Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lib Dems can do it on a drizzly Thursday in February – but wha
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Lib Dems can do it on a drizzly Thursday in February – but what about on 3 May?
Up until last year, Sunderland had carved out for itself one, and only one, niche in British political life: it counted its votes at general elections faster than anywhere else. For six successive elections from 1992 to 2015, the southern Sunderland seat was the first to declare in the country. Other than that, the city was politically unremarkable: it’s returned two Labour MPs ever since the 1960s and the Red team is similarly dominant at local level.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The reds would lose Rik vote, but gain in the centre, and those of us who are certain to vote blue if the alternative is Corbyn would have to actually consider which way to vote.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQ2_r-4U83M
Two problems for the Lib Dems. They lack that infrastructure in many places, having been hollowed out by their coalition years. Their national campaign is making no impression whatever.
Curiously, Lib Dems must be picking up ex-UKIP voters.
What is the average turnout in the Locals (as a benchmark)?
..........................................................................
I hear it repeated often but with very little evidence provided for it. I can't see another Labour leader polling better than the current one, it seems to be mainly said by people who themselves would prefer a different Labour leader.
A JRM v Corbyn GE makes a LD revival all the more likely.
The GE is a different matter. If a right wing English nationalist like Johnson or Rees Mogg is leading the Tories I will be forced into voting to keep the Labour marginal I live in out of Tory hands. Otherwise, it’ll probably be the LibDems once more.
The Pointing At Potholes Party is something you can have take a punt with. But not nationally.
There are big splits on a number of issues in the electorate, the idea a new Labour leader would magically unite these splits is fanciful IMO, people pine for a new Labour candidate in the same way they pine for a new centre party, because it would appeal to them. The problem is the electorate is composed slightly differently to how a lot of PB users would like it.
If the one or two people such as Morris would only consider voting Labour and they would lose many other votes moving back to a Millliband type position then electorally it isn't worth it. If a Milliband type position was more popular more people would have voted for it...
The truth is Corbyn won within Labour because very few people believed in what Labour had become anymore. Those who complain who didn't vote for it before can't really complain that it changed to attract voters who would vote for it. In purely electoral terms Corbyn has been a boost to Labour, we were in terrible shape after the last election now we would probably be favourites to form the next government. Those who don't want Corbyn in charge of Labour don't want Corbyn as PM rather* than having genuine concerns for the Labour party winning power.
*One or two aside but most on here.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/language-public-social-media-politics-repercussions
The rise of polite politicians who quietly put their case, from Corbyn to Gove to Rees-Mogg, shows some real electoral potential, not least as armour against the routine assaults of the tabloids. If I read that Rees-Mogg was alleged to have had a drunken orgy, I'd simply dismiss it as obvious nonsense, in a way that I wouldn't if I read it about Trump. I don't think I share many views with him, but the civil manner puts him in the same room. Similarly, Corbyn is protected against the idea that he was greedily amassing money from the Czechs to tell them secrets that he'd somehow acquired because it just doesn't seem credible, as it might for a more flamboyant left-winger.
By general consensus we are in an awkward position as a society and a country at the moment, and it's likely that the solutions will still be sub-optimal. It's worth recognising that none of us are likely to be entirely right as we look for the way forward, and that's a useful starting point for any discussion.
It was a mistake for Farron to go when he did. Pavement politics was his strength, not sure Cable has one. I expect a new LD leader within a year. I would like Lamb, but happy with Swinson or Moran.
https://twitter.com/robdothutton/status/964787499527823360
Labour’s problem with Corbyn is that with him as leader the Tories can bank 40% of the vote. His back story means millions will do whatever they can to keep him out of Number 10. It does not take much more than that for them to win. The Labour coalition is pretty fragile - I agree there are a lot of enthusiadtic Corbynistas, but there are also plenty of unenthusiastic, anti-Tories who see Labour currently as the only way to stop a loon-dictated Brexit. If the Tories can control themselves and not pick a right wing Brexiteer like Rees Mogg or Johnson as their next leader, then a lot of Labour votes could well be up for grabs.
What a result.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/964778597046276096
Which is why we left. Dummkopfs.
My stumbling block is not the idea of betrayal but that he would have anything worthwhile to tell the Czechs.
May is begging them for stuff.
They are pointing out the stuff she is begging for we have right now, and is in jeopardy only because we are leaving.
Dummkopfs.
My biggest concern is not his history of support of dubious causes, or his lack of interest in Brexit policy, but rather his lack of administrative ability. A Corbyn administration is most likely to be too woolly and ineffective to be oppressive. Indeed in its incompetence it may match the May regime.
Though I'd fancy Labour to finish on most seats after a campaign.
The problem is as much as some don't like Brexit it is popular among many and helped drive May to such a huge vote share, if that is taken away as an issue or run by someone seen as even less enthusiastic than May then that could drain a lot of May's support away.
TBH even if both Labour and Tories do quite well they could both lose votes by the time of the next election, but most of May's possible replacements seem to poll worse than her. Not to mention the fact they have to govern will probably lead to letting some people down. The idea that a new leader will come in for the Conservatives and everything will suddenly be fine seems a bit optimistic...
*Which seems unlikely at the moment.
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-angela-merkel-theresa-may-curious-frustrated-what-uk-wants-policy-a8214421.html?amp&__twitter_impression=true
UKIP will certainly be the biggest losers on voteshare and seats given they got 17% in May 2014 and that will help the Tories a bit (most of the by elections on Thursday were in seats last fought in 2015 and 2017 when the Tories comfortably won the local polls). Labour I think will perform below expectations. On contrast to the general election where Corbyn was fighting seats last fought when the Tories had a 7% lead the seats he will fight in May were last fought when Ed Miliband had a 2% lead, so he starts from a lower base and with current polls neck and neck there is even a danger Labour could make a small net loss of seats
Corbyn has managed to maintain some sort of constructive ambiguity about his position (at least for those not really paying attention) and it has starved the Lib Dems of their natural support. If the Lib Dems had any sense they would be doing everything in their power to expose the fact that it is difficult to get a fag paper between Corbyn's and May's position on Brexit and trying to peel away Labour supporters who actually care.
I suspect the numbers who do care are less than generally thought (notwithstanding the evidence on this Board) but it would be a start. With 40 odd percent still thinking that Brexit is a mistake the party of remain really should be in double figures. And it isn't despite these excellent bye-election results.
We sign up for a minimum of 99 years and the early exit fee will be €1 trillion per year of our early exit.
Plus Luke 15:7
That and even those who don't want it and think Labour do want it have other priorities.
Within 10 years it will be impossible to be in the EU without being in the EZ. Our departure will accelerate this. The budgets of EZ countries will be a matter for negotiation in Brussels and Frankfurt and deficits will be strictly controlled. Economic policy will largely be determined there too giving governments in member states very little say over how much they spend and, increasingly, how they spend it. Democracy will be very much diminished, roughly equivalent to the right to choose your local council.
In short going back to what we have now will simply not be an option because what we have now will not exist. I think it is highly unlikely that what does exist will look particularly attractive but who knows? It might prove wildly successful.
Free school meals for all children means better nutrition and better ability to concentrate.
There are more difficult points you could have made. Should adult individuals be free to make choices that may harm them and no-one else such as not wearing a seatbelt or smoking pot? On the other hand, smoking cigarettes harms others and so does unlimited numbers of children per child minder.
There is no ideological silver bullet solution to the problem of balancing personal freedom with the common good. But there are common sense pragmatic solutions. Try Amartya Sen - the Idea of Justice.
He could also have been a second source for intel they were unsure about.
Corbyn might not have known the picture of the jigsaw they were building. But he could have known where various pieces fitted together....
Admittedly, it's a stretch to think they could foresee that a way down the line, this guy could be in charge of renewing the UK's nuclear deterrent. Or not. But the secret to Russian chess success is planning six moves ahead!
I reckon about a decade before accession talks, as by then Brexit will be seen as the wrong solution to the ills of globalisation.
Why should I repent my sin when I did not sin?
EU divinity is very complicated!
The case for having a centrist Labour leader is more defensive - as Southam says, if the Tories had an attractive centrist leader they'd appeal to non-Corbyn Labour voters. But firstly it's hard to see who that would be - the Tories have really been through the pack and everyone looks exhausted, before you even start to look at their policies. And secondly, a lot of us feel that politics isn't worth bothering with if the choice is between a couple of very similar people. The case for Labour at the moment is simply that society is seriously unbalanced after nearly a decade of Conservative-led rule, and Labour would quie clearly try to address that, while a Tory government by a hard-right Mogg or a chancer like Boris would equally clearly not.
Yes, as Foxy says there's plenty of scope for discussing detailed policies and competence issues (though the current government does not set a high bar on that, does it?). But switching to a steady-as-we-go centrist as Barnesian argues just feels wrong for where Britain is today. I recognise the appeal of pleasant pragmatism - my father was very much in that camp - but we actually need a period of left-wing government to make our society more socially viable.