I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
The reality was that the LDs were the provisional wing of Blair's Labour Party and that is how they got towards 60 seats. However, they both pretended that was not the case. It really will be Christmas for Boris if they do join together.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's also absurdly self defeating. Nothing bolsters the case for independence quite like a bunch of wealthy southern English Tories telling us they won't allow it.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's possible to believe in both self-determination and a United Kingdom. Many of us do.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's possible to believe in both self-determination and a United Kingdom. Many of us do.
It's possible to believe in self determination and a united Europe. Many of us do. (And some of us even live here).
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's possible to believe in both self-determination and a United Kingdom. Many of us do.
It's possible to believe in self determination and a united Europe. Many of us do. (And some of us even live here).
indeed, and the results of two referendums in the past few years suggest that Scotland is in favour of a United Kingdom, and the UK is in favour of leaving the EU.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
Tories have never been natural fans of the impeccably Marxist concept of self determination; they were railroaded into it at short notice by Maggie's excellent little adventure in the South Atlantic.
Fast forward some. It's the election debate, late April 2024. Boris has grown into the role of PM. Brexit had a few bumps but has been forgotten, as the UK weathered the world recession better than most. The trade agreements with the rest of the word proved a huge boon to that resilience.
The points based immigration system has ironed out the initial teething problems. The tax system has been hugely simplified. Chancellor Gove takes much credit for this, together with a radical overhaul of student loans. "Hard Hat" Boris has just been on the telly in a digger again, cutting the earth for the 40th new hospital. NHS waiting times finally started to come down in 2023.
Much of our power now comes from renewables. Urban crime is still a problem, but is reducing - knife crime especially with stringent but fairly-applied stop and search. MI5 and MI6 have proven quite brilliant at finding and "relocating" global proceeds of crime. These "privateer" operations have taken down many billionnaires who were involved in gangsterism and the drug trade. Allowed to reinvest all their gains back into the system, they are now renowned as the best in the world at preventing terrorism.
A pragmatic level of flexibility saw off the worst of the problems with Universal Credit, which is now working well and even its critics acknowledge has delivered support where needed. Food banks are well stocked and well used, after their rebranding as "Boris Banks".
Scotland had a second referendum in 2023. Boris fought like a demon to keep it part of the union. They voted 52 to 48 to stay. A new law provides for a further referendum on leaving the UK - in 2043.
Boris's performances at PMQs have become a thing of legend. Relaxed, withering, on top of his brief. He has clearly enjoyed being PM. However many he had before, Boris could hardly deny the two new children - both sons - he has had in Downing Street with Carrie.
Set against this background - and with the Conservatives on 52% in the polls - it was a nervous Rebecca Long-Bailey that walked to the podium for Question Time Interviews the Leaders. With Andrew Neil.....
Did you type this with your left hand, to leave your right one free? None of this will happen, but your naivety is touching.
None? You can hope so. But there's 365 MPs about to try to make it - or something like it - a blueprint for 5 years of Govt. If they are remotely successful, then whoever Labour chooses Won't. Stand. A. Chance.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
I don't think so. Indeed it makes me suspicious of her political antennae. The next few years need to be at ground level, building up councillors and organisation. We are going to be bystanders on Brexit and Parliament for the next few years, though being untainted by that may well be a good thing.
I like Jess Philips and she is the most centrist of the mooted candidates, but she did take Birmingham Yardley off the Lib Dems.
That's all undoubtedly true. But ultimately, Lab/LD fighting has gifted Boris Johnson a certain number of seats (Kensington, Cities, Finchley probably others...). In a closer election that could make a big difference. Lab/LD coalition is probably the best to hope for in 2024.
Hmmm, If there had been a coalition it might have helped in London but would they have got the seats they did in England outside London, err no.
They didn't get many seats in England outside of London. Most of those were comfortable and I think would have been comfortable if Labour had stood down.
Like the leaflet posted through my door by my local SNP candidate said the most important subject of the is election was independence
But sure, let's pretend the SNP campaign wasn't about Indy if it makes you feel better.
One thing is surely indisputable and that is the Tory campaign in Scotland, such as it was post Ruth, was almost entirely about independence. Every Tory poster I saw said no to Indyref2. It was their entire message.
I loathe the idea of a second referendum in Scotland. We have not yet recovered from the divisiveness caused by the first one. But some of these posts are just silly. Of course the SNP want an Independence referendum. Those who voted for them either want the same or are complete idiots.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's possible to believe in both self-determination and a United Kingdom. Many of us do.
It's possible to believe in self determination and a united Europe. Many of us do. (And some of us even live here).
indeed, and the results of two referendums in the past few years suggest that Scotland is in favour of a United Kingdom, and the UK is in favour of leaving the EU.
In the first referendum Scotland voted to stay in the UK and the EU. In the second Scotland voted to stay in the EU. Yet we are now being dragged out against our will. There will be another indy ref and Scotland will vote to leave, we won't make the same mistake twice.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
That's a well-expressed article. Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories problems in the future, spanning the metropolitan constituency and northern working class in a coalition appeal, rather than the near-impossible task of attempting to appeal to both in a single figure.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
It's possible to believe in both self-determination and a United Kingdom. Many of us do.
It's possible to believe in self determination and a united Europe. Many of us do. (And some of us even live here).
indeed, and the results of two referendums in the past few years suggest that Scotland is in favour of a United Kingdom, and the UK is in favour of leaving the EU.
In the first referendum Scotland voted to stay in the UK and the EU. In the second Scotland voted to stay in the EU. Yet we are now being dragged out against our will. There will be another indy ref and Scotland will vote to leave, we won't make the same mistake twice.
No, we will vote to remain again. But even more of our remaining companies will not hang around for the result. The damage already done to our tax base by this nonsense is severe.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
Fast forward some. It's the election debate, late April 2024. Boris has grown into the role of PM. Brexit had a few bumps but has been forgotten, as the UK weathered the world recession better than most. The trade agreements with the rest of the word proved a huge boon to that resilience.
The points based immigration system has ironed out the initial teething problems. The tax system has been hugely simplified. Chancellor Gove takes much credit for this, together with a radical overhaul of student loans. "Hard Hat" Boris has just been on the telly in a digger again, cutting the earth for the 40th new hospital. NHS waiting times finally started to come down in 2023.
Much of our power now comes from renewables. Urban crime is still a problem, but is reducing - knife crime especially with stringent but fairly-applied stop and search. MI5 and MI6 have proven quite brilliant at finding and "relocating" global proceeds of crime. These "privateer" operations have taken down many billionnaires who were involved in gangsterism and the drug trade. Allowed to reinvest all their gains back into the system, they are now renowned as the best in the world at preventing terrorism.
A pragmatic level of flexibility saw off the worst of the problems with Universal Credit, which is now working well and even its critics acknowledge has delivered support where needed. Food banks are well stocked and well used, after their rebranding as "Boris Banks".
Scotland had a second referendum in 2023. Boris fought like a demon to keep it part of the union. They voted 52 to 48 to stay. A new law provides for a further referendum on leaving the UK - in 2043.
Boris's performances at PMQs have become a thing of legend. Relaxed, withering, on top of his brief. He has clearly enjoyed being PM. However many he had before, Boris could hardly deny the two new children - both sons - he has had in Downing Street with Carrie.
Set against this background - and with the Conservatives on 52% in the polls - it was a nervous Rebecca Long-Bailey that walked to the podium for Question Time Interviews the Leaders. With Andrew Neil.....
Did you type this with your left hand, to leave your right one free? None of this will happen, but your naivety is touching.
None? You can hope so. But there's 365 MPs about to try to make it - or something like it - a blueprint for 5 years of Govt. If they are remotely successful, then whoever Labour chooses Won't. Stand. A. Chance.
Putting. Full. Stops. In. Sentences. Just. Looks. Stupid.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
I know there's a desire to see more women in senior roles in politics, but extending that idea to picking a bunch of lightweight thirtysomethings just because they have the right kind of genitals, really isn't going to end well.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
I don't think so. Indeed it makes me suspicious of her political antennae. The next few years need to be at ground level, building up councillors and organisation. We are going to be bystanders on Brexit and Parliament for the next few years, though being untainted by that may well be a good thing.
I like Jess Philips and she is the most centrist of the mooted candidates, but she did take Birmingham Yardley off the Lib Dems.
Tend to agree with Foxy on this. Moran does not seem to have addressed the underlying questions sufficiently.
One of the big questions that I have not seen addressed is how the LDs will deal with the toxic legacy of the contempt they have spent 2-3 years expressing for people who disagree with them on Brexit. One consequence of a fundamentalist stance is that you alienate people. As I see it, under Farron and Swinson they have ploughed potentially fertile ground with salt.
I think she is a little naive in her proposal wrt cooperation with Labour. Ask the ghost of Paddy Ashdown what happened last time.
Do they expect to be a party of Remain areas only for the next 10-20 years? As I remarked before, I used to have LD councillors everywhere in modest numbers; now I have none whatsoever afaik within 10 miles' drive, other than rebrands to Independent.
I think she is also perhaps naive in her assessment of Labour - the party is not going to magically reform when only Corbyn is marginalised. She needs to be more cautious until Lab's future is defined; I do not see the Corbynistas letting go when they have hung on to more than 75% of seats.
Listening to Andy McDonald on R4 now, he is still pretending that Corbyn was not toxic on the doorstep.
Whether somebody who is himself ultimately a mediocrity, certainly as an administrator, will be able to do anything about it is another question entirely.
Inevitably, the SNP claimed a mandate for indyref2. It was the fourth time such a mandate had been claimed since the 2014 independence referendum. The first was in 2015, after the SNP’s 56-seat landslide; the second was in June 2016, after the UK’s Brexit vote fulfilled the SNP’s manifesto criteria of Scotland being taken out of the EU against its will; the third was after the party won the 2017 General Election, and this was the fourth.....
...This all points to the 2021 Scottish Parliament election - the most important there has ever been. That election will be fought on very clear ground, with very likely no room for debate on anything other than indyref2. If the SNP wins that election with a clear manifesto commitment for a second vote, a full two parliamentary terms after their first win, there can be no serious grounds to oppose it.
Well, it could hardly be worse. Probably one area where the cost/benefit ratio of the Cummings brand of revolutionary institutional vandalism tends towards the benefit side.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
I know there's a desire to see more women in senior roles in politics, but extending that idea to picking a bunch of lightweight thirtysomethings just because they have the right kind of genitals, really isn't going to end well.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
I know there's a desire to see more women in senior roles in politics, but extending that idea to picking a bunch of lightweight thirtysomethings just because they have the right kind of genitals, really isn't going to end well.
I wouldn't say either of those are particularly lightweight. Philips and Priti Patel I would see as more lightweight.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
I know there's a desire to see more women in senior roles in politics, but extending that idea to picking a bunch of lightweight thirtysomethings just because they have the right kind of genitals, really isn't going to end well.
O/T, but I suspect we're going to see something very significant in N Ireland early next year, when they finally try to get their own Government again. First of all there are going to new new elections which will result in an increase in the Pro RoI/EU vote, especially as the impact of Boris' Deal becomes clear. Unless, of course, he tries to renege on what he's agreed to, on the grounds that what it says isn't what he meant. Of course to do so would have other consequences. As as result I think 'Norn' will move closer to the RoI and within three or four years will rejoin the EU as some sort of separate state, still with the Queen as titular head, and in the Commonwealth. Somewhat similar to Cyprus and Malta,
So another positive outcome of Brexit then. Northern Ireland moves slowly back towards the inevitable reunification with the South whilst maintaining some links with the UK to placate the Unionists. Sounds good to me.
Whether somebody who is himself ultimately a mediocrity, certainly as an administrator, will be able to do anything about it is another question entirely.
So you still don't acknowledge his abilities to administer the greatest drubbing of Labour since the 30's? Sure, Labour gave him plenty of help, but even so, that's harsh....
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Whether somebody who is himself ultimately a mediocrity, certainly as an administrator, will be able to do anything about it is another question entirely.
So you still don't acknowledge his abilities to administer the greatest drubbing of Labour since the 30's? Sure, Labour gave him plenty of help, but even so, that's harsh....
Both of you might be right. Where is the evidence that an undoubted gift in sloganeering and some skill in writing up cod analysis on his blog can translate into the administrative and managerial ability to actually run anything? The difference is people skills.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Corbyn was offered that by Unite to Remain but shrugged it.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
I don't think so. Indeed it makes me suspicious of her political antennae. The next few years need to be at ground level, building up councillors and organisation. We are going to be bystanders on Brexit and Parliament for the next few years, though being untainted by that may well be a good thing.
I like Jess Philips and she is the most centrist of the mooted candidates, but she did take Birmingham Yardley off the Lib Dems.
Tend to agree with Foxy on this. Moran does not seem to have addressed the underlying questions sufficiently.
One of the big questions that I have not seen addressed is how the LDs will deal with the toxic legacy of the contempt they have spent 2-3 years expressing for people who disagree with them on Brexit. One consequence of a fundamentalist stance is that you alienate people. As I see it, under Farron and Swinson they have ploughed potentially fertile ground with salt.
I think she is a little naive in her proposal wrt cooperation with Labour. Ask the ghost of Paddy Ashdown what happened last time.
Do they expect to be a party of Remain areas only for the next 10-20 years? As I remarked before, I used to have LD councillors everywhere in modest numbers; now I have none whatsoever afaik within 10 miles' drive, other than rebrands to Independent.
I think she is also perhaps naive in her assessment of Labour - the party is not going to magically reform when only Corbyn is marginalised. She needs to be more cautious until Lab's future is defined; I do not see the Corbynistas letting go when they have hung on to more than 75% of seats.
Listening to Andy McDonald on R4 now, he is still pretending that Corbyn was not toxic on the doorstep.
I'm with Foxy as well. Later down the road, when the ground on which the government can be critiqued has been established and both opposition parties have worked through their grief and succession, it might be worth thinking about.
Right now, it is one of two things. It might be a manifesto pitch for a leadership bid, in which case fair enough. Or it is someone who is still in election mode, looking for a quick fix to the last problem, who hasn't yet adjusted to the long slog that lies ahead for the opposition parties.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Both parties are indeed still a way from accepting the obvious, which is that they catastrophically harmed not only each others' chances but with that the chances of Remain, with the over-confident aggressive rhetoric towards each other from both Corbyn's team and Swinson.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Who do you like for leader Nick? I think Lab/LD may need to go further than tactical voting advice, and instead think about standing down candidates in certain marginals.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Corbyn was offered that by Unite to Remain but shrugged it.
There were mistakes by both sides.
One of the biggest by the LibDems was scrabbling to drop in a new candidate when the Canterbury candidate withdrew and endorsed the Labour MP. The damage was done by then, and at the last minute they could afford to have let it ride. If they'd had the strategic nous to do this, the Canterbury MP would probably have a slightly larger majority and her convincing win would have established a nugget of goodwill and demonstrated the upside of co-operation.
Instead the LibDems blew the chance and forced someone on a doomed mission to be the replacement candidate, to no benefit to anyone.
When you look at the detail of how the LibDems campaigned, it is littered with misjudgements like that.
Fast forward some. It's the election debate, late April 2024. Boris has grown into the role of PM. Brexit had a few bumps but has been forgotten, as the UK weathered the world recession better than most. The trade agreements with the rest of the word proved a huge boon to that resilience.
The points based immigration system has ironed out the initial teething problems. The tax system has been hugely simplified. Chancellor Gove takes much credit for this, together with a radical overhaul of student loans. "Hard Hat" Boris has just been on the telly in a digger again, cutting the earth for the 40th new hospital. NHS waiting times finally started to come down in 2023.
Much of our power now comes from renewables. Urban crime is still a problem, but is reducing - knife crime especially with stringent but fairly-applied stop and search. MI5 and MI6 have proven quite brilliant at finding and "relocating" global proceeds of crime. These "privateer" operations have taken down many billionnaires who were involved in gangsterism and the drug trade. Allowed to reinvest all their gains back into the system, they are now renowned as the best in the world at preventing terrorism.
A pragmatic level of flexibility saw off the worst of the problems with Universal Credit, which is now working well and even its critics acknowledge has delivered support where needed. Food banks are well stocked and well used, after their rebranding as "Boris Banks".
Scotland had a second referendum in 2023. Boris fought like a demon to keep it part of the union. They voted 52 to 48 to stay. A new law provides for a further referendum on leaving the UK - in 2043.
Boris's performances at PMQs have become a thing of legend. Relaxed, withering, on top of his brief. He has clearly enjoyed being PM. However many he had before, Boris could hardly deny the two new children - both sons - he has had in Downing Street with Carrie.
Set against this background - and with the Conservatives on 52% in the polls - it was a nervous Rebecca Long-Bailey that walked to the podium for Question Time Interviews the Leaders. With Andrew Neil.....
Did you type this with your left hand, to leave your right one free? None of this will happen, but your naivety is touching.
None? You can hope so. But there's 365 MPs about to try to make it - or something like it - a blueprint for 5 years of Govt. If they are remotely successful, then whoever Labour chooses Won't. Stand. A. Chance.
Putting. Full. Stops. In. Sentences. Just. Looks. Stupid.
Ooooh, look at all the shiny full stops!
Ignore the charging rhino of Tory manifesto delivery, bearing down on Labour and Libdem alike.
O/T, but I suspect we're going to see something very significant in N Ireland early next year, when they finally try to get their own Government again. First of all there are going to new new elections which will result in an increase in the Pro RoI/EU vote, especially as the impact of Boris' Deal becomes clear. Unless, of course, he tries to renege on what he's agreed to, on the grounds that what it says isn't what he meant. Of course to do so would have other consequences. As as result I think 'Norn' will move closer to the RoI and within three or four years will rejoin the EU as some sort of separate state, still with the Queen as titular head, and in the Commonwealth. Somewhat similar to Cyprus and Malta,
So another positive outcome of Brexit then. Northern Ireland moves slowly back towards the inevitable reunification with the South whilst maintaining some links with the UK to placate the Unionists. Sounds good to me.
Tectonic plates do seem to be moving in Northern Ireland. Managing that will be a huge challenge, but it is it one that can be ducked. Great to see both the SDLP and the Alliance Party in the Commons.
With 5 years to go, and after the complete abject failure to capitalise on a clear opportunity, the LDs should be considering a complete change. Not just leader, but name, policy platform, everything.
I think though a tacit alliance like in 1997 works best. Apart from in West London, rarely are the two in head to head competition.
Yes, I agree. We did that in Surrey reasonably well - in my patch Labour's engagement was light and we naturally headed off for marginals beyond making a token showing. Conversely the local LibDems showed no interest in heading off to help Portsmouth South or Reading. It's diffiult to persuade local parties to stand down altogether but easier to persuade them to focus.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Do you think they do realise that? Johnson has vowed no tax rises and higher public spending. Let’s see what happens if he can’t deliver.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
But Labour's schtick is something for nothing. That the public sector can both borrow endlessly without consequence and tax the private sector endlessly without consequence.
Labour is underpinned by a broken business model. If you went to the market with a prospectus for Socialist Utopia plc and it failed, you could come back with an altered business plan for some diluted version that might work instead. But Labour keeps going back to the market with an identical pospectus. And every time it will fail. And the market knows this.
Who do you like for leader Nick? I think Lab/LD may need to go further than tactical voting advice, and instead think about standing down candidates in certain marginals.
Initially quite tempted by Angela Rayner - fairly dynamic, reasonably left-wing, no history of divisiveness, but not easily characterised as a prisoner of any faction. I'll look at RLB but not yet persuaded. Starmer is a possibility - in the end it'd be nice to have a woman but it's positively sexist to make that the only criterion.
Daily Mail claiming Swinson wants a seat in the Lords. FFS!!!!
I think Boris's mate Zac will get a peerage and keep his role on environment.
Without intruding on private grief, have you discovered where your modelling was out? It was brave of you to share and you clearly spent hours on it - getting it to deliver 325 Conservative seats....
Let’s face it, if Johnson’s plans for govt are anyway close to what’s been trailed over the last few days then a reasonable chunk of the Tory party is going to start getting a bit uncomfortable.
The Tory way to revive “forgotten towns” would be to revitalise them by drawing inward investment, building up training and skills and generally giving people a stake in the success of the economy and private industry. Not by piling in Government/taxpayers money from a magic money tree they used to claim didn’t exist. Obviously there is a potential role for kickstarting things, but not putting money in on a permanent basis to increase dependence on the state.
Thus far we’re getting a lot of impression of the latter rather than the former. And if so they’ll be a price to pay.
O/T, but I suspect we're going to see something very significant in N Ireland early next year, when they finally try to get their own Government again. First of all there are going to new new elections which will result in an increase in the Pro RoI/EU vote, especially as the impact of Boris' Deal becomes clear. Unless, of course, he tries to renege on what he's agreed to, on the grounds that what it says isn't what he meant. Of course to do so would have other consequences. As as result I think 'Norn' will move closer to the RoI and within three or four years will rejoin the EU as some sort of separate state, still with the Queen as titular head, and in the Commonwealth. Somewhat similar to Cyprus and Malta,
So another positive outcome of Brexit then. Northern Ireland moves slowly back towards the inevitable reunification with the South whilst maintaining some links with the UK to placate the Unionists. Sounds good to me.
43% of Northern Ireland voters voted for Unionist parties and only 38% for Nationalist parties, the main gainers were the non sectarian Alliance not the DUP.
However the fact there is still a Unionist majority in Scotland, where 54% voted for Unionist parties but not in Northern Ireland now shows Boris was quite right to keep Northern Ireland effectively in the single market and customs union and an open border with the Republic of Ireland as part of his Deal. A hard border with the Republic of Ireland would have pushed Irish reunification forward
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Well it would first require a Labour leader the Lib Dems were prepared to see in No.10. Pretending the two parties were compatible prior to the last election is futile.
And it is a good illustration of one more another disadvantage of FPTP.
Daily Mail claiming Swinson wants a seat in the Lords. FFS!!!!
I think Boris's mate Zac will get a peerage and keep his role on environment.
Without intruding on private grief, have you discovered where your modelling was out? It was brave of you to share and you clearly spent hours on it - getting it to deliver 325 Conservative seats....
You're setting new standards for magnanimity in victory over the last couple of days.
I don’t believe tactical voting and election pacts will work as an overarching electoral strategy in the U.K. And certainly not if there is no serious attempt being the involved parties to work together in advance on policy to drive an impression that they hold similar visions, and policy formulations for getting there. Not just “stop the Tories”.
Otherwise much of the electorate will just see it as restricting choice, and indeed in many cases may just vote Tory at worst, or just stay at home at best, if they are their preferred “second option”.
I’m no supporter of Scottish Independence but the rank hypocrisy from some of you Tories is something to behold. At least @Philip_Thompson is consistent in his beliefs on self-determination.
Philip Thompson is a libertarian not a conservative
I wonder which one the Tories fear the most. Will the pb Tories tell us?
My guess is Lisa Nandy.
Cooper is too tired and is tainted with Remain Chicanery, and Phillips is too divisive, empty-headed and opinionated.
Angela Rayner is good, but I think Lisa Nandy could be better.
(At the last Welsh Labour leadership elections, the potential leader and the potential deputy that the opposition parties feared the most both trailed in last).
Jess Phillips followed by Starmer, Nandy is not that bright and has no personality and despite supposedly being willing to accept Brexit consistently voted against the May and Boris Deal. Though Dawn Butler might be good but seems to me too London centric and tainted with Corbynism
Nandy is bright enough and charismatic enough. I think she comes across better (and is therefore more electable) than RLB. I think Butler would be great, though you have to ask why, compared to most of the other runners, you hardly ever see her on TV. Of course the obvious person to be the next leader is Charmer Starmer. But will he stand?
Starmer is the only one I could possibly actually see as PM, maybe Thornberry too but she has been brutally wounded by Flint.
However I don't think any of them could beat Boris, in fact given the current weak Labour field to succeed Corbyn and the fact Umunna and Berger failed to win their seats leaving a weak LD field to succeed Swinson too it looks like the Leader of the Opposition for the next 5 years in reality could well be Nicola Sturgeon
They are not selecting a future Prime Minister. The right choice and 2019 was 1987 to be followed by 1992. But the wrong choice and 2019 was 1979 and pretty well certain to be followed by 1983.
Though I do see that you were wrong. Far from being out on his ear, Farron is back with an increased majority. I wouldn't be averse to him having another stint as leader.
In deed and all credit to Farron that he is back, we really should have taken W&L. I always though it was the biggest LD mistake in the last parliament when Cable announced Farron had resigned. Would Tim have pursued such a disastrous anti-Brexit policy, probably not. He could have seen it as a conscience issue. Whilst that would not have pleased many it would not have offended anyone.
I wonder if others have noted that the Tories could potentially have taken another 20 + seats in iconic areas if the Brexit party had not stood. In many seats if only about 20% of their votes had gone blue the seats would have fallen. Targets for next time?
I wonder which one the Tories fear the most. Will the pb Tories tell us?
My guess is Lisa Nandy.
Cooper is too tired and is tainted with Remain Chicanery, and Phillips is too divisive, empty-headed and opinionated.
Angela Rayner is good, but I think Lisa Nandy could be better.
(At the last Welsh Labour leadership elections, the potential leader and the potential deputy that the opposition parties feared the most both trailed in last).
Jess Phillips followed by Starmer, Nandy is not that bright and has no personality and despite supposedly being willing to accept Brexit consistently voted against the May and Boris Deal. Though Dawn Butler might be good but seems to me too London centric and tainted with Corbynism
Nandy is bright enough and charismatic enough. I think she comes across better (and is therefore more electable) than RLB. I think Butler would be great, though you have to ask why, compared to most of the other runners, you hardly ever see her on TV. Of course the obvious person to be the next leader is Charmer Starmer. But will he stand?
Starmer is the only one I could possibly actually see as PM, maybe Thornberry too but she has been brutally wounded by Flint.
However I don't think any of them could beat Boris, in fact given the current weak Labour field to succeed Corbyn and the fact Umunna and Berger failed to win their seats leaving a weak LD field to succeed Swinson too it looks like the Leader of the Opposition for the next 5 years in reality could well be Nicola Sturgeon
They are not selecting a future Prime Minister. The right choice and 2019 was 1987 to be followed by 1992. But the wrong choice and 2019 was 1979 and pretty well certain to be followed by 1983.
Though I do see that you were wrong. Far from being out on his ear, Farron is back with an increased majority. I wouldn't be averse to him having another stint as leader.
In deed and all credit to Farron that he is back, we really should have taken W&L. I always though it was the biggest LD mistake in the last parliament when Cable announced Farron had resigned. Would Tim have pursued such a disastrous anti-Brexit policy, probably not. He could have seen it as a conscience issue. Whilst that would not have pleased many it would not have offended anyone.
Oh and applying logic I agree Timmy would be the sensible choice this time. Presumably that rules him out.
I wonder if others have noted that the Tories could potentially have taken another 20 + seats in iconic areas if the Brexit party had not stood. In many seats if only about 20% of their votes had gone blue the seats would have fallen. Targets for next time?
Indeed, Tories plus Brexit Party got 45.6%, Labour plus the LDs got 43.7%
I wonder if others have noted that the Tories could potentially have taken another 20 + seats in iconic areas if the Brexit party had not stood. In many seats if only about 20% of their votes had gone blue the seats would have fallen. Targets for next time?
Not if the BXP voters would otherwise rather have voted Labour
I wonder if others have noted that the Tories could potentially have taken another 20 + seats in iconic areas if the Brexit party had not stood. In many seats if only about 20% of their votes had gone blue the seats would have fallen. Targets for next time?
Not if the BXP voters would otherwise rather have voted Labour
Have a look at Barnsley. I’m sure the name of the Tory candidate was coincidental.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Do you think they do realise that? Johnson has vowed no tax rises and higher public spending. Let’s see what happens if he can’t deliver.
He hasn't vowed no tax rises, he's said no rises in the main three taxes. That's a huge, huge difference.
Who do you like for leader Nick? I think Lab/LD may need to go further than tactical voting advice, and instead think about standing down candidates in certain marginals.
Initially quite tempted by Angela Rayner - fairly dynamic, reasonably left-wing, no history of divisiveness, but not easily characterised as a prisoner of any faction. I'll look at RLB but not yet persuaded. Starmer is a possibility - in the end it'd be nice to have a woman but it's positively sexist to make that the only criterion.
What about you?
I'm keeping an open mind for now, trying to better understand why Labour lost and encouraging friends in despair at Johnson that they should join Labour and have a say in the leadership contest.
I'm keen to move on from Corbyn and I suspect RLB doesn't help do that. And in a different way, I'm not sure Starmer helps things move on either. Both could yet convince me though.
Which candidate will tell the members they are amazing and everything they wanted was amazing, and that but for Brexit and the evil media they would have won? Because thats who the members will choose- the one who makes them feel good.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Do you think they do realise that? Johnson has vowed no tax rises and higher public spending. Let’s see what happens if he can’t deliver.
He hasn't vowed no tax rises, he's said no rises in the main three taxes. That's a huge, huge difference.
Nor has he said anything about good old fiscal drag.
Daily Mail claiming Swinson wants a seat in the Lords. FFS!!!!
I think Boris's mate Zac will get a peerage and keep his role on environment.
Without intruding on private grief, have you discovered where your modelling was out? It was brave of you to share and you clearly spent hours on it - getting it to deliver 325 Conservative seats....
The model was based on swings from the 2017 position and tactical voting. It assumed the leave/ remain divide was baked into the 2017 figures.
The key flaw was ignoring the leave/ remain split and the willingness of Labour leave voters to switch across to the Tories rather than BXP or stay at home.
When l have the time and motivation I'll input the actual shares and see how it does.
"The Chief Rabbi must be dancing in the street. The pro-Israel lobby won our General Election by lying about Jeremy Corbyn."
Baroness Tonge. They are going to have to create a separate “cross bench” in the Lords to accommodate her, because the others have chucked her out.
On a related (and admittedly provocative, apologies) note....
Thought experiment: if the EHRC investigation comes up with spectacularly damning conclusions - and that's far from being an outside chance at this stage - what practical barriers could prevent the newly-empowered UK Government outlawing the Labour Party as a racist organisation?
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
Very understandably, triumphant Tories have forgotten that Johnson has told a lot of people a lot of lies over the last few months. His ability to navigate a way out of the homes he has dug for himself are most likely what will decide the 2023 election. If the election is in 2024 we’ll know he’s in serious trouble.
I am old enough to recall articles in the Sunday Telegraph circa 1987 pondering who would be Tory Prime Minister for the 2003 and 2008 GEs after Mrs Thatcher's inevitable retirement in 1999. History will repeat itself. Tories are again realising they are invincible.
My biggest takeaway from this election is the collapse of the LDs. I had assumed that with Labour consumed by unfettered Marxism the LDs would thrive. Wrong again!
It would be nice for Labour to get their house in some small semblance of order so that when Johnson inevitably unravels there is something modestly competent to take the wheel.
I wonder if others have noted that the Tories could potentially have taken another 20 + seats in iconic areas if the Brexit party had not stood. In many seats if only about 20% of their votes had gone blue the seats would have fallen. Targets for next time?
Not if the BXP voters would otherwise rather have voted Labour
Of course but that is not a given especially in the seats I'm referring to.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Do you think they do realise that? Johnson has vowed no tax rises and higher public spending. Let’s see what happens if he can’t deliver.
He hasn't vowed no tax rises, he's said no rises in the main three taxes. That's a huge, huge difference.
Not quite. He's vowed no rises in the main three tax rates.
I'm sure a larger economy and more investment will lead to rises in the receipts from these three taxes.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
Moran working together with Rayner particularly could cause the Tories real problems, spanning a metropolitan and northern working class appeal.
The article is fine until it gets to practical examples, all of which involve other parties standing aside for the LibDems and the "hatred" of Labour supporters in not doing so. There are far more cases where the LibDems continued to claim that they were the only chance of beating the Tories when in reality they were obviously just risking letting the Tories in - the case I know best is Portsmouth South, where the LibDems were still pushing this nonsense up to polling day and Labour just scraped in.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Basically what you're saying is that Labour no longer has wide enough appeal to beat the Tories alone. Surely instead of treating the symptoms with tactical voting alliances you need to look at why that is and how to fix it. Here's a tip, Marxist spending plans are loathed by the majority of British people. People realise that there's no such thing as something for nothing.
Do you think they do realise that? Johnson has vowed no tax rises and higher public spending. Let’s see what happens if he can’t deliver.
He hasn't vowed no tax rises, he's said no rises in the main three taxes. That's a huge, huge difference.
Nor has he said anything about good old fiscal drag.
Indeed. That alone is a huge source of additional revenue.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign - some said 'lend us your vote, its not about independence'.
Claiming a mandate for things that weren’t mentioned during the election?
I suspect we haven’t seen the last of that.
The Conservative manifesto was so gloriously unspecific they’ve got lots of room for manoeuvre! The Poll Tax was ushered in under a vague promise to “modernise the rates system”!
Conservative Party 1987 manifesto:
“We will legislate in the first Session of the new Parliament to abolish the unfair domestic rating system and replace rates with a fairer Community Charge.
This will be a fixed rate charge for local services paid by those over the age of 18, except the mentally ill and elderly people living in homes and hospitals. The less-well-off and students will not have to pay the full charge but everyone will be aware of the costs as well as the benefits of local services. “
A fairly accurate assessment of what it ended up as.
"The Chief Rabbi must be dancing in the street. The pro-Israel lobby won our General Election by lying about Jeremy Corbyn."
Baroness Tonge. They are going to have to create a separate “cross bench” in the Lords to accommodate her, because the others have chucked her out.
On a related (and admittedly provocative, apologies) note....
Thought experiment: if the EHRC investigation comes up with spectacularly damning conclusions - and that's far from being an outside chance at this stage - what practical barriers could prevent the newly-empowered UK Government outlawing the Labour Party as a racist organisation?
I don't believe there is the power to do so under current law. Terrorism, now...
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign '.
Absolute load of shit that you've got from yoons on Twitter. They mentioned independence all over their leaflets. Plus, you know, their manifesto.
But not in their Facebook ads until polling day. Funny that.
What am I missing? The election is over. The SNP wants independence for Scotland.
They are claiming a mandate - argued for on the basis of stopping the Tories for "independence" - they barely mentioned "independence" in their campaign - some said 'lend us your vote, its not about independence'.
Claiming a mandate for things that weren’t mentioned during the election?
I suspect we haven’t seen the last of that.
The Conservative manifesto was so gloriously unspecific they’ve got lots of room for manoeuvre! The Poll Tax was ushered in under a vague promise to “modernise the rates system”!
The hubris of the Tories is rather reminiscent of the atmosphere after the 1987 General Election. There may well be a few Poll Tax moments, and also perhaps an equivalent of the Single European Act whipped through. Those new MPs are just cannon fodder. No one at the top is interested in their thoughts.
The 1987 election which was followed by another win five years later, and a decade more in government?
Yes, that's the one. Also the poll tax riots, defenestration of the hubristic leader, and in 1997 a GE result that made Corbyns recent performance look good.
After what would be in this scenario after 19 years of government it's not going to be a story to scare them though.
Very understandably, triumphant Tories have forgotten that Johnson has told a lot of people a lot of lies over the last few months. His ability to navigate a way out of the homes he has dug for himself are most likely what will decide the 2023 election. If the election is in 2024 we’ll know he’s in serious trouble.
I am old enough to recall articles in the Sunday Telegraph circa 1987 pondering who would be Tory Prime Minister for the 2003 and 2008 GEs after Mrs Thatcher's inevitable retirement in 1999. History will repeat itself. Tories are again realising they are invincible.
My biggest takeaway from this election is the collapse of the LDs. I had assumed that with Labour consumed by unfettered Marxism the LDs would thrive. Wrong again!
It would be nice for Labour to get their house in some small semblance of order so that when Johnson inevitably unravels there is something modestly competent to take the wheel.
Perversely LDs win the most seats when Labour are centrist. The two party system is brutal to the LDs when Labour are hard left. Many natural liberals and centrists will vote Tory rather than LD when offered Corbyn, Foot et al.
Powerful article from Layla Moran. I think she's right that Lab and LD need to work together. What would be really effective is agreement to stand down in particular seats. I hope that those chosen as leaders of both parties are able to coordinate.
I don't think so. Indeed it makes me suspicious of her political antennae. The next few years need to be at ground level, building up councillors and organisation. We are going to be bystanders on Brexit and Parliament for the next few years, though being untainted by that may well be a good thing.
I like Jess Philips and she is the most centrist of the mooted candidates, but she did take Birmingham Yardley off the Lib Dems.
That's all undoubtedly true. But ultimately, Lab/LD fighting has gifted Boris Johnson a certain number of seats (Kensington, Cities, Finchley probably others...). In a closer election that could make a big difference. Lab/LD coalition is probably the best to hope for in 2024.
If the LDs had agreed an electoral pact with Labour, different people would have vote for them. How anyone calling themselves a liberal could vote for a Stalinist Labour party is beyond me.
My hopes are that a future Labour party with a new leader could work with the Lib Dems.
I think though a tacit alliance like in 1997 works best. Apart from in West London, rarely are the two in head to head competition.
So your dream for the LDs is to be Labours mini me?
Comments
But sure, let's pretend the SNP campaign wasn't about Indy if it makes you feel better.
I loathe the idea of a second referendum in Scotland. We have not yet recovered from the divisiveness caused by the first one. But some of these posts are just silly. Of course the SNP want an Independence referendum. Those who voted for them either want the same or are complete idiots.
Manifesto mentions:
EU: 106
Brexit: 68
Tories: 39
NHS: 29
Boris Johnson: 15
independence: 13
Not surprised:
Education: 3
Albeit sometimes Sturgeon seems to not quite understand this...
One of the big questions that I have not seen addressed is how the LDs will deal with the toxic legacy of the contempt they have spent 2-3 years expressing for people who disagree with them on Brexit. One consequence of a fundamentalist stance is that you alienate people. As I see it, under Farron and Swinson they have ploughed potentially fertile ground with salt.
I think she is a little naive in her proposal wrt cooperation with Labour. Ask the ghost of Paddy Ashdown what happened last time.
Do they expect to be a party of Remain areas only for the next 10-20 years? As I remarked before, I used to have LD councillors everywhere in modest numbers; now I have none whatsoever afaik within 10 miles' drive, other than rebrands to Independent.
I think she is also perhaps naive in her assessment of Labour - the party is not going to magically reform when only Corbyn is marginalised. She needs to be more cautious until Lab's future is defined; I do not see the Corbynistas letting go when they have hung on to more than 75% of seats.
Listening to Andy McDonald on R4 now, he is still pretending that Corbyn was not toxic on the doorstep.
Whether somebody who is himself ultimately a mediocrity, certainly as an administrator, will be able to do anything about it is another question entirely.
...This all points to the 2021 Scottish Parliament election - the most important there has ever been. That election will be fought on very clear ground, with very likely no room for debate on anything other than indyref2. If the SNP wins that election with a clear manifesto commitment for a second vote, a full two parliamentary terms after their first win, there can be no serious grounds to oppose it.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18103673.andy-maciver-tories-cant-keep-saying-no-scotland/
Pause.
Ah, my coat...
Have a good day.
I fully accept that it'd be good if Labour and LibDems (and Greens) reached tactical voting arrangements. But it needs a recognition by both sides that we caused each other problems.
Right now, it is one of two things. It might be a manifesto pitch for a leadership bid, in which case fair enough. Or it is someone who is still in election mode, looking for a quick fix to the last problem, who hasn't yet adjusted to the long slog that lies ahead for the opposition parties.
I think Lab/LD may need to go further than tactical voting advice, and instead think about standing down candidates in certain marginals.
One of the biggest by the LibDems was scrabbling to drop in a new candidate when the Canterbury candidate withdrew and endorsed the Labour MP. The damage was done by then, and at the last minute they could afford to have let it ride. If they'd had the strategic nous to do this, the Canterbury MP would probably have a slightly larger majority and her convincing win would have established a nugget of goodwill and demonstrated the upside of co-operation.
Instead the LibDems blew the chance and forced someone on a doomed mission to be the replacement candidate, to no benefit to anyone.
When you look at the detail of how the LibDems campaigned, it is littered with misjudgements like that.
Ignore the charging rhino of Tory manifesto delivery, bearing down on Labour and Libdem alike.
Labour is underpinned by a broken business model. If you went to the market with a prospectus for Socialist Utopia plc and it failed, you could come back with an altered business plan for some diluted version that might work instead. But Labour keeps going back to the market with an identical pospectus. And every time it will fail. And the market knows this.
What about you?
The Tory way to revive “forgotten towns” would be to revitalise them by drawing inward investment, building up training and skills and generally giving people a stake in the success of the economy and private industry. Not by piling in Government/taxpayers money from a magic money tree they used to claim didn’t exist. Obviously there is a potential role for kickstarting things, but not putting money in on a permanent basis to increase dependence on the state.
Thus far we’re getting a lot of impression of the latter rather than the former. And if so they’ll be a price to pay.
However the fact there is still a Unionist majority in Scotland, where 54% voted for Unionist parties but not in Northern Ireland now shows Boris was quite right to keep Northern Ireland effectively in the single market and customs union and an open border with the Republic of Ireland as part of his Deal. A hard border with the Republic of Ireland would have pushed Irish reunification forward
And it is a good illustration of one more another disadvantage of FPTP.
"The Chief Rabbi must be dancing in the street. The pro-Israel lobby won our General Election by lying about Jeremy Corbyn."
As predicted here on Saturday
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/12/15/new-liberal-democrat-mp-daisy-cooper-hints-run-leadership/amp/
Otherwise much of the electorate will just see it as restricting choice, and indeed in many cases may just vote Tory at worst, or just stay at home at best, if they are their preferred “second option”.
http://iht.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
https://twitter.com/BritishInEurope/status/1206224442243895298?s=20
I'm keen to move on from Corbyn and I suspect RLB doesn't help do that. And in a different way, I'm not sure Starmer helps things move on either. Both could yet convince me though.
The key flaw was ignoring the leave/ remain split and the willingness of Labour leave
voters to switch across to the Tories rather than BXP or stay at home.
When l have the time and motivation I'll input the actual shares and see how it does.
Thought experiment: if the EHRC investigation comes up with spectacularly damning conclusions - and that's far from being an outside chance at this stage - what practical barriers could prevent the newly-empowered UK Government outlawing the Labour Party as a racist organisation?
My biggest takeaway from this election is the collapse of the LDs. I had assumed that with Labour consumed by unfettered Marxism the LDs would thrive. Wrong again!
It would be nice for Labour to get their house in some small semblance of order so that when Johnson inevitably unravels there is something modestly competent to take the wheel.
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/opinion/columnists/here-s-how-prime-minister-boris-johnson-can-win-permanent-support-from-the-north-tom-richmond-1-10154724
I'm sure a larger economy and more investment will lead to rises in the receipts from these three taxes.
“We will legislate in the first Session of the new Parliament to abolish the unfair domestic rating system and replace rates with a fairer Community Charge.
This will be a fixed rate charge for local services paid by those over the age of 18, except the mentally ill and elderly people living in homes and hospitals. The less-well-off and students will not have to pay the full charge but everyone will be aware of the costs as well as the benefits of local services. “
A fairly accurate assessment of what it ended up as.
And a referendum is a great distraction (albeit a single discussion).