If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
I was simply observing that, as parish councils aren't "principal councils" as defined by the various local government acts, the party political label (where used - lots of parish council candidates leave this blank, or use descriptions such as 'resident' or 'local businessman') doesn't carry any significance as far as the administration of the council is concerned.
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
Only because all of your candidates have chosen to leave the "description" box on their nomination form completely blank.
Hide Corbyn away in a cupboard and bring out Mr Hammer and Sickle. What could go wrong?
I suppose Mr McD does at least dress well, and looks like a credible politician up to the point where he actually says something?
I wonder if this means that after the GE , Corbyn gives up and McDonnell becomes the left candidate.
Hope not I wouldnt vote for him.
Will there be a left candidate?
If McDonnell attempts to hang on and wins there will be a split. It will be the point the people who've been loyal because it's their party and they'd like to restore it say it's no longer the Labour Party any more. One of the problems "moderates" have had is that it's a firefight conducted in our house - despite wanting to win everyone also wants to protect the furniture. The hard left don't care - they're perfectly happy to demonise anyone who doesn't blindly follow the leadership. We saw it in the asymmetrical nature of the last leadership contest where Owen Smith went out of his way to be nice about Corbyn whereas Momentum fought the entire campaign on the basis that any challenge was a corporate conspiracy.
There's always been a tendency to regard the hard left as well intentioned but misguided rather than evil idiots, an attitude whose epitome is Corbyn - he has said really bad, obnoxious things in the past but gets a bit of a pass because he's an eccentric uncle - he can't have known about the anti-Semitism of groups he spoke to or joined as he's a nice bungler. McDonnell is an entirely different character - he's much nastier because he actually has a bit about him. It's the difference between some of Corbyn's more hapless cheerleaders and the genuine hard left arses who admit they hate everyone who doesn't share their politics.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
Is the nationalist bubble bursting? The local elections affirmed the Conservatives’ new found position as Scotland’s second party—and they will likely claim some SNP scalps on 8th June
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
You can put what you like provided it isn't offensive, blatantly untrue and contains fewer that eight words
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
But that's not a government policy, just personal choice?
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
But that's not a government policy, just personal choice?
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
I've repeatedly said she's not a fascist, but more in the Peronist/Kirchner mould.
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
You can put what you like provided it isn't offensive, blatantly untrue and contains fewer that eight words
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
You can put what you like provided it isn't offensive, blatantly untrue and contains fewer that eight words
Wow! That is interesting, and thanks to Mr B2 for pointing out much the same. I think the Hurstpierpoint and District Gentlemen's Temperance Society (just six words) might be making a leap into the world of local politics.
Given Macron is overwhelming odds on favourite with Ladbrokes, 1/10 compared to 6/1 for Le Pen it is not surprising most late bets are going on Le Pen as she is the only one who will provide any sort of return if she wins. Though really it is just a question of where Le Pen sits on the 35-40% mark
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
As would have been the UK in the late forties - it was TUC policy to get women out of the workplace, save, obviously, for women's jobs (secretary, teacher or nurse) until the women were married and had a child.
Given Macron is overwhelming odds on favourite with Ladbrokes, 1/10 compared to 6/1 for Le Pen it is not surprising most late bets are going on Le Pen as she is the only one who will provide any sort of return if she wins. Though really it is just a question of where Le Pen sits on the 35-40% mark
Betting on which and how many regions she might win would be more interesting if it were possible.
Macron would be far worse from a British perspective than the Breton, but I expect him to win.
Why?
I would have thought that Europe collapsing into protectionism and recriminations would be a disaster for the British, the French and most of the people of Europe.
I think a narrow case could be made in relation to Brexit negotiations, that Le Pen, looking to achieve similar goals to us, presents at least additional leverage to TMay - she could basically side up with Merkel ("France has abandoned you but we can still be partners") as a sort of Mainstream front, or she could negotiate in tandem with Le Pen. Le Pen has greatly watered down her Frexit plans so I think even if she were to be elected we would not see the fall of the EU.
Still, Macron isn't a bad choice either, he will be firm but not vindictive.
In every other way, for us and for France, Macron would be better.
Whatever happens with the French government it will not be good news for the UK, never has been and never will be.
"We always have been, we are, and I hope that we always shall be, detested in France." (Wellington)
Well, the UK (and certainly England) has fought France more times than any other nation on the planet so of course France will be difficult, Macron will move border checks back across the channel and try to attract business from London to Paris, though Fillon or Juppe would not have been much different
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I thought the question was about being told he wouldn't get on the parish council unless he stood for a particular party, and he was thinking that later on he might want to belong to a different party, and would he be able to change. to which the answer is yes. But better not to join a party you don't necessarily agree with in the first place. the country is littered with councillors who only joined the Tories because they thought that was the only way to get elected. And that is NOT a joke, or made-up. There are several of them on my local unitary authority, self-confessed.
The voting form for my local parish council carries no party labels at all, just the names and addresses of the candidates. It is therefore impossible to select by party, unless you know the people.
You can put what you like provided it isn't offensive, blatantly untrue and contains fewer that eight words
Wow! That is interesting, and thanks to Mr B2 for pointing out much the same. I think the Hurstpierpoint and District Gentlemen's Temperance Society (just six words) might be making a leap into the world of local politics.
So long as you didn't skip over the "blatantly untrue" bit from VfC?
If I were to be part of a minor regional party, or any party for that matter, and become parish councillor under that banner, would this be a barrier to changing party later down the line?
Don't defections happen quite regularly in parish councils, to the point that they're not really news (same as most things for parish councils to be fair).
No, as it happens. Since parish councils don't have political groups, as such, the concept of defection doesn't really apply.
I find that a slightly odd point. People can and do stand for election to parish councils under party political labels, even though once on the council they don't act as political group.
I
I was simply observing that, as parish councils aren't "principal councils" as defined by the various local government acts, the party political label (where used - lots of parish council candidates leave this blank, or use descriptions such as 'resident' or 'local businessman') doesn't carry any significance as far as the administration of the council is concerned.
In my experience parishes which are towns or cities (which are technically the same level as other parish councils) tend to have plenty of party political candidates, indeed almost everyone belongs to a party and act in groups, with whipping and everything, so it does affect administration (it shouldn't, at that level, but it can). What people think of as true parish councils - your collections of villages and town hinterlands - it tends to be quite rare that anyone stands under a party label, as has been pointed out. I know several unitary councillors who, when standing for their parishes, do not submit the necessary forms to stand as a party candidate at that level, but you get the occasional ones who do.
Minor regional parties seem to becoming more common, sometimes deliberate eschewing, in theory, party politics, counter intuitive as that sounds. There are a couple round my way like that, which dominate their towns. I'd see defection from them to be no different than defecting at district, county or unitary level, where it happens often enough not to be noteworthy.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
I would say that it is quite likely that there will be a split, but what that would mean in practice is not clear. Split to do what? Join the liberal democrats? sit in parliament as independents? would this then involve by elections immediately after GE 2017?
The labour party and the trade unions that support it are both moribund organisations who are wholly unrepresentative of the public as a whole. There are some great councillors and MP's, but the party bureaucracy is dysfunctional beyond belief. Like many organisations there is a social element to it and a history that people identify with, which as you say has stopped them from being critical of the leadership.
I am coming to the view - reluctantly as a member of several years standing - that the labour party needs to die completely. Only complete, wholesale, obliteration will allow something new to be created in its place. At the moment the labour party don't even qualify as an opposition. They fail in carrying out the most basic tasks of parliamentary process. They don't know what they stand for, other than vague polemical slogans and discredited promises and commitments. They should be completely rejected by the electorate. They deserve the coming obliteration.
Funny, I thought Kevenraged said he loved Scotland so much that he'd be leaving the country along with his business if we voted for indy, after sacking his Scottish employees of course. Must just be cupboard love for the petfood salesman.
Given Macron is overwhelming odds on favourite with Ladbrokes, 1/10 compared to 6/1 for Le Pen it is not surprising most late bets are going on Le Pen as she is the only one who will provide any sort of return if she wins. Though really it is just a question of where Le Pen sits on the 35-40% mark
Betting on which and how many regions she might win would be more interesting if it were possible.
Le Pen is at 10\1 at Betfair, so Ladbrokes are making free money from the gigantic crowds of bettors who are beating on their door to place stakes on her at 6\1.
Love this headline from the BBC: "French election: Macron hack details 'must not be spread'". That's right. Whatever you do, do NOT think of an elephant. Absolutely do not think of a large grey mammal with a trunk. Do not think of a banker politician either, or wonder what the hacked documents may reveal. Do not even think of wondering about offshore money. Macron is an extremely innocent victim. He is a nice man. You are not in a psychology experiment. This is not voter suppression. It is not psychological warfare.
People wearing masks stormed Macron's office in Lyons and threw around false banknotes with his face on. So I read in Russian-owned Sputnik News anyway.
Who knows what voteshare Le Pen will get? Who knows what will happen by tomorrow morning?
Looking at that poll with the Tories on 46% and given Yougov has had the Tories higher than Opinium I think a 51% Tory rating is the possible even likely outcome of that earlier tweet but we shall see
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
But that's not a government policy, just personal choice?
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
I would say that it is quite likely that there will be a split, but what that would mean in practice is not clear. Split to do what? Join the liberal democrats? sit in parliament as independents? would this then involve by elections immediately after GE 2017?
The labour party and the trade unions that support it are both moribund organisations who are wholly unrepresentative of the public as a whole. There are some great councillors and MP's, but the party bureaucracy is dysfunctional beyond belief. Like many organisations there is a social element to it and a history that people identify with, which as you say has stopped them from being critical of the leadership.
I am coming to the view - reluctantly as a member of several years standing - that the labour party needs to die completely. Only complete, wholesale, obliteration will allow something new to be created in its place. At the moment the labour party don't even qualify as an opposition. They fail in carrying out the most basic tasks of parliamentary process. They don't know what they stand for, other than vague polemical slogans and discredited promises and commitments. They should be completely rejected by the electorate. They deserve the coming obliteration.
+100
Being tied to the unions makes no sense in a world where union membership is now chosen by a minority and continues to decline.
Being linked to the co-operative movement makes no sense when a minority of co-op members vote Labour.
Fighting the class war of the 1920/30s makes no sense when class has declining relevance to the politics of the 21st century.
Trying to assemble a big tent coalition of blue collar workers, ethnic minorities and middle class guardian readers makes no sense when the interests of these constituencies are in such sharp conflict.
Seeing politics in terms of collectivism and solidarity makes no sense in a century where people increasingly value individualism and self-expression.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
I would say that it is quite likely that there will be a split, but what that would mean in practice is not clear. Split to do what? Join the liberal democrats? sit in parliament as independents? would this then involve by elections immediately after GE 2017?
The labour party and the trade unions that support it are both moribund organisations who are wholly unrepresentative of the public as a whole. There are some great councillors and MP's, but the party bureaucracy is dysfunctional beyond belief. Like many organisations there is a social element to it and a history that people identify with, which as you say has stopped them from being critical of the leadership.
I am coming to the view - reluctantly as a member of several years standing - that the labour party needs to die completely. Only complete, wholesale, obliteration will allow something new to be created in its place. At the moment the labour party don't even qualify as an opposition. They fail in carrying out the most basic tasks of parliamentary process. They don't know what they stand for, other than vague polemical slogans and discredited promises and commitments. They should be completely rejected by the electorate. They deserve the coming obliteration.
Currently the party is too weak to win, but too strong to die. Given that it will remain, IMO< too strong to die post June, I hope they clear up their dysfunction so they can hopefully become strong enough to win again.
Does anyone know why the poor PR souls don't rail against the word 'majority' when used in the sense of a lead in a seat under FPTP, the way they do against the word 'post' (which is surely just used as a metaphor for a point in time - 10pm on polling day)
Does anyone know why the poor PR souls don't rail against the word 'majority' when used in the sense of a lead in a seat under FPTP, the way they do against the word 'post' (which is surely just used as a metaphor for a point in time - 10pm on polling day)
In the US, plurality is common usage for such situations.
The SLAB vote is more concentrated. 3 seats could be on.
It amounts to a 6% swing from SNP to Lab compared with 2015.
East Lothian Scottish Labour might be a bet, but not for me personally
East Lothian more likely than not to go Labour IMO. The equivalent Holyrood constituency is already Labour and Labour is also confirmed by these council results. More surprisingly the local results also suggest Midlothian going Labour.
I don't follow European politics at all but, in a British context, a reliable rule of thumb is that a conservative party approaching 45% share of the vote is an anti-democratic, dissent-crushing fascist party.
Does anyone know why the poor PR souls don't rail against the word 'majority' when used in the sense of a lead in a seat under FPTP, the way they do against the word 'post' (which is surely just used as a metaphor for a point in time - 10pm on polling day)
I guess because majority isn't used a description for the flawed voting system itself. But you are right that majority makes no sense as a term used to describe the difference between the votes gained by the first place and second place candidates. But very little in the voting system we use makes any sense, other than it guaranteeing an alarming proportion of our politicians secure well-paid jobs for life.
Hide Corbyn away in a cupboard and bring out Mr Hammer and Sickle. What could go wrong?
I suppose Mr McD does at least dress well, and looks like a credible politician up to the point where he actually says something?
I wonder if this means that after the GE , Corbyn gives up and McDonnell becomes the left candidate.
Hope not I wouldnt vote for him.
Will there be a left candidate?
If McDonnell attempts to hang on and wins there will be a split. It will be the point the people who've been loyal because it's their party and they'd like to restore it say it's no longer the Labour Party any more. One of the problems "moderates" have had is that it's a firefight conducted in our house - despite wanting to win everyone also wants to protect the furniture. The hard left don't care - they're perfectly happy to demonise anyone who doesn't blindly follow the leadership. We saw it in the asymmetrical nature of the last leadership contest where Owen Smith went out of his way to be nice about Corbyn whereas Momentum fought the entire campaign on the basis that any challenge was a corporate conspiracy.
There's always been a tendency to regard the hard left as well intentioned but misguided rather than evil idiots, an attitude whose epitome is Corbyn - he has said really bad, obnoxious things in the past but gets a bit of a pass because he's an eccentric uncle - he can't have known about the anti-Semitism of groups he spoke to or joined as he's a nice bungler. McDonnell is an entirely different character - he's much nastier because he actually has a bit about him. It's the difference between some of Corbyn's more hapless cheerleaders and the genuine hard left arses who admit they hate everyone who doesn't share their politics.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
I think it's a fair point. If the candidate of the hard left wins post Corbyn that will really be it.
May has done the moderate wing of Labour one favour - she's arrested the tide of resignations as people can see that there'll be a leadership election shortly and are hanging on in there for now.
The SLAB vote is more concentrated. 3 seats could be on.
It amounts to a 6% swing from SNP to Lab compared with 2015.
East Lothian Scottish Labour might be a bet, but not for me personally
East Lothian more likely than not to go Labour IMO. The equivalent Holyrood constituency is already Labour and Labour is also confirmed by these council results. More surprisingly the local results also suggest Midlothian going Labour.
Re: the 30% for Labour in the latest Opinium. That's obviously wrong.
They are not going to practically match EdM's vote share, and outscore their PNS from the locals by a wide margin as well.
If the surveys keep on giving Labour headline VI scores that clearly fail to reflect their apocalyptically bad ratings in the supplementary questions, then I think we're heading for another 2015-type polling fail.
To what extent the calculation errors will benefit the Conservatives this time, and to what extent they might benefit the Liberal Democrats, I don't know - though FWIW I'm pretty sure that the Lib Dems aren't as low as 9% either.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
I would say that it is quite likely that there will be a split, but what that would mean in practice is not clear. Split to do what? Join the liberal democrats? sit in parliament as independents? would this then involve by elections immediately after GE 2017?
The labour party and the trade unions that support it are both moribund organisations who are wholly unrepresentative of the public as a whole. There are some great councillors and MP's, but the party bureaucracy is dysfunctional beyond belief. Like many organisations there is a social element to it and a history that people identify with, which as you say has stopped them from being critical of the leadership.
I am coming to the view - reluctantly as a member of several years standing - that the labour party needs to die completely. Only complete, wholesale, obliteration will allow something new to be created in its place. At the moment the labour party don't even qualify as an opposition. They fail in carrying out the most basic tasks of parliamentary process. They don't know what they stand for, other than vague polemical slogans and discredited promises and commitments. They should be completely rejected by the electorate. They deserve the coming obliteration.
Currently the party is too weak to win, but too strong to die. Given that it will remain, IMO< too strong to die post June, I hope they clear up their dysfunction so they can hopefully become strong enough to win again.
They need to sort it out quickly, one way or the other. If nothing else, someone needs to be a sensible opposition to the government.
Le Pen is at 10\1 at Betfair, so Ladbrokes are making free money from the gigantic crowds of bettors who are beating on their door to place stakes on her at 6\1.
Love this headline from the BBC: "French election: Macron hack details 'must not be spread'". That's right. Whatever you do, do NOT think of an elephant. Absolutely do not think of a large grey mammal with a trunk. Do not think of a banker politician either, or wonder what the hacked documents may reveal. Do not even think of wondering about offshore money. Macron is an extremely innocent victim. He is a nice man. You are not in a psychology experiment. This is not voter suppression. It is not psychological warfare.
People wearing masks stormed Macron's office in Lyons and threw around false banknotes with his face on. So I read in Russian-owned Sputnik News anyway.
Who knows what voteshare Le Pen will get? Who knows what will happen by tomorrow morning?
35-40%. Everyone currently alive on the planet will be 14 hours older. There are your answers.
If Labour are on 30 that's the same as 2015. Given the unique circumstances of the election that's not bad. Corbyn would have an argument to stay.
Absolutely. If they manage it, well, he's still terrible, but clearly either a lot more people do like him, or else people love the Labour brand a lot more, or they fear a Tory landslide even more. If they manage it.
I've been overestimating Labour and LD and underestimating the Tories for years. Time to start predicting bad results for Labour.
Anyone want to take a guess what Joe's "51%" tease is about with reference to tomorrow's ST poll?
"Intriguing" is a slightly odd word to describe the Tories being on 51% given there's already been a poll with them on 50%. Maybe it's 51% opposing Brexit...
If Labour are on 30 that's the same as 2015. Given the unique circumstances of the election that's not bad. Corbyn would have an argument to stay.
Do you think Labour will make 30% on June 8th?
Unlikely, but not impossible. But that is what the poll said.
It is. I agree it is unlikely. 26-28% would be my guess. 44% for the tories. With Mcdonnell now been leader of the campaign anything is possible (with no upside for labour).
Re: the 30% for Labour in the latest Opinium. That's obviously wrong.
They are not going to practically match EdM's vote share, and outscore their PNS from the locals by a wide margin as well.
If the surveys keep on giving Labour headline VI scores that clearly fail to reflect their apocalyptically bad ratings in the supplementary questions, then I think we're heading for another 2015-type polling fail.
To what extent the calculation errors will benefit the Conservatives this time, and to what extent they might benefit the Liberal Democrats, I don't know - though FWIW I'm pretty sure that the Lib Dems aren't as low as 9% either.
Compared to the US and to France our pollsters are useless. It is time they were held to account for their hooky adjustments. But I guess it suits the newspapers who mostly are the people paying their bills.
On topic I would think that the people betting are not fascist in some way but they are betting thinking that the exit polls could not of show better result and they could take a profit. They may not appreciate the accuracy of the trench polling
The SLAB vote is more concentrated. 3 seats could be on.
It amounts to a 6% swing from SNP to Lab compared with 2015.
East Lothian Scottish Labour might be a bet, but not for me personally
East Lothian more likely than not to go Labour IMO. The equivalent Holyrood constituency is already Labour and Labour is also confirmed by these council results. More surprisingly the local results also suggest Midlothian going Labour.
How about Edinburgh North & Leith?
Stay SNP as will Edinburgh East. Edinburgh West very probable for the Lib Dems. Edinburgh South looks like a three way marginal now with the Conservatives catching up with the SNP and Labour. Labour have a couple of reasons for retaining the seat - incumbency and the fact they regained the nearest Holyrood seat. Most intriguingly, local results indicate Joanna Cherry could lose her Edinburgh South West seat to the Conservatives. OTOH Ms Cherry has a massive margin for them to overcome - a bit like Midlothian for Labour.
On topic I would think that the people betting are not fascist in some way but they are betting thinking that the exit polls could not of show better result and they could take a profit. They may not appreciate the accuracy of the trench polling
I know plenty of people who assume Le Pen will win because she does not lead the polls and they assume polls are wrong, not appreciating not only the apparent accuracy of those polls, but just how far behind she apparently is.
Anyone want to take a guess what Joe's "51%" tease is about with reference to tomorrow's ST poll?
"Intriguing" is a slightly odd word to describe the Tories being on 51% given there's already been a poll with them on 50%. Maybe it's 51% opposing Brexit...
Yes, that would fit with 'intriguing'. People simultaneously getting behind May and starting to doubt that Brexit is wise.
Are any of you Labour lot betting on these bold/desperate 30% predictions/hopes? What's your under/over line for an evens bet?
Actually given UKIPs total collapse I think Lab may well get 30%.But as PB Tories are so cock sure of a complete collapse I would want Evens at 25% with them.
Question - let's assume for a moment the polls are overstating Labour and understating the Lib Dems. Would it be possible for this to create an even greater Tory majority?
I'm thinking of a 1987 style result (which had Labour on 27% and the SDP on 26%). Assuming that most of the Lib Dems would be Labour > Lib switchers, wouldn't this effectively allow the Tories to 'come through the middle' in a lot of seats?
I assume that the Labour vote is extremely concentrated in core areas, but if the Lib Dems are doing well nationally, it will probably be among hardcore remainers who are reasonably distributed around the country, albeit strongest in middle class and metropolitan areas.
The Macron hack has been pretty much confirmed as a GRU-led operation already.
Explanations of betting on Le Pen despite the polls:
1. The assumption the polls are wrong 2. Advance awareness or guesswork that something on Macron was going to drop (or still is to drop) 3. Its false money designed to create a message
Re: the 30% for Labour in the latest Opinium. That's obviously wrong.
They are not going to practically match EdM's vote share, and outscore their PNS from the locals by a wide margin as well.
If the surveys keep on giving Labour headline VI scores that clearly fail to reflect their apocalyptically bad ratings in the supplementary questions, then I think we're heading for another 2015-type polling fail.
To what extent the calculation errors will benefit the Conservatives this time, and to what extent they might benefit the Liberal Democrats, I don't know - though FWIW I'm pretty sure that the Lib Dems aren't as low as 9% either.
Compared to the US and to France our pollsters are useless. It is time they were held to account for their hooky adjustments. But I guess it suits the newspapers who mostly are the people paying their bills.
If they call this election as wrong as the last one, then the newspapers might as well save their money and get a soothsayer to cast the runes in 2022. The results would probably have about as much validity.
Well, that's a bit harsh I know. But not that harsh.
Le Pen is at 10\1 at Betfair, so Ladbrokes are making free money from the gigantic crowds of bettors who are beating on their door to place stakes on her at 6\1.
Love this headline from the BBC: "French election: Macron hack details 'must not be spread'". That's right. Whatever you do, do NOT think of an elephant. Absolutely do not think of a large grey mammal with a trunk. Do not think of a banker politician either, or wonder what the hacked documents may reveal. Do not even think of wondering about offshore money. Macron is an extremely innocent victim. He is a nice man. You are not in a psychology experiment. This is not voter suppression. It is not psychological warfare.
People wearing masks stormed Macron's office in Lyons and threw around false banknotes with his face on. So I read in Russian-owned Sputnik News anyway.
Who knows what voteshare Le Pen will get? Who knows what will happen by tomorrow morning?
35-40%. Everyone currently alive on the planet will be 14 hours older. There are your answers.
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
But that's not a government policy, just personal choice?
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
As a matter of interest, is Nazi Germany the only fascist country you recognise?
Ancient history was never my strong point, but I think Fascist Italy also had a "hearth and home" policy for women.
It just seems strange to fixate on that part of the programme. Modern Japan, where women still largely give up work after marriage, would be fascist if that is your sole criteria.
But that's not a government policy, just personal choice?
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
Comments
The number who would be more likely to vote Labour if Corbyn was replaced perhaps.
There's always been a tendency to regard the hard left as well intentioned but misguided rather than evil idiots, an attitude whose epitome is Corbyn - he has said really bad, obnoxious things in the past but gets a bit of a pass because he's an eccentric uncle - he can't have known about the anti-Semitism of groups he spoke to or joined as he's a nice bungler. McDonnell is an entirely different character - he's much nastier because he actually has a bit about him. It's the difference between some of Corbyn's more hapless cheerleaders and the genuine hard left arses who admit they hate everyone who doesn't share their politics.
After the election, even if Labour gets to the high twenties the house is burnt down anyway. I'd expect a lot of Labour people will go public with what they actually think about people like Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and the destruction they wreak when allowed to organise anything other than a protest.
OTOH, I will DIE if 51% is the Tories' poll rating! :O
Is the nationalist bubble bursting?
The local elections affirmed the Conservatives’ new found position as Scotland’s second party—and they will likely claim some SNP scalps on 8th June
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/is-the-nationalist-bubble-bursting?platform=hootsuite
You and your dad seem to have this fixation that Le Pen is "Fascist".
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/860865302200020993
Without them it's SNP 41, Con 26 Lab 25.
Con 35%
Lab 8%
LDem 30%
UKIP 1%
Green 2%
Ind/Others 24%
2013
Con 24.5%
Lab 8.2%
LDem 22.3%
UKIP 15.3%
Green 2.6%
Ind/Others 27.1%
2015 GE
Con 43.9%
Lab 12.5%
LDem 23.0%
UKIP 14.1%
Green 6.0%
Ind/Others 2.5%
My ward is now a marginal
There was a byelection a couple of weeks ago which we held with a slightly smaller majority.
Minor regional parties seem to becoming more common, sometimes deliberate eschewing, in theory, party politics, counter intuitive as that sounds. There are a couple round my way like that, which dominate their towns. I'd see defection from them to be no different than defecting at district, county or unitary level, where it happens often enough not to be noteworthy.
The labour party and the trade unions that support it are both moribund organisations who are wholly unrepresentative of the public as a whole. There are some great councillors and MP's, but the party bureaucracy is dysfunctional beyond belief. Like many organisations there is a social element to it and a history that people identify with, which as you say has stopped them from being critical of the leadership.
I am coming to the view - reluctantly as a member of several years standing - that the labour party needs to die completely. Only complete, wholesale, obliteration will allow something new to be created in its place. At the moment the labour party don't even qualify as an opposition. They fail in carrying out the most basic tasks of parliamentary process. They don't know what they stand for, other than vague polemical slogans and discredited promises and commitments. They should be completely rejected by the electorate. They deserve the coming obliteration.
Ok not fine, but stubbornly close to last time.
Love this headline from the BBC: "French election: Macron hack details 'must not be spread'". That's right. Whatever you do, do NOT think of an elephant. Absolutely do not think of a large grey mammal with a trunk. Do not think of a banker politician either, or wonder what the hacked documents may reveal. Do not even think of wondering about offshore money. Macron is an extremely innocent victim. He is a nice man. You are not in a psychology experiment. This is not voter suppression. It is not psychological warfare.
People wearing masks stormed Macron's office in Lyons and threw around false banknotes with his face on. So I read in Russian-owned Sputnik News anyway.
Who knows what voteshare Le Pen will get? Who knows what will happen by tomorrow morning?
It's all MOE anyway.
Being tied to the unions makes no sense in a world where union membership is now chosen by a minority and continues to decline.
Being linked to the co-operative movement makes no sense when a minority of co-op members vote Labour.
Fighting the class war of the 1920/30s makes no sense when class has declining relevance to the politics of the 21st century.
Trying to assemble a big tent coalition of blue collar workers, ethnic minorities and middle class guardian readers makes no sense when the interests of these constituencies are in such sharp conflict.
Seeing politics in terms of collectivism and solidarity makes no sense in a century where people increasingly value individualism and self-expression.
May has done the moderate wing of Labour one favour - she's arrested the tide of resignations as people can see that there'll be a leadership election shortly and are hanging on in there for now.
They are not going to practically match EdM's vote share, and outscore their PNS from the locals by a wide margin as well.
If the surveys keep on giving Labour headline VI scores that clearly fail to reflect their apocalyptically bad ratings in the supplementary questions, then I think we're heading for another 2015-type polling fail.
To what extent the calculation errors will benefit the Conservatives this time, and to what extent they might benefit the Liberal Democrats, I don't know - though FWIW I'm pretty sure that the Lib Dems aren't as low as 9% either.
Some of the new, inexperienced members are confused. They actually thought Labour was going to win last week. Reality is a bitch.
I've been overestimating Labour and LD and underestimating the Tories for years. Time to start predicting bad results for Labour.
"Blyth Valley, local election votes:
Con: 8,726
Lab: 8,601
UKIP: 2,116
LD: 2,034
Independent: 393"
Tories are 3.25 on Betfair Sportsbook:
https://www.betfair.com/sport/politics
I'm thinking of a 1987 style result (which had Labour on 27% and the SDP on 26%). Assuming that most of the Lib Dems would be Labour > Lib switchers, wouldn't this effectively allow the Tories to 'come through the middle' in a lot of seats?
I assume that the Labour vote is extremely concentrated in core areas, but if the Lib Dems are doing well nationally, it will probably be among hardcore remainers who are reasonably distributed around the country, albeit strongest in middle class and metropolitan areas.
Explanations of betting on Le Pen despite the polls:
1. The assumption the polls are wrong
2. Advance awareness or guesswork that something on Macron was going to drop (or still is to drop)
3. Its false money designed to create a message
Well, that's a bit harsh I know. But not that harsh.
https://tinyurl.com/kehbm56
Perhaps TSE can give a view?
Cant see it on BBC just now though and I thought thats where it was yesterday