Is there nothing that these Labour stooges will not stoop to, hoping to mask their own glaring deficiencies. Nobody in Scotland will have heard of the loser.
A good article David but obviously written before David Milliband's barely coded message that he's willing able and more than up for it!
(Or did his description that Labour were in the worst position they've been in for 52 years mean something else?)
David Miliband, the bloke who couldnt stand up to Gordon
riiiight
Bananaman.. who made such a mess of a diplomatic visit that Mandy had to rescue him..
its on a par with Brown chasing Obama thro the kitchens of the white house
I've just had an idea for picking the next Labour leader. Throw the candidate up in the air on PB and the one that lands with the most bullet holes is the one to choose
A bullet-riddled corpse could scarce do a worse job than the current incumbent. This is one JC that will clearly not be rising from the dead after three days or any number of days!
A good article David but obviously written before David Milliband's barely coded message that he's willing able and more than up for it!
(Or did his description that Labour were in the worst position they've been in for 52 years mean something else?)
David Miliband, the bloke who couldnt stand up to Gordon
riiiight
Bananaman.. who made such a mess of a diplomatic visit that Mandy had to rescue him..
its on a par with Brown chasing Obama thro the kitchens of the white house
I've just had an idea for picking the next Labour leader. Throw the candidate up in the air on PB and the one that lands with the most bullet holes is the one to choose
A bullet riddled corpse would be a better than David Milliband.
With Jezza, Labour are in the position of a pontoon player who is sitting with an eight and a seven. Do they stick and rely on the other players busting?
Or do they twist and risk drawing a George Galloway?
One factor that makes Copeland (and Stoke) particularly significant is that they validate the opinion polls. These have been returning figures out of line with local by-elections, where the Tories have been doing a good deal worse and the Lib Dems a good deal better. We can now say with a little more confidence that for Westminster, the polling seems the more reliable.
So much for the Dunny-on-the-Wold by election results
David Herdson overstates this. We can say this with more confidence in strongly Leave-voting seats. The evidence from seats that voted Remain so far points the other way.
About 400 constituencies voted Leave. Good news for May!
I'm coming back to this point in a thread header soon. It's more complicated than this.
Obviously the Conservatives are doing very well and Labour are doing very badly, mind.
Good morning all. I'm not sure that Brexit has as much salience as we anoraks believe. It doesn't really engage ordinary peoples' passions. This is, of course, pure anecdota based on talking to my extended family.
We had a vote, the government is getting on with it, and now the conversation is about the NHS and social care - that's if we talk about politics at all. I would add that the Labour voters in my tribe do like Mrs May. Which is a genuine surprise. I thought they'd see Thatcher II.
Isn't this a typical it depends?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
To comment directly on David's piece, I agree with much of what he says. Labour risk losing voters who prize good administration to the Tories, alienated voters to UKIP and hardcore Remainers to the Lib Dems. The cumulative effect could result in an enormous Conservative majority and very few safe Labour seats.
Even inner London is not quite as safe as it looks. Many voters here are Remainers before they are Labour and are horrified at Labour's capitulation over Brexit. They haven't left Labour yet but they are far from happy.
F1: got to say, the mechanics will need their Weetabix to shift the rear tyres. And if one comes loose in the pit lane it'll cause anyone it hits some serious damage.
One factor that makes Copeland (and Stoke) particularly significant is that they validate the opinion polls. These have been returning figures out of line with local by-elections, where the Tories have been doing a good deal worse and the Lib Dems a good deal better. We can now say with a little more confidence that for Westminster, the polling seems the more reliable.
So much for the Dunny-on-the-Wold by election results
David Herdson overstates this. We can say this with more confidence in strongly Leave-voting seats. The evidence from seats that voted Remain so far points the other way.
About 400 constituencies voted Leave. Good news for May!
I'm coming back to this point in a thread header soon. It's more complicated than this.
Obviously the Conservatives are doing very well and Labour are doing very badly, mind.
Good morning all. I'm not sure that Brexit has as much salience as we anoraks believe. It doesn't really engage ordinary peoples' passions. This is, of course, pure anecdota based on talking to my extended family.
We had a vote, the government is getting on with it, and now the conversation is about the NHS and social care - that's if we talk about politics at all. I would add that the Labour voters in my tribe do like Mrs May. Which is a genuine surprise. I thought they'd see Thatcher II.
Isn't this a typical it depends?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
This is also why Labour is also in trouble in its supposed London heartland. Lab-LD switchers will easily deliver seats such as Ealing Central & Acton, Brentford & Isleworth to the Tories.
O/T. I don't know if this has been discussed already but the reports on Sky and the BBC seem a little worrying. Some news agencies have been excluded from a press briefing at the White House. Is this correct? If so, is it as black and white as that? If it is as reported then it appears as if the Trump administration is trampling over the first amendment!
It's no different from what Obama sometimes did, but - for some reason I can't explain - it's getting a ton more publicity.
The Obama White House certainly did more interviews with liberal media outlets than Conservative ones, but I don't think that's unusual. I suspect Bush did more with Conservative ones, for example.
Did the Obama White House keep certain media outlets out of the press room for official press briefings?
A good article David but obviously written before David Milliband's barely coded message that he's willing able and more than up for it!
(Or did his description that Labour were in the worst position they've been in for 52 years mean something else?)
David Miliband, the bloke who couldnt stand up to Gordon
riiiight
Bananaman.. who made such a mess of a diplomatic visit that Mandy had to rescue him..
its on a par with Brown chasing Obama thro the kitchens of the white house
I've just had an idea for picking the next Labour leader. Throw the candidate up in the air on PB and the one that lands with the most bullet holes is the one to choose
A bullet riddled corpse would be a better than David Milliband.
Vote zombie! full rights for the undead! Yep, there really is a zombie party...
One factor that makes Copeland (and Stoke) particularly significant is that they validate the opinion polls. These have been returning figures out of line with local by-elections, where the Tories have been doing a good deal worse and the Lib Dems a good deal better. We can now say with a little more confidence that for Westminster, the polling seems the more reliable.
So much for the Dunny-on-the-Wold by election results
David Herdson overstates this. We can say this with more confidence in strongly Leave-voting seats. The evidence from seats that voted Remain so far points the other way.
About 400 constituencies voted Leave. Good news for May!
I'm coming back to this point in a thread header soon. It's more complicated than this.
Obviously the Conservatives are doing very well and Labour are doing very badly, mind.
Good morning all. I'm not sure that Brexit has as much salience as we anoraks believe. It doesn't really engage ordinary peoples' passions. This is, of course, pure anecdota based on talking to my extended family.
We had a vote, the government is getting on with it, and now the conversation is about the NHS and social care - that's if we talk about politics at all. I would add that the Labour voters in my tribe do like Mrs May. Which is a genuine surprise. I thought they'd see Thatcher II.
Isn't this a typical it depends?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
This is also why Labour is also in trouble in its supposed London heartland. Lab-LD switchers will easily deliver seats such as Ealing Central & Acton, Brentford & Isleworth to the Tories.
And seats like Cambridge to the LDs. Labour is the Party with the Europe problem. Ironic isn't it.
To comment directly on David's piece, I agree with much of what he says. Labour risk losing voters who prize good administration to the Tories, alienated voters to UKIP and hardcore Remainers to the Lib Dems. The cumulative effect could result in an enormous Conservative majority and very few safe Labour seats.
Even inner London is not quite as safe as it looks. Many voters here are Remainers before they are Labour and are horrified at Labour's capitulation over Brexit. They haven't left Labour yet but they are far from happy.
Would they be amenable to the Liberal Democrats if Labour continue to bungle things?
I am also considering that as there is no chance of Labour forming a government at the moment there would appear to be very little practical difference between voting Orange and voting Red.
Funnily enough, YouGov has just asked that question - in Scotland
Have you heard of: Corbyn: 96 Miliband: 96 Khan: 74
At 74% awareness I suspect he's well ahead of quite a few Holyrood Ministers......
Khan also is the most liked (or to be precise, least disliked) UK Labour politician on a net -5 - compared to Thornberry (-47) and Miliband (-37) for example.....
Those Theresa May popularity numbers keep being held in the stratosphere. Seeing her win seats like Copeland is only going to cement that with the party faithful. But I suspect that many of those for whom voting for "the Toffs" of Cameron and Osborne would have been unthinkable are now happy to see May getting on with the job and wish her well.
Rory Stewart:
I must have met a hundred people who said that they didn’t like the Tories, but liked the Prime Minister. They volunteered that she “had a very difficult job”, that they “wouldn’t like to be in her place”, that she was “working very hard”, and “doing well” (even if they added a Cumbrian “so far”). Increasingly, if I was stuck for something to say I just raised Theresa May. Somehow the Brexit vote, and her approach to it had struck a chord: people were prepared to empathise instead of criticise, and believed in her seriousness.
Who can forget Theresa the Appeaser trending on Twitter....
Saw plenty of 'Theresa the Appeaser' placards in Westminster the other evening, accompanied by Momentum banners. There were literally hundreds of them. It's clear that Corbyn's message is getting through.
unspoofable
Good to see your irony detector is functioning so well.
I confess to being a fan of Rory Stewart. I expect him to make Cabinet next time around.
"When William Hill first put the market up – after the independence referendum – they marked that outcome at no less than 125/1. (I apologise for not being able to namecheck the PBer who tipped the bet; I forget who it was.)"
A good article David but obviously written before David Milliband's barely coded message that he's willing able and more than up for it!
(Or did his description that Labour were in the worst position they've been in for 52 years mean something else?)
David Miliband, the bloke who couldnt stand up to Gordon
riiiight
Bananaman.. who made such a mess of a diplomatic visit that Mandy had to rescue him..
its on a par with Brown chasing Obama thro the kitchens of the white house
I've just had an idea for picking the next Labour leader. Throw the candidate up in the air on PB and the one that lands with the most bullet holes is the one to choose
A bullet riddled corpse would be a better than David Milliband.
Both significantly better than Jezza and with the dead having more electoral life than Corbyn.
Funnily enough, YouGov has just asked that question - in Scotland
Have you heard of: Corbyn: 96 Miliband: 96 Khan: 74
At 74% awareness I suspect he's well ahead of quite a few Holyrood Ministers......
Khan also is the most liked (or to be precise, least disliked) UK Labour politician on a net -5 - compared to Thornberry (-47) and Miliband (-37) for example.....
Good for Khan for calling out the Nats. They've got away with it for far too long, They should be treated like their sister nationalist parties elsewhere in Europe.
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020. After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years. The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4. Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
To comment directly on David's piece, I agree with much of what he says. Labour risk losing voters who prize good administration to the Tories, alienated voters to UKIP and hardcore Remainers to the Lib Dems. The cumulative effect could result in an enormous Conservative majority and very few safe Labour seats.
Even inner London is not quite as safe as it looks. Many voters here are Remainers before they are Labour and are horrified at Labour's capitulation over Brexit. They haven't left Labour yet but they are far from happy.
Would they be amenable to the Liberal Democrats if Labour continue to bungle things?
I am also considering that as there is no chance of Labour forming a government at the moment there would appear to be very little practical difference between voting Orange and voting Red.
Of course. My own seat, Islington South & Finsbury, has a huge Labour majority now (with the Conservatives second). But the Lib Dems came within 500 votes of taking it in 2005 and were expected to take it in 2010. These seats are potentially much more volatile than is often presupposed.
Yet the defining characteristic of Mr Corbyn’s leadership is not his doctrinaire politics and unsavoury alliances with extremists and antisemites, but his remorseless incompetence. His grasp of policy is minimal and his lack of articulacy is demonstrated repeatedly in parliamentary debate.
Widely regarded as an affable duffer, Mr Corbyn lacks even that reputed public amiability. When pressed in interviews he loses his temper. His public standing and refusal to recognise fault in himself are born of vanity.
I don't know if it's vanity or something else, but he does occasionally get pissy when questioned. In fairness he is under a lot of stress, but it does seem as though his genuine personal amiability is not always evident in the public sphere, where his fuse has blown a few times.
O/T. I don't know if this has been discussed already but the reports on Sky and the BBC seem a little worrying. Some news agencies have been excluded from a press briefing at the White House. Is this correct? If so, is it as black and white as that? If it is as reported then it appears as if the Trump administration is trampling over the first amendment!
It's no different from what Obama sometimes did, but - for some reason I can't explain - it's getting a ton more publicity.
Did Obama ban the BBC? I would genuinely be interested as to why and in what circumstances.
He held briefings with selected invitation lists, excluding organisations he didn't like.
If Peter from Putney is around, I'd be interested in a link to his tip of Marathon offering 3-1 against Macron. I can't see any politics on their website at all.
Is there nothing that these Labour stooges will not stoop to, hoping to mask their own glaring deficiencies. Nobody in Scotland will have heard of the loser.
Question - are the labour stooges now worse than the Tory stooges?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Which seats? The LibDems rising to 12-13% is more than offset by the Tories rising to 44%. So I guess we are restricted to looking at the LibDems nicking a couple off Labour?
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
F1: got to say, the mechanics will need their Weetabix to shift the rear tyres. And if one comes loose in the pit lane it'll cause anyone it hits some serious damage.
Apparently this was mentioned at one of the many meetings. The teams have said they'll work on better nut-locking systems and Charlie has said there will be draconian punishments (which I read as either race bans or WCC points deductions) for anyone who releases a car without four wheels safely attached. Will be interesting to see how it works in practice.
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020. After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years. The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4. Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
As ever, DYOR.
Peter, do you assume the boundary changes go through if it is a 2020 election?
And seats like Cambridge to the LDs. Labour is the Party with the Europe problem. Ironic isn't it.
Predictable though. How many Conservatives actually liked the EU? A dozen? Surely not more. Most of them, including both the current and former leadership, either disliked (Osborne/Cameron) or actually loathed it (May/Hammond) but were fearful of the consequences of standing up to something so big and thin-skinned as the EU. Therefore they unenthusiastically endorsed Remain. But can anyone honestly say that May or Hammond look unduly sorry that Leave won? Of course not! They've got the best of both worlds - the opportunity to stick two fingers up at the EU and the ability to say to voters, 'well, we did what you told us but we warned you it would be a fiasco' when things go wrong. That's a position most MPs, the overwhelming majority of members and a big slice of Tory voters can live with, and is helpfully attracting the Brexit vote from elsewhere as well, making a formidable coalition.
Labour, however, are in exactly the reverse position. They genuinely do love the idea of Europe (partly I think because they see it as a counterweight to the US, whom they much dislike, and partly because it is much more left wing than Britain and provides a heavy check on non-Labour governments). They are however led by an old stager who (with some justice) sees it as a tool of the big corporations with a thin veneer of pseudo-socialism on top. He is therefore, like May, actually pretty happy with the result and sees no reason to fight the democratic will of the people. This is causing those who want him to stand up against Brexit to have nervous breakdowns because they (correctly) identify he will do nothing to stop it and therefore there is no realistic way of getting the result either reversed or softened to some 'Brexit in name only' that they could just about live with. More ironically still, given how weighted Labour's vote is to the big conurbations although most of its constituencies voted leave most of its actual voters want Remain (as Alistair noted upthread). So it is impaled upon a colossal hook. Had the country voted Remain, these tensions would have been irrelevant, but now, they threaten to tear the party to pieces.
The Liberal Democrats are therefore, helpfully, in a position to sweep up the remains. Or at least they would have been, but for the coalition.
Casino - it always seems to be the way that successful betting exploits are celebrated in terms of spending one's ill-gotten gains on luxuries, in your case on a holiday with Mrs Casino in Thailand. With me, it's on buying a case of good wine or spending a small fortune going to the West End theatre followed by dinner, etc. We never seem to equate winning with having that old creaking boiler fixed or whatever.
Indeed. PaddyPower are very generously sponsoring my visit to Cheltenham this year
Got a tricky story about a top official and Russia...No problem, create a story involving the media , because we know they can't resist taking the bait to talk endlessly about themselves.
Multiple news outlets denied access to White House press briefing The Guardian, New York Times, CNN and more were barred from ‘gaggle’ hours after Trump once again called much of the media an ‘enemy of American people’
On topic - well, no party lasts forever, and FPTP means that dropping below say 15% means virtual annihilation. However, Labour's problem isn't that nobody likes the party - 20-25% of the electorate is actually enthusiastic, though unhappy with election results. The problem, as others have pointed out, is that the uneasy coalition between mostly middle-class idealist socialists and mostly working-class pragmatic voters who simply want a better life is under acute strain, aggravated by Brexit.
But FPTP is also a virtual firewall. In a PR system, the party would have divided long ago on the lines of most European countries, where the two parts are everywhere in separate parties, who get along to a greater or lesser extent. Under FPTP, splitting is a murder-suicide where both halves crash and burn. The dilemma is partly resolved in today's personality-obsessed world by finding a fluent leader whose charisma appeals across the divide, cf. Tony, and those aren't in plentiful supply.
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Which seats? The LibDems rising to 12-13% is more than offset by the Tories rising to 44%. So I guess we are restricted to looking at the LibDems nicking a couple off Labour?
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
EEA membership is a very reasonable aspiration, not incompatible with the Brexit vote, and would be my preferred outcome. I dont think that the Tories can deliver it, so it will need to come from an opposition party.
The spring LD conference in York has the highest number of attendees ever, and still 2 weeks to go. Sadly, I cannot be there as working.
Yet the defining characteristic of Mr Corbyn’s leadership is not his doctrinaire politics and unsavoury alliances with extremists and antisemites, but his remorseless incompetence. His grasp of policy is minimal and his lack of articulacy is demonstrated repeatedly in parliamentary debate.
Widely regarded as an affable duffer, Mr Corbyn lacks even that reputed public amiability. When pressed in interviews he loses his temper. His public standing and refusal to recognise fault in himself are born of vanity.
I don't know if it's vanity or something else, but he does occasionally get pissy when questioned. In fairness he is under a lot of stress, but it does seem as though his genuine personal amiability is not always evident in the public sphere, where his fuse has blown a few times.
And how do we all think that attitude is going to go during a full-blown general election campaign, when he's getting asked every day for six weeks about his support for the IRA and Hamas, and his lack of support for the monarchy and the Union Jack?
He does - more Scots have heard of Khan (74%) than Northerners (70) or those from Midlands/Wales (66). Indeed Khan's awareness among Scots is pretty close to the South of England (77) - only London (91) is much ahead, as might be expected.
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Which seats? The LibDems rising to 12-13% is more than offset by the Tories rising to 44%. So I guess we are restricted to looking at the LibDems nicking a couple off Labour?
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
They won 8% at the last election. Opposing Brexit makes good sense as a way of getting back into the teens, and they believe in it, so they carry conviction. Bear in mind that if they get to 13%, their vote share won't rise by 5% everywhere, in Kent, Essex, Lincolnshire, Staffordshire, Warwickshire, their vote won't rise at all. But, conversely, they could be seeing rises of 10-20% in SW London, the Stockbroker Belt and university constituencies,
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020. After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years. The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4. Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
As ever, DYOR.
Peter, do you assume the boundary changes go through if it is a 2020 election?
I have no doubt that if Corbyn is replaced by someone reasonably credible, a caretaker like Johnson or Harmen or Benn, for example, then it would be far closer than it looks at the moment.
LDs are still pretty toxic themselves. Their blessed coalition got us into this almighty mess.
That's an interesting point. You could argue it's Nick Clegg for his Faustian pact or you could argue it's Ed Milliband for his Tom Ripleyish ambition. A cot death in both cases would have avoided the disaster of Brexit and Corbyn
Many people (*) now seem to think that Michael Howard was exactly the right person to lead the Conservative Party after the one-man disaster area that was IDS. He didn't do particularly well in 2005; but he did steady the ship and start the much-needed change in direction.
I see Farron as doing the same for the Lib Dems as Howard did for the Conservatives; he's not going to win large numbers of seats, but he's doing well with the rebuilding process.
If that's true, and Labour's essentially got to give up on 2020, what characteristics are needed in a Howard-like steady-the-ship Labour leader up to then? Someone who may not be able to win in 2020, but will at least keep losses to a minimum whilst preparing for the next leader.
Some I can think of: *) A unifying figure, acceptable to both Momentum and Nick's 'hard right' of the Labour party. *) Someone seen as generally competent (not hard when compared to Corbyn). *) A move-shaker, acceptable to the unions, who knows lots of people at all party levels. *) A non-flashy person, not obsessed with image. *) Not a policy wonk. *) Someone who can inspire the base.
Looking at these (and Labour people may see the above very differently), the only one I can see is Watson, however much I dislike him. But even he's not a perfect match.
There are far more Scots in Khan's London than there are in Malcolm's Ayrshire. Khan's more in touch.
Only one of those groups of Scots has a vote in Scotland though. Khan has just called up to 50% of the latter (many of whom are past & current SLab voters) racists; excellent work, son.
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020. After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years. The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4. Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
As ever, DYOR.
Peter, do you assume the boundary changes go through if it is a 2020 election?
I have no doubt that if Corbyn is replaced by someone reasonably credible, a caretaker like Johnson or Harmen or Benn, for example, then it would be far closer than it looks at the moment.
That's a big 'if'.
Boris Johnson would indeed be a revelation for them!
Funnily enough, YouGov has just asked that question - in Scotland
Have you heard of: Corbyn: 96 Miliband: 96 Khan: 74
At 74% awareness I suspect he's well ahead of quite a few Holyrood Ministers......
Khan also is the most liked (or to be precise, least disliked) UK Labour politician on a net -5 - compared to Thornberry (-47) and Miliband (-37) for example.....
Good for Khan for calling out the Nats. They've got away with it for far too long, They should be treated like their sister nationalist parties elsewhere in Europe.
I object to Khan's inflamatory language. The Scots always have had a strong sense of their own identity and are justifyably proud of their Country. Live anywhere in Scotland and London looks remote and out of touch with their Country's interests. They will always have a desire for Independence but that does not mean that an English Metropolitan elite politician has the right to attack that desire.
Khan needs to concentrate on London and not stoke the fires of division himself.
And by the way my wife, who is a Scot, and I are not in favour of Scots Independence but will come to the defence of Scots to have that ambition, though in practice it is unlikely to happen
Only one of those groups of Scots has a vote in Scotland though. Khan has just called up to 50% of the latter (many of whom are past & current SLab voters) racists; excellent work, son.
@fatshez: If you think Sadiq Khan said Scottish nationalism is the same as racism then don't worry, you're not a racist. You're an idiot.
@fatshez: But good luck with the "we hate a Muslim mayor of London and his country for perfectly benign reasons" argument guys.
I think I just heard a Labour person on Radio 4 say "What we should be asking ourselves is how bad it might have been if we didn't have Jeremy"
I must be dreaming.
The answer is: "less bad".
What would it take to shake these people out of their dreamings? I can't see how any more evidence could be provided other than perhaps a complete and utter shellacking in May's county elections. Even then these cultists would go on the TV and say that Mandelson has undermined the whole local election campaign somehow via Portland or whatever.
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Which seats? The LibDems rising to 12-13% is more than offset by the Tories rising to 44%. So I guess we are restricted to looking at the LibDems nicking a couple off Labour?
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
Opposing BREXIT is a hiding to nothing, as you imply. But Single Market membership isn't. This is fertile ground for the LibDems but they have yet to sharpen their position. There is still much muddled talk about 'unfettered access' when the real question is membership or out.
For all his faults, Ed Miliband achieved a net swing towards Labour at the last GE !
And that is all a leader can do at election time. And he did do better, and Labour stupidly forget that. The team organise the GOTV. He made other errors, but he did increase the vote.
Tories victory was down to Lynton Crosby, not Tories. That said, Crosby fucked up The London Mayoralty, with his "I was right that Immigration and EU was key across the country in the GE, so I will try the same in London where all the voters are pro-immigration and pro-EU.'
To comment directly on David's piece, I agree with much of what he says. Labour risk losing voters who prize good administration to the Tories, alienated voters to UKIP and hardcore Remainers to the Lib Dems. The cumulative effect could result in an enormous Conservative majority and very few safe Labour seats.
Even inner London is not quite as safe as it looks. Many voters here are Remainers before they are Labour and are horrified at Labour's capitulation over Brexit. They haven't left Labour yet but they are far from happy.
Would they be amenable to the Liberal Democrats if Labour continue to bungle things?
I am also considering that as there is no chance of Labour forming a government at the moment there would appear to be very little practical difference between voting Orange and voting Red.
Of course. My own seat, Islington South & Finsbury, has a huge Labour majority now (with the Conservatives second). But the Lib Dems came within 500 votes of taking it in 2005 and were expected to take it in 2010. These seats are potentially much more volatile than is often presupposed.
Emily Thornberry losing her seat to the Liberal Democrats would be worth the licence fee on its own!
More seriously though, Corbyn's strategy over all this has been abysmally cack-handed even allowing for the difficulties he faces. By backing Brexit, he risks alienating his vote in metropolitan areas. By backing unchecked migration to appease those voters, he is running the risk of throwing away the working class.
I feel obliged to say that I think a more skilful leader could have avoided that trap. The obvious way would be to champion benefit reform to reward work and create jobs, ending one of the grievances of the WWC against migration at a stroke. Or he could have campaigned to say that the exit should be minimalist and include a few restrictions on work permits (which would be a dishonest position given the EU's stated position, but such things have never troubled him in the past).
He is displaying instead the narcissistic self-indulgence of a fairly stupid 60s socialist who thinks he is good and everyone else evil, and therefore everything he wants to do is right because it's him doing it. Not quite what is needed in a leader...especially now.
If Peter from Putney is around, I'd be interested in a link to his tip of Marathon offering 3-1 against Macron. I can't see any politics on their website at all.
Mr. Sandpit, tough on the mechanics, though. A second can make a difference, and it's very easy to make a mistake.
Very true. I think that the pit stops will be closer to three seconds than two this year, certainly in the early races. Combination of the new larger and heavier wheels, and more caution about releasing the car. From memory there were only 3 or 4 incidents of cars being released with three wheels in the whole of last season, although there was the funny incident at Spa of the car with a mismatched tyre, for which a penalty was given.
I think back to the work Williams in particular did last year over the winter, they shaved half a second from their stops and made very few mistakes in 2016. Last winter they had the huge advantage of being able to practice using the previous year's car - not so this winter as the 2017 cars are so different.
I'm actually getting pretty frustrated with labour. They are so incredibly complacent. They know that in the absence of an snp line challenger in England that they will always return 150ish seats, and many have already written off 2020, so they refuse to act in the face of clear evidence they will be hit hard because they are too afraid to risk their necks to do something as they failed last time. That's rough, but even if we believe 2020 cannot be recovered, they cannot afford to wait for their enemy to make a mistake. It's usually a good strategy but corbyn shrugs off the effects and the Tories might self implode, but that cannot be relied on. Whispers from the unions corbyn is on a final warning and MPs continuing to pout but nothing else is not helping the party or the country, as who is to say they won't react the same in the first disaster after the 'final' warning.
If someone happens to think corbyn is great for labour, well, I praise their imagination.
One factor that makes Copeland (and Stoke) particularly significant is that they validate the opinion polls. These have been returning figures out of line with local by-elections, where the Tories have been doing a good deal worse and the Lib Dems a good deal better. We can now say with a little more confidence that for Westminster, the polling seems the more reliable.
So much for the Dunny-on-the-Wold by election results
David Herdson overstates this. We can say this with more confidence in strongly Leave-voting seats. The evidence from seats that voted Remain so far points the other way.
About 400 constituencies voted Leave. Good news for May!
I'm coming back to this point in a thread header soon. It's more complicated than this.
Obviously the Conservatives are doing very well and Labour are doing very badly, mind.
Good morning all. I'm not sure that Brexit has as much salience as we anoraks believe. It doesn't really engage ordinary peoples' passions. This is, of course, pure anecdota based on talking to my extended family.
We had a vote, the government is getting on with it, and now the conversation is about the NHS and social care - that's if we talk about politics at all. I would add that the Labour voters in my tribe do like Mrs May. Which is a genuine surprise. I thought they'd see Thatcher II.
Isn't this a typical it depends?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
I slapped an 'anecdota' in there. Of course it depends . I'm less worried about a recession between now and GE20 than I was. The Brexit negotiations will set the mood music for the foreseeable, as you say.
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020. After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years. The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4. Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
As ever, DYOR.
Peter, do you assume the boundary changes go through if it is a 2020 election?
MM - Yes, I'm assuming the boundary changes go through. It would be an absolute outrage were that no to be the case after the LibDems reneged on their commitment to support such changes, already overdue, 5 years ago. My understanding is that this would benefit the Tories by around 13 - 15 seats net.In broad terms, I'm taking the view that this would be cancelled by the LibDems winning between 25-35 seats next time.
There are far more Scots in Khan's London than there are in Malcolm's Ayrshire. Khan's more in touch.
Only one of those groups of Scots has a vote in Scotland though. Khan has just called up to 50% of the latter (many of whom are past & current SLab voters) racists; excellent work, son.
I think nationalism is basically racist. The extenuating circumstance for the Scots is that England have just voted nationalist in the referendum so in effect the Scots are just saying they don't want any part of English nationalism they'd sooner go alone or back to the EU and who can blame them.
Mr. Sandpit, tough on the mechanics, though. A second can make a difference, and it's very easy to make a mistake.
Very true. I think that the pit stops will be closer to three seconds than two this year, certainly in the early races. Combination of the new larger and heavier wheels, and more caution about releasing the car. From memory there were only 3 or 4 incidents of cars being released with three wheels in the whole of last season, although there was the funny incident at Spa of the car with a mismatched tyre, for which a penalty was given.
I think back to the work Williams in particular did last year over the winter, they shaved half a second from their stops and made very few mistakes in 2016. Last winter they had the huge advantage of being able to practice using the previous year's car - not so this winter as the 2017 cars are so different.
I reckon these mechanics practice so much they rely on something akin to muscle memory. It'll be interesting to see how much different tyres affect this: will they essentially have to retrain afresh?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Which seats? The LibDems rising to 12-13% is more than offset by the Tories rising to 44%. So I guess we are restricted to looking at the LibDems nicking a couple off Labour?
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
Opposing BREXIT is a hiding to nothing, as you imply. But Single Market membership isn't. This is fertile ground for the LibDems but they have yet to sharpen their position on this. There is still much muddled talk about 'unfettered access' when the real question is membership or out.
Even Farron recognises this when he appealed to the EU not to keep promoting a second referendum. The problem for the lib dems is that the argument on staying in has moved on and that when negotiations commence any attempt to frustrate the negotiations will invoke fury, the same applies to labour.
I believe that the secret to success is to be flexible with all options open but that control of our borders and laws, together with the ability to negotiate worldwide trade deals are red lines
Mr. Dixie, not sure I'd heard that (the 'vote for a Muslim') bit before.
you are joking? Leaflets are not printed in English in muslim areas. The weeks before elections, the Labour candidate goes to every mosque and (I have seen it before very eyes) and the Iman says 'this is your Muslim candidate to vote for'. Adolf's cronies would have done the same thing I assume.
Yet the defining characteristic of Mr Corbyn’s leadership is not his doctrinaire politics and unsavoury alliances with extremists and antisemites, but his remorseless incompetence. His grasp of policy is minimal and his lack of articulacy is demonstrated repeatedly in parliamentary debate.
Widely regarded as an affable duffer, Mr Corbyn lacks even that reputed public amiability. When pressed in interviews he loses his temper. His public standing and refusal to recognise fault in himself are born of vanity.
I don't know if it's vanity or something else, but he does occasionally get pissy when questioned. In fairness he is under a lot of stress, but it does seem as though his genuine personal amiability is not always evident in the public sphere, where his fuse has blown a few times.
And how do we all think that attitude is going to go during a full-blown general election campaign, when he's getting asked every day for six weeks about his support for the IRA and Hamas, and his lack of support for the monarchy and the Union Jack?
"Can we have a general election on the NHS please?!"
Those Theresa May popularity numbers keep being held in the stratosphere. Seeing her win seats like Copeland is only going to cement that with the party faithful. But I suspect that many of those for whom voting for "the Toffs" of Cameron and Osborne would have been unthinkable are now happy to see May getting on with the job and wish her well.
Rory Stewart:
I must have met a hundred people who said that they didn’t like the Tories, but liked the Prime Minister. They volunteered that she “had a very difficult job”, that they “wouldn’t like to be in her place”, that she was “working very hard”, and “doing well” (even if they added a Cumbrian “so far”). Increasingly, if I was stuck for something to say I just raised Theresa May. Somehow the Brexit vote, and her approach to it had struck a chord: people were prepared to empathise instead of criticise, and believed in her seriousness.
At her best she has something of the Angela Merkel about her. If she coud curb the temptation to ape Maggie (thankfully not too often these days) by not trying to appear resolute instead of keeping her natural humility she could stay popular even without Corbyn's help
"and ran a candidate who was a local doctor and ambulance driver" that certainly wouldn't survive even a cursory fact check... but an excellent piece by Rory.
@GillTroughton is a doctor, but ceased practising when she married and had children. She then worked for the ambulance service. It is all water under the bridge now, but why do you persist with your "alternative facts" about her?
She didnt complete her first F1 rotation, has not now or has ever had a medical license. Her LinkedIn profile claimed she "trained to be a surgeon", yes during her foundation year which she never completed. The press release after she was selected referred to her as a local doctor. Utter nonsense.
Indeed. If the shoe were on the other political foot then, in a Wing Commander Nuttall style, there would be much Dr Troughton MD pisstaking occuring on here.
But the colour of the rosette buys her a PB free pass.
There are far more Scots in Khan's London than there are in Malcolm's Ayrshire. Khan's more in touch.
Only one of those groups of Scots has a vote in Scotland though. Khan has just called up to 50% of the latter (many of whom are past & current SLab voters) racists; excellent work, son.
I think nationalism is basically racist. The extenuating circumstance for the Scots is that England have just voted nationalist in the referendum so in effect the Scots are just saying they don't want any part of English nationalism they'd sooner go alone or back to the EU and who can blame them.
that's better, Rog. My point, badly made, is that in England, the authorities are racist against us. We just want a level playing field. You won't get a council house in London if you have a cockney accent.
If Peter from Putney is around, I'd be interested in a link to his tip of Marathon offering 3-1 against Macron. I can't see any politics on their website at all.
Nick - I didn't quote a price of 3/1 for Macron, but rather 3.0 DECIMAL, i.e. 2/1! Those odds are still there this morning, check them out via Oddschecker's Political section, where Marathon's odds are up there in lights!
O/T. I don't know if this has been discussed already but the reports on Sky and the BBC seem a little worrying. Some news agencies have been excluded from a press briefing at the White House. Is this correct? If so, is it as black and white as that? If it is as reported then it appears as if the Trump administration is trampling over the first amendment!
It's no different from what Obama sometimes did, but - for some reason I can't explain - it's getting a ton more publicity.
Did Obama ban the BBC? I would genuinely be interested as to why and in what circumstances.
Trump is a disaster. Corbyn in reverse, but in power too.
I've noticed this is a key rebuttal tactic: presented with evidence of Trump running roughshod over the Constitution, the response is Obama did the same, but it wasn't reported, so no one noticed.
And often the claims that 'Obama did it too' turn out to be false.
Comments
Compared to 1997, the respective falls were 29% and 22%.
If the Copeland swing were repeated nationally, the Conservatives would win 397 seats to 166 for Labour.
Or do they twist and risk drawing a George Galloway?
There are a few parts of the country (I live in one), where Brexit is still actively discussed and decried every day. I suspect that in the dozen or so constituencies like that (and which mostly coincide with the LibDems best chances: SW London, Cambridge, OxWab etc.), being the only anti-Brexit party is an electoral advantage.
Of course, if Mrs May secures us a good deal, and the transition is smooth, then the number of bitter Remainers will decline, and the LibDems edge here will be disappear. But if the next three and a half years feature a recession (almost irrespective of the ultimate cause), then it might swing the other way.
We will see, of course, but I suspect were there an election today then the LDs would get around 12-13% of the popular vote, and would gain a few seats.
Even inner London is not quite as safe as it looks. Many voters here are Remainers before they are Labour and are horrified at Labour's capitulation over Brexit. They haven't left Labour yet but they are far from happy.
Did the Obama White House keep certain media outlets out of the press room for official press briefings?
http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ge10/man/parties/CURE.html
However, Wales would be lost. The Conservatives would win 20 out of 38 seats.
I am also considering that as there is no chance of Labour forming a government at the moment there would appear to be very little practical difference between voting Orange and voting Red.
Have you heard of:
Corbyn: 96
Miliband: 96
Khan: 74
At 74% awareness I suspect he's well ahead of quite a few Holyrood Ministers......
Khan also is the most liked (or to be precise, least disliked) UK Labour politician on a net -5 - compared to Thornberry (-47) and Miliband (-37) for example.....
I must be dreaming.
In the possibly overstated after-glow of the Tories' win in Copeland, coupled with the inevitability that Corbyn's time as Labour leader is drawing albeit excruciatingly slowly towards its end, now might be a good time to consider the prospect on there being no overall majority at the next General Election, which seems all the more likely should this not take place until the designated date in May 2020.
After all, despite all the bullish talk about the Tories' prospects, right now the party is grappling with a majority barely into double figures, with at least some prospect of by-election losses over the next 3 years.
The really huge potential banana skin, apart from the economy seriously going off the rails is a complete and utter foul-up of our Brexit negotiations with the rest of the EU, which has to be a distinct possibility. Of course, were this to happen, the Tories would then be attributed with 100% of the blame, notwithstanding that a majority of Labour supporters also voted for "Leave" last year.
There is currently quite a wide discrepancy in the betting markets for there being no overall majority at the next GE (whenever that might be). Those nice folk at both Laddies and BetFred are offering 2/1, whilst Betfair' Sportsbook is much meaner with their price of just 5/4.
Unless Corbyn, or one of his cronies is still running the Labour party in three years time, I think the GE result is likely to be much closer than currently appears likely and on this basis, I've had a couple of hundred on there be no overall majority next time.
As ever, DYOR.
Now 102-9 ... Lyon last 2 wickets.
Watermelon on pizza.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/recipes/watermelon-pizza/9520/?utm_term=.e7acb31011f2
The answer is: "less bad".
Once Article 50 is served, the LibDems are going to look like a Flat Earth Society, denying the political reality we live in. Harking back to a time when we didn't know we lived on a globe will make the UKIP stance of harking back to the golden age of the 50's look positively modern.
The short-termism of the LibDems over Brexit is remarkable. How about some real policies instead? Something for the 2020's? When we are outside the EU...
For all his faults, Ed Miliband achieved a net swing towards Labour at the last GE !
Labour, however, are in exactly the reverse position. They genuinely do love the idea of Europe (partly I think because they see it as a counterweight to the US, whom they much dislike, and partly because it is much more left wing than Britain and provides a heavy check on non-Labour governments). They are however led by an old stager who (with some justice) sees it as a tool of the big corporations with a thin veneer of pseudo-socialism on top. He is therefore, like May, actually pretty happy with the result and sees no reason to fight the democratic will of the people. This is causing those who want him to stand up against Brexit to have nervous breakdowns because they (correctly) identify he will do nothing to stop it and therefore there is no realistic way of getting the result either reversed or softened to some 'Brexit in name only' that they could just about live with. More ironically still, given how weighted Labour's vote is to the big conurbations although most of its constituencies voted leave most of its actual voters want Remain (as Alistair noted upthread). So it is impaled upon a colossal hook. Had the country voted Remain, these tensions would have been irrelevant, but now, they threaten to tear the party to pieces.
The Liberal Democrats are therefore, helpfully, in a position to sweep up the remains. Or at least they would have been, but for the coalition.
I think it's the fact that he underperformed expectations/polls that did for him...
Multiple news outlets denied access to White House press briefing
The Guardian, New York Times, CNN and more were barred from ‘gaggle’ hours after Trump once again called much of the media an ‘enemy of American people’
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/24/media-blocked-white-house-briefing-sean-spicer?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
But FPTP is also a virtual firewall. In a PR system, the party would have divided long ago on the lines of most European countries, where the two parts are everywhere in separate parties, who get along to a greater or lesser extent. Under FPTP, splitting is a murder-suicide where both halves crash and burn. The dilemma is partly resolved in today's personality-obsessed world by finding a fluent leader whose charisma appeals across the divide, cf. Tony, and those aren't in plentiful supply.
The spring LD conference in York has the highest number of attendees ever, and still 2 weeks to go. Sadly, I cannot be there as working.
That's a big 'if'.
I see Farron as doing the same for the Lib Dems as Howard did for the Conservatives; he's not going to win large numbers of seats, but he's doing well with the rebuilding process.
If that's true, and Labour's essentially got to give up on 2020, what characteristics are needed in a Howard-like steady-the-ship Labour leader up to then? Someone who may not be able to win in 2020, but will at least keep losses to a minimum whilst preparing for the next leader.
Some I can think of:
*) A unifying figure, acceptable to both Momentum and Nick's 'hard right' of the Labour party.
*) Someone seen as generally competent (not hard when compared to Corbyn).
*) A move-shaker, acceptable to the unions, who knows lots of people at all party levels.
*) A non-flashy person, not obsessed with image.
*) Not a policy wonk.
*) Someone who can inspire the base.
Looking at these (and Labour people may see the above very differently), the only one I can see is Watson, however much I dislike him. But even he's not a perfect match.
(*) Citation needed.
@jonsnowC4: Distressed to find that we have not been banned from the White House: We are working in it...
@PaulDBrant: Copeland vote
44% 1983 (Foot)
47% 1987 (Kinnock)
49% 1992 (K)
58, 52, 51% 1997 etc (Blair)
46% 2010 (GB)
42% 2015 (EdM)
37% 2017 (JC)
Khan needs to concentrate on London and not stoke the fires of division himself.
And by the way my wife, who is a Scot, and I are not in favour of Scots Independence but will come to the defence of Scots to have that ambition, though in practice it is unlikely to happen
@fatshez: But good luck with the "we hate a Muslim mayor of London and his country for perfectly benign reasons" argument guys.
Bonkers on stilts.
christ on a rocket powered bike
Tories victory was down to Lynton Crosby, not Tories. That said, Crosby fucked up The London Mayoralty, with his "I was right that Immigration and EU was key across the country in the GE, so I will try the same in London where all the voters are pro-immigration and pro-EU.'
More seriously though, Corbyn's strategy over all this has been abysmally cack-handed even allowing for the difficulties he faces. By backing Brexit, he risks alienating his vote in metropolitan areas. By backing unchecked migration to appease those voters, he is running the risk of throwing away the working class.
I feel obliged to say that I think a more skilful leader could have avoided that trap. The obvious way would be to champion benefit reform to reward work and create jobs, ending one of the grievances of the WWC against migration at a stroke. Or he could have campaigned to say that the exit should be minimalist and include a few restrictions on work permits (which would be a dishonest position given the EU's stated position, but such things have never troubled him in the past).
He is displaying instead the narcissistic self-indulgence of a fairly stupid 60s socialist who thinks he is good and everyone else evil, and therefore everything he wants to do is right because it's him doing it. Not quite what is needed in a leader...especially now.
https://www.marathonbet.co.uk/en/betting/Specials/?menu=3898
You have to scroll down the page a bit
Amazingly Macron is still on offer at 2/1
I think back to the work Williams in particular did last year over the winter, they shaved half a second from their stops and made very few mistakes in 2016. Last winter they had the huge advantage of being able to practice using the previous year's car - not so this winter as the 2017 cars are so different.
If someone happens to think corbyn is great for labour, well, I praise their imagination.
I believe that the secret to success is to be flexible with all options open but that control of our borders and laws, together with the ability to negotiate worldwide trade deals are red lines
But the colour of the rosette buys her a PB free pass.
Those odds are still there this morning, check them out via Oddschecker's Political section, where Marathon's odds are up there in lights!
Wrong then, wrong now.