[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
I'm sure she'll live with your disappointment.
Tbh I can't think of better words to describe the endless 24/7 discussion and speculation about her appearance, sexuality, domestic arrangements, clothing budget, reading habits, price of her coffee maker etc, etc, followed by copious amounts of aggressive abuse that is anything but passive This is pretty much what all high profile women pols get, and 'weird' and 'obsessive' is the least of it.
Not all female politicians spend a lifetime hiding their obvious sexuality
Not everyone's obsessively weird enough to care about it.
Mate, we’re both indoors on a beautifully sunny day, endlessly posting on an obscure politics site where people are actively discussing the general election result in Torbay in 1997
I think we can safely say we PBers are all ‘obsessively weird’
not me I am in the garden supping beer in between coats of stain on the picnic bench.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
I'm sure she'll live with your disappointment.
Tbh I can't think of better words to describe the endless 24/7 discussion and speculation about her appearance, sexuality, domestic arrangements, clothing budget, reading habits, price of her coffee maker etc, etc, followed by copious amounts of aggressive abuse that is anything but passive This is pretty much what all high profile women pols get, and 'weird' and 'obsessive' is the least of it.
Not all female politicians spend a lifetime hiding their obvious sexuality
How about a list of Labour's 1997 gains which have been continually Labour ever since:
Tynemouth Leeds NE Batley Wirral S Crosby / Sefton C Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham Hall Green Southampton Test Harrow W Brent N Ealing N Hayes Westminster N Eltham Mitcham
and Labour gains in 1997 which were Labour in 2019 albeit with some loss in between:
Leeds NW Sheffield Hallam Lancaster Chester Wirral W Hove Brighton Kemptown Enfield N Enfield Southgate Ealing Acton Brentford Ilford N Putney Battersea Croydon C Cardiff N Bristol W
I'm sure I've missed some.
A list of Tory losses in 1997, which have not returned to Tory since, would also be interesting.
Conservative losses 1997 to Labour and never regained:
Tynemouth Leeds NE Batley Wirral S Crosby / Sefton C Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham Hall Green Southampton Test Harrow W Brent N Ealing N Hayes Westminster N Eltham Mitcham
Plus to the SNP
Edinburgh Pentlands / SW Perth
Plus losses to Labour and which have been won by the LibDems also subsequently:
Leeds NW Bristol W
Plus loss to Labour which has been won by Green subsequently:
Brighton Pavillion
Plus loss to LibDems and which has been won by Labour subsequently:
Sheffield Hallam
Add Luton N, Luton S and Slough to the constituencies gained by Labour in 1997 and held subsequently since.
Bedford and Warwick were gained by Labour in 1997 and won in 2019 but had been Conservative for some of the time between.
Pretty much 100% of Tories on the 1997 election show are accepting the result gracefully without whingeing or complaining. That isn't always the case these days when a party loses an election.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
It's a bit wierd that someone would find this passive aggressive.
Well, to me it looks like some one has made a passing comment, that could be interpreted as a compliment, about her hair, and she has used the words "obsessed" and "weird" to describe them in response. Maybe passive aggressive is the wrong term, it's more like a teenage girls reaction
It's not intended as a compliment, but following up on an older and failed Unionist attack line trying to get her for hypocritically having a personal hairdresser in the time of plague.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
It's a bit wierd that someone would find this passive aggressive.
Well, to me it looks like some one has made a passing comment, that could be interpreted as a compliment, about her hair, and she has used the words "obsessed" and "weird" to describe them in response. Maybe passive aggressive is the wrong term, it's more like a teenage girls reaction
It was far from a compliment, only a weirdo could read it as such.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
Capable politician doesnt like being judged by her hair or legs shocker?
No-one talks much about our PMs dishevelled appearance (which is fine), why are the electorate so fussed about May shoes or Sturgeons hair or their legs?
tim on here was always going on about Cameron's hair. His avatar was of a bald David Cameron. Ed Miliband was constantly judged by his appearance, as was Jeremy Corbyn. Farage is mocked for his teeth and clothes. So I dont think it's correct to say it's only female politicans that have this fuss made of their appearance, or that Digby Jones is obsessed by Nicola Sturgeon's. He has just made a comment about her.
In that Twitter debate about Sturgeon’s curiously perfect hairdo in a time of cholera, someone says that she is almost certainly wearing a wig
On reflection I think that’s right. Look at a dozen different photos of her and the hair never changes (plague or no plague). Even the occasional ruffled bits look the same.
It’s quite clever. The unchanging ‘haircut‘ adds to her general demeanour of steadfast calm.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
Capable politician doesnt like being judged by her hair or legs shocker?
No-one talks much about our PMs dishevelled appearance (which is fine), why are the electorate so fussed about May shoes or Sturgeons hair or their legs?
tim on here was always going on about Cameron's hair. His avatar was of a bald David Cameron. Ed Miliband was constantly judged by his appearance, as was Jeremy Corbyn. Farage is mocked for his teeth and clothes. So I dont think it's correct to say it's only female politicans that have this fuss made of their appearance, or that Digby Jones is obsessed by Nicola Sturgeon's. He has just made a comment about her.
In that Twitter debate about Sturgeon’s curiously perfect hairdo in a time of cholera, someone says that she is almost certainly wearing a wig
On reflection I think that’s right. Look at a dozen different photos of her and the hair never changes (plague or no plague). Even the occasional ruffled bits look the same.
It’s quite clever. The unchanging ‘haircut‘ adds to her general demeanour of steadfast calm.
And same applies to Wales but not a word about that
The Ornkey Island rules or Guernseys have got even less publicity than Wales.
I really dont mind devolution but the idea that devolved nations smaller than Yorkshire should get similar coverage to England is completely unrealistic.
Wales is twice the size of Yorkshire.
5.3 million in Yorkshire, 3.1 million in Wales.
That’s its population, not its size.
Do you think I hadnt noticed? It makes more sense for coverage to be related to people rather than sq metres. Anyway, you know perfectly well what I am saying, as do other readers, whether you or they agree or not.
When anyone says “England is ten times bigger than Scotland” the meaning is entirely clear.
I detect a strain of Celtic inferiority complex at work
I applaud your philosophical acceptance of Cornwall being a diddy wee place.
Although, of course, when Sean Thomas goes home to Cornwall the population mysteriously trebles.
Ah, that comment about England being ten times bigger than Scotland must be why ditribution managers dahn sarf can't understand why a delivery to Aberdeen can't slip in one to Inverness on the same there-and-back day.
And same applies to Wales but not a word about that
The Ornkey Island rules or Guernseys have got even less publicity than Wales.
I really dont mind devolution but the idea that devolved nations smaller than Yorkshire should get similar coverage to England is completely unrealistic.
Wales is twice the size of Yorkshire.
5.3 million in Yorkshire, 3.1 million in Wales.
That’s its population, not its size.
Do you think I hadnt noticed? It makes more sense for coverage to be related to people rather than sq metres. Anyway, you know perfectly well what I am saying, as do other readers, whether you or they agree or not.
When anyone says “England is ten times bigger than Scotland” the meaning is entirely clear.
I detect a strain of Celtic inferiority complex at work
Turnip incoming in 3...2...1
ydoethur , We know it is exact opposite, Eadric and other southern jessies act as if they have little willies, they are terrified of the Scots leaving and them being part of a real diddy country. England has gone to the dogs. SAOR ALBA
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
Good post.
Starmer will do better by virtue of not being Corbyn. But he surely should be able to best Corbyn’s 40%.
It depends on the strength of third parties. Thus the LAB GE2017 result was helped by the collapse of the LDs and UKIP.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Yes it was lovely, brilliant pubs , full of ponces now
If Portillo had really wanted to return to parliament he might have been able to do so at the Uxbridge by-election in July 1997.
Hague was already leader by then and the Tories only narrowly won the 1997 Uxbridge by election with a good local candidate, John Randall.
Portillo sensibly waited until the 1999 Kensington and Chelsea by election (which I campaigned in for him and where I met Norman Lamont in the pub) to return to the Commons.
Though of course he still lost the leadership in 2001 to IDS
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
Capable politician doesnt like being judged by her hair or legs shocker?
No-one talks much about our PMs dishevelled appearance (which is fine), why are the electorate so fussed about May shoes or Sturgeons hair or their legs?
tim on here was always going on about Cameron's hair. His avatar was of a bald David Cameron. Ed Miliband was constantly judged by his appearance, as was Jeremy Corbyn. Farage is mocked for his teeth and clothes. So I dont think it's correct to say it's only female politicans that have this fuss made of their appearance, or that Digby Jones is obsessed by Nicola Sturgeon's. He has just made a comment about her.
In that Twitter debate about Sturgeon’s curiously perfect hairdo in a time of cholera, someone says that she is almost certainly wearing a wig
On reflection I think that’s right. Look at a dozen different photos of her and the hair never changes (plague or no plague). Even the occasional ruffled bits look the same.
It’s quite clever. The unchanging ‘haircut‘ adds to her general demeanour of steadfast calm.
A wig with grey roots?
UP TO HIS USUAL STANDARD OF SCOTTISH EXPERT KNOWLEDGE
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
Capable politician doesnt like being judged by her hair or legs shocker?
No-one talks much about our PMs dishevelled appearance (which is fine), why are the electorate so fussed about May shoes or Sturgeons hair or their legs?
tim on here was always going on about Cameron's hair. His avatar was of a bald David Cameron. Ed Miliband was constantly judged by his appearance, as was Jeremy Corbyn. Farage is mocked for his teeth and clothes. So I dont think it's correct to say it's only female politicans that have this fuss made of their appearance, or that Digby Jones is obsessed by Nicola Sturgeon's. He has just made a comment about her.
In that Twitter debate about Sturgeon’s curiously perfect hairdo in a time of cholera, someone says that she is almost certainly wearing a wig
On reflection I think that’s right. Look at a dozen different photos of her and the hair never changes (plague or no plague). Even the occasional ruffled bits look the same.
It’s quite clever. The unchanging ‘haircut‘ adds to her general demeanour of steadfast calm.
A wig with grey roots?
lol. Fair enough.
However, look at a page of images of her, and the uniformity of her haircut is startling
OK you could say that she just gets her haircut every morning (and fair enough, she's First Minister) but then that DOES suggest she is now getting her hair cut during the plague
(or she has a special wig with authentic grey roots)
Maybe she drives to Durham to get it cut every day, with a pit stop to test the eyes and look at the bluebells.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
There are precious few under the age of 60 who've been down a pit. Leigh went Tory. Swathes of new house building all detached or semis with ample gardens have sprung up on what was previously derelict or grazing land. It is slowly developing into an outer commuting settlement for those who don't fancy City living. And has been doing for some time. It is still remarkably cheap.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
I had never heard of him before he became Labour leader. By 2017 I knew his backstory, I don't think that explanation works to be honest.
I was a callow young conservative type in 1997, and saddened to see “decent” John Major trounced by “sneaky” Tony Blair.
What was clear though was the grotesque underinvestment in public services and public space, which New Labour rightly set about addressing.
When I arrived in the U.K. from NZ, in 2000, the country still looked so *incredibly* tatty, both compared to where I had come from and to other European countries I was able to visit.
That changed, at least in London.
IMO London today is more shiny but less interesting than it was in the 1990s. The main difference is the enormous amount of money that has been spent on the transport system since then.
John Major's 'invincible green suburbs' aren't what they were but central London is certainly more impressive.
The skyline has been transformed. Not always for the better, but it is much more dramatic.
Walk up Primrose Hill and look south and nearly all the major structures, forming the skyline, were erected in the last 20 years: the Shard, the Gherkin, 22 Bishopsgate, most of Canary Wharf, the Cheesegrater, London Eye, and more
I have to say I hate skyscrapers. I take my hat off to those who can work and live in them without being constantly anxious. I get nervous looking at them!
I cycled through the city yesterday and actually came over a little queasy when I was at the bottom of one and looked up. A relief to get into the outskirts of EC1 where the roofs are lower.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
There are precious few under the age of 60 who've been down a pit. Leigh went Tory. Swathes of new house building all detached or semis with ample gardens have sprung up on what was previously derelict or grazing land. It is slowly developing into an outer commuting settlement for those who don't fancy City living. And has been doing for some time. It is still remarkably cheap.
I suspect most outsiders still associate mining areas with images of slagheaps even though the slagheaps are now country parks.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
I'm sure she'll live with your disappointment.
Tbh I can't think of better words to describe the endless 24/7 discussion and speculation about her appearance, sexuality, domestic arrangements, clothing budget, reading habits, price of her coffee maker etc, etc, followed by copious amounts of aggressive abuse that is anything but passive This is pretty much what all high profile women pols get, and 'weird' and 'obsessive' is the least of it.
Not all female politicians spend a lifetime hiding their obvious sexuality
Not everyone's obsessively weird enough to care about it.
Mate, we’re both indoors on a beautifully sunny day, endlessly posting on an obscure politics site where people are actively discussing the general election result in Torbay in 1997
I think we can safely say we PBers are all ‘obsessively weird’
Spending warm summer days indoors Writing frightening verse of a strange haired girl with a lack of mirth
I deduced who that was, without previously knowing.
ETA I thought the second couplet was very distinctive, turns out they are you. You are a master of pastiche.
Thank you!
In a biography of Morrissey, Jonny Rogan has a picture of him sunbathing as a youngster with the caption "Spending a warm summers day outdoors" as if to dispel the myth of a moody teenager.
In the liner notes, under the obligatory quotes praising the book from Newspapers, the final one reads
"I hope Jonny Rogan ends his days very soon in an M3 pile up" - Morrissey
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
I had never heard of him before he became Labour leader. By 2017 I knew his backstory, I don't think that explanation works to be honest.
Hmmm... so as someone who has posted over 30,000 times on a politics message board would you say you were:
a) less informed than the average voter.
b) equally informed.
or
c) a little bit obsessed with politics?
I worked in a factory when I was a student, and remember a discussion about politics. Someone asked what party Margaret Thatcher was in, and then asked the room if they knew? A few incredulous looks, but also plenty of blank faces. This was 1989 - just the ten years since she became PM.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
On 7 May 2012 the University of Cambridge granted my Irish great-uncle, a 31 year-old doctor, a certificate stating that he had proved himself by -
“his KNOWLEDGE and SKILL in SANITARY SCIENCE, to wit in Chemistry and Physics in the causes and prevention of Epidemic and Infectious Diseases and in the means of remedying or ameliorating those Circumstances and Conditions of life which are know to be injurious to health as well as in the Laws of the Realm relating to Public Health is CERTIFIED to be well qualified in respect of Knowledge and Skill aforesaid to fulfil the Duties of a Medical Officer of Health.”
On 8 September 1915, having joined the Royal Army Medical Corps, he died of his wounds. Septicaemia, ironically enough. His family did not realise how ill he was.
Epidemic and Infectious Diseases are always with us. And always will be.
2012? 1915? Did his friends just call him The Doctor, by any chance?
Well spotted! At least someone read it. 1912 of course.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
There's an incredibly grim scene in the film Mona Lisa which was supposed to have been filmed in the Kings Cross area, although whether it was actually filmed there or they used a studio is difficult to say.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
My Dad worked at Spitalfields market in the mornings in the 80s. Yesterday when I was cycling near Shoreditch overground station there were a few streets that reminded me what the East End used to look like in those days.
In the afternoons when he'd finished at the market he used to teach mentally handicapped men football at the William Brinson Centre in Wapping, working for the ILEA! You might have bumped into him!
On 7 May 2012 the University of Cambridge granted my Irish great-uncle, a 31 year-old doctor, a certificate stating that he had proved himself by -
“his KNOWLEDGE and SKILL in SANITARY SCIENCE, to wit in Chemistry and Physics in the causes and prevention of Epidemic and Infectious Diseases and in the means of remedying or ameliorating those Circumstances and Conditions of life which are know to be injurious to health as well as in the Laws of the Realm relating to Public Health is CERTIFIED to be well qualified in respect of Knowledge and Skill aforesaid to fulfil the Duties of a Medical Officer of Health.”
On 8 September 1915, having joined the Royal Army Medical Corps, he died of his wounds. Septicaemia, ironically enough. His family did not realise how ill he was.
Epidemic and Infectious Diseases are always with us. And always will be.
2012? 1915? Did his friends just call him The Doctor, by any chance?
Well spotted! At least someone read it. 1912 of course.
I had read it, but assumed you were talking about a long-lost certificate that was finally delivered!
How about a list of Labour's 1997 gains which have been continually Labour ever since:
Tynemouth Leeds NE Batley Wirral S Crosby / Sefton C Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham Hall Green Southampton Test Harrow W Brent N Ealing N Hayes Westminster N Eltham Mitcham
and Labour gains in 1997 which were Labour in 2019 albeit with some loss in between:
Leeds NW Sheffield Hallam Lancaster Chester Wirral W Hove Brighton Kemptown Enfield N Enfield Southgate Ealing Acton Brentford Ilford N Putney Battersea Croydon C Cardiff N Bristol W
I'm sure I've missed some.
A list of Tory losses in 1997, which have not returned to Tory since, would also be interesting.
Conservative losses 1997 to Labour and never regained:
Tynemouth Leeds NE Batley Wirral S Crosby / Sefton C Birmingham Edgbaston Birmingham Hall Green Southampton Test Harrow W Brent N Ealing N Hayes Westminster N Eltham Mitcham
Plus to the SNP
Edinburgh Pentlands / SW Perth
Plus losses to Labour and which have been won by the LibDems also subsequently:
Leeds NW Bristol W
Plus loss to Labour which has been won by Green subsequently:
Brighton Pavillion
Plus loss to LibDems and which has been won by Labour subsequently:
Sheffield Hallam
Edinburgh Pentlands and Perth would have voted notionally Conservative in 2017 on the 1997/2001 boundaries.
In 2019 the Tories would have possibly still been ahead in all the South Perthshire and Kinross wards with all of the SNP majority in Ochil and South Perthshire coming from the Clackmannanshire wards.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
I had never heard of him before he became Labour leader. By 2017 I knew his backstory, I don't think that explanation works to be honest.
It is interesting how "popular knowledge" works and is often far behind freely available information.
Consider the shock of the Petrol Strike - suddenly the country *knew* that 75% of price of petrol was tax. I'd worked in the oil business and knew that as a background fact. I was continually meeting educated, engaged people who were startled to discover that it wasn't all going to the oil companies....
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
I had never heard of him before he became Labour leader. By 2017 I knew his backstory, I don't think that explanation works to be honest.
Hmmm... so as someone who has posted over 30,000 times on a politics message board would you say you were:
a) less informed than the average voter.
b) equally informed.
or
c) a little bit obsessed with politics?
I worked in a factory when I was a student, and remember a discussion about politics. Someone asked what party Margaret Thatcher was in, and then asked the room if they knew? A few incredulous looks, but also plenty of blank faces. This was 1989 - just the ten years since she became PM.
Well I had posted a lot by the time he became leader, and had never heard of him! The attacks on him as a terrorist sympathiser etc were all over the papers in the run up to 2017, I doubt people changed their vote two years later because they'd only just rumbled it.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
But Corbyn wasn't leader in previous decades, so the military connection didn't matter. The question was why Corbyn could win over the electorate in 2017 and not 2019, and I suggested that some of the attacks hadn't yet broken through.
There were plenty of reasons why Labour came closer in 2017, but also reasons why Corbyn was able to turn around his popularity ratings.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
There are precious few under the age of 60 who've been down a pit. Leigh went Tory. Swathes of new house building all detached or semis with ample gardens have sprung up on what was previously derelict or grazing land. It is slowly developing into an outer commuting settlement for those who don't fancy City living. And has been doing for some time. It is still remarkably cheap.
I suspect most outsiders still associate mining areas with images of slagheaps even though the slagheaps are now country parks.
A lot of the slag heaps aka bings here (and burnt oil shale bings) in Lothian that I remember from my childhood have actually disappeared in Lothian - they are now motorway foundations etc. The red shale of burnt blaes is very noticeable in things like the works for the new Queensferry Crossing.
It was updated to 30k as well, and that's not even the scary thing. They're barely testing at all, so we can guesstimate the daily infection count at 500k+.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
But Corbyn wasn't leader in previous decades, so the military connection didn't matter. The question was why Corbyn could win over the electorate in 2017 and not 2019, and I suggested that some of the attacks hadn't yet broken through.
There were plenty of reasons why Labour came closer in 2017, but also reasons why Corbyn was able to turn around his popularity ratings.
It should be noted that Corbyn was able to pick up much of the traditional working class support which Labour had lost in 2010 and 2015 to UKIP.
This is the definition of focusing on the superficial, but I have become fairly convinced it's a wig. That of course is by no means an issue - very sensible I'd say. I don't see that it can indicate a health issue because Nicola has been incredibly, exhaustingly active over this time. Unless it's alopecia, which if it is, must have been incredibly alarming for her when it happened.
I like Nicola Sturgeon because she is passionate about her cause and strong minded but I was disappointed to see her throw 'obsessed'' and 'weird' into this exchange. There's something annoyingly passive aggressive and victim like in it.
Capable politician doesnt like being judged by her hair or legs shocker?
No-one talks much about our PMs dishevelled appearance (which is fine), why are the electorate so fussed about May shoes or Sturgeons hair or their legs?
tim on here was always going on about Cameron's hair. His avatar was of a bald David Cameron. Ed Miliband was constantly judged by his appearance, as was Jeremy Corbyn. Farage is mocked for his teeth and clothes. So I dont think it's correct to say it's only female politicans that have this fuss made of their appearance, or that Digby Jones is obsessed by Nicola Sturgeon's. He has just made a comment about her.
In that Twitter debate about Sturgeon’s curiously perfect hairdo in a time of cholera, someone says that she is almost certainly wearing a wig
On reflection I think that’s right. Look at a dozen different photos of her and the hair never changes (plague or no plague). Even the occasional ruffled bits look the same.
It’s quite clever. The unchanging ‘haircut‘ adds to her general demeanour of steadfast calm.
A wig with grey roots?
lol. Fair enough.
However, look at a page of images of her, and the uniformity of her haircut is startling
OK you could say that she just gets her haircut every morning (and fair enough, she's First Minister) but then that DOES suggest she is now getting her hair cut during the plague
(or she has a special wig with authentic grey roots)
Her hair looks shite. My hair looks the same every day and I do fuck all with it. It looks equally shite.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
Stoke Newington and Ladbroke Grove too. Always a bracing, enervating sense of jeopardy walking round there even in mid mornings.
Oh yes, I was a student then and I was fascinated by these areas. I remember going to Bankside and discovering rundown old Georgian houses, possibly with medieval roots, on Cardinal's Cap Alley. I reckoned they possibly dated from the days of The Stews and the Bishop of Winchester's brothels.
It felt like living archaeology. I was often the only person on the street, with cold rivermist silvering the cobbles. It was brilliantly atmospheric but also bloody spooky. A dangerous adventure. I was always eager to get back to Fitzrovia (which was itself quite shabby compared to now)
Well, exams done! Yesterday was by far the worst one, took me over 15 hours of non-stop work! Hopefully I’ve done okay...
Is this a law conversion course for non-law graduates? You give the impression that the examinations have been extended openbook assessments , unless I have misunderstood.
Well, exams done! Yesterday was by far the worst one, took me over 15 hours of non-stop work! Hopefully I’ve done okay...
Is this a law conversion course for non-law graduates? You give the impression that the examinations have been extended openbook assessments , unless I have misunderstood.
Yup. Open-book “e-examinations” in which we had 24 hours to complete them.
Boris is the only Tory leader ever to have seen his party win Sedgefield.
It voted for Boris more than the Tories
But Boris was opposing Corbyn so no big deal and at that stage he'd yet to see the collapse of confidence that his handling of the biggest crisis in generations have led to.
May was also opposing Corbyn but Sedgefield had a 6000 Labour majority in 2017.
So yes it was a big deal and the latest poll still gives a 6% Tory lead
Wait for tonight's leader approval ratings
Mike, how do you square the circle of Corbyn's apparent toxicity and his 40% of the electorate in 2017?
There are plenty of reasons why Labour did well in 2017, but just to focus on Corbyn:
A lot of people's "first impression" had been based on newspaper stories, not the man himself. For the 2017 election, he was tidied up, kept his temper in check, and was better than most expected. With May being much worse than expected, the comparison was in his favour too. His approval ratings even briefly went positive.
After that there wasn't really anywhere he could go. His backstory would keep coming up, and he couldn't keep up the statesman act for long. The Tories kept plugging away at his history, found some successful attacks and pounded away on social media with them (When I was canvassing, his opinions on Venezuela actually came up a few times!)
Another example is an interesting article not long after the 2019 election, looking at mining towns and wondering how on earth they went Tory. Brexit would be an issue, but they visited a pub, where the upstairs had walls adorned with Mining memorabilia, but downstairs it was all about the local army regiment. In the 1980s everyone there would have had a family member who mined, now these were the areas where young people went in to the armed forces. Corbyn's history of IRA support, and perceived anti-military stance were a huge sore point in many of these red wall areas.
There was no shortage of young blokes from mining areas going into the military in previous decades.
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
There are precious few under the age of 60 who've been down a pit. Leigh went Tory. Swathes of new house building all detached or semis with ample gardens have sprung up on what was previously derelict or grazing land. It is slowly developing into an outer commuting settlement for those who don't fancy City living. And has been doing for some time. It is still remarkably cheap.
I suspect most outsiders still associate mining areas with images of slagheaps even though the slagheaps are now country parks.
A lot of the slag heaps aka bings here (and burnt oil shale bings) in Lothian that I remember from my childhood have actually disappeared in Lothian - they are now motorway foundations etc. The red shale of burnt blaes is very noticeable in things like the works for the new Queensferry Crossing.
Landscaping them was a huge, decades long job.
I remember reading that on one Yorkshire slagheap over 200,000 tonnes of spoil had been removed, over 400,000 tonnes of topsoil put down and 150,000 trees planted.
And that type of landscaping was taking place every few miles.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
Stoke Newington and Ladbroke Grove too. Always a bracing, enervating sense of jeopardy walking round there even in mid mornings.
Oh yes, I was a student then and I was fascinated by these areas. I remember going to Bankside and discovering rundown old Georgian houses, possibly with medieval roots, on Cardinal's Cap Alley. I reckoned they possibly dated from the days of The Stews and the Bishop of Winchester's brothels.
It felt like living archaeology. I was often the only person on the street, with cold rivermist silvering the cobbles. It was brilliantly atmospheric but also bloody spooky. A dangerous adventure. I was always eager to get back to Fitzrovia (which was itself quite shabby compared to now)
I didn’t move to near London until the early nineties but my occasional visits in the eighties were eye opening, stumbling by accident into the cardboard city near Waterloo. Very different nowadays.
Going back further to the sixties, I love the James Mason hosted ‘The London Nobody Knows’. Not sure if this will link properly but here’s the full video.
The City and the East End and East London are up. Barely needs saying. West End and West London are maybe down. Is it true that Marble Arch used to be some kind of tourist destination?! Not sure if the Ryanair generation has even heard of it. And in the suburbs beyond, white flight. Not many non-English speaking areas in West London in the 80s. The biggest long-term Conservative to Labour swings in the country, bar Merseyside. Finally, watch Mr Bean, as late as the 1990s, a lot of London looks provincial.
Well, exams done! Yesterday was by far the worst one, took me over 15 hours of non-stop work! Hopefully I’ve done okay...
Is this a law conversion course for non-law graduates? You give the impression that the examinations have been extended openbook assessments , unless I have misunderstood.
Yup. Open-book “e-examinations” in which we had 24 hours to complete them.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
Stoke Newington and Ladbroke Grove too. Always a bracing, enervating sense of jeopardy walking round there even in mid mornings.
Oh yes, I was a student then and I was fascinated by these areas. I remember going to Bankside and discovering rundown old Georgian houses, possibly with medieval roots, on Cardinal's Cap Alley. I reckoned they possibly dated from the days of The Stews and the Bishop of Winchester's brothels.
It felt like living archaeology. I was often the only person on the street, with cold rivermist silvering the cobbles. It was brilliantly atmospheric but also bloody spooky. A dangerous adventure. I was always eager to get back to Fitzrovia (which was itself quite shabby compared to now)
It wasn't gated back then, I think the gate went up in the late 80s (not sure of the legality).
That Google Images shot is astonishing, in retrospect. Those wonderful Georgian houses, looking directly on to the river Thames and at St Paul's (Wren supposedly stayed in one, to keep an eye on the building oh his cathedral), were largely empty. And surrounded by derelict land, old bomb sites, dossers.
You probably could have bought one for pennies. Now virtually priceless.
Just gone back to the google shot and looked again. There's a plaque which says Christopher Wren something on one house ...
Well, exams done! Yesterday was by far the worst one, took me over 15 hours of non-stop work! Hopefully I’ve done okay...
Is this a law conversion course for non-law graduates? You give the impression that the examinations have been extended openbook assessments , unless I have misunderstood.
Yup. Open-book “e-examinations” in which we had 24 hours to complete them.
I did such a course at UEA back in 1996/97. Very intense - basically two years of a law degree in one academic year. We sat six 3-hour closed book exams plus a 5000 word dissertation on European Law. There was also one piece of 3000 word coursework for each subject.
On 7 May 2012 the University of Cambridge granted my Irish great-uncle, a 31 year-old doctor, a certificate stating that he had proved himself by -
“his KNOWLEDGE and SKILL in SANITARY SCIENCE, to wit in Chemistry and Physics in the causes and prevention of Epidemic and Infectious Diseases and in the means of remedying or ameliorating those Circumstances and Conditions of life which are know to be injurious to health as well as in the Laws of the Realm relating to Public Health is CERTIFIED to be well qualified in respect of Knowledge and Skill aforesaid to fulfil the Duties of a Medical Officer of Health.”
On 8 September 1915, having joined the Royal Army Medical Corps, he died of his wounds. Septicaemia, ironically enough. His family did not realise how ill he was.
Epidemic and Infectious Diseases are always with us. And always will be.
2012? 1915? Did his friends just call him The Doctor, by any chance?
Well spotted! At least someone read it. 1912 of course.
I had read it, but assumed you were talking about a long-lost certificate that was finally delivered!
No. It has been on my wall for years. It just struck me today given all the focus on epidemics.
Every generation in our family going back to the mid-19th century has had doctors in it, some of them also involved in the wars of the time, from the Franco-German war of 1870 via the Boer wars to the world wars of the last century.
The City and the East End and East London are up. Barely needs saying. West End and West London are maybe down. Is it true that Marble Arch used to be some kind of tourist destination?! Not sure if the Ryanair generation has even heard of it. And in the suburbs beyond, white flight. Not many non-English speaking areas in West London in the 80s. The biggest long-term Conservative to Labour swings in the country, bar Merseyside. Finally, watch Mr Bean, as late as the 1990s, a lot of London looks provincial.
The West End is definitely not "down". Oxford Street and Marble Arch can be a bit scruffy, but this has been the case for decades.
The rest of the West End - Mayfair, Marylebone, Fitzrovia, Covent Garden, Soho, and so on - oozes money. It's not always pretty but it is very wealthy and looks it
Most places are fine if you have a tonne of money, I mean more like the externality it generates for newcomers and outsiders, the culture, the influence, the stuff that makes a city & makes people come to a city. Has anything worthwhile come out of there since "Notting Hill"?
I've only just become aware of this. Presumably the complaint will be that Welsh/Scottish institutions shouldn't lose out on students being paid for from England. It's now fairly clear that the loans aren't being repaid.
The 1997 election coverage is slightly misleading in the sense that the share of the vote, 44% to 31%, wasn't enormously different to the 1992 election, which was 43% to 35%. Also they didn't really mention the fact that turnout was down quite a lot from 77% to 71%. Labour received less total votes in 1997 than the Tories in 1992.
Belgian prince Joaquin attended an illegal party in Cordoba that is being investigated by the Spanish Police for exceeding the allowed number of attendees, all of whom have had to be quarantined after King Philip of Belgium's nephew tested positive for COVID-19. Sources at the Belgian Royal Palace confirmed to Efe that Prince Joaquín, son of Princess Astrid and Prince Lorenzo, traveled to Spain on May 24 on a commercial flight and with a permit to enter the country, despite restrictions by the pandemic, due to doing business practices there.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
There's an incredibly grim scene in the film Mona Lisa which was supposed to have been filmed in the Kings Cross area, although whether it was actually filmed there or they used a studio is difficult to say.
Battlebridge Road?
Been used in many movies, the Ladykillers, and Shirley Valentine
Page down for some really bleak shots of 70s London, inc King's Cross
Ah Battlebridge Road. Remember getting fearfully lost and disoriented having scored some hash and supped mushroom tea at a squat in Camden Town c.1985. I couldn't seem to find a way around Kings Cross as November rain lashed down, sirens wailed and it went dark. Nobody around at all. All derelict land behind there then. Course it was probably only a few minutes. Happy Days!
Incidentally, Battlebridge was the name of the village in Georgian times.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
I too moved to London in the 80s. Amlogst other areas, Spitalfields and Wapping have seen the most incredible transformation.
Look at these wonderful photos of the East End from 1960-80.
Stoke Newington and Ladbroke Grove too. Always a bracing, enervating sense of jeopardy walking round there even in mid mornings.
Oh yes, I was a student then and I was fascinated by these areas. I remember going to Bankside and discovering rundown old Georgian houses, possibly with medieval roots, on Cardinal's Cap Alley. I reckoned they possibly dated from the days of The Stews and the Bishop of Winchester's brothels.
It felt like living archaeology. I was often the only person on the street, with cold rivermist silvering the cobbles. It was brilliantly atmospheric but also bloody spooky. A dangerous adventure. I was always eager to get back to Fitzrovia (which was itself quite shabby compared to now)
It wasn't gated back then, I think the gate went up in the late 80s (not sure of the legality).
That Google Images shot is astonishing, in retrospect. Those wonderful Georgian houses, looking directly on to the river Thames and at St Paul's (Wren supposedly stayed in one, to keep an eye on the building oh his cathedral), were largely empty. And surrounded by derelict land, old bomb sites, dossers.
You probably could have bought one for pennies. Now virtually priceless.
Used to work near Upper Street in the early 80s. You could get sausage, egg & chips for lunch at a different greasy spoon every day for a month. Saw Ralph McTell sing Streets of London (inter alia) at the King's Head Theatre. After work we picked our way home through the blasted monochrome landscapes of Don McCullin.
The 1997 election coverage is slightly misleading in the sense that the share of the vote, 44% to 31%, wasn't enormously different to the 1992 election, which was 43% to 35%. Also they didn't really mention the fact that turnout was down quite a lot from 77% to 71%. Labour received less total votes in 1997 than the Tories in 1992.
As OGH tells us ad infinitum it's not about votes but seats - bums on benches if you prefer. 1997 was remarkable because the change in votes (not insignificant in and of itself) led to a massive change in seats with the Conservatives losing at least half their total.
What is also interesting is 1997 showed the Conservatives can poll badly and lose a lot more seats than Labour who have yet to go sub 200 in any election since 1945 (the Conservatives have done it three times).
The City and the East End and East London are up. Barely needs saying. West End and West London are maybe down. Is it true that Marble Arch used to be some kind of tourist destination?! Not sure if the Ryanair generation has even heard of it. And in the suburbs beyond, white flight. Not many non-English speaking areas in West London in the 80s. The biggest long-term Conservative to Labour swings in the country, bar Merseyside. Finally, watch Mr Bean, as late as the 1990s, a lot of London looks provincial.
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
There's an incredibly grim scene in the film Mona Lisa which was supposed to have been filmed in the Kings Cross area, although whether it was actually filmed there or they used a studio is difficult to say.
Battlebridge Road?
Been used in many movies, the Ladykillers, and Shirley Valentine
Page down for some really bleak shots of 70s London, inc King's Cross
Ah Battlebridge Road. Remember getting fearfully lost and disoriented having scored some hash and supped mushroom tea at a squat in Camden Town c.1985. I couldn't seem to find a way around Kings Cross as November rain lashed down, sirens wailed and it went dark. Nobody around at all. All derelict land behind there then. Course it was probably only a few minutes. Happy Days!
Incidentally, Battlebridge was the name of the village in Georgian times.
1985!? Camden Town?? Squats? Mushrooms??
There is a high chance we were in the same pub, bar, party, squat, concert, in that era. How strange!
Watching Kings Cross being "cleansed" was interesting..... Under a Labour government as well.
Some of the developers were doing the old buy-the-rental-properties trick. Then slowly forcing the tenants out. Complete with paying employees to be anti-social tenants to force the others out.
As LatAm (and maybe now India) come to the corona party, the growing global tally of cases is starting to look exponential, again, after a period of plateau
I do not see how we avoid a second wave. Countries opening up now will get infected by their neighbours (see California suffering from its proximity to Mexico).
Absent a vaccine, countries will have to choose between death or poverty
The outrage about this is really quite something, coming from a Scottish government which charges £9k a year to English students, and zero to Scots
You halfwit England charges Scottish students £9K
To be fair I don't really have a problem with that situation. If Scotland is funding the universities out of its own budget it would be mad to subsidise English students. However if UK government wants to reform the student 'loan' system it can hardly just apply to English institutions.
As LatAm (and maybe now India) come to the corona party, the growing global tally of cases is starting to look exponential, again, after a period of plateau
I do not see how we avoid a second wave. Countries opening up now will get infected by their neighbours (see California suffering from its proximity to Mexico).
Absent a vaccine, countries will have to choose between death or poverty
Africa is coming next, I think.
Wait till it gets in the refugee camps. The poor bloody Rohinga, Sudanese, Syrians et al ...
Universities are fucked anyway, they're making all their money off Chinese students because they can't find a way to capitalise their research so they capitalise capital.
The 1997 election coverage is slightly misleading in the sense that the share of the vote, 44% to 31%, wasn't enormously different to the 1992 election, which was 43% to 35%. Also they didn't really mention the fact that turnout was down quite a lot from 77% to 71%. Labour received less total votes in 1997 than the Tories in 1992.
As OGH tells us ad infinitum it's not about votes but seats - bums on benches if you prefer. 1997 was remarkable because the change in votes (not insignificant in and of itself) led to a massive change in seats with the Conservatives losing at least half their total.
What is also interesting is 1997 showed the Conservatives can poll badly and lose a lot more seats than Labour who have yet to go sub 200 in any election since 1945 (the Conservatives have done it three times).
That's the political impact but I agree with Andy that vote share should not be ignored. Did anyone point out that Blair got fewer votes than Major in '92?
I'm sure David Dimbleby told a story where he said he mentioned on the broadcast that the people waving union jacks in Downing St were Labour party workers but he was admonished the editor for 'spoiling the moment.'
The outrage about this is really quite something, coming from a Scottish government which charges £9k a year to English students, and zero to Scots
You halfwit England charges Scottish students £9K
Fuck off, you dismal tartan gargoyle.
England charges everyone £9k or more.
Scotland singles out English students, and makes them pay, but all other EU students get Scottish education free. It's the most outrageous discrimination, and it is now ending.
I'm quite liking the idea of another nail in the coffin of the 'UK internal single market' (albeit cultural in this case).
[London is] shit compared to late seventies and early eighties, it was brilliant in London then, I spent lots and lots of time there , stayed in Tara hotel in Kengsington and life was great.
I moved to London in the 1980s when you could still find bomb sites. The areas of Lambeth and Southwark close to the Thames were very rough.
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Somers Town/Kings Cross is utterly unrecognizable from those days.
There's an incredibly grim scene in the film Mona Lisa which was supposed to have been filmed in the Kings Cross area, although whether it was actually filmed there or they used a studio is difficult to say.
Battlebridge Road?
Been used in many movies, the Ladykillers, and Shirley Valentine
Page down for some really bleak shots of 70s London, inc King's Cross
Ah Battlebridge Road. Remember getting fearfully lost and disoriented having scored some hash and supped mushroom tea at a squat in Camden Town c.1985. I couldn't seem to find a way around Kings Cross as November rain lashed down, sirens wailed and it went dark. Nobody around at all. All derelict land behind there then. Course it was probably only a few minutes. Happy Days!
Incidentally, Battlebridge was the name of the village in Georgian times.
1985!? Camden Town?? Squats? Mushrooms??
There is a high chance we were in the same pub, bar, party, squat, concert, in that era. How strange!
I moved to London in 1980. I have no lost love for that London. It was grimy, poor, depressed and generally pretty miserable. The London of today is way more vibrant.
As LatAm (and maybe now India) come to the corona party, the growing global tally of cases is starting to look exponential, again, after a period of plateau
I do not see how we avoid a second wave. Countries opening up now will get infected by their neighbours (see California suffering from its proximity to Mexico).
Absent a vaccine, countries will have to choose between death or poverty
Africa is coming next, I think.
And possibly the US heartlands where the real Americans reside.
The outrage about this is really quite something, coming from a Scottish government which charges £9k a year to English students, and zero to Scots
You halfwit England charges Scottish students £9K
To be fair I don't really have a problem with that situation. If Scotland is funding the universities out of its own budget it would be mad to subsidise English students. However if UK government wants to reform the student 'loan' system it can hardly just apply to English institutions.
But Scotland is subsidised by England via Barnett. Essentially English taxpayers are giving money to Scotland, so Scottish students can have free tuition. Scotland says thankyou by charging English students, but not any other students in the EU.
The only reason England hasn't burned down Scotland in anger is because the English are too apathetic, and barely realise Scotland exists most of the time
Well Barnett may well be a subsidy but that's not its intention. And Scotland had no choice but to offer free tuition to EU students.
Do remember that England did quite well out of the oil money at the time.
Belgian prince Joaquin attended an illegal party in Cordoba that is being investigated by the Spanish Police for exceeding the allowed number of attendees, all of whom have had to be quarantined after King Philip of Belgium's nephew tested positive for COVID-19. Sources at the Belgian Royal Palace confirmed to Efe that Prince Joaquín, son of Princess Astrid and Prince Lorenzo, traveled to Spain on May 24 on a commercial flight and with a permit to enter the country, despite restrictions by the pandemic, due to doing business practices there.
John Major's declaration from Huntingdon in which David Bellamy was the Referendum Party candidate.
Major holds the seat for the Tories with 31,000 votes
I admire your fortitude in sticking with what must be hours of fairly painful viewing.
Though I've watched it since on You Tube, I missed 1997 election night because I was shattered after a long day telling and knocking-up in St Ives and surrounding villages and of course the St Ives constituency doesn't count until the morning.
After catching up on the results and a glorious "Full Cornish" (don't ask), I took the bus to Penzance and joined the crowd at the St John's Hall where the counting was taking place.
It was also County Council elections and the LDs were trying to hold on to majority control of Cornwall CC (as it then was). That was the main reason I went down to work there in the final couple of days.
Indeed, one can argue the local election results were the start of the Conservative comeback. The LDs lost 177 seats, mainly those won in 1993 on a much lower turnout and the Conservatives gained 180 nationally.
In Cornwall, the LDs narrowly lost overall control losing two seats to go from 41 to 39 on the 79-seat authority. The Independents picked up two to 23.
As far as St Ives was concerned, I remember trying to listen to the Declaration. I recall former MP David Harris got a warm round of applause - he was genuinely liked across the board but had stood down and the new Conservative candidate was a local estate agent.
The Conservatives lost 8,000 votes from 1992 which represented about a 12% drop in vote share. The Referendum candidate got just under 4000 votes and I reckon the rest stayed at home. Andrew George got barely a thousand votes more than in 1992 and coincidentally Labour's vote was down by about the same number.
Comments
If you watch the Professionals or the Sweeney you get a feel of the place then.
Bedford and Warwick were gained by Labour in 1997 and won in 2019 but had been Conservative for some of the time between.
https://twitter.com/foxwoundband/status/1266613385862447104?s=20
And given how the military has shrunk in size almost certainly more so than now.
The little known reason why the Conservatives have done increasingly well in mining areas is that they've been demographically trending that way since the 1970s and judging by the current house building will continue to do so.
https://twitter.com/anneapplebaum/status/1266716031034306560?s=20
https://twitter.com/FareedNBCS/status/1266587297706893312?s=09
Portillo sensibly waited until the 1999 Kensington and Chelsea by election (which I campaigned in for him and where I met Norman Lamont in the pub) to return to the Commons.
Though of course he still lost the leadership in 2001 to IDS
With not a clue what to do...
https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/1266711557603459073
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlrtcbLuoUM
Leigh went Tory. Swathes of new house building all detached or semis with ample gardens have sprung up on what was previously derelict or grazing land.
It is slowly developing into an outer commuting settlement for those who don't fancy City living. And has been doing for some time.
It is still remarkably cheap.
Major holds the seat for the Tories with 31,000 votes
I cycled through the city yesterday and actually came over a little queasy when I was at the bottom of one and looked up. A relief to get into the outskirts of EC1 where the roofs are lower.
Sounds like the opening acts on the outermost stage at Reading.
In a biography of Morrissey, Jonny Rogan has a picture of him sunbathing as a youngster with the caption "Spending a warm summers day outdoors" as if to dispel the myth of a moody teenager.
In the liner notes, under the obligatory quotes praising the book from Newspapers, the final one reads
"I hope Jonny Rogan ends his days very soon in an M3 pile up" - Morrissey
a) less informed than the average voter.
b) equally informed.
or
c) a little bit obsessed with politics?
I worked in a factory when I was a student, and remember a discussion about politics. Someone asked what party Margaret Thatcher was in, and then asked the room if they knew? A few incredulous looks, but also plenty of blank faces. This was 1989 - just the ten years since she became PM.
Always a bracing, enervating sense of jeopardy walking round there even in mid mornings.
In the afternoons when he'd finished at the market he used to teach mentally handicapped men football at the William Brinson Centre in Wapping, working for the ILEA! You might have bumped into him!
In 2019 the Tories would have possibly still been ahead in all the South Perthshire and Kinross wards with all of the SNP majority in Ochil and South Perthshire coming from the Clackmannanshire wards.
Consider the shock of the Petrol Strike - suddenly the country *knew* that 75% of price of petrol was tax. I'd worked in the oil business and knew that as a background fact. I was continually meeting educated, engaged people who were startled to discover that it wasn't all going to the oil companies....
There were plenty of reasons why Labour came closer in 2017, but also reasons why Corbyn was able to turn around his popularity ratings.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.508296,-0.0977109,3a,75y,144.55h,80.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA4vdAKN2677EkMf-e6XSUg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Is it gated? There's a grille?
I remember reading that on one Yorkshire slagheap over 200,000 tonnes of spoil had been removed, over 400,000 tonnes of topsoil put down and 150,000 trees planted.
And that type of landscaping was taking place every few miles.
Going back further to the sixties, I love the James Mason hosted ‘The London Nobody Knows’. Not sure if this will link properly but here’s the full video.
https://dai.ly/x5h8w0m
Every generation in our family going back to the mid-19th century has had doctors in it, some of them also involved in the wars of the time, from the Franco-German war of 1870 via the Boer wars to the world wars of the last century.
https://twitter.com/LucyHunterB/status/1266666828069310464?s=20
Government releases papers showing how advice changed in run-up to lockdown"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/29/sage-minutes-reveal-how-uk-advisers-reacted-to-coronavirus-crisis
Remember getting fearfully lost and disoriented having scored some hash and supped mushroom tea at a squat in Camden Town c.1985. I couldn't seem to find a way around Kings Cross as November rain lashed down, sirens wailed and it went dark. Nobody around at all. All derelict land behind there then.
Course it was probably only a few minutes.
Happy Days!
Incidentally, Battlebridge was the name of the village in Georgian times.
What is also interesting is 1997 showed the Conservatives can poll badly and lose a lot more seats than Labour who have yet to go sub 200 in any election since 1945 (the Conservatives have done it three times).
Okay...
Some of the developers were doing the old buy-the-rental-properties trick. Then slowly forcing the tenants out. Complete with paying employees to be anti-social tenants to force the others out.
Africa is coming next, I think.
I'm sure David Dimbleby told a story where he said he mentioned on the broadcast that the people waving union jacks in Downing St were Labour party workers but he was admonished the editor for 'spoiling the moment.'
Do remember that England did quite well out of the oil money at the time.
That a euphemism ?
Though I've watched it since on You Tube, I missed 1997 election night because I was shattered after a long day telling and knocking-up in St Ives and surrounding villages and of course the St Ives constituency doesn't count until the morning.
After catching up on the results and a glorious "Full Cornish" (don't ask), I took the bus to Penzance and joined the crowd at the St John's Hall where the counting was taking place.
It was also County Council elections and the LDs were trying to hold on to majority control of Cornwall CC (as it then was). That was the main reason I went down to work there in the final couple of days.
Indeed, one can argue the local election results were the start of the Conservative comeback. The LDs lost 177 seats, mainly those won in 1993 on a much lower turnout and the Conservatives gained 180 nationally.
In Cornwall, the LDs narrowly lost overall control losing two seats to go from 41 to 39 on the 79-seat authority. The Independents picked up two to 23.
As far as St Ives was concerned, I remember trying to listen to the Declaration. I recall former MP David Harris got a warm round of applause - he was genuinely liked across the board but had stood down and the new Conservative candidate was a local estate agent.
The Conservatives lost 8,000 votes from 1992 which represented about a 12% drop in vote share. The Referendum candidate got just under 4000 votes and I reckon the rest stayed at home. Andrew George got barely a thousand votes more than in 1992 and coincidentally Labour's vote was down by about the same number.