politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you want to compare main party/leader performances from pas

SystemSystem Posts: 12,256
edited May 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If you want to compare main party/leader performances from past elections use this chart based on the CON + LAB aggregate

Last night in a discussion on LE2018 on Newsnight the Oxford-educated Corbyn cheerleader, Owen Jones, sought to suggest that his man’s performance at the 2017 General Election was comparable with what Tony Blair achieved in 2001. He did it by taking the national percentage vote shares rather than looking at seat total or size of majority or some other measure. Certainly LAB got 40.3% at GE2017 compared with Blair’s 40.7% at GE2001

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,762
    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    2,000 Guineas post -Murillo 50-1 and Gustav Klimtt 4-1 ew Dutch
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    I make it that Corbyn achieved the strongest losing performance in the chart, and so probably since Atlee lost to Churchill. So in terms of electoral appeal he would be behind only Atlee, Blair and Wilson.

    It's certainly something.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    I think it's a comment on Corbyn not being supported by the authentic working class.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,069
    edited May 2018
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    No wonder they say that Oxford's a complete dump :p

    Edited extra bit: Mr. Pete, what time's that?
  • JSpringJSpring Posts: 100
    edited May 2018
    I sometimes wonder how the Lab/Tory vote would have split in those elections under an Aussie-style AV system. My estimates:

    1970 - 53/47 Tory (the Liberal base was somewhat more anti-Labour than anti-Tory)
    F 1974 - 52/48 Tory (probably leading to an overall Tory majority)
    O 1974 - 51/49 Lab (Liberals giving Labour the benefit of the doubt)
    1979 - 52/48 Tory (the anti-Labour Liberals largely went to the Tories on first preferences)
    1983 - 59/41 Tory (contrary to popular belief, the Alliance base wasn't particularly 'Labour on holiday')
    1987 - 55/45 Tory (Kinnock more acceptable to Alliance voters, and by this stage they would be getting tired of Thatcher anyway)
    1992 - 52/48 Tory (either a Tory/UUP deal or a more narrow Tory majority)
    1997 - 59/41 Lab (Labour majority of over 200)
    2001 - 58/42 Lab (ditto)
    2005 - 54/46 Lab (Tories helped by the couple of percent of UKIP voters, who were at this stage middle-class Thatcherites mostly)
    2010 - 53/47 Tory (Pretty much a similar outcome)
    2015 - 54/46 Tory (UKIPPers break slightly more for the Tories than for Labour)
    2017 - 50/50 (Tories just about remain the largest party, interesting post-election negotiations follow)
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,258
    I agree Mike, a very useful chart.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me very proud to have been at the other place.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,372
    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,788
    The problem is that Jones (and he is certainly not alone on left or right in this) is, despite his intelligence, very much a partisan hack first, above anything else, and proud to be so. Any pronouncements he makes have to be judged in the context that every point he makes is going to try to spin the message he wants to make look good (far more than mere politicians do sometimes). It doesn't mean he cannot be right, certainly, but when it comes to quoting stats, or any kind of performance measures, they can almost certainly be taken with a grain of salt at best because they will intentionally be cherry picking the best possible ones.

    It's not as though it is not possible to find a place in media while being a clear supporter of one side or the other, without giving the impression of being little more than a cheerleader for that side. But it is the path he has chosen, as many do.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    Its a draw plus 77 minus 33 draw
    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/992710380479746048
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,510
    edited May 2018
    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    Apart from the best London results since 1971 that were described all night by the BBC as rubbish
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    Its a draw plus 77 minus 33 draw
    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/992710380479746048

    This is winning:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_1995
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    edited May 2018
    kle4 said:

    The problem is that Jones (and he is certainly not alone on left or right in this) is, despite his intelligence, very much a partisan hack first, above anything else, and proud to be so. Any pronouncements he makes have to be judged in the context that every point he makes is going to try to spin the message he wants to make look good (far more than mere politicians do sometimes). It doesn't mean he cannot be right, certainly, but when it comes to quoting stats, or any kind of performance measures, they can almost certainly be taken with a grain of salt at best because they will intentionally be cherry picking the best possible ones.

    It's not as though it is not possible to find a place in media while being a clear supporter of one side or the other, without giving the impression of being little more than a cheerleader for that side. But it is the path he has chosen, as many do.

    Yes - he completely lacks any rigour which fails to fit his agenda - many commentators with allegiances are able to be much more balanced and self-critical.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    bigjohnowls said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    Apart from the best London results since 1971 that were described all night by the BBC as rubbish
    Ahh - you're Owen Jones daddy and you have all of our sympathies. :)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    2018 numbers will narrow the gap by a couple of hundred one presumes after the by election tory losses so far and for rest of the year are totted up and added to Thursdays results
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,258
    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    Its a draw plus 77 minus 33 draw
    https://twitter.com/PeterStefanovi2/status/992710380479746048

    This is winning:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_1995
    Arun, Bromley, Broxbourne, Huntingdonshire, Kensington and Chelsea, Macclesfield, Runnymeade, South Staffordshire, Spelthorne, Surrey Heath, Wandsworth and Westminster.

    I think they were the only councils held by the Tories after that night.
  • William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    2018 numbers will narrow the gap by a couple of hundred one presumes after the by election tory losses so far and for rest of the year are totted up and added to Thursdays results
    An imperceptible drop, given the scale.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    edited May 2018
    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    I don't think either party got 40%, at least not in the national equivalent vote.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    bigjohnowls said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    Apart from the best London results since 1971 that were described all night by the BBC as rubbish
    Your party set expectations way to high.

    Hardly anyone elses fault but their own
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    Tell John -he seems to think they were awesome
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,510
    felix said:

    kle4 said:

    The problem is that Jones (and he is certainly not alone on left or right in this) is, despite his intelligence, very much a partisan hack first, above anything else, and proud to be so. Any pronouncements he makes have to be judged in the context that every point he makes is going to try to spin the message he wants to make look good (far more than mere politicians do sometimes). It doesn't mean he cannot be right, certainly, but when it comes to quoting stats, or any kind of performance measures, they can almost certainly be taken with a grain of salt at best because they will intentionally be cherry picking the best possible ones.

    It's not as though it is not possible to find a place in media while being a clear supporter of one side or the other, without giving the impression of being little more than a cheerleader for that side. But it is the path he has chosen, as many do.

    Yes - he completely lacks any rigour which fails to fit his agenda - many commentators with allegiances are able to be much more balanced and self-critical.
    What’s even more annoying is that he’s done some really good interviews with those who would be considered opponents - Peter Hitchens, Dan Hannan, Jacob R-M - but outside that specific environment he seems to lose himself completely when it comes to critical analysis of any left of centre position that doesn’t completely agree with his own.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    Estimates from @electoralreform suggest that 3,981 individuals (1.8%) were denied ballot papers in areas that were trialing voter ID in the local elections. Extraordinary.

    There’s about two dozen allegations of voter fraud a year.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    Estimates from @electoralreform suggest that 3,981 individuals (1.8%) were denied ballot papers in areas that were trialing voter ID in the local elections. Extraordinary.

    There’s about two dozen allegations of voter fraud a year.

    How many of them went on to return with their ID? Also can you post the name of who is tweeting, it's sometimes interesting to look at replies and such. Thanks!
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    wow

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-43966944
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
    Seven months to go? This was comparing the state just after the locals in 2017 to now.

    For GB, not exactly the same date range
    Sep 2017: 2764
    Now: 2646
    Delta: 118
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    bigjohnowls said:

    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
    GB gap is 9110 - 6468 =2642
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,133
    bigjohnowls said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
    GB gap is 9110 - 6468 =2642
    Yes, but it's not down by 10%... nowhere near.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
    Seven months to go? This was comparing the state just after the locals in 2017 to now.

    For GB, not exactly the same date range
    Sep 2017: 2764
    Now: 2646
    Delta: 118
    ok thanks.

    Must go and enjoy the sun now
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,788
    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    Of course it is, and far better than they were expected to get by most, but that doesn't mean pointing out someone else's spin about the amount is a bad thing. Mike makes the point just as or even more strongly when people try to spin the opposing point about how well the Tories did in 2017 - in that yes it is impressive to get 43%, but that is not the most significant point to make, when the opposition get 40%. So it isn't a partisan point.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,761
    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    RobD said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    Well the blue line has ticked down a bit and the red line has ticked up a bit - start of a trend in the run-up to the next general election? Who knows?
    Gap down by 10%.

    If only the LDs were the chartists!!
    The gap (in England) has changed by 154 from 3,069 (2017) to 2,915, about 5%.
    With 7 months still to go.

    Didnt realise from that chart the Tories have over 3000 more councillors??

    Oh no they dont as its a GB chart not an England chart.

    Do you have the GB numbers??
    GB gap is 9110 - 6468 =2642
    Yes, but it's not down by 10%... nowhere near.
    True and would be a bit optimistic to assume another 100 losses by 31/12/18

    You are closer than me

    Enjoy the weather Im off for a pint
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,788
    bigjohnowls said:

    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    Apart from the best London results since 1971 that were described all night by the BBC as rubbish
    A lady from Momentum was on the BBC around 3/4 am, and while she was not happy the result in Plymouth was not being talked about more, she referred to the results for Labour overall as 'mixed'. When Momentum are saying that about the results, maybe a bit less with the victimhood stuff about the media, bigjohn.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,510
    Floater said:

    wow

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-43966944

    I assume that any child attending will be taken into care and their parents prosecuted, as would happen with any other serious abuse coming to the attention of authorities?

    Or are we going to repeat the scandals of Rotherham and elsewhere again, not wishing to intervene in cases of child abuse because of “cultural sensitivities”?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Sandpit said:

    Floater said:

    wow

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-43966944

    I assume that any child attending will be taken into care and their parents prosecuted, as would happen with any other serious abuse coming to the attention of authorities?

    Or are we going to repeat the scandals of Rotherham and elsewhere again, not wishing to intervene in cases of child abuse because of “cultural sensitivities”?
    I stand to be corrected but I am not aware of any prosecution over this in the UK
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    Sandpit said:

    Floater said:

    wow

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-43966944

    I assume that any child attending will be taken into care and their parents prosecuted, as would happen with any other serious abuse coming to the attention of authorities?

    Or are we going to repeat the scandals of Rotherham and elsewhere again, not wishing to intervene in cases of child abuse because of “cultural sensitivities”?
    1 case every 3 days .... in Wales!!!!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,788
    SandyRentool said:

    Some of my comrades are being very silly with their use of statistics.

    We all know that the results were a bit 'whatever'.

    'Whatever' results, particularly when that's about the score for all the bigger parties, really show up the truly extreme from mere very strong supporters. Very strong supporters can be perfectly happy to accept things were not the bestest evaar, without worrying it undermines their credentials as a supporter somehow. Labour and the Tories had enough positive outcomes to focus on to keep their spinners in business without looking truly ridiculous as they ignore any negatives.

    Of course the senior political figures and spin doctors have to only ever talk up their results (that's why we take everything spin doctors or unofficial spin doctors like Jones with a pinch of salt), but there's no reason even an intense supporter of a party should not be able to say when they have a bad night, or a middling night.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    Floater said:

    Sandpit said:

    Floater said:

    wow

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-east-wales-43966944

    I assume that any child attending will be taken into care and their parents prosecuted, as would happen with any other serious abuse coming to the attention of authorities?

    Or are we going to repeat the scandals of Rotherham and elsewhere again, not wishing to intervene in cases of child abuse because of “cultural sensitivities”?
    1 case every 3 days .... in Wales!!!!
    By contrast 1 prosecution every 3 years in Britain.

    Has anyone ever been convicted yet in Britain on a law which streches back decades ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    edited May 2018
    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    So out of curiosity William, when Hugh Gaitskell got 44% of the popular vote and his arse handed to him in 1959, was that an 'impressive performance?'

    Or Wilson, on 43% in 1979, losing an election he was widely expected to win?

    It is vote share relative to the other main party that matters, as that chart so interestingly demonstrates.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,251
    ydoethur said:

    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    So out of curiosity William, when Hugh Gaitskell got 44% of the popular vote and his arse handed to him in 1959, was that an 'impressive performance?'

    Or Wilson, on 43% in 1979, losing an election he was widely expected to win?

    It is vote share relative to the other main party that matters, as that chart so interestingly demonstrates.
    It was Callaghan by '79....
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,487
    It doesn't matter how Own spins all this. The bold fact is Labour are a long way from government other than perhaps squeaking by a rainbow coalition.

    To be honest, imho it is all irrelevant anyway - what happens at Brexit will change everything.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,487
    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,487
    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992760080557895680

    https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/992771175641178113
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,718
    Re London, Lewisham was 60% Lab, 14% Con, 12% Lib Dem, 12% Green, 2% Others.

    Bexley was 55% Con, 37% Lab, 8% Others.
  • William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    ydoethur said:

    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    So out of curiosity William, when Hugh Gaitskell got 44% of the popular vote and his arse handed to him in 1959, was that an 'impressive performance?'

    Or Wilson, on 43% in 1979, losing an election he was widely expected to win?

    It is vote share relative to the other main party that matters, as that chart so interestingly demonstrates.
    Obviously there is a wider context to every stat. Gaitskell lost votes and he lost seats, so did Wilson in '70. Corbyn took Labour from 30% to 40% in two years in an election that everyone said was going to be disastrous for the Labour party and that was called only to take advantage of remarkably negative circumstances for the party.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    rottenborough said:

    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
    Fitting 10000+ steps a day into his work routine, we should all be so lucky.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,904
    Quincel said:

    rottenborough said:

    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
    Fitting 10000+ steps a day into his work routine, we should all be so lucky.
    Towards the end of last year, I got to one million steps in a month, ;)
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    Posh white liberal middle class communities who live in 'nice areas' which are less diverse than the wider city or town - essentially the definition of a Lib Dem ward/borough. Outside the very posh north of Southwark by the Thames they barely exist in poorer or average London boroughs.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    SO - another winning bet for me. FFS.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    Sean_F said:

    Re London, Lewisham was 60% Lab, 14% Con, 12% Lib Dem, 12% Green, 2% Others.

    Bexley was 55% Con, 37% Lab, 8% Others.

    I wonder how many people who now live in Bexley lived in Lewisham twenty years ago.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    MarqueeMark said:

    ydoethur said:

    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    So out of curiosity William, when Hugh Gaitskell got 44% of the popular vote and his arse handed to him in 1959, was that an 'impressive performance?'

    Or Wilson, on 43% in 1979, losing an election he was widely expected to win?

    It is vote share relative to the other main party that matters, as that chart so interestingly demonstrates.
    It was Callaghan by '79....
    I was just testing...

    ...testing my fat finger typing, that is! :smile:
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,258
    If West Brom stay up, it will rival Fulham in 07-08 for the most remarkable of survivals.

    And the Top 4 could look very interesting if Chelsea win tomorrow...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    William_H said:

    ydoethur said:

    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    So out of curiosity William, when Hugh Gaitskell got 44% of the popular vote and his arse handed to him in 1959, was that an 'impressive performance?'

    Or Wilson, on 43% in 1979, losing an election he was widely expected to win?

    It is vote share relative to the other main party that matters, as that chart so interestingly demonstrates.
    Obviously there is a wider context to every stat. Gaitskell lost votes and he lost seats, so did Wilson in '70. Corbyn took Labour from 30% to 40% in two years in an election that everyone said was going to be disastrous for the Labour party and that was called only to take advantage of remarkably negative circumstances for the party.
    But you said earlier that the wider context didn't matter and 'You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.'

    So which is it? Does it matter, or does it not matter?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992760080557895680

    https://twitter.com/campbellclaret/status/992771175641178113

    You know you have a problem when you're being lectured on honesty by Alistair Campbell.

    It must be like being lectured by a Chavista on the importance of sound money.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,158
    tlg86 said:

    If West Brom stay up, it will rival Fulham in 07-08 for the most remarkable of survivals.

    And the Top 4 could look very interesting if Chelsea win tomorrow...

    We really have to give Darren Moore the job. Tremendous effort.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-2018
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
    William_H said:

    You can spin it however you like, but its fairly silly to pretend that getting 40% of the vote isn't an impressive performance.

    Would you describe Edward Heath's performance as Tory leader in 1966 as impressive? He polled 42% and Labour won a landslide majority.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_1966
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,023
    brendan16 said:

    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    Posh white liberal middle class communities who live in 'nice areas' which are less diverse than the wider city or town - essentially the definition of a Lib Dem ward/borough. Outside the very posh north of Southwark by the Thames they barely exist in poorer or average London boroughs.
    Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    The LDs made gains from the Tories in the leafy parts of the borough and the Tories made a couple of gains from Labour in some of the more working-class areas around Wimbledon Park.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    edited May 2018
    AndyJS said:

    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

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

    This is Wikipedia. So naturally, treat with caution.

    However, if it is even halfway accurate it gives a very good idea of the scale of Labour's problem. In England they have twice as many councillors as the Tories in London and more than four times as many in the big metropolitan areas. But they lag in the unitary authorities, which include many medium-sized urban centres, and in the counties they're barely ahead of the Liberal Democrats. They're as far behind the Tories in the English districts as the Tories are behind them in London.

    I cannot see Labour winning an election until they've at least begun to dent their deficit in the last three.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,855
    brendan16 said:

    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    Posh white liberal middle class communities who live in 'nice areas' which are less diverse than the wider city or town - essentially the definition of a Lib Dem ward/borough. Outside the very posh north of Southwark by the Thames they barely exist in poorer or average London boroughs.
    Sounds like they've very sensibly found their niche.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,718
    another_richard said:

    Sean_F said:

    Re London, Lewisham was 60% Lab, 14% Con, 12% Lib Dem, 12% Green, 2% Others.

    Bexley was 55% Con, 37% Lab, 8% Others.

    I wonder how many people who now live in Bexley lived in Lewisham twenty years ago.
    There will be some, but there will also be lots who considered themselves staunch Labour voters a generation ago, who now vote Conservative.

    K & C was Con 48%, Lab 32%, Lib Dem 14%, others 6%. That's a big drop in Conservative vote share, but it had no impact on seats. H & F was Lab 54%, Con 33%, Lib Dem 12%.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,240
    rottenborough said:

    It doesn't matter how Own spins all this. The bold fact is Labour are a long way from government other than perhaps squeaking by a rainbow coalition.

    To be honest, imho it is all irrelevant anyway - what happens at Brexit will change everything.

    We should be less sniffy about rainbow coalitions. The current Conservative Party is an astounding coalition, from Ken Clarke and Justine Greening to Peter Bone and JRM. I don’t see that Labour/SNP/Lib Dem would be any more a stretch, especially given that it would be C&S rather than formal coalition (the Lib Dems wouldn’t be that stupid).

    But I agree that Brexit will be the wildcard, and all parties would be well advised to get their best team in place before, not after, the sh*t hits the fan… and that may involve a change of leader.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Lewisham joins Barking&Dagenham and Newham as boroughs with 100% Labour representation in London.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,718
    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

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

    This is Wikipedia. So naturally, treat with caution.

    However, if it is even halfway accurate it gives a very good idea of the scale of Labour's problem. In England they have twice as many councillors as the Tories in London and more than four times as many in the big metropolitan areas. But they lag in the unitary authorities, which include many medium-sized urban centres, and in the counties they're barely ahead of the Liberal Democrats. They're as far behind the Tories in the English districts as the Tories are behind them in London.

    I cannot see Labour winning an election until they've at least begun to dent their deficit in the last three.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom
    A lot of Wiki's electoral statistics are provided by Cllr. David Boothroyd, and are therefore trustworthy.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,855
    edited May 2018
    Sandpit said:

    Another interesting graph. Councillor numbers vs Parliament colour. Where do the numbers go from here?
    image

    What's amazing about this chart is that the Liberal surge in the 70s, and the Alliance's success in the mid 1980s didn't involve much at the local council level.

    Edit to add: I mean Alliance in the early 80s.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,487
    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,258
    Just on the local elections in Woking, the Lib Dems gained one seat off the Tories and came close in a couple of others which would have resulted in the Tories losing control of the council.

    The Lib Dems held my ward by 56 votes. They put in a lot of effort in terms of leaflets and had a teller at the polling station. The Tories by contrast didn't put much effort in. As already noted on here, where the Lib Dems were not competitive, their vote did not do that well relative to Labour. Does that matter? Not really, it seems to me to be smart politics to concentrate on places you can win. They certainly seem better at it than Labour.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,941
    El_Capitano said:

    rottenborough said:

    It doesn't matter how Own spins all this. The bold fact is Labour are a long way from government other than perhaps squeaking by a rainbow coalition.

    To be honest, imho it is all irrelevant anyway - what happens at Brexit will change everything.

    We should be less sniffy about rainbow coalitions. The current Conservative Party is an astounding coalition, from Ken Clarke and Justine Greening to Peter Bone and JRM. I don’t see that Labour/SNP/Lib Dem would be any more a stretch, especially given that it would be C&S rather than formal coalition (the Lib Dems wouldn’t be that stupid).

    But I agree that Brexit will be the wildcard, and all parties would be well advised to get their best team in place before, not after, the sh*t hits the fan… and that may involve a change of leader.
    You missed out the DUP.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited May 2018
    JosiasJessop said:

    Quincel said:

    rottenborough said:

    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
    Fitting 10000+ steps a day into his work routine, we should all be so lucky.
    Towards the end of last year, I got to one million steps in a month, ;)
    Give or take, I guess that's maybe 25 miles a day---a decent cruising speed I think.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    edited May 2018
    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    The good burghers of Wandsworth did that more than once in the 1980s as well. O'Farrell's memoirs are eloquent in their frustration on that point.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,904
    Toms said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Quincel said:

    rottenborough said:

    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
    Fitting 10000+ steps a day into his work routine, we should all be so lucky.
    Towards the end of last year, I got to one million steps in a month, ;)
    Give or take, I guess that's maybe 25 miles a day---a decent cruising speed I think.
    Not quite that much. For me, 2,000 steps is about a mile (which makes each step slightly less than a yard). Therefore it was 500 miles in the month, or around 16 miles a day - or five hours of walking. Less if I ran.

    I managed at least 20,000 steps a day for all of 2017, but I gave up in January simply because it was taking too much of my time. Getting up at five in the morning to walk for a couple of hours wasn't proving exactly intellectually fulfilling ...
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited May 2018
    AndyJS said:

    Lewisham joins Barking&Dagenham and Newham as boroughs with 100% Labour representation in London.

    Negative house prices as a result???.. who wants to live in the People's Republic of anywhere???
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,483
    Well, after 5 hours solid gardening I am resting my weary feet on the terrace, where there is sunshine, a bit of a breeze, bird song and quiet.

    Does life get any more perfect? No.

    Anyway, just for @NickPalmer here is dear old Jeremy giving a speech at a rally for Iran praising Iran’s “tolerance and diversity” (tell that to the Bahai’s) in 2015. He does of course mention the human rights abuses under the Shah. But not a word of criticism of the current Iranian regime.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=MwJYbR3NHoU

    He mentions those Iranians who fled to London after the 1952 coup which overthrew Mossadeq and then goes on to say what a large Iranian community there is on Britain - 300,000 but in a nice piece of sleight of hand fails to mention that that community contains many who fled Iran after the Khomeinist revolution. Perhaps he did not want to upset his hosts? Perhaps he does not know about them? But in a speech devoted to a tour d’horizon of British history in Iran it is odd that he chooses to be economical with an actualite which does not reflect well on the current regime, whose tolerance and diversity he has just praised.

    Note also how he pats himself on the back for raising the issue of the chemical gas attack by Saddam Hussein on Halabja and contrast this with his recent reaction to similar attacks by the Syrian leader on his people.

    It is very well being in favour of a world without war and weapons and hatred, as Corbyn says in that speech. No-one would disagree with him on that aim. But it does not occur to him that a regime which treats its own people as appallingly as the Iranian regime has is perhaps not necessarily one which will spread peace and goodwill to its neighbours.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,510
    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    ttps://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    If something similar were to happen at a general election, with Labour piling up useless votes in Islington and Manchester while losing marginal seats in the midlands, the Corbynista are going to go nuts. I’m looking forward to it already!
  • brendan16brendan16 Posts: 2,315
    Omnium said:

    brendan16 said:

    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    Posh white liberal middle class communities who live in 'nice areas' which are less diverse than the wider city or town - essentially the definition of a Lib Dem ward/borough. Outside the very posh north of Southwark by the Thames they barely exist in poorer or average London boroughs.
    Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
    It's limiting but allows them to win in places like Twickenham and Surbiton. They have little to offer those who haven't been so lucky in life.
  • TomsToms Posts: 2,478
    edited May 2018
    JosiasJessop said:

    Toms said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Quincel said:

    rottenborough said:

    Quincel said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    Why mention that Owen Jones is 'Oxford educated'? Is it supposed to make us surprised at his stupidity or just add further confirmation of it?

    Makes me jealous. I applied to Oxford and was rejected. Owen Jones went to Oxford and now makes a living writing and participating in politics, and he has a really cute cat. Is that the life I could have had?

    (No)
    Would you want it? He got heat stroke from excessive canvassing iirc.
    Fitting 10000+ steps a day into his work routine, we should all be so lucky.
    Towards the end of last year, I got to one million steps in a month, ;)
    Give or take, I guess that's maybe 25 miles a day---a decent cruising speed I think.
    Not quite that much. For me, 2,000 steps is about a mile (which makes each step slightly less than a yard). Therefore it was 500 miles in the month, or around 16 miles a day - or five hours of walking. Less if I ran.

    I managed at least 20,000 steps a day for all of 2017, but I gave up in January simply because it was taking too much of my time. Getting up at five in the morning to walk for a couple of hours wasn't proving exactly intellectually fulfilling ...
    I find walking therapeutic, especially away from cars and man made noise, including those (Norwegian?) walking sticks---you can hear them coming for some distance and they spoil any chance of see interesting wild life. I prefer to have a goal, for instance shopping, or just to get from some "A" to some "B". For me, the same thing applies to cycling, only cars are, sadly, unavoidable.
    Running, for me, has a life of its own, though best done on paths.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,737
    The Tottenham choke well and truly on. I won £105 on West Brom today and topped up my Spurs finishinh outside the top 4 position. On for just over £3,500 now. Will get another £100 when Chelsea beat Liverpool tomorrow and will top up some more, if they let me.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

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

    This is Wikipedia. So naturally, treat with caution.

    However, if it is even halfway accurate it gives a very good idea of the scale of Labour's problem. In England they have twice as many councillors as the Tories in London and more than four times as many in the big metropolitan areas. But they lag in the unitary authorities, which include many medium-sized urban centres, and in the counties they're barely ahead of the Liberal Democrats. They're as far behind the Tories in the English districts as the Tories are behind them in London.

    I cannot see Labour winning an election until they've at least begun to dent their deficit in the last three.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom
    A lot of Wiki's electoral statistics are provided by Cllr. David Boothroyd, and are therefore trustworthy.
    How long has he been a Westminster councillor ?

    I wonder if people who are councillors in districts they can never hope to win are different to councillors in districts where they expect to be permanently in power.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,063
    SouthamObserver said:

    The Tottenham choke well and truly on. I won £105 on West Brom today and topped up my Spurs finishinh outside the top 4 position. On for just over £3,500 now. Will get another £100 when Chelsea beat Liverpool tomorrow and will top up some more, if they let me.

    Spurs are at home for their last two fixtures - Newcastle and Leicester

    They should get max points but then this is Spurs
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    edited May 2018
    SouthamObserver said:

    The Tottenham choke well and truly on. I won £105 on West Brom today and topped up my Spurs finishinh outside the top 4 position. On for just over £3,500 now. Will get another £100 when Chelsea beat Liverpool tomorrow and will top up some more, if they let me.

    Could be worse. You could be a supporter of Durham County Cricket Club.

    To be 83/6 when your opponents have racked up 440 is bad enough.

    When those opponents are Leicestershire the humiliation must be nearly unbearable.

    Edit - and they're at home as well...
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,023
    brendan16 said:

    Omnium said:

    brendan16 said:

    surby said:

    Just found out the Lib Dems won 6 council seats in Merton - all in Wimbledon constituency.

    Posh white liberal middle class communities who live in 'nice areas' which are less diverse than the wider city or town - essentially the definition of a Lib Dem ward/borough. Outside the very posh north of Southwark by the Thames they barely exist in poorer or average London boroughs.
    Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
    It's limiting but allows them to win in places like Twickenham and Surbiton. They have little to offer those who haven't been so lucky in life.
    I didn't really mean for the LDs

    People are people, and if you start to start excusing the political process because a (perceived) set of voters dosn't fit your average stereotype then you're heading for trouble.

    If you choose to not want deomcracy then a different dynamic will evolve. It'll be much further away from the LDs though.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,718
    another_richard said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

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

    This is Wikipedia. So naturally, treat with caution.

    However, if it is even halfway accurate it gives a very good idea of the scale of Labour's problem. In England they have twice as many councillors as the Tories in London and more than four times as many in the big metropolitan areas. But they lag in the unitary authorities, which include many medium-sized urban centres, and in the counties they're barely ahead of the Liberal Democrats. They're as far behind the Tories in the English districts as the Tories are behind them in London.

    I cannot see Labour winning an election until they've at least begun to dent their deficit in the last three.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom
    A lot of Wiki's electoral statistics are provided by Cllr. David Boothroyd, and are therefore trustworthy.
    How long has he been a Westminster councillor ?

    I wonder if people who are councillors in districts they can never hope to win are different to councillors in districts where they expect to be permanently in power.
    Quite a while, I think.

    Brent was Lab 60%, Con 23%, Lib Dem 11%, others 6%. It's hard to imagine the Lib Dems came first in 2006, with 27/ 60 councillors.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    AndyJS said:

    Lewisham joins Barking&Dagenham and Newham as boroughs with 100% Labour representation in London.

    But unlike Newham and Barking Lewisham used to be politically mixed.

    There was even suggestions in 1987 that Lewisham would become 'the new Wandsworth' ie fill up with Conservative voting finance workers to the City and Canary Wharf.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,063
    Since Wednesday I have largely just lurked but to be honest the tribal arguments are to be expected but at times they become somewhat tedious especially when the sun is shining, the sea is beautiful, the garden is lovely with birdsong and it is just a pleasure to be alive with a wonderful lady wife of 54 years and a fabulous family.

    However, I do find Williamson and Owen Jones really quite absurd and when the day momentum fail it will be a pleasure to watch their complete meltdown
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Popular vote in Wandsworth, total votes for all candidates:

    Con: 130,254
    Lab: 125,705
    LD: 25,555
    Greens: 13,426
    Ind: 4,150
    Renew: 2,474
    UKIP: 269
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 96
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 26

    Total votes: 301,955


    Percentages:

    Con: 43.14%
    Lab: 41.63%
    LD: 8.46%
    Greens: 4.45%
    Ind: 1.37%
    Renew: 0.82%
    UKIP: 0.09%
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 0.03%
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 0.01%
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    edited May 2018
    ydoethur said:

    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    The good burghers of Wandsworth did that more than once in the 1980s as well. O'Farrell's memoirs are eloquent in their frustration on that point.
    Didn't O'Farrell boast about throwing bricks through windows with Conservative posters on ?

    Or was that someone else ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,137
    another_richard said:

    ydoethur said:

    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    The good burghers of Wandsworth did that more than once in the 1980s as well. O'Farrell's memoirs are eloquent in their frustration on that point.
    Didn't I'Farrell boast about throwing bricks through windows with Conservative posters on ?

    Or was that someone else ?
    It was a friend of his upset at the Major victory in 1992.

    He boasted instead about graffitiing a number of public buildings in Exeter while a student, with the phrase, perfectly punctuated, 'Jobs, not bombs.'
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    I'm sure he was equally upset that Labour got 100 MPs more than the Conservatives in England in 2005 even though they received fewer votes.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    AndyJS said:

    Popular vote in Wandsworth, total votes for all candidates:

    Con: 130,254
    Lab: 125,705
    LD: 25,555
    Greens: 13,426
    Ind: 4,150
    Renew: 2,474
    UKIP: 269
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 96
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 26

    Total votes: 301,955


    Percentages:

    Con: 43.14%
    Lab: 41.63%
    LD: 8.46%
    Greens: 4.45%
    Ind: 1.37%
    Renew: 0.82%
    UKIP: 0.09%
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 0.03%
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 0.01%

    That contradicts Chris Williamson's tweet which had Labour ahead in Wandsworth
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    ydoethur said:

    another_richard said:

    ydoethur said:

    rottenborough said:

    Oh. Labour Corbynites heading down the same rabbit hole of popular vote as Clinton supporters did:

    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/992798919267704833

    The good burghers of Wandsworth did that more than once in the 1980s as well. O'Farrell's memoirs are eloquent in their frustration on that point.
    Didn't I'Farrell boast about throwing bricks through windows with Conservative posters on ?

    Or was that someone else ?
    It was a friend of his upset at the Major victory in 1992.

    He boasted instead about graffitiing a number of public buildings in Exeter while a student, with the phrase, perfectly punctuated, 'Jobs, not bombs.'
    The story was in this book as I remember:

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Things-Can-Only-Get-Worse/dp/1784162639/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1525540930&sr=1-2&keywords=o'farrell&dpID=5199BlK7nfL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,897
    Sean_F said:

    another_richard said:

    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    AndyJS said:

    Both the BBC and Sky seem to have reassessed their election data and the number of Tory councillor losses is now just 33.

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

    This is Wikipedia. So naturally, treat with caution.

    However, if it is even halfway accurate it gives a very good idea of the scale of Labour's problem. In England they have twice as many councillors as the Tories in London and more than four times as many in the big metropolitan areas. But they lag in the unitary authorities, which include many medium-sized urban centres, and in the counties they're barely ahead of the Liberal Democrats. They're as far behind the Tories in the English districts as the Tories are behind them in London.

    I cannot see Labour winning an election until they've at least begun to dent their deficit in the last three.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_make-up_of_local_councils_in_the_United_Kingdom
    A lot of Wiki's electoral statistics are provided by Cllr. David Boothroyd, and are therefore trustworthy.
    How long has he been a Westminster councillor ?

    I wonder if people who are councillors in districts they can never hope to win are different to councillors in districts where they expect to be permanently in power.
    Quite a while, I think.

    Brent was Lab 60%, Con 23%, Lib Dem 11%, others 6%. It's hard to imagine the Lib Dems came first in 2006, with 27/ 60 councillors.
    You were a candidate in Brent in 2006 as I remember.

    How has north Wembley changed since ?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2018
    felix said:

    AndyJS said:

    Popular vote in Wandsworth, total votes for all candidates:

    Con: 130,254
    Lab: 125,705
    LD: 25,555
    Greens: 13,426
    Ind: 4,150
    Renew: 2,474
    UKIP: 269
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 96
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 26

    Total votes: 301,955


    Percentages:

    Con: 43.14%
    Lab: 41.63%
    LD: 8.46%
    Greens: 4.45%
    Ind: 1.37%
    Renew: 0.82%
    UKIP: 0.09%
    Duma Polska = Polish Pride: 0.03%
    Democrats and Veterans Party: 0.01%

    That contradicts Chris Williamson's tweet which had Labour ahead in Wandsworth
    I'll have to check it again. Maybe I've made a mistake somewhere.
This discussion has been closed.