Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Motivating Labour’s huge volunteer army can be at odds with ma

13567

Comments

  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2018
    She would be a .lot happier if she gave up the cesspit that is Twitter.
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    "a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"

    Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    Control of the issue is not the gift of the party. It is driven by:
    1 The Complainant
    2 Elements of the Media
    3 Opposition Parties

    1 is aggrieved and may seek to damage the perpetrator
    2 some elements have a connected agenda, see Jewish Chronicle, others may be hostile
    3 Will seek maximum damage

    Finally some sensible Labour members will try to distance themselves, hence party disunity.
  • Options
    steve_garnersteve_garner Posts: 1,019
    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    The people damaging Corbyn are those making anti-Semitic comments, not those fighting racism in the Labour Party.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    You know Labour Could have treated the issue seriously.

    They deserve everything they are reaping over this
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,446

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    "a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"

    Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.

    My favourite Star Trek episode is the Corbynite Manoeuvre

    (I'll get me coat...)
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    El_Sid said:

    El_Sid said:


    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.

    Either way, the likelihood is that the issue won't go away.
    Yeah, that's politics - but if ever a clear statement was needed on an issue, this was it. Instead we get Corbyn supping with Jewdas and half-hearted apologies for the offence caused.
    And then there is this lot

    http://hurryupharry.org/2018/05/03/jonathan-rosenhead-the-evil-zionist-conspiracy-that-never-was/
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    South Cambs is witnessing a political earthquake.One of the safest Tory and councils seats in the country could be going LibDem .Remainers taking revenge? Heidi Allen must be alarmed.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    Jess Phillips comment on Boris, "Well nobody mentioned Customs Unions to me".

    Genuine LOL.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
    I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    stodge said:

    AndyJS said:


    The Tories gained a couple of seats from Labour in Merton which I don't think anyone was expecting.

    The Liberal Democrats gained five seats in Merton including seats from the Conservatives in Dundonald and Trinity Ward as well as regaining all three West Barnes seats.

    Was anyone expecting that ?

    Redbridge loses its three LibDems.

    As recently as 2010, Redbridge Council was Con 30, Lab 26, LD 7.

    Now Lab 51 (+16), Con 12 (-13)
    Hold on. Doesn't Redbridge have a fairly large Jewish population? Is it concentrated in one or two wards or do we need to be slightly careful about ascribing every Labour setback to antisemitism?
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....

    Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?

    The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."
    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/

    The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
    I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.
    They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...
    Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??
    No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.
    "a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"

    Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.

    That is a non sequitur. Labour was defending quite a strong baseline from 2014 - particularly in London - and now appears to have made net gains of circa 60 seats. That is not a landslide win - but neither is it a defeat. These results are certainly in line with what I expected - indeed ,if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    A Sacha Baron Cohen biopic of a Corbyn lookalike is what we need.
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Round 1 Sheffield Metro Region


    Dan Jarvis 47.1%
    Con 14.5
    LD 10.4
    Yorkshire Party 8.6
    Greens 7.8
    Save Our NHS 4.2

    Labour 66% in Barnsley, 44.7% in Rotherham, 43.9% in Doncaster, 42.1% in Sheffield
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
  • Options
    Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?

    "Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....
  • Options
    El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 145
    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,899
    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    Projected shares leads to Labour being 3 ahead of the Tories on 283 vs 280. Reflects what I was saying earlier. The bias that Cameron managed to build into the current seats in favour of the Tories has gone. I fear trouble ahead....
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,978

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    Good luck to him.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    Good luck to him.
    Not sure that HM will appoint him based on a BBC projection ;)
  • Options
    El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 145

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    So you have placed bets accordingly?

    You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
  • Options
    JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
    I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.
    Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?

    "Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....
    Understanding NEV is well beyond the pay grade of a humble lawyer but my best guess is that the Tories are doing a lot less well in the marginals than they are in safe seats, the results in the midlands notwithstanding.
  • Options
    marke09marke09 Posts: 926

    Kevin Schofield
    ‏Verified account @PolhomeEditor
    20m20 minutes ago

    Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,001
    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
    Yes, level pegging for oppositions at the locals is not nearly good enough.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/05/27/guest-slot-rod-crosby-the-bell-tolls-for-labour-and-miliband/
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-2018
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    marke09 said:


    Kevin Schofield
    ‏Verified account @PolhomeEditor
    20m20 minutes ago

    Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.

    Doesn't this pre-announcement rather give the game away?
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    El_Sid said:

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    So you have placed bets accordingly?

    You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
    Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146
    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
    I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.
    The Tories somehow need to steer their own voters and members towards allowing them to take positions which will enable them to outflank their progressive opponents. If UKIP is dead, this should make the task easier.
  • Options
    Bob__SykesBob__Sykes Posts: 1,176
    DavidL said:

    Projected shares leads to Labour being 3 ahead of the Tories on 283 vs 280. Reflects what I was saying earlier. The bias that Cameron managed to build into the current seats in favour of the Tories has gone. I fear trouble ahead....

    The Tories are screwed, at some point, for sure - but I don't think you can say a GE is remotely likely to result in a national vote going anything like Con 35, Lab 35, LD 16, others 14. One or both of the top two is going to be a good few points higher than that in a GE.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    AndyJS said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.
    I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
    But these are not mid term elections!. To repeat my earlier comment Labour - under Gaitskell - did far worse than this back in 1960 & 1961 and still went on to win the 1964 election. Labour's position is also stronger than at the same stage of the 1983 and 1987 Parliaments. The Tories also performed far better at the 2005 election than appeared probable in mid-2002!
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
    You are thinking pre the referendum Trump and Corbyn.Maybe it has changed.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,144
    JonathanD said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
    I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.
    Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.
    Just not in a referendum.....
  • Options
    justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    DavidL said:

    AndyJS said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.
    I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.
    But it is based on the assumption that people would vote the same way at a General Election - and, as John Curtice would say, all the evidence suggests that to be unlikely.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,001
    https://twitter.com/RadicalAssoc/status/992403156125519872 Lib Dem Gain !

    However Heidi has a 22,000 vote cushion over them in the general
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Good afternoon, fellow voters.

    Just a week to go until we discover what or whom Max Verstappen will crash into at the Spanish Grand Prix.
  • Options
    ChameleonChameleon Posts: 3,902
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?

    "Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....
    Understanding NEV is well beyond the pay grade of a humble lawyer but my best guess is that the Tories are doing a lot less well in the marginals than they are in safe seats, the results in the midlands notwithstanding.
    On the flip side losses in West Oxfordshire/Aylesbury/Winchester etc indicate that they could be underperforming in traditional safe seats, while strong performances in the midlands equals strong performances in the marginals.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    stodge said:

    AndyJS said:


    The Tories gained a couple of seats from Labour in Merton which I don't think anyone was expecting.

    The Liberal Democrats gained five seats in Merton including seats from the Conservatives in Dundonald and Trinity Ward as well as regaining all three West Barnes seats.

    Was anyone expecting that ?

    Redbridge loses its three LibDems.

    As recently as 2010, Redbridge Council was Con 30, Lab 26, LD 7.

    Now Lab 51 (+16), Con 12 (-13)
    Hold on. Doesn't Redbridge have a fairly large Jewish population? Is it concentrated in one or two wards or do we need to be slightly careful about ascribing every Labour setback to antisemitism?
    The Barnet councillor was making a similar point in saying that many local issues influenced the result there although the antisemitism scandal of course had an impact. Although I have to say, I didn’t get the comment about identity politics re Jewish voters turning away from Labour. After the antisemitism scandal it’s perfectably understandable; its a consequence of racism, not identity politics. Plus Jewish voters have been turning to the Tories even prior to the scandal.
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited May 2018
    Yorkshire out for 50,where's Oldkingcole ;-)

    Day 3 looking in danger ;-)
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    Yorkcity said:

    El_Sid said:

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    So you have placed bets accordingly?

    You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
    Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.
    But are those figures going to happen?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,001
    RobD said:

    Yorkcity said:

    El_Sid said:

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    So you have placed bets accordingly?

    You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
    Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.
    But are those figures going to happen?
    The numbers after Big Ben goes bong are always a massive surprise !

    The next election could be anywhere from Lab 330 to Con 400 still I think.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
    DavidL said:

    AndyJS said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.
    I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.
    Ultimately it's a figure arrived at from local election results. Everyone knows that large numbers of people in, say, Hertfordshire vote LD in local elections and Con in general elections. So it can't be accurate for an actual general election. It's interesting nonetheless.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,627

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    I’ve been having fun and enjoying myself.

    I’ll save the nuanced analysis for another day which is, I grant you, more complicated.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,146

    JonathanD said:

    DavidL said:

    RobD said:

    DavidL said:

    Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.

    Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.

    I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.

    Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.
    I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.
    Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.
    Just not in a referendum.....
    Osborne did warn the referendum would be a catastrophe.
  • Options
    BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,489
    AndyJS said:

    Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-2018

    Yes but up 56 Councillors
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    BigRich said:

    AndyJS said:

    Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-2018

    Yes but up 56 Councillors
    Absolutely. But they'd prefer to get in a positive position with councils as well as councillors.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Congrats to Prof Thrasher who predicted Con 36%,Lab 36%,LD 18% and current standings show he will be right on the mark.The truth is, as the othe JC said,nothing has changed,nothing has changed,and Tory and Lab are level pegging.
  • Options
    BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    RobD said:

    Yorkcity said:

    El_Sid said:

    BBC LAB 283 CON 280

    JEZZA is PM

    So you have placed bets accordingly?

    You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
    Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.
    But are those figures going to happen?
    Well.

    Quite.
  • Options
    KentRisingKentRising Posts: 2,850
    A year since I last posted and May is - as I predicted - still in post, and the Tories are gaining councils. What crisis?
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Mr. Pete, is it Rallings[sp] and Thrasher who do the exit polling?

    And yes, congrats to Thrasher.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    AndyJS said:
    The one's I am seeing there are pretty good for the Tories?
  • Options
    nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    Birmingham results?
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    I’ve been having fun and enjoying myself.

    I’ll save the nuanced analysis for another day which is, I grant you, more complicated.
    Can’t say I blame you for enjoying yourself today! I wonder whether Watford’s results have been declared yet....
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,627
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    I’ve enjoyed the hubris in London though.

    I’ve got to have my fun.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.

    There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    I don't think Labour do have much to crow about, however well they spin these results. Level-pegging with the government is not where an Opposition wants to be in local elections.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    I’ve enjoyed the hubris in London though.

    I’ve got to have my fun.
    Oh absolutely, its all good fun.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    That loud banging sound you might have heard....Trump's lawyers after his rambling to the media 2 minutes ago.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990
    Do you remember how many years there were between local and general?
  • Options
    El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 145
    justin124 said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
    But these are not mid term elections!. To repeat my earlier comment Labour - under Gaitskell - did far worse than this back in 1960 & 1961 and still went on to win the 1964 election. Labour's position is also stronger than at the same stage of the 1983 and 1987 Parliaments. The Tories also performed far better at the 2005 election than appeared probable in mid-2002!
    And I'll repeat my earlier quote from the British Election Survey - 1 year or 4 years before a GE, doesn't matter. These are mid-term elections - and let's face it, it's not like the Government have had a good year, a competent Opposition would be wiping the floor against this lot. The opposition parties did well in 2005 thanks to unpopularity of the Gulf War, Labour won in 1964 in no small part thanks to "fresh faces" after their leader died the year before at the age of 56 - are you suggesting that is what Labour should rely on now?

    Sure you can cherry-pick all you like, but the historical averages are what they are. We can't predict GE2022 in detail, but we can look at what history says will happen _on average_, and say that history tends to repeat itself in an average sort of way. Now obviously we have Brexit ahead which is a black swan kind of event, but there's always "something".
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
    Recount in Harrow, Kenton East where Labour are defending 3 seats.

    2014 result:

    Lab 1695, 1561, 1550
    Con 1310, 1200, 1178
    Ind Lab 534, 459, 377
    UKIP 453
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.
    It is true they won't be worried overmuch because they know they can do better at GEs, and who cares about the PLP, but they clearly do care about media narratives, since Corbyn's team played the expectation management game to the hilt in May 2017, relatively successfully. They knew they were in for a bad night, and tried to limit the damage of that. This year they have been far more upbeat generally, so got a bit carried away.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    AndyJS said:
    Harrow is beginning to look interesting.
  • Options
    El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 145
    Yorkcity said:

    El_Sid said:

    justin124 said:

    if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.

    But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.
    You are thinking pre the referendum Trump and Corbyn.Maybe it has changed.
    Occam's Razor suggests that it hasn't. Neither Juncker nor Trump get the bins emptied.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:
    Harrow is beginning to look interesting.
    Maybe I am not just used to twitter but have the Tories not won every seat so far? Obviously depends what wards these are.
  • Options
    Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    kle4 said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.

    Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.

    For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
    Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.
    It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.
    It is true they won't be worried overmuch because they know they can do better at GEs, and who cares about the PLP, but they clearly do care about media narratives, since Corbyn's team played the expectation management game to the hilt in May 2017, relatively successfully. They knew they were in for a bad night, and tried to limit the damage of that. This year they have been far more upbeat generally, so got a bit carried away.
    Ah, I forgot about that (re May 2017 expectation management). I do think that the morale of parliamentary parties is important: I just don’t think Corbyn does.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,068
    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    And they also gained three, maybe four, councils.
  • Options
    El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 145
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    marke09 said:


    Kevin Schofield
    ‏Verified account @PolhomeEditor
    20m20 minutes ago

    Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.

    Why can't more people who stand down as MPs be in competitive seats? I don't need to expect a change, but it'd be nice if so many of them were not capable of declaring the new MP five minutes after the last one steps down. I guess parties really work to discourage people in competitive seats from standing down though.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,001

    Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.

    How has Wandsworth managed to keep council tax so low ? I hear about car park charges and raking it in on business rates for Westminster.
  • Options
    BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    El_Sid said:
    Well.

    Quite.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048
    edited May 2018
    An unwisely vague choice of phrase perhaps - she's given up trying to convince them so is going to join the Tories?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    And they also gained three, maybe four, councils.
    It has got better and better for them I think. Slightly flattered by a catastrophe in 2014 but definitely more progress than they might have feared with Kingston to come.
  • Options
    The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    edited May 2018

    Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.

    There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.

    Jo Swinson has been touted, but I get the sense she isn’t that popular on here. I’m struggling to think of any potential LD leaders who really grabs your attention, but they have done well in these elections despite Vince, so who knows what could happen with even a marginally better leader.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,426
    kle4 said:

    An unwisely vague choice of phrase perhaps - she's given up trying to convince them so is going to join the Tories?
    She'd be better off joining the Liberals in Yardley!
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388
    edited May 2018
    Harrow

    Pinner South Tories hold x 3
    Harrow Weald Tories hold x 3
    Stanmore Park Tories hold x 3
    Hatch End Tories hold x 3
    Wealdstone Labour hold x 3
    Roxeth Labour hold x 3
    Harrow on the Hill Labour hold x 1 Lab gain x 2
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,048

    Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.

    There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.

    Jo Swinson has been touted, but I get the sense she isn’t that popular on here. I’m struggling to think of any potential LD leaders who really grabs your attention, but they have done well in these elections despite Vince, so who knows what could happen with even a marginally better leader.
    I think most of the LD MPs are either not leadership material (or they would have been seriously touted before now, given they were down to a handful before) or do not have high enough profiles for us to really know how they might do in a leadership position. Swinson has a little more profile than the others, and at the least seems more on the ball than Cable, so is probably worth a shout, but perhaps someone like Moran could spring a surprise and be prett good, it is hard to say.
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    A Labour minority government on the basis of this highly satisfactory result for Labour has emerged as a real possibility but these elections will be remembered for the Tory shambles of Voter ID,which could well have swung it for the Tories in Swindon where it was so close.
  • Options
    nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    Pulpstar said:

    Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.

    How has Wandsworth managed to keep council tax so low ? I hear about car park charges and raking it in on business rates for Westminster.
    Although every council has pockets of poverty I think in Wandsworth those pockets are really quite small.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,005
    Ms. Apocalypse, if he were in better health, I'd still advocate Lamb. Sensible, intelligent, been in government (unlike Farron who deliberately avoided it by being LD president [chairman] to avoid dirtying his ambitions with the grubbiness of office). They should've gone for him instead of Farron.

    I quite like Swinson, although that may be coloured by her incredibly helpful timing to rule herself out of the last leadership election.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Looks like Labour have gained a couple of seats in Harrow on the Hill.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    AndyJS said:
    Harrow is beginning to look interesting.
    Maybe I am not just used to twitter but have the Tories not won every seat so far? Obviously depends what wards these are.
    If Labour lose Kenton East, they probably lose the Council.
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    At what time is Tower Hamlets expected to finish the count?

    Sorry, rephrasing, which day TH is expected to finish?
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,290
    Will Jarvis refuse to step down as MP?


    https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/992413888208568320
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,990

    A Labour minority government on the basis of this highly satisfactory result for Labour has emerged as a real possibility but these elections will be remembered for the Tory shambles of Voter ID,which could well have swung it for the Tories in Swindon where it was so close.

    Shambles?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,387
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391

    At what time is Tower Hamlets expected to finish the count?

    Sorry, rephrasing, which day TH is expected to finish?

    Don't be snappish - it's a hard job counting a 132% turnout election
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    edited May 2018
    DavidL said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.

    And they also gained three, maybe four, councils.
    It has got better and better for them I think. Slightly flattered by a catastrophe in 2014 but definitely more progress than they might have feared with Kingston to come.
    Early results from the good ol' RBK are looking good for the LDs: by my reckoning they've picked up 5 seats from the Tories and 2 from Labour in the first five wards to declare.
This discussion has been closed.