politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Tories are wrong to fear that Corbyn could become Prime Mi

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Tories are wrong to fear that Corbyn could become Prime Minister in the foreseeable future – part 1

Labour came out of the last election 58 seats short of the Tories and the MP totals of other parties barely make up the gap particularly as Sinn Fein don’t take up their seats. This situation eas exacerbated by the Conservative-DUP no confidence vote agreement.

Read the full story here

tlg86

First past the post.

williamglenn

Second preference.

Morris_Dancer

Interesting thoughts. Can't comment too much until the other parts are up.

As an aside, I'm enjoying Discourses on Livy, by Machiavelli. A few chapters so far seem pertinent to our own situation.

justin124

56 seats short of the Tories - not 58!
There is no way the SNP could fail to support any attempt to bring the Tories down. To fail to do so would hand a great gift to Labour in Scotland. Labour gains at SNP expense would begin to remove the pro-Tory electoral bias in the system - as would any LibDem gains from the Tories.

HYUFD

Provided the DUP continue to support the Tories as long as this Parliament lasts Corbyn is unlikely to become PM though on current polling he has a good chance of becoming PM with SNP support

justin124

HYUFD said:

Provided the DUP continue to support the Tories as long as this Parliament lasts Corbyn is unlikely to become PM though on current polling he has a good chance of becoming PM with SNP support

Indeed - unless we have a sudden cluster of Tory by election reverses.

The_Taxman

I am not so sure that a fresh election will not happen if the current PM is replaced.

I think that the Tories made a basic miscalculation in 2017 in that many social security benefits/ tax credits were not increased as fast as inflation or were in fact frozen following the Brexit slump in the value of the pound. Bills were going up and incomes could not keep up pace. That could have been the difference between winning a small majority and falling short as is the current tally in parliament for the Tories. It is true the minimum wage went up in early 2017 but to truly get the electoral dividend any increase needs to promptly coincide with an election.

I always felt Theresa May was a bit of a void in terms of personality/ charisma and this lack of inspiration would feed back the sort of result delivered in June of last year.

I would not rule out the grim reaper springing a few surprises on politics up until 2022. It is 24 years since a Leader of the Opposition died in office. Prior to that it was the 1960s and Hugh Gaitskell who sadly died in office. Corbyn may be a vegetarian and non drinker/ smoker, so he may statistically be likely to live longer but he is no spring chicken. The stress could kill him if M15/6 don't get to him first.

So, a General Election is unlikely but if May and her party orchestrate a smooth and seamless transition of PM. Then, the government could win a snap election if they called one if they manipulate positive economic variables such as Increases in Benefits/Tax Credits and pensions at the right time. The government lost the last election, I think they will have learnt from their mistakes and will try to ensure they do not repeat the same administrative mistakes.

NickPalmer

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

stodge

Afternoon all

Again, nothing too surprising here. First point is the period 2018-22 for Labour has to be preparing for Government and it's going to be a fine balance between the radicalism needed to enthuse the troops while not sounding too "new" and frightening the voters away.

Every day and week the Conservatives look to be indulging or self-indulging in internal feuding and squabbling makes the idea of a Labour Government less unattractive to voters desperate for a change and some improvement in their economic life (and most people won't believe 1.7% economic growth will leave them with champagne and caviar to spare).

From a politics perspective, the obvious would be for Labour to drop the "grand old man" and go for someone with much less political baggage and more telegenic modernity and there's the key - both Wilson and Blair emphasised optimism and modernity. IF Labour could find such a figure, the Conservatives wouldn't be assessing the losses, they'd be counting the survivors digging out from the landslide.

justin124

The_Taxman said:

I am not so sure that a fresh election will not happen if the current PM is replaced.

I think that the Tories made a basic miscalculation in 2017 in that many social security benefits/ tax credits were not increased as fast as inflation or were in fact frozen following the Brexit slump in the value of the pound. Bills were going up and incomes could not keep up pace. That could have been the difference between winning a small majority and falling short as is the current tally in parliament for the Tories. It is true the minimum wage went up in early 2017 but to truly get the electoral dividend any increase needs to promptly coincide with an election.

I always felt Theresa May was a bit of a void in terms of personality/ charisma and this lack of inspiration would feed back the sort of result delivered in June of last year.

I would not rule out the grim reaper springing a few surprises on politics up until 2022. It is 24 years since a Leader of the Opposition died in office. Prior to that it was the 1960s and Hugh Gaitskell who sadly died in office. Corbyn may be a vegetarian and non drinker/ smoker, so he may statistically be likely to live longer but he is no spring chicken. The stress could kill him if M15/6 don't get to him first.

So, a General Election is unlikely but if May and her party orchestrate a smooth and seamless transition of PM. Then, the government could win a snap election if they called one if they manipulate positive economic variables such as Inceasesin Benefits/Tax Credits and pensions at the right time. The government lost the last election, I think they will have learnt from their mistakes and will try to ensure they do not repeat the same administrative mistakes.

The changed Parliamentary arithmetic would not make it quite so easy for the incumbent Government to call an early election. Corbyn would be better placed than last April to try to put together an alternative Government from the existing House of Commons.

SquareRoot

NickPalmer said:

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

justin124

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

Many people do not believe we have a serious Government at present!

Mortimer

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

Provided the DUP continue to support the Tories as long as this Parliament lasts Corbyn is unlikely to become PM though on current polling he has a good chance of becoming PM with SNP support

Indeed - unless we have a sudden cluster of Tory by election reverses.

Short-strawism at its best....

TwistedFireStopper

If the Tories do throw May out of the window before the next election, there will be an almighty clamour for there to be another election. Losing one leader is unfortunate, but two.....

Barnesian

I agree with the analysis but not the heading.

I agree that there won't be an early election and that Labour won't get an overall majority for the reasons given. But I disagree with the statement that "Tories are wrong to fear that Corbyn could become Prime Minister in the foreseeable future".

I think it is likely that Corbyn will be the next PM with a minority Labour Government and C&S from the minor parties. Corbyn can look for C&S from about 50 MPs. The Tories can only count on 10 from the DUP, so the arithmetic, in a tight race, favours a Labour government.

Today I've changed my betting on the Tory leadership. I now think that May will go in Q3 2019 rather than last out until 2020+. And I think her successor will be Boris.

Boris is not well regarded by most of his colleagues and up until now, I've taken the view that they wouldn't permit his name to go forward to the membership who would almost certainly vote for him. But I now think that they may hold their noses and support him as the best chance of winning the next election and keeping their seats.

The parallels between Johnson and Trump are uncanny. Both have an unusual relationship with the truth and consistency (and women). Both are narcissists. Both are cunning rather than analytical. Both have a populist way with language and can cut through to C2DEs. I see Johnson's relationship with the Tory parliamentary party as similar to Trump's relationship with the Republican Congressmen.

Next election will between Corbyn and Johnson. But I don't see Corbyn as another Hilary! (more Bernie Sanders).

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Stopper, disagree. People just want a break from politics.

The_Taxman

justin124 said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

Many people do not believe we have a serious Government at present!

I agree with that.

What surprises me is when Gordon Brown, John Major and Jim Callaghan suffered a catastrophic loss of credibility they plumbed the depths of polling. Theresa May for her awfulness is still polling better than the "winner" David Cameron did in either of his General Election outings. Corbyn is a paradox, he energises those that Labour left behind but repels those who could bring Labour forward.

Yorkcity

The_Taxman said:

I am not so sure that a fresh election will not happen if the current PM is replaced.

I think that the Tories made a basic miscalculation in 2017 in that many social security benefits/ tax credits were not increased as fast as inflation or were in fact frozen following the Brexit slump in the value of the pound. Bills were going up and incomes could not keep up pace. That could have been the difference between winning a small majority and falling short as is the current tally in parliament for the Tories. It is true the minimum wage went up in early 2017 but to truly get the electoral dividend any increase needs to promptly coincide with an election.

I always felt Theresa May was a bit of a void in terms of personality/ charisma and this lack of inspiration would feed back the sort of result delivered in June of last year.

I would not rule out the grim reaper springing a few surprises on politics up until 2022. It is 24 years since a Leader of the Opposition died in office. Prior to that it was the 1960s and Hugh Gaitskell who sadly died in office. Corbyn may be a vegetarian and non drinker/ smoker, so he may statistically be likely to live longer but he is no spring chicken. The stress could kill him if M15/6 don't get to him first.

So, a General Election is unlikely but if May and her party orchestrate a smooth and seamless transition of PM. Then, the government could win a snap election if they called one if they manipulate positive economic variables such as Increases in Benefits/Tax Credits and pensions at the right time. The government lost the last election, I think they will have learnt from their mistakes and will try to ensure they do not repeat the same administrative mistakes.

That is a bit dark for a democracy.Hopefully our security services would not interfere .Surely things have moved on from Peter Wright and Spycatcher and the threat to Harold Wilson.

TheJezziah

Barnesian said:

Next election will between Corbyn and Johnson. But I don't see Corbyn as another Hilary!

It will be the Trump vs Sanders contest we really should have had... but a UK version!

I think those counting on the grim reaper in regards to Corbyn are missing another important factor. He had a fairly wealthy and privileged upbringing. Somebody on here made a topic why Labour are wrong to count on by election defeats to finish the Tory government off.

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Not only is it the healthy lifestyle but other factors as well, aside from living in London due to pollution he is almost the perfect candidate to live longer than most. Of course death can strike even the most healthy so nothing is certain but due to all the factors at play with Corbyn I think he is probably less at risk than many middle aged people who have more negative factors such as poor diet poor background etc.

Edit: I can understand it is probably a more realistic hope for some than the Conservatives actually trying to appeal to voters....

NickPalmer

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

rkrkrk

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

I’d love to be able to bet with some of the pb posters on number of momentum deselections.
Going by their rhetoric it should be anyone who didn’t back Jezza originally.

SquareRoot

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

SquareRoot

justin124 said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

Many people do not believe we have a serious Government at present!

Neither do I but Labour needs to look like it could run the Country. It doesn't look like it could run a barn dance, never mind the Country.

YBarddCwsc

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

oxfordsimon

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

There may not yet be MP deselections, but there are numerous councillor deselections/local party take-overs.

I have friends in Brighton who are despairing at the state of the local Labour party.

Barnesian

TheJezziah said:

Barnesian said:

Next election will between Corbyn and Johnson. But I don't see Corbyn as another Hilary!

It will be the Trump vs Sanders contest we really should have had... but a UK version!

I think those counting on the grim reaper in regards to Corbyn are missing another important factor. He had a fairly wealthy and privileged upbringing. Somebody on here made a topic why Labour are wrong to count on by election defeats to finish the Tory government off.

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Not only is it the healthy lifestyle but other factors as well, aside from living in London due to pollution he is almost the perfect candidate to live longer than most. Of course death can strike even the most healthy so nothing is certain but due to all the factors at play with Corbyn I think he is probably less at risk than many middle aged people who have more negative factors such as poor diet poor background etc.

Edit: I can understand it is probably a more realistic hope for some than the Conservatives actually trying to appeal to voters....

If Boris Johnson does win the next General Election, how do you think he will get on with Trump? He has insulted him in the past and Trump bears a grudge.

EDIT: Of course if it is 2022 Trump will probably not be around. It will be a Democrat.

TheJezziah

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

It was specifically referring to those who actually died in office so whilst many of the new recruits for sometime probably don't met the criteria or the stereotype of wealthier/poorer backgrounds or at least not to the same extent these were people who generally came into parliament a long time ago.

Also not 100% without checking but I think it took into account the different amounts of MP's.

The main thrust of my post was that it is another factor in favour of Corbyn's longevity rather than people from poorer backgrounds being somehow good and those from richer bad and that is reflected in the Conservatives and Labour. I care much more about views than background.

MarqueeMark

The_Taxman said:

Corbyn may be a vegetarian and non drinker/ smoker, so he may statistically be likely to live longer but he is no spring chicken. The stress could kill him if M15/6 don't get to him first.

McDonnell is higher on their list of prioroties than Corbyn...

TheJezziah

To be honest the list of people who have insulted or snubbed Trump in some way must be pretty damn big, even if he his incredibly petty it would take a lot of work just to remember all these people you have to try and get back at.

I can't actually remember the insult myself but I can't see it being a major obstacle unless he actually campaigned against Trump in some big way or had something seen as a big opposition to him.

The_Taxman

TheJezziah said:

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

It was specifically referring to those who actually died in office so whilst many of the new recruits for sometime probably don't met the criteria or the stereotype of wealthier/poorer backgrounds or at least not to the same extent these were people who generally came into parliament a long time ago.

Also not 100% without checking but I think it took into account the different amounts of MP's.

The main thrust of my post was that it is another factor in favour of Corbyn's longevity rather than people from poorer backgrounds being somehow good and those from richer bad and that is reflected in the Conservatives and Labour. I care much more about views than background.

I think MPs dying in office is quite heavily correlated to the political cycle. Large new intakes tend to be younger whereas a government that has been in power a long-time has much older MPs. Certainly the Tories suffered in the 1990s and Labour had quite a few deaths in the 2005 - 2010 parliament.

MarqueeMark

Barnesian said:

Today I've changed my betting on the Tory leadership. I now think that May will go in Q3 2019 rather than last out until 2020+. And I think her successor will be Boris.

Boris is not well regarded by most of his colleagues and up until now, I've taken the view that they wouldn't permit his name to go forward to the membership who would almost certainly vote for him. But I now think that they may hold their noses and support him as the best chance of winning the next election and keeping their seats.

Boris could have a go for a couple of years, and there would still be plenty of time to replace him ahead of the election if he disappoints/is as crap as expected (delete according to taste).

YBarddCwsc

TheJezziah said:

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

It was specifically referring to those who actually died in office so whilst many of the new recruits for sometime probably don't met the criteria or the stereotype of wealthier/poorer backgrounds or at least not to the same extent these were people who generally came into parliament a long time ago.

Also not 100% without checking but I think it took into account the different amounts of MP's.

The main thrust of my post was that it is another factor in favour of Corbyn's longevity rather than people from poorer backgrounds being somehow good and those from richer bad and that is reflected in the Conservatives and Labour. I care much more about views than background.

I honestly doubt if there is any statistical evidence to support your claim.

I think during the period 2000-2015, the average age of Labour MPs was greater than Tory MPs. This is probably because a Labour MP had typically entered the Commons in 1992 or 1997 at middle age, and had aged in Parliament.

By contrast, it was not till 2005 or 2010 that there were infusions of new Conservative MPs.

As the average age was greater, so there were more sitting Labour MPs who passed away.

I haven't checked, but I would now expect the average age of Tory MPs to exceed the average of Labour MPs, and so the pendulum swings the other way.

Sean_F

The_Taxman said:

justin124 said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

I think that's right, but with a less pessimistic undertone (for Labour). Labour's task is simply and patiently to look increasingly like the serious alternative government. I don't think the evident exhaustion of the Government will carry them through to a Conservative win in 2022, whether they're led by May or the ghost of Mother Theresa. They may just about lurch through Brexit, and then they'll really need a spell of recuperation in opposition.

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

Many people do not believe we have a serious Government at present!

I agree with that.

What surprises me is when Gordon Brown, John Major and Jim Callaghan suffered a catastrophic loss of credibility they plumbed the depths of polling. Theresa May for her awfulness is still polling better than the "winner" David Cameron did in either of his General Election outings. Corbyn is a paradox, he energises those that Labour left behind but repels those who could bring Labour forward.

No surprise at all. In the eyes of many voters, there's a big positive reason for voting Conservative (Brexit) and a big negative reason (Corbyn). And the three PM's you mention wrestled with worse economic situations than May.

May is poor at politics, but that doesn't affect the average voter.

YBarddCwsc

The_Taxman said:

TheJezziah said:

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

It was specifically referring to those who actually died in office so whilst many of the new recruits for sometime probably don't met the criteria or the stereotype of wealthier/poorer backgrounds or at least not to the same extent these were people who generally came into parliament a long time ago.

Also not 100% without checking but I think it took into account the different amounts of MP's.

The main thrust of my post was that it is another factor in favour of Corbyn's longevity rather than people from poorer backgrounds being somehow good and those from richer bad and that is reflected in the Conservatives and Labour. I care much more about views than background.

I think MPs dying in office is quite heavily correlated to the political cycle. Large new intakes tend to be younger whereas a government that has been in power a long-time has much older MPs. Certainly the Tories suffered in the 1990s and Labour had quite a few deaths in the 2005 - 2010 parliament.

Exactly.

TwistedFireStopper

MarqueeMark said:

Barnesian said:

Today I've changed my betting on the Tory leadership. I now think that May will go in Q3 2019 rather than last out until 2020+. And I think her successor will be Boris.

Boris is not well regarded by most of his colleagues and up until now, I've taken the view that they wouldn't permit his name to go forward to the membership who would almost certainly vote for him. But I now think that they may hold their noses and support him as the best chance of winning the next election and keeping their seats.

Boris could have a go for a couple of years, and there would still be plenty of time to replace him ahead of the election if he disappoints/is as crap as expected (delete according to taste).

Fuck it, why not let all the Tory MPs have a go? Do a week about, see who makes a go of it. Sort of like work experience, but you get paid 70 grand a year plus expenses and you don't really have to turn up if you have something else on.

TheWhiteRabbit

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

OchEye

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

Please tell from your actual personal experience and not from what you read in the Telegraph or Mail...

TheWhiteRabbit

OchEye said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

Please tell from your actual personal experience and not from what you read in the Telegraph or Mail...

Look at Haringey and the whole idea that all deselections are "official" is clearly false.

Philip_Thompson

Barnesian said:

TheJezziah said:

Barnesian said:

Next election will between Corbyn and Johnson. But I don't see Corbyn as another Hilary!

It will be the Trump vs Sanders contest we really should have had... but a UK version!

I think those counting on the grim reaper in regards to Corbyn are missing another important factor. He had a fairly wealthy and privileged upbringing. Somebody on here made a topic why Labour are wrong to count on by election defeats to finish the Tory government off.

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Not only is it the healthy lifestyle but other factors as well, aside from living in London due to pollution he is almost the perfect candidate to live longer than most. Of course death can strike even the most healthy so nothing is certain but due to all the factors at play with Corbyn I think he is probably less at risk than many middle aged people who have more negative factors such as poor diet poor background etc.

Edit: I can understand it is probably a more realistic hope for some than the Conservatives actually trying to appeal to voters....

If Boris Johnson does win the next General Election, how do you think he will get on with Trump? He has insulted him in the past and Trump bears a grudge.

EDIT: Of course if it is 2022 Trump will probably not be around. It will be a Democrat.

If they have to they'd get along just fine, just like May and Trump now after their spat at the end of last year.

Trump may hold a grudge but he also has an even bigger ego. If Johnson said something nice to Trump in private they'd move on.

oxfordsimon

TheWhiteRabbit said:

OchEye said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

Please tell from your actual personal experience and not from what you read in the Telegraph or Mail...

Look at Haringey and the whole idea that all deselections are "official" is clearly false.

And indeed at council level in Brighton.

Philip_Thompson

TwistedFireStopper said:

MarqueeMark said:

Barnesian said:

Today I've changed my betting on the Tory leadership. I now think that May will go in Q3 2019 rather than last out until 2020+. And I think her successor will be Boris.

Boris is not well regarded by most of his colleagues and up until now, I've taken the view that they wouldn't permit his name to go forward to the membership who would almost certainly vote for him. But I now think that they may hold their noses and support him as the best chance of winning the next election and keeping their seats.

Boris could have a go for a couple of years, and there would still be plenty of time to replace him ahead of the election if he disappoints/is as crap as expected (delete according to taste).

Fuck it, why not let all the Tory MPs have a go? Do a week about, see who makes a go of it. Sort of like work experience, but you get paid 70 grand a year plus expenses and you don't really have to turn up if you have something else on.

Like hosting Have I Got News For You.

The_Taxman

Philip_Thompson said:

Barnesian said:

TheJezziah said:

Barnesian said:

Next election will between Corbyn and Johnson. But I don't see Corbyn as another Hilary!

It will be the Trump vs Sanders contest we really should have had... but a UK version!

I think those counting on the grim reaper in regards to Corbyn are missing another important factor. He had a fairly wealthy and privileged upbringing. Somebody on here made a topic why Labour are wrong to count on by election defeats to finish the Tory government off.

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Not only is it the healthy lifestyle but other factors as well, aside from living in London due to pollution he is almost the perfect candidate to live longer than most. Of course death can strike even the most healthy so nothing is certain but due to all the factors at play with Corbyn I think he is probably less at risk than many middle aged people who have more negative factors such as poor diet poor background etc.

Edit: I can understand it is probably a more realistic hope for some than the Conservatives actually trying to appeal to voters....

If Boris Johnson does win the next General Election, how do you think he will get on with Trump? He has insulted him in the past and Trump bears a grudge.

EDIT: Of course if it is 2022 Trump will probably not be around. It will be a Democrat.

If they have to they'd get along just fine, just like May and Trump now after their spat at the end of last year.

Trump may hold a grudge but he also has an even bigger ego. If Johnson said something nice to Trump in private they'd move on.

Johnson would probably offer Trump a knighthood as Thatcher did for Reagan. Crude but affective!

oxfordsimon

Philip_Thompson said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

MarqueeMark said:

Barnesian said:

Today I've changed my betting on the Tory leadership. I now think that May will go in Q3 2019 rather than last out until 2020+. And I think her successor will be Boris.

Boris is not well regarded by most of his colleagues and up until now, I've taken the view that they wouldn't permit his name to go forward to the membership who would almost certainly vote for him. But I now think that they may hold their noses and support him as the best chance of winning the next election and keeping their seats.

Boris could have a go for a couple of years, and there would still be plenty of time to replace him ahead of the election if he disappoints/is as crap as expected (delete according to taste).

Fuck it, why not let all the Tory MPs have a go? Do a week about, see who makes a go of it. Sort of like work experience, but you get paid 70 grand a year plus expenses and you don't really have to turn up if you have something else on.

Like hosting Have I Got News For You.

Or being UKIP leader

ydoethur

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

I take it you are only including those polls that gave the main opposition party a double-digit lead? Otherwise the Alliance were 27 points clear of the Conservatives late in 1981 (and Labour, for that matter).

ydoethur

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

I am very puzzled that there has as yet been no move against Jared O'Mara. I'm not quite sure this is the message you want to be sending out.

Verulamius

My guess, very unscientific, is that May will go this year.

The negotiations for Brexit will have been wrapped up by October, as it will take all the EU countries etc. 6 months to ratify the agreement.

Hence after that date there will be a pause.....

TheWhiteRabbit

ydoethur said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

I take it you are only including those polls that gave the main opposition party a double-digit lead? Otherwise the Alliance were 27 points clear of the Conservatives late in 1981 (and Labour, for that matter).

It was the main opposition party, yes, though I don't think it shifts anything.

I have 1979 as 18 months, i.e. late 1980.

oxfordsimon

ydoethur said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

I am very puzzled that there has as yet been no move against Jared O'Mara. I'm not quite sure this is the message you want to be sending out.

The white-washing committee has yet to rule on his 'alleged' bad behaviour.

IanB2

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

Being a spad, think tank writer or charity lobbyist aren't professions noted for reduced life expectancy.

justin124

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

In the 1959 Parliament Labour failed to take the lead until autumn 1961. Well into 1962 before a clear lead was established.

jameslaz

I think that the 48 letters is almost a done deal and will surely be reached over the next few days. If I were in Theresa's shoes, I would do a Major and call a vote of confidence - this would focus the mind and give her the possibility of exiting with honour rather than being humiliated.

justin124

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

DavidL

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

MarqueeMark

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

SquareRoot

OchEye said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

Please tell from your actual personal experience and not from what you read in the Telegraph or Mail...

we have been here before. I do not buy or read the daily mail> I rarely if ever ready the Torygraph. If I ever buy a paper. Its the Times.

justin124

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

SquareRoot

oxfordsimon said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

OchEye said:

SquareRoot said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

Yeah..... but don't plead ignorance. You know very well what is going on in constituencies.

Please tell from your actual personal experience and not from what you read in the Telegraph or Mail...

Look at Haringey and the whole idea that all deselections are "official" is clearly false.

And indeed at council level in Brighton.

Hmmm .. events dear boy events. we shall see.

The_Taxman

jameslaz said:

I think that the 48 letters is almost a done deal and will surely be reached over the next few days. If I were in Theresa's shoes, I would do a Major and call a vote of confidence - this would focus the mind and give her the possibility of exiting with honour rather than being humiliated.

I think she is the type that will only be evicted rather than taking the challenge to her opponents. Major won an election with an outright majority, he was more popular than the party. Theresa May on the other hand lost a parliamentary majority and is more unpopular than her party. It is completely different to the 1990s, the Tories could theoretically be still in power in ten years with the left leading Labour. So, the prize is bigger than 1990s with the Tory government being well past its sell by date in 1995.

stevef

I agree with most of this article -but I disagree that the system is biased in favour of the Tories. Nothing much has changed since 2010 when the Tories failed to get a majority on 37% when Labour got a majority of 66 on 36% in 2005.

No I dont think there will be an election before 2022 for all the reasons given. I think too that Corbyn secretly wants to prolong for as long as possible his fantasy that the last election means that he a prime minister in waiting, when in fact it was no such thing, and he is currently doing worse in terms of leads over the Tories than both Miliband and Kinnock.

No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. This rule has never been broken.

Mortimer

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Sean_F

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

IanB2

stevef said:

I agree with most of this article -but I disagree that the system is biased in favour of the Tories. Nothing much has changed since 2010 when the Tories failed to get a majority on 37% when Labour got a majority of 66 on 36% in 2005.

No I dont think there will be an election before 2022 for all the reasons given. I think too that Corbyn secretly wants to prolong for as long as possible his fantasy that the last election means that he a prime minister in waiting, when in fact it was no such thing, and he is currently doing worse in terms of leads over the Tories than both Miliband and Kinnock.

No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. This rule has never been broken.

The system has always been biased in favour of both Tories and Labour, and it is simply a question of who has the biggest favourable bias. Right now it probably is the Tories, as Labour's return for its votes in Scotland has fallen away (among other reasons).

ydoethur

TheWhiteRabbit said:

ydoethur said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

I take it you are only including those polls that gave the main opposition party a double-digit lead? Otherwise the Alliance were 27 points clear of the Conservatives late in 1981 (and Labour, for that matter).

It was the main opposition party, yes, though I don't think it shifts anything.

I have 1979 as 18 months, i.e. late 1980.

Sorry, brain fade, was looking at the wrong line.

I would agree that the fact Corbyn has not yet established a clear lead does not bode well for his chances at the next election - events have been more akin to Black Wednesday than Mac the Knife, yet he cannot take advantage.

IanB2

oxfordsimon said:

ydoethur said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

That's the problem for Labour. They will never look a serious alternative Govt with Corbyn as l;eader and Momentum deselecting decent MP's.

What MP deselections? Total to date is zero.

I am very puzzled that there has as yet been no move against Jared O'Mara. I'm not quite sure this is the message you want to be sending out.

The white-washing committee has yet to rule on his 'alleged' bad behaviour.

Lady Shabby is otherwise engaged?

Sean_F

IanB2 said:

stevef said:

I agree with most of this article -but I disagree that the system is biased in favour of the Tories. Nothing much has changed since 2010 when the Tories failed to get a majority on 37% when Labour got a majority of 66 on 36% in 2005.

No I dont think there will be an election before 2022 for all the reasons given. I think too that Corbyn secretly wants to prolong for as long as possible his fantasy that the last election means that he a prime minister in waiting, when in fact it was no such thing, and he is currently doing worse in terms of leads over the Tories than both Miliband and Kinnock.

No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. This rule has never been broken.

The system has always been biased in favour of both Tories and Labour, and it is simply a question of who has the biggest favourable bias. Right now it probably is the Tories, as Labour's return for its votes in Scotland has fallen away (among other reasons).

1997 and 2001 are the only elections where the Conservatives would have done better under PR. Even in 1983, Labour did better than under PR. You'd have to go back to 1935 to find an election where the system did not favour Labour.

justin124

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

DavidL

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

TwistedFireStopper

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

TheJezziah

YBarddCwsc said:

I honestly doubt if there is any statistical evidence to support your claim.

I think during the period 2000-2015, the average age of Labour MPs was greater than Tory MPs. This is probably because a Labour MP had typically entered the Commons in 1992 or 1997 at middle age, and had aged in Parliament.

By contrast, it was not till 2005 or 2010 that there were infusions of new Conservative MPs.

As the average age was greater, so there were more sitting Labour MPs who passed away.

I haven't checked, but I would now expect the average age of Tory MPs to exceed the average of Labour MPs, and so the pendulum swings the other way.

To be honest my main claim is people from wealthier backgrounds live longer than those from poorer backgrounds. As you go onto talk about the make up of the house of commons I think you are disagreeing with a point I haven't made.

If we are just talking about a politicians from a certain political party dying (how many on each side) then you are absolutely right that average age of that partys MPs is a key figure. This isn't really anything to do with any point I made though.

I was specifically referring to the age sitting MP's die at in reference to their background (as very much a side point to the main point I was making)

DavidL

That list of greatest living sportsman in full:

1. Roger Federer.
2. ehhh....

TheJezziah

IanB2 said:

YBarddCwsc said:

TheJezziah said:

One of the many points was that Tory MP's, partially due to their (usually) wealthier upbringing/backgrounds tended to live longer than Labour MP's who tended to be from poorer backgrounds.

Is this right ? It may have been true once when Labour did have a substantial number of MPs drawn from manual/labouring jobs.

Those times are long, long gone.

I doubt if there is any statistically significant difference in longevity of Tory versus Labour MPs elected since 1997.

There are have been more Labour by-elections because of death, but for most of the period since 1997, there have been more Labour MPs than Tories.

Being a spad, think tank writer or charity lobbyist aren't professions noted for reduced life expectancy.

Yeah I can't imagine in 20 (more?) or so years we will be having the same conversation regarding some older Labour politicians being from more manual labour backgrounds.

justin124

TwistedFireStopper said:

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

I have always been very strongly opposed to any discrimination against children born out of wedlock.

YBarddCwsc

TheJezziah said:

I was specifically referring to the age sitting MP's die at in reference to their background (as very much a side point to the main point I was making)

If you really believe there is a significant different in the background of Labour MPs as opposed to Tory MPs, then I think you are wrong.

Maybe 30 years ago. But not now.

stevef

IanB2 said:

stevef said:

I agree with most of this article -but I disagree that the system is biased in favour of the Tories. Nothing much has changed since 2010 when the Tories failed to get a majority on 37% when Labour got a majority of 66 on 36% in 2005.

No I dont think there will be an election before 2022 for all the reasons given. I think too that Corbyn secretly wants to prolong for as long as possible his fantasy that the last election means that he a prime minister in waiting, when in fact it was no such thing, and he is currently doing worse in terms of leads over the Tories than both Miliband and Kinnock.

No opposition has ever come to power without being at least 15 points ahead in polls between elections. This rule has never been broken.

The system has always been biased in favour of both Tories and Labour, and it is simply a question of who has the biggest favourable bias. Right now it probably is the Tories, as Labour's return for its votes in Scotland has fallen away (among other reasons).

I was not referring to the First Past the Post system which favours Tories and Labour -because they are big parties with concentrated support.

Its not the system's fault if Labour has lost support in Scotland. It is Labour's fault.

The fact remains that because Labour voters are concentrated in the cities, it takes fewer votes to elect a Labour MP than a Tory one. This is why Tories have been unable to win majorities on 37% where Labour wins comfortable majorities on 36%.

Theuniondivvie

justin124 said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

I have always been very strongly opposed to any discrimination against children born out of wedlock.

Thank goodness the word 'bastard' has no negative connotations.

tlg86

DavidL said:

That list of greatest living sportsman in full:

1. Roger Federer.
2. ehhh....

The achievements of Nicklaus and Woods are comparable.

Mortimer

justin124 said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

I have always been very strongly opposed to any discrimination against children born out of wedlock.

Didn't realise 'basic common decency signalling' was a thing....

Ishmael_Z

ydoethur said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

ydoethur said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Time taken for opposition to establish a consistent double-digit lead:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (February): Never - did not return to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1979 (May): 18 months - did not return to power [Foot elected]
1983 (June): Never - did not return to power
1987 (June): 28 months - did not return to power [Berlin wall falls]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
1997 (May): Never - did not return to power
2001 (May): Never - did not return to power
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power
2010 (May): 22 months - did not return to power [Omnishambles budget]
2015 (May): Never - did not return to power
2017 (Jun): 7 months and counting.

Polling success, unsurprisingly, correlates pretty well.

Corbyn doesn't have to win a double digit lead in 2018. But he does need one in 2019.

Or look at it another way, oppositions who won:

1970 (June): 12 months - returned to power
1974 (October): 24 months - returned to power [IMF bailout]
1992 (April): 8 months - returned to power [Black Wednesday]
2005 (May): 35 months - returned to power

Which correlate pretty much with the strength of the majority (or not) at the subsequent election (1970 is a bit short)

I take it you are only including those polls that gave the main opposition party a double-digit lead? Otherwise the Alliance were 27 points clear of the Conservatives late in 1981 (and Labour, for that matter).

It was the main opposition party, yes, though I don't think it shifts anything.

I have 1979 as 18 months, i.e. late 1980.

Sorry, brain fade, was looking at the wrong line.

I would agree that the fact Corbyn has not yet established a clear lead does not bode well for his chances at the next election - events have been more akin to Black Wednesday than Mac the Knife, yet he cannot take advantage.

He is a reactive politician: his instinct is to find individual cases to have a protest about. Hence the Sharon from Doncaster letters at PMQs - that isn't a gimmick, it's who he is. He will be left high and dry if the NHS recovers from its winter crisis (as it usually does, come spring) and UC is not quite the disaster he hopes. He can't engage on big picture politics at all, and especially not brexit politics, both because he is not interested and because he is stupid. I absolutely bet that he could not explain the difference between the single market and the customs union.

justin124

Theuniondivvie said:

justin124 said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

I have always been very strongly opposed to any discrimination against children born out of wedlock.

Thank goodness the word 'bastard' has no negative connotations.

I apply that to the parents - not the children.

TwistedFireStopper

justin124 said:

TwistedFireStopper said:

justin124 said:

Sean_F said:

justin124 said:

MarqueeMark said:

justin124 said:

The MPs for Sheffield Hallam and Mansfield are a disgrace . Both should be deselected.

I suspect the MP for Mansfield is much better aligned to the views of his voters than you are....

They are a pair of scumbags.

Do they both denounce "bastards"?

I would hope not. I certainly do not do that myself - though am very unimpressed by their parents.

"I'm not a bastard denouncer, but....."

I have always been very strongly opposed to any discrimination against children born out of wedlock.

`Highlighting that the NZ PM is "having a bastard" is absolutely not judgemental or in anyway denouncing "bastards". No sirree.

DavidL

tlg86 said:

DavidL said:

That list of greatest living sportsman in full:

1. Roger Federer.
2. ehhh....

The achievements of Nicklaus and Woods are comparable.

If you accept that golf is a sport I might give you Nicklaus. But staying at the top of a sport as energetic as tennis for 14 years is just ridiculous.

tlg86

DavidL said:

tlg86 said:

DavidL said:

That list of greatest living sportsman in full:

1. Roger Federer.
2. ehhh....

The achievements of Nicklaus and Woods are comparable.

If you accept that golf is a sport I might give you Nicklaus. But staying at the top of a sport as energetic as tennis for 14 years is just ridiculous.

Fair point. It is remarkable. I tend to think winning a major in golf is easier than winning a grand slam in tennis. Winning multiple majors in golf is, I think, harder. Where the crossover point is I don't know, but Nicklaus's 18 wins (and 19 seconds!) is astonishing.

I suppose the golfer's career is generally longer, but the Fed has totally rewritten the rules for what tennis players can do.

EDIT: If you want to see just how remarkable Federer is, have a look at his win against Sampras at Wimbledon 2001. It's something that - due to age, I admit - Nadal and Djokovic don't have in their record.

Independent_Colin

"Even with the current boundaries the Conservatives could expect to have a double digit lead on seats over Labour if both parties achieve the same national voucher."

Does OGH dictate articles into a speech recognition app.
Surely that is the only way "vote share" could get translated to voucher.

Yorkcity

The BBC on the main news were suggesting that there is nearly enough letters to trigger a conservative leadership contest.With more letters going in next week.

Big_G_NorthWales

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

ydoethur

DavidL said:

tlg86 said:

DavidL said:

That list of greatest living sportsman in full:

1. Roger Federer.
2. ehhh....

The achievements of Nicklaus and Woods are comparable.

If you accept that golf is a sport I might give you Nicklaus. But staying at the top of a sport as energetic as tennis for 14 years is just ridiculous.

Actually, it's even worse than that. He won his first grand slam in 2003 - fifteen years ago.

ydoethur

tlg86 said:

EDIT: If you want to see just how remarkable Federer is, have a look at his win against Sampras at Wimbledon 2001. It's something that - due to age, I admit - Nadal and Djokovic don't have in their record.

On the other hand, he is also the only one of those three to have been beaten by Tim Henman

Sean_F

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

Tory MP's love leadership contests.

Big_G_NorthWales

Yorkcity said:

The BBC on the main news were suggesting that there is nearly enough letters to trigger a conservative leadership contest.With more letters going in next week.

I very much doubt it and anyway it would trigger s vote of no confidence that is unlikely to succeed

Big_G_NorthWales

Sean_F said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

Tory MP's love leadership contests.

Not in these circumstances and not yet

ydoethur

Sean_F said:

Tory MP's love leadership contests.

Tories believe firmly that as gentlemen they should have hobbies (I am actually quoting a Tory on that).

Now fox hunting is banned and shagging every woman in sight is frowned upon, leadership contests are the only thing offering the right level of danger and excitement.

Yorkcity

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

Maybe the Conservative MPs do not agree with you .Or at least the number required to trigger a leadership contest.

Nigelb

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

But the only consultation of public opinion involved in any putative leadership contest is restricted to the rather odd group that constitutes Conservative party members... so 'needs to' has very little to do with it.

Am I alone here in thinking there is literally no one one either front bench I would be happy to see leading the country ?
Something I can't remember thinking ever before.

Big_G_NorthWales

Yorkcity said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

Maybe the Conservative MPs do not agree with you .Or at least the number required to trigger a leadership contest.

It does not trigger a contest. It triggers a vote of no confidence which she has to lose before a leadership contest could take place

tlg86

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

EDIT: If you want to see just how remarkable Federer is, have a look at his win against Sampras at Wimbledon 2001. It's something that - due to age, I admit - Nadal and Djokovic don't have in their record.

On the other hand, he is also the only one of those three to have been beaten by Tim Henman

Not wanting to do down Roger's achievements, but in a way I think that is partly a reflection of the current era. Back then, Federer beat the best grass court player in the fourth round and then came up against the second best grass court player in the quarters (and then he'd have had to beat another grass court specialist in the semi final had he beaten Henman).

Today it tends to be the same players winning whatever the surface.

Big_G_NorthWales

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

But the only consultation of public opinion involved in any putative leadership contest is restricted to the rather odd group that constitutes Conservative party members... so 'needs to' has very little to do with it.

Am I alone here in thinking there is literally no one one either front bench I would be happy to see leading the country ?
Something I can't remember thinking ever before.

Agree - absolutely no one at this time

Nigelb

ydoethur said:

tlg86 said:

EDIT: If you want to see just how remarkable Federer is, have a look at his win against Sampras at Wimbledon 2001. It's something that - due to age, I admit - Nadal and Djokovic don't have in their record.

On the other hand, he is also the only one of those three to have been beaten by Tim Henman

Even the tennis gods have their off days...

But has any other sportsman risen above opponents of comparable quality to Sampras, Nadal and Djokovic over so extended a period ?

another_richard

I came across this recently - said to be one of the top five goals ever:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTN2bvVCOQs

You watch it and think '"that's brilliant but is it in the top five ever ?" and then you see the second goal.

I rather suspect if they had been scored by one of the 'flamboyant' underachievers which English football abounded with in that era those goals would be better known.

Yorkcity

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Yorkcity said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

Maybe the Conservative MPs do not agree with you .Or at least the number required to trigger a leadership contest.

It does not trigger a contest. It triggers a vote of no confidence which she has to lose before a leadership contest could take place

Do you think she will continue if a vote of no confidence is forced on her ?

Big_G_NorthWales

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Nigelb said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

DavidL said:

Mortimer said:

DavidL said:

Pretty dull round of the FA Cup. All the big boys going through as you would expect, United, City, Chelsea, West Brom.

Think I might screenshot this and put a frame on it!

BaggiesBaggiesBaggies

Happy to oblige.

6 O'clock news not great for May. And I have to say that the clip from David Lidington once again made me think that he is so far over promoted that planet earth is out of sight.

It is interesting that those of us who follow politics are quite often out of step with public

If TM depends on the news media for popularity she should have been holed below the waterline but I am increasingly of the opinion the public are fairer to her than many would think

To hear the politico's constantly talking about her disastrous conference speech while surveys of the public are much fairer recognising a loss of voice can happen to anyone and that she persists and does not give in

She is at 38% approval with no other conservative near. A leadership race gives no certainty anyone else would fair better. For now she needs to stay in place

But the only consultation of public opinion involved in any putative leadership contest is restricted to the rather odd group that constitutes Conservative party members... so 'needs to' has very little to do with it.

Am I alone here in thinking there is literally no one one either front bench I would be happy to see leading the country ?
Something I can't remember thinking ever before.

Agree - absolutely no one at this time

And why would anyone want to take on this poisoned chalice pre Brexit