isn't Lego brilliant! My parents always said it was they best money they ever spent on me, and I do the same now with my nephews and hopefully will do with my own children when they arrive.
As for "destroying" Labour, why should anyone want to see a political party destroyed ? Labour is currently in a bad way but it will recover - it has before. Once it becomes a credible alternative, the notion of an LD-Lab Coalition will become not only less fanciful within the parties but outside them too.
The Conservatives will, in 2020, have to defend their record not just on Brexit but on other aspects of Government. We are three years from that and not even halfway through the current parliament.
Livingstone would feel he's too old and worn out, although he's only a year older than Donald Trump. John Smith's dead. Anyone else?
Maybe the decades of low ratings for politicians by the public are now bringing about a vicious circle, with high-calibre individuals less likely to go into politics. Aaargh ...
If the media assessed policies as much as they assessed politicians, we'd be a lot better governed.
Where would turn Yellow under this scenario? Remain strongholds (SW London, perhaps Hornsey & Wood Green, Cambridge, OxWAb), plus two in Scotland thanks to Unionist tactical voting (NE Fife, Edinburgh West). There are other possibles: maybe Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Bath or Yeovil. Or you could theoretically see the LDs slip through in four way marginals, as happened so memorably in Inverness in the 1980s.
Nevertheless, absent a return to a 20% vote share (which I do not expect), I think it's very hard to see the LibDems doing better than 15 seats, and I maintain my 12 to 14 seat forecast.
Latest poll (change since last election)
Germany 20% (-5)
France 12% (-17)
Netherlands 10% (-28)
It takes a brave man or woman now to want to go into such public service now, and live out their lives under constant scrutiny by people who wish them to fall down.
2. Labour - having already very nearly broken the Union through its catastrophically botched devolution plan - has been thoroughly infiltrated and poisoned by the Far Left. It's presently controlled by a terrorist-sympathising leadership that's kept in place by an extreme, pseudo-Marxist majority amongst the membership base, and is likely to remain so. It's not at all illogical to wish to be well rid of such an organisation. A credible Opposition is needed to make our democracy work. Labour no longer seems capable of providing it, and its recovery to a position of strength is far from assured - see the Liberal Party between the Wars.
3. Faced with a choice between Corbynite Labour and the Tories under virtually anybody, there's only ever going to be one winner.
Politics like economics works in cycles. We seem to be at the dark point in the cycle as their is no hope. Events are likely to present somebody, probably within the Labour Party to be propelled into No.10. First of all Corbyn needs to resign/ forced out by ill health / die. Second the beacon of hope candidate needs to emerge with an agenda of hope and positive change. In 1992 Labour was being written off as being in a death spiral, look how things changed in 5 years. Labour won with the biggest majority since the 1930s!
The Tories currently have a very beatable leader, things are going to go wrong big style with Brexit. I still don't see an early GE happening. Labour could surprise us all. I for one would not vote for May as PM if you paid me, she is useless/ clueless. I used to vote Tory but will not vote for May as she is the personification of a vacuum. I might vote Lib Dem if Corbyn is still leader but if he is no longer leader I would vote for a moderate Labour leader like Hunt, Umunna or somebody not even that well known like Kier Starmer.
On this scenario, anywhere with an 11% or less Labour lead over the LibDems is theoretically vulnerable as are Conservative majorities of 4% or under. I would add a caveat: I think I'd only want to play those places where there is a strong Remain vote for the LDs to tap into.
This gives us five London seats where they're competitive, two university seats, two Scottish seats, one West Country, two South East market towns, and two three/four way marginals where they might sneak through the middle.
12-14 seats sounds about right.
They should promise to support legislation they agree with and oppose legislation they disagree with, and repeat this message endlessly until we're sick and tired of hearing it.
Clearly they would support legislation that provides PR because they agree with it.
Brexit and Trump as President makes2016 an interesting year.
But we've lived through much worse. As a reminder ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV-vU-HvlHI&list=RDEV-vU-HvlHI#t=0
What is the deal when someone is made a "Roles Applicant"? This renders them unable to post yet not obviously banned, is it the site's equivalent of the 28 day pre charge detention rule?
It's hard to believe she used to be an MP with prospects.
However if you want big events then the EU has as big a chance of a Black Wednesday event as the UK - Euro crisis, Itailan banks, Le Pen, Merkel out, Greece, Putin etc.
Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it , but not necessarily in the way you expected.
Looking at the national picture though, more worrying than Labour-Tory cycles to me is the longer cycle that proceeded from Old Labour and One Nation Tories 1940-79, if not earlier, to a 1970s coup that installed Thatcher and Successors 1980-2017. (They're still in office.)
Apparently one reason it was possible to build 300,000 to 500,000 homes per year in the past is that 1945-79 governments almost ignored public sector debt. It was ~2x higher than today at times. They also discussed how to increase materials output with industry, so that shortages were avoided. That degree of government intervention is ruled out if everyone recites daily: 'we worship the market; it will provide our needs'.
Whoever challenges and articulates today's orthodoxy could, one assumes, gain the support of well over 25% of the electorate. They can see the housing shortage, the NHS problems, the lack of social care and gas and electricity overcharges for themselves.
Brexit may not work, it's a risk, but wishing disaster on your own people just to say yadda isnt terribly edifying.
The inevitable Brexit disaster will not be caused by people "wishing for it".
The Brexiteers must look to themselves, eventually.
The referendum was called by a remain PM and the campaign was lost when remain couldnt advance a coherent argument for staying. Ive yet to see may PB remainers analyse why they lost.