Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
I thought it was irresponsible tinkering with the constitution for limited short term gain. The right of PMs to go to the country is an example of Chesterton's fence (google it) - something you shouldn't dismantle until you understand precisely why it was there in the first place.And I think today was conclusive - it was so obviously right that May should be able to seek a mandate and a majority; the Act didn't in the end frustrate that but it made it pretty touch and go.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Are Montgomery or Brecon and Radnor vulnerable to being retaken? Both would have voted Leave. (This area is historically as much Liberal as Tory, although it's small c conservative).
Oxford West and Abingdon boundaries may have been messed around with, I was told, making it a safer Tory seat. But could it still be vulnerable? It voted Remain.
I reckon that it would be vulnerable, it entirely depends on how well the Lib Dems campaign on the EU issue.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
I thought it was irresponsible tinkering with the constitution for limited short term gain. The right of PMs to go to the country is an example of Chesterton's fence (google it) - something you shouldn't dismantle until you understand precisely why it was there in the first place.And I think today was conclusive - it was so obviously right that May should be able to seek a mandate and a majority; the Act didn't in the end frustrate that but it made it pretty touch and go.
Touch and go? You must be joking. An election was inevitable from the second she stepped out of Downing Street yesterday morning.
If you're looking for examples of Chesterton's fence I give you a far more important one: The UK's membership of the EU.
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Here are the council results for Southport from last year:
I have no idea why there this is all talk of corbyn going. It is only 7 weeks until the supreme leader will win all 650 seats in an historic election seeing 21st Century Socialism sweeping the nation.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Why was it an off-limits point of theology with Cathy Newman, and suddenly answerable in the HoC?
Actions speak louder than words. He voted for equal marriage.
Personal beliefs are irrelevant, it is policy that matters.
OK. My personal view is that believing either that homosexuals are sinners, or that we are all sinners, are equal disqualifications from being anywhere near the levers of power. And his integrity is very much in question: either he has changed his mind pretty bloody quick or decided that resiling from his former beliefs is politically expedient. Affirming before the world and denying between the rocks, as it were.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Problem is local election results weren't much help in forecasting the result in Eastleigh at the last election. All the councillors were LDs and the Tories won the seat by nearly 10,000.
I think it's slightly fanciful to suggest that the Tories will be on the attack rather than defence against the Lib Dems, as those commenting on Southport, North Norfolk, and Carshalton have.
In 2015, the blood in the water was Lib Dem blood, and the Tories were (rightly) absolutely focused on that. In 2017, the blood in the water is Labour blood, whereas the Lib Dems have achieved large swings in recent by-elections from the Conservatives, and their brand is not toxic like it was last time.
They will doubtless do some polling and, if they sense something happening, they won't hold back. Consequently, the Lib Dems won't be able to sit back. I just don't see it, though - why pour resources into really hard pick-ups, when there are ample Labour seats with sub-5,000 majorities?
Is there any obligation on Corbyn to resign if he does lose 100 or 150 seats?
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
In general I think it a mistake for a leader to resign the day after losing. There needs to be a period of reflection and wound licking before a contest. This applies to all parties.
Are Montgomery or Brecon and Radnor vulnerable to being retaken? Both would have voted Leave. (This area is historically as much Liberal as Tory, although it's small c conservative). Oxford West and Abingdon boundaries may have been messed around with, I was told, making it a safer Tory seat. But could it still be vulnerable? It voted Remain.
Look at the Welsh assembly elections in 2016. Montgomeryshire saw further falls in the LibDem vote.
Kirsty Williams improved in B&R, but then entered the tired Welsh Assembly Labour Government, giving it the one seat majority the electors had denied. I suspect that will cost the LDs in Brecon & Radnor.
The LDs may come back in Montgomeryshire and B & R, but not yet.
Are Montgomery or Brecon and Radnor vulnerable to being retaken? Both would have voted Leave. (This area is historically as much Liberal as Tory, although it's small c conservative).
Oxford West and Abingdon boundaries may have been messed around with, I was told, making it a safer Tory seat. But could it still be vulnerable? It voted Remain.
Montgomery is a safe Tory seat now even if Glyn Davies retires (it doesn't look as though he will).
Brecon is more vulnerable (it is their only assembly seat) but I don't think it will go yellow yet - they tend to follow their own rhythms and I think there are a couple more pro-Tory swings to go.
Cardiff Central and Swansea West are more realistic targets for the Liberal Democrats.
I have no idea why there this is all talk of corbyn going. It is only 7 weeks until the supreme leader will win all 650 seats in an historic election seeing 21st Century Socialism sweeping the nation.
And will that mean we leave the EU or Remain in it?
I have no idea why there this is all talk of corbyn going. It is only 7 weeks until the supreme leader will win all 650 seats in an historic election seeing 21st Century Socialism sweeping the nation.
And will that mean we leave the EU or Remain in it?
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
This is all meaningless nonsense. The opposition is Corbyn. My cats excrement has more chance of winning a general election than that senile old trot. The word bollocks should be added to the Oxford English dictionary. Definition: anything passing out of his lips. Electral ebola.
The election may ironically help the left's longer term hopes in the PLP. If Corbynites replace some of the MPs standing down and the total size of the PLP falls as a result of the GE, then it will be easier for the left to achieve their 15% to have a candidate on the next Leadership ballot.
This is all meaningless nonsense. The opposition is Corbyn. My cats excrement has more chance of winning a general election than that senile old trot. The word bollocks should be added to the Oxford English dictionary. Definition: anything passing out of his lips. Electral ebola.
Normally I'd pass this sort of thing off as a partisan rant by opponents if it was one of the Eds, or the Milibands. But in Corbyn's case it is probably true.
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Problem is local election results weren't much help in forecasting the result in Eastleigh at the last election. All the councillors were LDs and the Tories won the seat by nearly 10,000.
If you look at the data I posted, the LDs in Southport did staggeringly well last year. (Much better, in fact, than Mark Senior's back of the fag packet guesses.) They also made a lot of progress from 2012, which indicates that things are working well there for them.
Ultimately, though, I think Sir Norfolk makes the killer point. Why would we put in a massive amount of effort in a clear Remain voting area, where the LDs are making significant local progress, when there are nearby constituencies which are much more winnable?
Is there any obligation on Corbyn to resign if he does lose 100 or 150 seats?
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
In much the way Captain Smith bravely stayed on the bridge to stabilise his ship after that unfortunate incident with an iceberg in April 1912?
It sank more or less straight down, it didn't capsize.
It did snap in half though although it was 70 years before we found that out.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
What about North Norfolk? Lamb has a 4,000 majority but there are over 8,000 Ukip votes to mine. Local authority area (broadly coterminous with the constituency if I'm not mistaken) has a relatively high average age (47,) and voted 59:41 to Leave.
That is a good point. I’d be genuinely sorry if Lamb lost, but he looks vulnerable.
Lamb has hung on through his personal vote. In 1979 the Tory lead over the Liberals (in third) was a massive 33,000. He has fought and lost and then fought and won. And fought hard. He probably wins until he wants to step down. But then it will be a hard task for his successor to hang on.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
True, it was badly constructed legislation. But fixed terms are a good idea.
Is there any obligation on Corbyn to resign if he does lose 100 or 150 seats?
Seriously, we are used to red-eyed losers resigning on election night. But, Labour’s problems got far worse when a tearful EdM resigned after the election in 2015.
I could imagine Jeremy may stay on to stabilise the ship.
In general I think it a mistake for a leader to resign the day after losing. There needs to be a period of reflection and wound licking before a contest. This applies to all parties.
I agree with that, but in the longer term it doesn't seem obvious to me that Mr Corbyn would resign anyway in the event of a loss.
He's focussed on changing the Labour party to perpetuate his beliefs. If he didn't budge after a vote of no confidence from the PLP, why would he bother about mere voters, of whom many will have defined themselves as Tories anyway?
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
What about North Norfolk? Lamb has a 4,000 majority but there are over 8,000 Ukip votes to mine. Local authority area (broadly coterminous with the constituency if I'm not mistaken) has a relatively high average age (47,) and voted 59:41 to Leave.
That is a good point. I’d be genuinely sorry if Lamb lost, but he looks vulnerable.
Lamb has hung on through his personal vote. In 1979 the Tory lead over the Liberals (in third) was a massive 33,000. He has fought and lost and then fought and won. And fought hard. He probably wins until he wants to step down. But then it will be a hard task for his successor to hang on.
Libs may well do better than forecast. 55 seats in 2010 means they have form. Labour demise could mean they get 70 seats
That is a very commendable first effort, beating ChrisA’s 50 LD seats.
But, it dwarfs WilliamGlenn’s spectacle of 150 LD MPs.
My guess is that they’ll get ~10 MPs.
No gains at all?
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
10 seats is one gain.
Net. Maybe they lose a couple, gain 3.
I don't think they'll lose Carshalton & Wallington because there's a big Labour (and a smaller Green) vote to squeeze.
Southport will be tougher, as it was a Leave voting area, and as the Conservatives can hope to eat into the sizeable UKIP vote, but I'd still make them narrow favourites to hold on.
Other than those two, which seats do you see as vulnerable?
Hasn’t Brake been in trouble locally with favourable property deals from Sutton council to a company he directs ? Guido was banging on about it a while back. I don’t know Carshalton, so I am happy to take advice from local experts.
Ceredigion I do know well. The 2015 election was very dirty, with Mark Williams (now exposed as a election expenses fraudster by the Electoral Commission) smearing the Plaid Cymru candidate as a fascist. I don’t think what we have learned since 2015 has improved Mark’s chances.
Southport looks a goner to me.
The remaining seats look safe.
What about North Norfolk? Lamb has a 4,000 majority but there are over 8,000 Ukip votes to mine. Local authority area (broadly coterminous with the constituency if I'm not mistaken) has a relatively high average age (47,) and voted 59:41 to Leave.
That is a good point. I’d be genuinely sorry if Lamb lost, but he looks vulnerable.
Lamb has hung on through his personal vote. In 1979 the Tory lead over the Liberals (in third) was a massive 33,000. He has fought and lost and then fought and won. And fought hard. He probably wins until he wants to step down. But then it will be a hard task for his successor to hang on.
Cable was bloody useless in the coalition. All their supposed wisdom and he got the square root of fuck all done. In comparison beaker the former park ranger was very harshly treated to lose their seat. Him and Webb are big losses for the lib dems.
I was fond of Norman Baker too. (And Lamb is OK.)
The rest, not so much.
I met Norman lamb, I was impressed. His heart was really in the right place during the coalition and he put in place some things relating to people with learning difficulties which have gone largely unnoticed and hopefully made some real differences to people lives.
He was like the anti-chuka...Much better in person and really sincere / knew his stuff.
I have only ever met one LibDem MP. I was seriously unimpressed.
Not that I have ever met more than a couple of other MPs of any party, but those others have had at least some sort of presence.
I went to Uni with a now retired-from-politics Liberal "Shadow Minister". Jesus he was mediocre in every sense. A decent enough bloke, and very well meaning, but.... a total anorak. Zero charisma, super geeky, not especially bright. I met him once at the Commons for a drink and he just seemed bored, and depressed, by how boring it all was, and he was already quite boring in himself.
At University I knew Gavin Barwell, Kwasi Kwarteng, Lucy Frazer and Tristram Hunt all well.
Kwasi is the only one with a genuinely first rate intelligence.
(None of them were idiots, I'd add. Lucy was a bright, dedicated, hardworker and you'd be pleased to have her as your MP. Gavin was a sincere guy, who went into politics for all the right reasons. Tristram was... in Footlights very briefly. I would add that Kwasi is the only one of the four that I've stayed in touch with.)
'in Footlights very briefly' - love it.
Kwasi always comes across very well on radio/tv too - why oh why has he not been promoted yet?
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Why was it an off-limits point of theology with Cathy Newman, and suddenly answerable in the HoC?
Actions speak louder than words. He voted for equal marriage.
Personal beliefs are irrelevant, it is policy that matters.
OK. My personal view is that believing either that homosexuals are sinners, or that we are all sinners, are equal disqualifications from being anywhere near the levers of power. And his integrity is very much in question: either he has changed his mind pretty bloody quick or decided that resiling from his former beliefs is politically expedient. Affirming before the world and denying between the rocks, as it were.
Presumably Theresa May takes the same view, indeed so does the Queen, as that is the current C of E policy.
The key issue in running tolerant and inclusive policy is not being an active supporter of whatever, but supporting its right to equal treatment. For example, I believe Islam to be a misguided faith invented by a false prophet. I do fully support its equal treatment before the law. It is fundamental in a free society to support the rights of people that you are convinced are in error.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Here are the council results for Southport from last year:
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Kids are brilliant, had a chat about politics with my nine year old son in the car
He said he was a bit Conservative because he liked the idea of not paying bills (tax).
When I asked who would pay for his school and hospitals, he said he'd would be Labour, but....
Jeremy Clarkson wouldn't like it, because he hates manual Labour.
We then discussed prime ministers. His favourite was Churchill. He has heard of Cameron and May. He had heard of Tony Blair, but was convinced he was an actor.
Chuka and the rest of the general election whingers must be rugby union fans. Just because their side have nobbled all their own props, they want the referee to step in and order uncontested scrums.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
But that is because Corbyn was too thick to seek to outmanouvre her!
I don't know. You can argue Corbyn missed a trick with the semantics (he should have pushed for a vote of no confidence) but I struggle to see situations where a LOTO could legitimately argue against going to the country given the opposition's whole role is, you know, to seek to form a government (I suppose there would be some limited circumstances, e.g. a government seeking an election six months to a year before one was scheduled or very early into a new term, but that's about it).
But the key point is that had Corbyn forced May to go down the road of tabling a No Confidence Vote in her own Government , she might have had to step aside with him becoming PM for at least a short period - and perhaps for the entire Campaign period! He was an utter imbecile for failing to try that
Not Edinburgh West nor Fife NE nor Dumbartonshire East?
Not even in leafy SW London? Or the hearts of Remainia? And no benefit from Labour being down 5 percentage points or more, while the LDs have increased their vote share by 50%?
I reckon 12 seats in the minimum.
I can't see how they won't gain seats. they got 9 when they got no votes. Local by-elections show they have a chance. more than 20 nailed on.
Would you like to say exactly which 20+ seats are nailed-on LibDem gains ?
Could they lose Southport
Yes. It's a (marginally) Leave voting area, which they won on barely more than 30% of the vote last time.
But there's a student vote to eat into, and the Labour Party is likely to go backwards to their benefit.
I'd make it 55% chance for the LDs, 45% for the Conservatives.
Nope , astonishingly the Conservatives came 3rd behind Labour in the 2016 locals , the Lib Dems won every seat and led the Conservatives by 5,500 votes
Which wards make up the constituency and what were the vote shares? That certainly indicates that the LDs have decent local organisation (which together with the Hanretty Remain/Leave estimates) should certainly make them favourites in the seat.
Ainsdale , Birkdale , Cambridge , Dukes , Kew , Meols and Norwood . It is first time ever LDems have won all 7
Vote share approx
LD 39% Lab 21% Con 20% UKIP 12% Green 8%
Problem is local election results weren't much help in forecasting the result in Eastleigh at the last election. All the councillors were LDs and the Tories won the seat by nearly 10,000.
If you look at the data I posted, the LDs in Southport did staggeringly well last year. (Much better, in fact, than Mark Senior's back of the fag packet guesses.) They also made a lot of progress from 2012, which indicates that things are working well there for them.
Ultimately, though, I think Sir Norfolk makes the killer point. Why would we put in a massive amount of effort in a clear Remain voting area, where the LDs are making significant local progress, when there are nearby constituencies which are much more winnable?
But are there nearby constituencies which are much more winnable for the Conservatives ?
Sefton Central is now safe Labour and I think West Lancashire is too.
Ribble South will be safe Conservative.
Chorley is winnable for the Conservatives but its not next-door.
Labour should hold flea pits like Islington, Hackney and Tottenham due to the outstanding quality of their candidates there? Tower Hamlets should also go 250% Socialist due to their muslim brotherhood alliance. Rest of Britian....mmmmmm? Maybe Creasy can save Walthamstow-my old hood. Outside of other urban shitholes I think there are disasters a plenty. Corbyn will hang on until the bitter end though. Him fatbot Lammy Einstein and fourbellies are the future.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
True, it was badly constructed legislation. But fixed terms are a good idea.
I am sympathetic to the argument that a PM can't just 'cut and run'. The problem is I'm not sure how you could construct a better way to regulate a fixed term parliament. In a parliamentary democracy, parliament has to have the power to dissolve itself. I suppose you could remove the two-thirds majority shtick and simply allow an election on a vote of no confidence (hence creating some kind of stigma on a government for voting no confidence in itself) but I can't see that holding back a government that really wanted to go for it.
It also removes the ability of a new PM coming in mid-term to seek their own mandate.
I think it's slightly fanciful to suggest that the Tories will be on the attack rather than defence against the Lib Dems, as those commenting on Southport, North Norfolk, and Carshalton have.
In 2015, the blood in the water was Lib Dem blood, and the Tories were (rightly) absolutely focused on that. In 2017, the blood in the water is Labour blood, whereas the Lib Dems have achieved large swings in recent by-elections from the Conservatives, and their brand is not toxic like it was last time.
They will doubtless do some polling and, if they sense something happening, they won't hold back. Consequently, the Lib Dems won't be able to sit back. I just don't see it, though - why pour resources into really hard pick-ups, when there are ample Labour seats with sub-5,000 majorities?
But where, for example, should the Norfolk Tories target ?
Norwich North, Yarmouth and Waveney should be safe and your chances in Norwich South are minimal.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Why was it an off-limits point of theology with Cathy Newman, and suddenly answerable in the HoC?
Actions speak louder than words. He voted for equal marriage.
Personal beliefs are irrelevant, it is policy that matters.
OK. My personal view is that believing either that homosexuals are sinners, or that we are all sinners, are equal disqualifications from being anywhere near the levers of power. And his integrity is very much in question: either he has changed his mind pretty bloody quick or decided that resiling from his former beliefs is politically expedient. Affirming before the world and denying between the rocks, as it were.
If a politician believes that I'm a sinner, he's correct in that belief.
If he goes on to argue that therefore, he is entitled to persecute me, then I'll vote against him.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
True, it was badly constructed legislation. But fixed terms are a good idea.
I am sympathetic to the argument that a PM can't just 'cut and run'. The problem is I'm not sure how you could construct a better way to regulate a fixed term parliament. In a parliamentary democracy, parliament has to have the power to dissolve itself. I suppose you could remove the two-thirds majority shtick and simply allow an election on a vote of no confidence (hence creating some kind of stigma on a government for voting no confidence in itself) but I can't see that holding back a government that really wanted to go for it.
It also removes the ability of a new PM coming in mid-term to seek their own mandate.
Some countries work differently. The US has always had fixed elections for both executive and legislature
The election may ironically help the left's longer term hopes in the PLP. If Corbynites replace some of the MPs standing down and the total size of the PLP falls as a result of the GE, then it will be easier for the left to achieve their 15% to have a candidate on the next Leadership ballot.
Thanks for this - it's the only argument that makes sense as to why Corbyn did not vote against the snap election. If Labour had voted against May, it would have been a big blow to May's standing (because of the reasons she gave for calling the election). I think a lot of people would have appreciated Corbyn showing some cojones - and reaped a bit of uplift in the polls. Instead he seems about to sacrifice a chunk of his own party and give us a 1983-style Tory majority..
I guess the long-term plan is to have Momentum take over the Labour Party fully, kick the remaining Blairites out, and attempt to grow the party with new members based on an assumption that increased social inequality following 2 or 3 Tory governments will provide plenty of young, idealistic recruits.
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
But as May has just shown, it doesn't prevent that at all.
But that is because Corbyn was too thick to seek to outmanouvre her!
I don't know. You can argue Corbyn missed a trick with the semantics (he should have pushed for a vote of no confidence) but I struggle to see situations where a LOTO could legitimately argue against going to the country given the opposition's whole role is, you know, to seek to form a government (I suppose there would be some limited circumstances, e.g. a government seeking an election six months to a year before one was scheduled or very early into a new term, but that's about it).
But the key point is that had Corbyn forced May to go down the road of tabling a No Confidence Vote in her own Government , she might have had to step aside with him becoming PM for at least a short period - and perhaps for the entire Campaign period! He was an utter imbecile for failing to try that
Would that actually happen though?
The Act provides that Parliament is dissolved if a motion of no confidence is passed, unless a motion of confidence in a new government is passed within a set timeframe.
Corbyn couldn't have managed a vote of confidence in himself, as he didn't have a majority. But would he have become Prime Minister?
Thatcher didn't become PM after the no confidence vote in Callaghan. He remained PM until the election in 1979.
Works both ways don't it. A lot of very hacked off people out there that there are people trying to reverse the public vote to leave the EU.
A lot of people hacked off that by voting leave, they have been branded racist, ignorant rather than having a political view that holds the nation state higher than a Club.
And so on.
Having said that, I still think a Conservative majority of 35 and above is a great result. Cant at this point see the 50s and 60s some people think is on the cards.
Non-surprise of the day: of course he's going to stay on regardless.
Barring death or serious illness, Corbyn stays - with the support of the Far Left majority amongst the membership - until an ideologically acceptable successor can be guaranteed of getting onto the leadership ballot paper.
I don't see why Corbyn or anybody else from his tendency would willingly surrender control of Labour. They've been campaigning, rebelling, protesting and marching uselessly for decades, and have stuck at it through thick and thin: why give up now?
"he BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority."
Why do/did people hate the FTPA so much? As much as it annoyed me during the Coalition years, it strikes me as a generally good principle that PMs cannot cut and run at the time of their own choosing.
I thought it was irresponsible tinkering with the constitution for limited short term gain. The right of PMs to go to the country is an example of Chesterton's fence (google it) - something you shouldn't dismantle until you understand precisely why it was there in the first place.And I think today was conclusive - it was so obviously right that May should be able to seek a mandate and a majority; the Act didn't in the end frustrate that but it made it pretty touch and go.
Touch and go? You must be joking. An election was inevitable from the second she stepped out of Downing Street yesterday morning.
If you're looking for examples of Chesterton's fence I give you a far more important one: The UK's membership of the EU.
We all know why the EU exists: to enable people like you to look out for themselves without considering the interests of the people at large
"he BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority."
snigger
This is how right wing anti-BBC loons sound to normal people, of course.
Remember the last time a snap election was supposed to destroy the opposition and 'grind the [Tory] bastards into dust'? Now Kinnock says he won't see another Labour government:
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
They do sometimes when they have rigged the result sufficiently in advance. It looks good to foreign observers.
As one of the few posters who have been here for four GEs along with my LD friends Mike Smithson and Mark Senior, I now feel it is my responsibility to be a senior statesman and offer my wise guidance to you on #GE2017!
So:
CON will win - but not as much as some think. We would be happy with a majority of 50.
We might finish 10% to 12% ahead - certainly not 20% or whatever some polls say.
LAB unlikely to go below 200 seats. Unlikely to get less than 28%.
LD comeback = not happening apart from a few seats maybe Bath, SW London. Not in Bermondsey.
SLAB = wipeout. CON get a few more seats in Scotland
Non-surprise of the day: of course he's going to stay on regardless.
Barring death or serious illness, Corbyn stays - with the support of the Far Left majority amongst the membership - until an ideologically acceptable successor can be guaranteed of getting onto the leadership ballot paper.
I don't see why Corbyn or anybody else from his tendency would willingly surrender control of Labour. They've been campaigning, rebelling, protesting and marching uselessly for decades, and have stuck at it through thick and thin: why give up now?
He may try but he will almost certainly be challenged if Labour are heavily defeated, probably by Keir Starmer and it will be up to the membership to decide which of them they want to lead them
I think it's slightly fanciful to suggest that the Tories will be on the attack rather than defence against the Lib Dems, as those commenting on Southport, North Norfolk, and Carshalton have.
In 2015, the blood in the water was Lib Dem blood, and the Tories were (rightly) absolutely focused on that. In 2017, the blood in the water is Labour blood, whereas the Lib Dems have achieved large swings in recent by-elections from the Conservatives, and their brand is not toxic like it was last time.
They will doubtless do some polling and, if they sense something happening, they won't hold back. Consequently, the Lib Dems won't be able to sit back. I just don't see it, though - why pour resources into really hard pick-ups, when there are ample Labour seats with sub-5,000 majorities?
But where, for example, should the Norfolk Tories target ?
Norwich North, Yarmouth and Waveney should be safe and your chances in Norwich South are minimal.
That leaves Norfolk North.
You are assuming there that Norfolk Tories have some kind of army of mobile activists. We know that Tory HQ can summon up a few busloads of younger activists, mostly probably based in the city, but out in the sticks I expect most of their membership is relatively elderly and/or busy. They'll have enough people to spin the plates - and even a safe seat generates a fair workload during a GE - but how many of them would be willing to spend weeks working a seat at the other end of the county? The few Tory associations I know struggle for active helpers because of the age/health profile of their membership.
If Corbyn is challenged as leader immediately after 8 June then surely the election has to be under existing rules and Corbyn couldn't stall the election until after any rule change at the Party Conference.
It would be a similar timetable to the Owen Smith challenge.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Technically if you have had extra marital sex, committed adultery, ever stolen anything, eaten shellfish or made a blasphemous statement you have also been sinful so I don't think anything Farron's statement on homosexuality was that surprising given his evangelical Christian beliefs
I would have thought the good people of Hartlepool would have loved jezza. Don't they quite like voting for a Monkey who walk around town in sports gear muttering nonsense? Hangers had Kim Jong Un popularity.
As one of the few posters who have been here for four GEs along with my LD friends Mike Smithson and Mark Senior, I now feel it is my responsibility to be a senior statesman and offer my wise guidance to you on #GE2017!
So:
CON will win - but not as much as some think. We would be happy with a majority of 50.
We might finish 10% to 12% ahead - certainly not 20% or whatever some polls say.
LAB unlikely to go below 200 seats. Unlikely to get less than 28%.
LD comeback = not happening apart from a few seats maybe Bath, SW London. Not in Bermondsey.
SLAB = wipeout. CON get a few more seats in Scotland
Huzzah.... countdown can end. Although these mellowed forecasts are showing worrying signs of sensibility?
The Danish fishermen argue that they have traditional fishing rights that antedate the EU by a thousand years.
Just like everyone else they gave those up when they joined the EU. If they want to leave the EU then they can maybe get their ancient rights back.
They believe that they have a strong case in law.
Giving Theresa May a blank cheque to negotiate what she chooses, means that she can chuck to the wolves anyone that she finds inconvenient. That is what Theresa's "pig in a poke" Brexit election, without outling her strategy means.
Chuka Umunna @ChukaUmunna Theresa May is a disgrace-she called an Election because she rejects the idea of an Opposition in our democracy.We are not some dictatorship
Er, Chuka luv, dictators don't usually call elections.....
I have never understood why some people rate him.
Agreed. Far too smooth to be effective in the post Blair age.
He represents the type of Labour leader who will probably be the next Labour PM though, centrist, pro single market and telegenic even if he comes out with the odd stupid partisan statement but par for the course in a general election campaign
As one of the few posters who have been here for four GEs along with my LD friends Mike Smithson and Mark Senior, I now feel it is my responsibility to be a senior statesman and offer my wise guidance to you on #GE2017!
So:
CON will win - but not as much as some think. We would be happy with a majority of 50.
We might finish 10% to 12% ahead - certainly not 20% or whatever some polls say.
LAB unlikely to go below 200 seats. Unlikely to get less than 28%.
LD comeback = not happening apart from a few seats maybe Bath, SW London. Not in Bermondsey.
SLAB = wipeout. CON get a few more seats in Scotland
Will CON gain Bootle? Good to see you posting here again.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Technically if you have had extra marital sex, committed adultery, ever stolen anything, eaten shellfish or made a blasphemous statement you have also been sinful so I don't think anything Farron's statement on homosexuality was that surprising given his evangelical Christian beliefs
Extra-marital sex is much more common than extra marital sex.
In the last Labour membership poll only 20% said Corbyn should continue if Labour lose the next election compared to 68% that he shouldn't. What a ridiculous situation it would be for him to contest a leadership contest, so that he can hang on for a few months to try and change the rules. I can't see it.
English hatin', Jew Baitin', Republican Homophobes
This is what Farron said today on the subject of whether being gay was a sin:
Mr Farron replied: "I do not. And I tell you what, I am very proud to have gone through the lobby behind him in the coalition government where the Liberal Democrats introduced gay marriage, equal marriage, and indeed did not go as far as it should have done in terms of recognising transgender rights.
"However, there is much more to be done, and if we campaign in this election, as we will, for an open, tolerant, united society, then we need to make sure that we do not in any way be complacent about LGBT rights, not just here, but in other parts of the world."
Bloody LDs, crap at homophobia. You need kippers for that, or at least the turnip taliban.
Technically if you have had extra marital sex, committed adultery, ever stolen anything, eaten shellfish or made a blasphemous statement you have also been sinful so I don't think anything Farron's statement on homosexuality was that surprising given his evangelical Christian beliefs
Extra-marital sex is much more common than extra marital sex.
The Danish fishermen argue that they have traditional fishing rights that antedate the EU by a thousand years.
Just like everyone else they gave those up when they joined the EU. If they want to leave the EU then they can maybe get their ancient rights back.
They believe that they have a strong case in law.
Giving Theresa May a blank cheque to negotiate what she chooses, means that she can chuck to the wolves anyone that she finds inconvenient. That is what Theresa's "pig in a poke" Brexit election, without outling her strategy means.
You believe wrongly. Currently the only rules that apply to fishing within EU waters are EU laws. Everything else was surrendered when Denmark and we joined the EU. Whatever rights they had before were thrown away by the idiocy of joining the EU.
Comments
If you're looking for examples of Chesterton's fence I give you a far more important one: The UK's membership of the EU.
In 2015, the blood in the water was Lib Dem blood, and the Tories were (rightly) absolutely focused on that. In 2017, the blood in the water is Labour blood, whereas the Lib Dems have achieved large swings in recent by-elections from the Conservatives, and their brand is not toxic like it was last time.
They will doubtless do some polling and, if they sense something happening, they won't hold back. Consequently, the Lib Dems won't be able to sit back. I just don't see it, though - why pour resources into really hard pick-ups, when there are ample Labour seats with sub-5,000 majorities?
Kirsty Williams improved in B&R, but then entered the tired Welsh Assembly Labour Government, giving it the one seat majority the electors had denied. I suspect that will cost the LDs in Brecon & Radnor.
The LDs may come back in Montgomeryshire and B & R, but not yet.
Brecon is more vulnerable (it is their only assembly seat) but I don't think it will go yellow yet - they tend to follow their own rhythms and I think there are a couple more pro-Tory swings to go.
Cardiff Central and Swansea West are more realistic targets for the Liberal Democrats.
Ultimately, though, I think Sir Norfolk makes the killer point. Why would we put in a massive amount of effort in a clear Remain voting area, where the LDs are making significant local progress, when there are nearby constituencies which are much more winnable?
It sank more or less straight down, it didn't capsize.
It did snap in half though although it was 70 years before we found that out.
He's focussed on changing the Labour party to perpetuate his beliefs. If he didn't budge after a vote of no confidence from the PLP, why would he bother about mere voters, of whom many will have defined themselves as Tories anyway?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38768217
The key issue in running tolerant and inclusive policy is not being an active supporter of whatever, but supporting its right to equal treatment. For example, I believe Islam to be a misguided faith invented by a false prophet. I do fully support its equal treatment before the law. It is fundamental in a free society to support the rights of people that you are convinced are in error.
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2014/217/
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2012/217/
http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2011/217/
The LibDems are certainly favourites in Southport but I wonder if we could hear the views of a man on the ground.
Someone called Rod perhaps ?
OK
He said he was a bit Conservative because he liked the idea of not paying bills (tax).
When I asked who would pay for his school and hospitals, he said he'd would be Labour, but....
Jeremy Clarkson wouldn't like it, because he hates manual Labour.
We then discussed prime ministers. His favourite was Churchill. He has heard of Cameron and May. He had heard of Tony Blair, but was convinced he was an actor.
All in all a fun trip home.
Sefton Central is now safe Labour and I think West Lancashire is too.
Ribble South will be safe Conservative.
Chorley is winnable for the Conservatives but its not next-door.
There will have to be a split then for sure.
It also removes the ability of a new PM coming in mid-term to seek their own mandate.
Norwich North, Yarmouth and Waveney should be safe and your chances in Norwich South are minimal.
That leaves Norfolk North.
If he goes on to argue that therefore, he is entitled to persecute me, then I'll vote against him.
https://twitter.com/Stoviesplz/status/854794959219814401
I guess the long-term plan is to have Momentum take over the Labour Party fully, kick the remaining Blairites out, and attempt to grow the party with new members based on an assumption that increased social inequality following 2 or 3 Tory governments will provide plenty of young, idealistic recruits.
Well, it's a plan I suppose...
Defeated by 691 in 2010 and then regained by 801 in 2015.
The Act provides that Parliament is dissolved if a motion of no confidence is passed, unless a motion of confidence in a new government is passed within a set timeframe.
Corbyn couldn't have managed a vote of confidence in himself, as he didn't have a majority. But would he have become Prime Minister?
Thatcher didn't become PM after the no confidence vote in Callaghan. He remained PM until the election in 1979.
https://twitter.com/JournoStephen/status/854795486515126272
Meanwhile, I have been urged to 'fight for a Labour government'. OK then - Jezza, please resign now.
Works both ways don't it. A lot of very hacked off people out there that there are people trying to reverse the public vote to leave the EU.
A lot of people hacked off that by voting leave, they have been branded racist, ignorant rather than having a political view that holds the nation state higher than a Club.
And so on.
Having said that, I still think a Conservative majority of 35 and above is a great result. Cant at this point see the 50s and 60s some people think is on the cards.
I think it is inevitable that he will try and stay on.
Barring death or serious illness, Corbyn stays - with the support of the Far Left majority amongst the membership - until an ideologically acceptable successor can be guaranteed of getting onto the leadership ballot paper.
I don't see why Corbyn or anybody else from his tendency would willingly surrender control of Labour. They've been campaigning, rebelling, protesting and marching uselessly for decades, and have stuck at it through thick and thin: why give up now?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/19/jeremy-corbyns-brother-brands-bbc-evil-criticising-labour-leader/
"he BBC is ‘evil’ and will take every opportunity it can to to prevent Jeremy Corbyn becoming prime minister, the Labour leader’s brother has said.
In an astonishing outburst, Piers Corbyn accused the corporation of a series of cover ups to protect the Establishment - that included making attacks on his brother - but insisted Labour could still win a ‘reasonable’ majority."
snigger
If you could leave anytime between 1st July and 30th September it would suit me very nicely.
Many thanks,
Chestnut
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39642337 - Leanne Wood to stand...Chris Bryant to plead, "Help Me Rhondda".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p050hvml
We are full members for another 23 months.
As one of the few posters who have been here for four GEs along with my LD friends Mike Smithson and Mark Senior, I now feel it is my responsibility to be a senior statesman and offer my wise guidance to you on #GE2017!
So:
CON will win - but not as much as some think. We would be happy with a majority of 50.
We might finish 10% to 12% ahead - certainly not 20% or whatever some polls say.
LAB unlikely to go below 200 seats. Unlikely to get less than 28%.
LD comeback = not happening apart from a few seats maybe Bath, SW London. Not in Bermondsey.
SLAB = wipeout. CON get a few more seats in Scotland
So...
Cat Smith =
https://twitter.com/chunkymark/status/854754278388490240
It would be a similar timetable to the Owen Smith challenge.
They would have given those up when the joined the EU.
Giving Theresa May a blank cheque to negotiate what she chooses, means that she can chuck to the wolves anyone that she finds inconvenient. That is what Theresa's "pig in a poke" Brexit election, without outling her strategy means.
Attack Lindisfarne again ?
His invective worked wonders for Ed Miliband in GE2015.
https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/854798706100588544
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/apr/19/bill-oreilly-fox-news-sexual-harassment-board-meeting?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other