The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
Brexit with rollercoasters: the £3.5bn London Resort fantasy theme park
With its rickety rides, fire-breathing dragons and Arthurian castle, the enchanted realms proposed for the Thames Estuary park are little Britain writ large.
How dare a British theme park have a union jack....forget all the jobs it will create, it is a disgusting Gammon theme park.
I like the fact that they forget to mention that it is privately funded.
I am sure if it had been an EU funded project with a massive EU flag, the Graudian would have said look how wonderful the EU is, investing in job creation projects.
My mother's incident stricken cruise ship is just limping past the sea outside my window, having been due back in Southampton Friday morning. Those who booked on the scheduled cruise following will have missed out completely.
"Speaking on BBC Wales Mr Howells, who was previously minister of higher education, foreign and Commonwealth affairs and transport, continued his attack on Momentum.
He said: "It is poisonous, it is anti semitic, it sums up this dreadful north London middle class group who is so alienated from most voters in Wales and the north east of England. This Momentum group has captured all the most important committees within the Labour Party."
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
As a PR fan I thought they were going to be misrepresented by your post but they are not! It is barmy.
Their press release also specifically mentions LD under representation but doesnt mention the Brexit party who have it even worse.
Apart from their bessies all over the Government benches.
As much as I dislike the Brexit Party being a believer in PR involves sticking up for parties I disagree with when the system is unjust against them. 642,000 votes for zero MPs cant be right.
I personally think some level of representation with that number of votes is preferable, I think it deserved and support a system to see it happen. But I dont think it's an outrage if people want a geographic based approach in their voting system and that no area wants to be represented by them.
The good thing is you dont even need to convinced 50% of the people to implement a PR system unless you want to, you can do so on a lot less so it should be easier!
Apart from the betting question of who will and won't win the only interesting question about these ghastly candidates is: Are there any who can win by being a Corbyn leftie and then about turn and save the party by moving to the social democrat centre left? Any candidates? (Burgon is disqualifed for being a repellent, dim bully).
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
As a PR fan I thought they were going to be misrepresented by your post but they are not! It is barmy.
Their press release also specifically mentions LD under representation but doesnt mention the Brexit party who have it even worse.
Apart from their bessies all over the Government benches.
As much as I dislike the Brexit Party being a believer in PR involves sticking up for parties I disagree with when the system is unjust against them. 642,000 votes for zero MPs cant be right.
I personally think some level of representation with that number of votes is preferable, I think it deserved and support a system to see it happen. But I dont think it's an outrage if people want a geographic based approach in their voting system and that no area wants to be represented by them.
The good thing is you dont even need to convinced 50% of the people to implement a PR system unless you want to, you can do so on a lot less so it should be easier!
600 seats elected as usual, with the other 50 distributed for each 2% of the vote the party gets (or 550 and a seat per 1%)
Incidentally, anyone know the correct share of the vote for last week? Wiki figures look wrong when you look at Con and Lab votes compared to total votes, both higher than they state. Thanks.
Are you comparing UK or GB shares? Both are on the wiki page for polling for the next GE.
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
"Speaking on BBC Wales Mr Howells, who was previously minister of higher education, foreign and Commonwealth affairs and transport, continued his attack on Momentum.
He said: "It is poisonous, it is anti semitic, it sums up this dreadful north London middle class group who is so alienated from most voters in Wales and the north east of England. This Momentum group has captured all the most important committees within the Labour Party."
Great article. He should stand for leadership himself and go into all the debates all guns blazing. He would have a hell of an impact and either win, enable a moderate or (more likely) set up a split. The last thing the LP needs is non-Corbynista candidates pulling their punches!
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
It is democracy it's just not a PR system. I dont thinks it's the most democratic but its unfair to pretend it's not democratic at all, particular when people are judging based on a single policy they want.
"Speaking on BBC Wales Mr Howells, who was previously minister of higher education, foreign and Commonwealth affairs and transport, continued his attack on Momentum.
He said: "It is poisonous, it is anti semitic, it sums up this dreadful north London middle class group who is so alienated from most voters in Wales and the north east of England. This Momentum group has captured all the most important committees within the Labour Party."
"They look at our past and only see a country which has been involved with slavery. They never celebrate that this country opposed and held out against fascism.
"They will never acknowledge that immigrants want to come to this country because it is a place where people are taken care of. Everything in there eyes is tyrannical and colonialism and most people just don't believe that.
"When the Russians tried to assassinate the Skripals and an innocent women died he called for the Russians to be allowed to investigate it!"
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
Yes, if only the voting system were different, but the parties campaigned and people voted as if they weren't, then you could have a make-believe result to set aside that other real result.
Remain lost a direct democracy vote on direct democracy rules, and now it's lost a representative democracy vote on representative democracy rules.
Incidentally, anyone know the correct share of the vote for last week? Wiki figures look wrong when you look at Con and Lab votes compared to total votes, both higher than they state. Thanks.
Are you comparing UK or GB shares? Both are on the wiki page for polling for the next GE.
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
Yes, if only the voting system were different, but the parties campaigned and people voted as if they weren't, then you could have a make-believe result to set aside that other real result.
Remain lost a direct democracy vote on direct democracy rules, and now it's lost a representative democracy vote on representative democracy rules.
This is beginning to resemble a tennis player challenging another to a match on a grass court to see who is the best, losing, then saying the real test is on clay, losing again and saying he'd have won if they'd played on a hard court indoors
Tennis matches can be won by the player who wins the fewest points too. But I don't reckon many who lose the match despite winning most points last long making the argument they should be awarded the match
Incidentally, anyone know the correct share of the vote for last week? Wiki figures look wrong when you look at Con and Lab votes compared to total votes, both higher than they state. Thanks.
Are you comparing UK or GB shares? Both are on the wiki page for polling for the next GE.
The GB shares are Con 44.7% Lab 32.9% LD 11.8%, 4.0% SNP, 2.8% Green, 2.1% BXP at a GB level.
Opinium got their final poll spot on. 45% Con, 33% Lab, 12% LD
53-47 to Remain parties. They should have gone for a 2nd referendum, not a GE
.. and remember all those on here who were rubbishing Opinium as an outlier…..
In fairness it looked like that. Comedy Results didn’t surprise me but ICM? How are the mighty fallen.
I think the polling industry can pat itself on the back. The spread of final polls were normal random variation and nearly everyone got in the general region.
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
It is democracy it's just not a PR system. I dont thinks it's the most democratic but its unfair to pretend it's not democratic at all, particular when people are judging based on a single policy they want.
The majority of developed countries use PR and NZ changed from FPTP to a form of PR. There's no perfect system, but there are less imperfect systems.
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
PB would probably instead be debating 'real issues' like climate change, the NHS, housing or student loans ...
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
It is democracy it's just not a PR system. I dont thinks it's the most democratic but its unfair to pretend it's not democratic at all, particular when people are judging based on a single policy they want.
The majority of developed countries use PR and NZ changed from FPTP to a form of PR. There's no perfect system, but there are less imperfect systems.
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
PB would probably instead be debating 'real issues' like climate change, the NHS, housing or student loans ...
And I support a PR system. I just think the inherent unacceptability of FPTP gets overplayed.
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
It's bizarre to cite as an advantage of PR that it would have prevented the one government in the entire post-war period which unquestionably was able to deal with what seemed like an utterly intractable national problem.
"Speaking on BBC Wales Mr Howells, who was previously minister of higher education, foreign and Commonwealth affairs and transport, continued his attack on Momentum.
He said: "It is poisonous, it is anti semitic, it sums up this dreadful north London middle class group who is so alienated from most voters in Wales and the north east of England. This Momentum group has captured all the most important committees within the Labour Party."
"They look at our past and only see a country which has been involved with slavery. They never celebrate that this country opposed and held out against fascism.
"They will never acknowledge that immigrants want to come to this country because it is a place where people are taken care of. Everything in there eyes is tyrannical and colonialism and most people just don't believe that.
"When the Russians tried to assassinate the Skripals and an innocent women died he called for the Russians to be allowed to investigate it!"
Nailed it....
So, who is the Kim Howells that’s currently an MP, because that’s where the value is going to be?
Whoever he or she is, they’re currently hundreds to one against - until they put their name forward.
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
It is democracy it's just not a PR system. I dont thinks it's the most democratic but its unfair to pretend it's not democratic at all, particular when people are judging based on a single policy they want.
The majority of developed countries use PR and NZ changed from FPTP to a form of PR. There's no perfect system, but there are less imperfect systems.
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
PB would probably instead be debating 'real issues' like climate change, the NHS, housing or student loans ...
The majority of countries claim only stands because there are lots of small countries that use it. By population I do believe far more living in democracies use FPTP.
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
It’s the “Everyone is a winner, snowflake sports day” effect.
No, it’s the perfectly reasonable view - adopted by most of the world - that the object of an election is to ensure that as many people are represented as possible.
Our system is designed to make more than half the voters feel like losers. And we wonder why our politics is in trouble.
Our politics isn't in trouble. Quite the opposite, given a choice of abandoning our politics and subsuming it into European politics, most people wanted to keep our politics.
The 23.06.16 vote was on a pig in a poke, not on a precise deal negotiated by the government, approved by parliament and then put to the people (this did happen in 1975).
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
It is democracy it's just not a PR system. I dont thinks it's the most democratic but its unfair to pretend it's not democratic at all, particular when people are judging based on a single policy they want.
It’s funny people will say Johnson has the people on his side, you tell them that 58% of people voted against him or for someone else, but he won the election so everybody agrees with boris and they love him, no they don’t but people aren’t interested in the details. As an aside anyone able to tell me what demographic and other background info they have on the new Tory MPs how many of them reflect their constituents?
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Not sure. I think Sajid may be for the chop. But Gove will remain at the Cabinet Office for now tasked with delivering Brexit and absorbing DexEU. After that though the Saj should watch his back!
The Electoral Reform Society, which campaigns for a fairer voting system, has released figures saying 14.5m voters are effectively “unrepresented” because they voted for a candidate who did not win.
As a PR fan I thought they were going to be misrepresented by your post but they are not! It is barmy.
Their press release also specifically mentions LD under representation but doesnt mention the Brexit party who have it even worse.
Apart from their bessies all over the Government benches.
As much as I dislike the Brexit Party being a believer in PR involves sticking up for parties I disagree with when the system is unjust against them. 642,000 votes for zero MPs cant be right.
I personally think some level of representation with that number of votes is preferable, I think it deserved and support a system to see it happen. But I dont think it's an outrage if people want a geographic based approach in their voting system and that no area wants to be represented by them.
The good thing is you dont even need to convinced 50% of the people to implement a PR system unless you want to, you can do so on a lot less so it should be easier!
600 seats elected as usual, with the other 50 distributed for each 2% of the vote the party gets (or 550 and a seat per 1%)
Whats wrong with that?
a small improvement I guess. but why on earth not have a properly proportional system? Here in Germany everybody elects a local constituency MP (whoever gets a plurality of the vote). then there a load of MPs elected to make the number of MPs in each party proportional to the party vote. similar to the Scottish system except the numbers of MPs are strictly propotional for all the parties who meet the threshold.
and the thing is, unlike in the UK, nobody in Germany complains that the system is unfair, or undemocratic, or that their vote was wasted. turnout is also higher.
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
So he says ‘dom I want to be re-elected in 2024’ ‘ok boris leave it to me’
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
You don't believe in Borogoves? Their history looks a bit like tb/gb.
Anyone else slightly uneasy about a cabinet minister stepping down from being an MP but keeping their job post election?
It may well be an interim appointment until the post-Brexit major reshuffle. In which case, for the sake of continuity, it is not an unreasonable solution.
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
You don't believe in Borogoves? Their history looks a bit like tb/gb.
Not as I remember it. TB/GB at least started off as a team. BJ/MG jumped straight to 2005.
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Not sure. I think Sajid may be for the chop. But Gove will remain at the Cabinet Office for now tasked with delivering Brexit and absorbing DexEU. After that though the Saj should watch his back!
What to do with Michael Gove is going to be the most interesting of questions that we see answered in the coming days.
I think he stays in place, either continuing as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (try explaining that role to a foreigner!) or Secretary to the Cabinet Office, effectively DPM and responsible for co-ordination of policy across departments. DExEU will be abolished and moved into his role.
BJ can do the headlines, and MG the required details.
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
It's bizarre to cite as an advantage of PR that it would have prevented the one government in the entire post-war period which unquestionably was able to deal with what seemed like an utterly intractable national problem.
Perhaps if we’d had PR from 45-79, we wouldn’t have got into such a mess.
Not much discussion here about Lisa Nandy, although the rest of the media is full of her.
I'm interested because I've wished for a year that she were PM (never thought that about any individual before). One of the few MPs who didn't lose their heads or their moral compass over Brexit, and now maybe the only MP who is being constructive and saying insightful things about how Labour needs to change.
And her odds have shortened dramatically.
But does she actually have a chance at the leadership, or is it all just hype?
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Not sure. I think Sajid may be for the chop. But Gove will remain at the Cabinet Office for now tasked with delivering Brexit and absorbing DexEU. After that though the Saj should watch his back!
What to do with Michael Gove is going to be the most interesting of questions that we see answered in the coming days.
I think he stays in place, either continuing as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (try explaining that role to a foreigner!) or Secretary to the Cabinet Office, effectively DPM and responsible for co-ordination of policy across departments. DExEU will be abolished and moved into his role.
He is the brains, the imagination, the one who can create that elusive vision. He’s also a completely untrustworthy bastard.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Not sure. I think Sajid may be for the chop. But Gove will remain at the Cabinet Office for now tasked with delivering Brexit and absorbing DexEU. After that though the Saj should watch his back!
What to do with Michael Gove is going to be the most interesting of questions that we see answered in the coming days.
I think he stays in place, either continuing as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (try explaining that role to a foreigner!) or Secretary to the Cabinet Office, effectively DPM and responsible for co-ordination of policy across departments. DExEU will be abolished and moved into his role.
He is the brains, the imagination, the one who can create that elusive vision. He’s also a completely untrustworthy bastard.
Unlikely but it does highlight a bigger point. Successful governments tend to have a very close team at the centre. Think Thatcher/Howe, then Lawson, Brown/Blair, Cameron/Osborne. I think that is not a coincidence. Government is just too difficult for one person to do it all. But Boris strikes me as very much a lone wolf.
TBF to Boris, he strikes me as one for delegation. Set the tone and the direction then let everyone else do the detail. He must have a decent relationship with Sajid Javid to have appointed him though
Not sure. I think Sajid may be for the chop. But Gove will remain at the Cabinet Office for now tasked with delivering Brexit and absorbing DexEU. After that though the Saj should watch his back!
What to do with Michael Gove is going to be the most interesting of questions that we see answered in the coming days.
I think he stays in place, either continuing as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (try explaining that role to a foreigner!) or Secretary to the Cabinet Office, effectively DPM and responsible for co-ordination of policy across departments. DExEU will be abolished and moved into his role.
He is the brains, the imagination, the one who can create that elusive vision. He’s also a completely untrustworthy bastard.
He is also useless.
Everything is relative Malcolm. One eyed men and all that.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Starmer is by far the most credible potential Labour leader on offer, the brightest and the most centrist, great news for the Tories if he does not get it
Starmer would seem very unlikely to reverse Labours fortunes in the north. He could make some impact on remania but that depends on Johnson not pivoting to bigger spending and taking that ground from them.
Not sure how much his popularity with members is simply a by product of them not wanting Brexit to happen. Once it does happen does his popularity shrink?
Starmer would be the candidate most feared by the Tories - he's the closest to a Blair that Labour has right now.
For all the current Blair hate, he was an exceptional politician. Starmer is just a reasonable and intelligent lawyer, he has done nothing to deserve comparisons with Blair. Blair didnt win landslides by just being reasonable and not loony left.
Starmer is, at best, a good middle manager. He has no boldness, no courage and no obvious ability to inspire others.
Boris in in power for the next seven billion years. The drama has gone. All we have left is aftershocks, and this minor party leadership gossip.
Time for us all to take a very deep breath and maybe a very long break.
Would you be happier if we had an election every fortnight?
I think that might be a little too much drama for the rest of us though...
On the contrary, I have enjoyed this feast of endless drama, since Scottish indyref and Corbyn's elevation, it has been a non stop carnival of WTAFery.
But now it is drawing to a close. You can sense it. The energy drains away. Other dramas - America, China - return to centre stage.
And personally I welcome the chance to stretch out and think Who Cares, for a while at least. Zzzz....
It’s precisely now that things become really interesting: watching what Boris does now, who he appoints, what is actually in the Withdrawal Bill, how he plans for the negotiations with the EU and all the other things that he will slip through, while the opposition is navel-gazing, and people like you take a break and get distracted. All of these will affect the next 5 years and more.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
Perhaps we could sell Scotland to the Scots in a leveraged buyout. Think outside the box.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
People buying property at the £65m level aren’t affecting the average london housing market one bit, they’ll likely spend a million or two more ‘doing up’ the place, will employ people directly to look after it, and are likely to have significant business interests in the U.K., bringing millions more in FDI.
London being full of the world’s billionaires is a bloody good thing, both for the economy in general and for government’s tax revenues. We should be encouraging them all to invest in the U.K. and move to London.
Anyone else slightly uneasy about a cabinet minister stepping down from being an MP but keeping their job post election?
Yes, although it’s not without precedent. George Robertson did it in 1999.
Has Nicky Morgan got dodgy photos of Boris or something? I get that he rewarded her for loyalty when he first came to power. But for her then to sit out the election and keep her job.. especially when there’s a well-trained Rottweiler like Whittingdale* ready to return and rip the still-beating heart out of the BBC? Personally a bit surprised.
(* I actually think he’s rather more nuanced than that. He did a neat pivot when he got promoted from Chair of the Commons Slagging off the Beeb in the Sunday Papers Committee to SoS last time )
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Yep Corbyn/McDonnell worked like an absolute dream. Blair/Brown not so much. For the Tories.
Not much discussion here about Lisa Nandy, although the rest of the media is full of her.
I'm interested because I've wished for a year that she were PM (never thought that about any individual before). One of the few MPs who didn't lose their heads or their moral compass over Brexit, and now maybe the only MP who is being constructive and saying insightful things about how Labour needs to change.
And her odds have shortened dramatically.
But does she actually have a chance at the leadership, or is it all just hype?
I guess she has a chance, but not as great as her current odds suggest imo, although in a world where Jess Phillips has traded in single figures, what do I know?
The problem that Lisa Nandy will have in getting elected is the Labour membership are largely made up of Corbynistas and Nandy was one of those who resigned from shadow cabinet in 2016 and tried to force Corbyn out. She then went on to be co-chairman of Owen Smith leadership challenge against Corbyn.
So, as you can imagine, she is not particularly popular amongst the Corbyn cult who will have a major say over who his replacement will be.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
So you dont support the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge in Johnson's manifesto?
I have friends who live in Stoke, and commute to London for 3 days a week. Mortgage on a nice house all paid off, and only working part time in their 40s.
It isn't even that unusual, when I was teaching there, there were a number of kids who had parents working in the emergency services in London.
One of the new Tory MPs elected is already used to the cameras, having taken part in a documentary about marrying a man more than three decades older than her.
Dehenna Davison MP, 26, made headlines in 2015 when she announced she was marrying Cllr John Fareham, who is 35 years her senior.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
So you dont support the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge in Johnson's manifesto?
Of course I do. The more we can extract from these sales the better.
Anyone else slightly uneasy about a cabinet minister stepping down from being an MP but keeping their job post election?
Yes, although it’s not without precedent. George Robertson did it in 1999.
Has Nicky Morgan got dodgy photos of Boris or something? I get that he rewarded her for loyalty when he first came to power. But for her then to sit out the election and keep her job.. especially when there’s a well-trained Rottweiler like Whittingdale* ready to return and rip the still-beating heart out of the BBC? Personally a bit surprised.
(* I actually think he’s rather more nuanced than that. He did a neat pivot when he got promoted from Chair of the Commons Slagging off the Beeb in the Sunday Papers Committee to SoS last time )
Not convinced that the anti-BBC stuff from the Govt is about anything other than trying to come to some resolution on over 75 licences. Johnson has written some very pro BBC opinion pieces in his time.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
Perhaps we could sell Scotland to the Scots in a leveraged buyout. Think outside the box.
Not sure we have the money. But an interesting idea.
I have friends who live in Stoke, and commute to London for 3 days a week. Mortgage on a nice house all paid off, and only working part time in their 40s.
It isn't even that unusual, when I was teaching there, there were a number of kids who had parents working in the emergency services in London.
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
So you dont support the foreign resident stamp duty surcharge in Johnson's manifesto?
Of course I do. The more we can extract from these sales the better.
If they are so good surely we should be making it cheaper to get them over here rather than increasing taxes on them?
Clearly even the policy wonks in a tory govt agree that the balance has been wrong, hence the additional stamp duty proposal.
If so, and should Jezza anoint her, given the current membership I guess this is a walk over?
I thought Long Bailey didn't do too badly at all in the various TV debates. Rayner looks fighting fit too judging by her appearance at the count. They won't win in 2024 but Labour could do far worse.
Well, yes. They could elect Richard Burgon, or Ian Lavery.
But being far better than those two doesn’t mean Wrong Daily is any good.
And will Seamus Milne and Andrew Murray still be around as advisors?
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
People buying property at the £65m level aren’t affecting the average london housing market one bit, they’ll likely spend a million or two more ‘doing up’ the place, will employ people directly to look after it, and are likely to have significant business interests in the U.K., bringing millions more in FDI.
London being full of the world’s billionaires is a bloody good thing, both for the economy in general and for government’s tax revenues. We should be encouraging them all to invest in the U.K. and move to London.
More like 20 million of work. Plus.
Interestingly, alot of the super high end restoration people (think restoring cathedrals, palaces etc) make a living doing brand new work for such projects. There was this one chap who so fell in love with Robert Adams that he had most of a place redone in restoration grade repro of Home House - that had all the Georgian experts buying new cars....
In what way does that help the people of London who are mostly renting and hoping for prices to come back to wages?
Most of the London renters voted Labour anyway, most Stoke Tory voters already own a property
So one nation conservatism is now about representing Tory voters only?
No, the North as well as the South, if London renters want to buy a property so badly they can move out of the capital where it is cheaper especially as rail links and broadband improves
Foreign oligarchs, launderers and speculators making London their playground doesnt benefit the UK, nor Londoners.
Well let’s eliminate the trade deficit then. Not hard. Cut consumption by 10% or so, increase the savings ratio by another 20%. Accept a fairly serious increase in unemployment, maybe a million or so. Or keep selling our assets to pay for the crap. London housing is probably the least harmful of what we have to sell.
Perhaps we could sell Scotland to the Scots in a leveraged buyout. Think outside the box.
Not sure we have the money. But an interesting idea.
I'm sure the money could be lent on easy terms. Perhaps to invest in Central American port facilities, as well?
Anyone else slightly uneasy about a cabinet minister stepping down from being an MP but keeping their job post election?
Yes, although it’s not without precedent. George Robertson did it in 1999.
Has Nicky Morgan got dodgy photos of Boris or something? I get that he rewarded her for loyalty when he first came to power. But for her then to sit out the election and keep her job.. especially when there’s a well-trained Rottweiler like Whittingdale* ready to return and rip the still-beating heart out of the BBC? Personally a bit surprised.
(* I actually think he’s rather more nuanced than that. He did a neat pivot when he got promoted from Chair of the Commons Slagging off the Beeb in the Sunday Papers Committee to SoS last time )
Not convinced that the anti-BBC stuff from the Govt is about anything other than trying to come to some resolution on over 75 licences. Johnson has written some very pro BBC opinion pieces in his time.
But the average person will see the abolition of the licence fee as a £154.50 tax cut, not to mention the many millions more saved by not clogging up magistrates courts with more than 10% of the total number of prosecutions in England last year - mostly of elderly and ‘vulnerable’ people, with the associated negative headlines for the government.
The BBC is great, but the media market is unrecognisable from where it was only a decade ago. Let them raise their own money, and let DCMS provide grants directly for “public service” programming to whoever will make and screen it at no cost to the consumer.
Sell off C4 too, another few billion for the Northern England Infrastructure Fund.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Yep Corbyn/McDonnell worked like an absolute dream. Blair/Brown not so much. For the Tories.
You misunderstand the terms of success for hard left Lab. They are not at all convinced they lost anything last week.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Not my theory.
You, NP, will gravitate a tad to the right?
You didn't answer the question of course at all though!
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Not my theory.
You, NP, will gravitate a tad to the right?
You didn't answer the question of course at all though!
RLB - what actually might she stand for?
Ooh me sir me sir please. She will stand for more of the same. Lab are quite likely to do exactly the same thing again and wait for the electorate finally to see the light and give them a 650 seat majority.
I have a bit of a problem with that Pie rant. It sounds much more like don't tell people they are thick, but they still made totally the wrong decisions. Thus, we should be nice to their face to get their vote, then we can do what we want.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Not my theory.
You, NP, will gravitate a tad to the right?
You didn't answer the question of course at all though!
RLB - what actually might she stand for?
Ooh me sir me sir please. She will stand for more of the same. Lab are quite likely to do exactly the same thing again and wait for the electorate finally to see the light and give them a 650 seat majority.
Do send me the paper on that.
Meanwhile I'm still really rather interested in NP's view.
How far to the left would you guess RLB is? She strikes me as a little less rabid left than Corbyn, but only slightly so.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
The theory of punters is that the membership will go for the leftier choice, and RLB seems to be getting backing from that side. I'm not really sure that the members will be steered quite as automatically as that - if there's a candidate who doesn't take a factional position a lot of us will be interested. But having a leadership team who are close friends is a good idea - one thing that really worked well for Corbyn/Mconnell, and up to a point Corbyn/Watson (Watson headed off the split very neatly), and we can all do without more Blair/Brown-style psychodramas.
Not my theory.
You, NP, will gravitate a tad to the right?
You didn't answer the question of course at all though!
RLB - what actually might she stand for?
Ooh me sir me sir please. She will stand for more of the same. Lab are quite likely to do exactly the same thing again and wait for the electorate finally to see the light and give them a 650 seat majority.
Power without responsibility is the aim. Perpetual opposition is perfect. Don't forget Corbyn even opposed Blair at every opportunity, so his 200 seat total can only be viewed as a big win.
Comments
He said: "It is poisonous, it is anti semitic, it sums up this dreadful north London middle class group who is so alienated from most voters in Wales and the north east of England. This Momentum group has captured all the most important committees within the Labour Party."
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/kim-howells-jeremy-corbyn-labour-17426182
The good thing is you dont even need to convinced 50% of the people to implement a PR system unless you want to, you can do so on a lot less so it should be easier!
Whats wrong with that?
PR in the election on 12.12.19 would have given us a HoC which is 54-55% in favour of holding a confirmatory vote on the withdrawal agreement. Because national and local elections still use FPTP, 58% of HoC seats are held by anti-EU parties. To paraphrase Ian Hislop: If that's democracy, I'm a banana.
"They will never acknowledge that immigrants want to come to this country because it is a place where people are taken care of. Everything in there eyes is tyrannical and colonialism and most people just don't believe that.
"When the Russians tried to assassinate the Skripals and an innocent women died he called for the Russians to be allowed to investigate it!"
Nailed it....
Remain lost a direct democracy vote on direct democracy rules, and now it's lost a representative democracy vote on representative democracy rules.
Tennis matches can be won by the player who wins the fewest points too. But I don't reckon many who lose the match despite winning most points last long making the argument they should be awarded the match
Meanwhile, Clive Lewis today broke cover to say he is thinking about running....
Looking back further, PR would have prevented a Thatcher government and we'd never have had Brexit, which was largely due to the sheer misery of millions of people in poorer areas who feel that their lives have been blighted and protested accordingly.
PB would probably instead be debating 'real issues' like climate change, the NHS, housing or student loans ...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/16/whitehall-dominic-cummings-boris-johnson-civil-servants
Whoever he or she is, they’re currently hundreds to one against - until they put their name forward.
Far, far more.
So perhaps McDonnell =92%, Corbyn=90%, RLB=85%, BBC=52%, Bercow=50% (ok that one's a joke), Boris=20% and Jacob Rees Mogg=5% (say)
Just a made up scale, and probably wrong, but quite interested to see whether I have the order right, and whether you think RLB is more or less far left.
I backed her a while back, but flattened out long ago for small profits - amazed she's priced as she is.
In 1 case a 6 bed Belgravia penthouse was sold for £65 million to a Hong Kong businessman hours after the Tory majority was confirmed
https://www.homesandproperty.co.uk/property-news/london-property-boris-johnson-election-win-property-deals-worth-mega-millions-a135466.html
and the thing is, unlike in the UK, nobody in Germany complains that the system is unfair, or undemocratic, or that their vote was wasted. turnout is also higher.
Unusual - but nothing to lose sleep over.
I think he stays in place, either continuing as Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (try explaining that role to a foreigner!) or Secretary to the Cabinet Office, effectively DPM and responsible for co-ordination of policy across departments. DExEU will be abolished and moved into his role.
BJ can do the headlines, and MG the required details.
https://youtu.be/G0nIhL4v6bY
I'm interested because I've wished for a year that she were PM (never thought that about any individual before). One of the few MPs who didn't lose their heads or their moral compass over Brexit, and now maybe the only MP who is being constructive and saying insightful things about how Labour needs to change.
And her odds have shortened dramatically.
But does she actually have a chance at the leadership, or is it all just hype?
Plus probable substantial investment from the buyer, in whatever business interest he has in the U.K.
https://www.ilivehere.co.uk/statistics-stoke-on-trent-city-of-stoke-on-trent-36516.html
In London only 49.5% of residents own a property by contrast
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/most-families-in-london-now-rent-rather-than-own-homes-8347013.html
It’s precisely now that things become really interesting: watching what Boris does now, who he appoints, what is actually in the Withdrawal Bill, how he plans for the negotiations with the EU and all the other things that he will slip through, while the opposition is navel-gazing, and people like you take a break and get distracted. All of these will affect the next 5 years and more.
I plan on watching him like a hawk.
Watch this space....
London being full of the world’s billionaires is a bloody good thing, both for the economy in general and for government’s tax revenues. We should be encouraging them all to invest in the U.K. and move to London.
(* I actually think he’s rather more nuanced than that. He did a neat pivot when he got promoted from Chair of the Commons Slagging off the Beeb in the Sunday Papers
Committee to SoS last time
The problem that Lisa Nandy will have in getting elected is the Labour membership are largely made up of Corbynistas and Nandy was one of those who resigned from shadow cabinet in 2016 and tried to force Corbyn out. She then went on to be co-chairman of Owen Smith leadership challenge against Corbyn.
So, as you can imagine, she is not particularly popular amongst the Corbyn cult who will have a major say over who his replacement will be.
It isn't even that unusual, when I was teaching there, there were a number of kids who had parents working in the emergency services in London.
https://tinyurl.com/t29h6e9
One of the new Tory MPs elected is already used to the cameras, having taken part in a documentary about marrying a man more than three decades older than her.
Dehenna Davison MP, 26, made headlines in 2015 when she announced she was marrying Cllr John Fareham, who is 35 years her senior.
Clearly even the policy wonks in a tory govt agree that the balance has been wrong, hence the additional stamp duty proposal.
Interestingly, alot of the super high end restoration people (think restoring cathedrals, palaces etc) make a living doing brand new work for such projects. There was this one chap who so fell in love with Robert Adams that he had most of a place redone in restoration grade repro of Home House - that had all the Georgian experts buying new cars....
The BBC is great, but the media market is unrecognisable from where it was only a decade ago. Let them raise their own money, and let DCMS provide grants directly for “public service” programming to whoever will make and screen it at no cost to the consumer.
Sell off C4 too, another few billion for the Northern England Infrastructure Fund.
You, NP, will gravitate a tad to the right?
You didn't answer the question of course at all though!
RLB - what actually might she stand for?
Meanwhile I'm still really rather interested in NP's view.