Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Their system is limited to the EEA. There's nothing spiteful about continuing to enforce their existing rules, however much it offends your sense of entitlement.
No it isn't. I literally just went through Naples airport and it had US, Australia and NZ flags (among others) on the e-gates at arrivals. None of those countries have any formal trade deal with the EU and aren't in the EEA/EFTA.
That is a can of worms I wouldn't have opened. I doubt every single future off-colour comment from any Conservative MP will elicit an apology from Johnson. The stuff last night from Ben Bradley is really not nice, but it's hardly for the PM to apologise for him. The signatories of that letter haven't thought this through.
I don't think Rayners comments did her any harm, the pompous stuffed shirts on the Tory backbenches were never going to back her. She can touch the Labour erogenous zones in a way that Starmer cannot.
Yes, I think the East/West Berlin comparison with Wales is slightly offensive.
I'd also note that many people thought Dominic Cummings should be locked up for ever for travelling up and down the country in violation of travel restrictions. Many of those same people now seem to take the view that the Welsh government imposing travel restrictions is tantamount to fascism.
The comparison with Berlin is hyperbolic.
But if -- as is widely reported in the Welsh media & on the BBC -- Drakeford has asked English police to stop Welsh people leaving Wales, to turn them back and to report them to the home police force, then that is a major, major blunder.
The optics are absolutely terrible. It would be bad enough if he asked the Welsh police to do it, but to ask the English police, once they have left Wales, is a really monumental error .
And anyone who gets one of these fines is not going to pay it, but challenge it. It seems pretty unclear to me whether Drakeford actually has this authority.
If Drakeford's policy does turn out to be a disaster could we see the Conservatives beating Labour in Wales for the first time in a national election for over 100 years next year?
It is not out of the question, in April a Yougov Welsh Assembly poll had it Con 38% Lab 32% Plaid 19% on the constituency vote and Con 37% Lab 29% and Plaid 18% on the regional vote
1. The Tories beat Labour in a National Election in Wales in 2009.
2. There is a vast pool of voters who do not vote in the Welsh Assembly elections (over 55 per cent). If the Tories (or Plaid) can get just 15 per cent of them to vote for their party, then they would win.
3. Drakeford (who is not a great communicator and not noticeably competent) was on course to lose, but the Rona came to his help and he is seen in Wales as having had a good pandemic (at least compared to Boris).
I think if his lockdown is seen as not achieving much, and there a few instances of Welsh Government ministers caught not obeying the rules (e.g. travelling to England), and there are a few arrests and fines for ridiculous things, then the gloss could come of his pandemic bounce. It is hard to say who would then benefit -- probably the Don't Vote party.
There is though an interesting fight developing in Cardiff West, between Drakeford and a maverick but popular Welsh politician, Neil McEvoy.
Drakeford's seat is marginal, he has a 3.7 per cent majority -- and he could lose his seat.
The European elections were not a UK national election or a Welsh Assembly election but a Europe wide election and the Tories got 1 MEP the same as Labour in Wales anyway and only led the popular vote by less than 1%
I agree though tapping non voters would help and if the lockdown really hits the Welsh economy and ministers are seen to be ignoring the voters Welsh Labour could well lose and Drakeford lose his seat, especially as the Tories got 36% at GE19 in Wales so if they held their vote then and Labour lost about a quarter of its 2019 vote of 40% to Plaid as often happens in Assembly elections the Tories would top the poll
I don't think the Toris will top the poll. Their leader in Wales is less impressive than Drakeford.
Both the Tory and Labour Party in Wales made the wrong choice of leader. The Labour Party should have chose Eluned Morgan (not Drakeford) and the Tories should have chosen Suzy Davies (not Paul).
It would probably help the Labour Party, if McEvoy took out Drakeford in Cardiff West.
McEvoy won't take out Drakeford in Cardiff West in his new Welsh National Party (WNP) incarnation. He has good levels of popularity with many in Fairwater particularly but Plaid will stand and he will split the Nat vote. Many in Plaid hate him as much as Labour activists do.
It is true that many in Plaid Cymru hate Neil McEvoy.
I don't know what will happen in Cardiff West. I certainly would vote for McEvoy, though, if I lived there.
On topic, I think Cyclefree's analysis is good, and notably fair. My main recommendation to Starmer at this stage is to do more presentations jointly with colleagues, especially Dodds - he has done enough to show he's a plausible PM, now he needs to show Labour has strength in depth.
On topic, I think the problem is that Labour have been good at pointing out the problems but not very good at pointing out solutions.
It is very easy to say Track and Trace is rubbish. And so what is your plan?
As I understand it, Labour doesn't favour a different system, just that it is managed better. I can't honestly say how much responsibility I really think the government has for the operational aspects of it, but the appointments and contract awards of this government are certainly... questionable. I think that's all the political mileage Labour can get out of this: "it's not working because you gave it to your clueless chums". It's a cut but not a serious wound.
District polling is supporting a strong shift to Biden state wise In 2016 when the state polls showed Clinton leading, the district polling was showing a different picture with Trump winning. Seems the polling as is so localised they picked up the education gap that national and state polling missed.
I do, but it's missing a couple of the district level polls that came out today - which, by the way, paint the same picture.
Though that data also shows Trump still leading in most Florida districts still and Biden only ahead by 2% in the 2 Michigan districts with 6% or 8% respectively refusing to declare who they are voting for, so may well be silent Trumps.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Must be an element of making a point in it. On the other hand, we are asking for a much less close economic and security arrangement than Iceland, Norway or Switzerland has with the EU so you can see their logic. It will be a massive ball-ache when I am travelling to the EU on business again, on the other hand the thought of all those leave voters looking at their blue passports while they queue at Spanish immigration will warm my heart. Sorry to be petty but as Leavers like to say, we voted out, get over it.
Yes, this is right. The UTOA Remainers on here can barely conceal their delight: they are thrilled that Britons post-Brexit might be treated with unnecessary bureaucratic pedantry at the border.
It satisfies their desire for vengeance. It also shows why they are so widely despised.
The despising is entirely mutual, believe me! It is hilarious to see Brexiteers who argued that we needed to exert more control over our border complaining about the EU doing the same thing. The arrogance of it is just staggering. What does UTOA stand for?
On topic, I think Cyclefree's analysis is good, and notably fair. My main recommendation to Starmer at this stage is to do more presentations jointly with colleagues, especially Dodds - he has done enough to show he's a plausible PM, now he needs to show Labour has strength in depth.
He needs Rayner more. Someone a bit more combative. Make her Shadow Home Secretary.
Bit unlikely in Penarth, but there again the Welsh Govt has expertly contrived a situation where it’s quite possibly easier to buy a wrap of heroin up the Valleys than a duvet right now, so we live in a strange world.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
I thought you liked raving flag waving nationalists.
No idea where you got that impression. If you mean I do not like being a colony of England then that is a different story but I am not into raves or flag waving personally.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
On topic: There's much to commend in this article, but I don't agree with a fairly central theme that Labour should be fighting on Johnson's home turf. He is good at sweeping rhetoric, and absolutely fucking terrible at detail. For me, killing this Tory administration ought to be a matter of death by a thousand cuts. And a good QC knows how to use a scalpel as well as a club. This is not a strategy that would work in many circumstances. There needs to be time (and there is), there needs to a government that is making mistakes so the cuts don't look like pedantry (there is). Further, there is a compelling rationale for not blundering in and making themselves hostages to fortune so early on. The government might, you know, actually get some things right. And any sweeping attacks you make which are then proven wrong become ammo to be fired back at you at a later date.
Another important point is that since the pandemic struck, politics has largely moved out of the streets and back indoors. Thank goodness for that, too. It's been such a welcome break to not have gangs of idiots harassing MPs on the streets. Johnson has a foot in that old world, but Starmer feels clean. There's a real hope that the cold rain of coronavirus is waking the country up from the fevered rampage it's been on, and that someone who doesn't look at all like a populist will attract voters. When Theresa May tried to ride the populist wave in 2017, it was a stiff and awkward performance. I think that wave has broken, so there's absolutely no reason for Starmer to repeat May's mistake. I have never voted Labour, but I'm impressed with Starmer so far. He's not making any bad mistakes, which is a low bar but a necessary one. When the policy ideas start to flow, I'll be ready to listen to Labour in a way I haven't been for the whole of my adult life so far. If a polling company approached me today and asked whom I would vote for, it wouldn't be Labour. But I was never the kind of person who would just suddenly drop everything and say yeah, red for me next time. If I am at all representative of a body of people in this country, then other people will be the same, dropping their instinctive opposition to Labour and saying ok, in your own time, let's hear what you've got to say.
Personally - and it may surprise people to hear me say this - I think the skills even of top QC’s - don’t necessarily translate very well to politics. They have their place but can be a bit overrated. Lawyers - even good ones - aren’t necessarily great communicators outside their natural environment.
Though some are brilliant at it 😏.
Hi Cyclefree
You would know more about this than me, so I may be completely wrong. If so please tell me.
The job of a lawyer is to argue the facts and the law, generally based on information supplied by somebody else - a client, a solicitor, a junior counsel - to a small group of people face to face who have to pay attention. That is to say, know what they need to say and say it. Imagination is not needed or indeed helpful, as it might lead to them going off script.
Meanwhile, a politician needs to think up what to say, and then sell it to a very large disparate group of people who don’t have to listen if they don’t want to.
Would it therefore be fair to say that lawyers do not always have the qualities required to be leaders, rather than just advocates?
I appreciate many lawyers had vivid imaginations - Tony Blair’s fantasies about WMD spring to mind - but apart from him are Thatcher and Attlee the only barristers at law to be PM since 1922? Although again they were two very successful PMs.
A big topic this. It depends on what type of lawyer you are talking about. Criminal lawyers have to have empathetic skills because of the nature of the work and have to be able to weave a story to jurors who do not have to listen.
Civil lawyers are seeking to persuade a different sort of audience. One of the most cutting remarks a judge can make to a civil lawyer is that his speech is a “jury speech” ie stronger on emotions than legal argument.
Many lawyers are very articulate and persuasive and some are actors manque. And being able to persuade, to tell a story, to get people onside and with you is a key part of being a good lawyer and of being a leader. But lawyers’ skills tend to be used in an arena where the boundaries and rules are clear and understood (a courtroom etc) and outside that those skills don’t necessarily translate well. So they can be great in Parliament but not necessarily great outside it.
More is needed to be an effective leader I think. Managing people, for instance. Plus sometimes other attributes which come with being a good lawyer - caution, care with words, calmness and rationality- may hold them back. Politics can be colourful and vivid and brutal and emotional.
Blair didn’t practise much as a lawyer but was an effective politician. Hilary Clinton was a good lawyer but bloody useless as a politician. John Smith was pretty good. Thatcher I think learnt a great deal of her communication skills from her lay preaching when younger rather than her work as a tax barrister.
Hard to generalise but hope this gives you a bit of an answer. I’m sure other legal bods on here will have a view.
Ken Clarke was a lawyer, too. Don’t know how good, but he was pretty competent by all your other measures.
That is a can of worms I wouldn't have opened. I doubt every single future off-colour comment from any Conservative MP will elicit an apology from Johnson. The stuff last night from Ben Bradley is really not nice, but it's hardly for the PM to apologise for him. The signatories of that letter haven't thought this through.
I wonder how many of those signatories worried about the abuse lawyers got as a result of comments made by the PM and the Home Secretary or asked them to stop as the A-G and Lord Chancellor did.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
Starmer has not been tested yet, at all. The idea voters have been won back is fanciful.....a lot of work to be done and thinking that Labour have somehow achieved much under KS is really quite complacent....
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
This is a betting site, in case you forgot the fact.
I did not see a mention of betting anywhere in your whinge.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
Well I hope you read this, because I was on your side of this argument until you acted like a child right now. Your obsession with the little used like function, and making deeply personal insults when, to my mind, you were making a persuasive point, is your own hangup, not others.
@kle4 - I have given you a "like" for that. Please do not to throw a tantrum ...
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Must be an element of making a point in it. On the other hand, we are asking for a much less close economic and security arrangement than Iceland, Norway or Switzerland has with the EU so you can see their logic. It will be a massive ball-ache when I am travelling to the EU on business again, on the other hand the thought of all those leave voters looking at their blue passports while they queue at Spanish immigration will warm my heart. Sorry to be petty but as Leavers like to say, we voted out, get over it.
Yes, this is right. The UTOA Remainers on here can barely conceal their delight: they are thrilled that Britons post-Brexit might be treated with unnecessary bureaucratic pedantry at the border.
It satisfies their desire for vengeance. It also shows why they are so widely despised.
The despising is entirely mutual, believe me! It is hilarious to see Brexiteers who argued that we needed to exert more control over our border complaining about the EU doing the same thing. The arrogance of it is just staggering. What does UTOA stand for?
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Ben Bradley has now turned Mansfield into a near safe Tory seat, Chingford, Kensington, Wycombe, Hastings, Reading West, Milton Keynes, even Uxbridge, Beckenham and Wimbledon are now easier Labour targets than Mansfield
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
IANAL but away from leadership, the backbench MP who is also a lawyer may have an advantage over other colleagues in being able to read and understand the legislation they are voting on. Party leaders and whips might prefer lobby fodder, of course.
On this point, I found that detailed non-partisan scrutiny was viewed by front-benchers and civil servants alike as tiresome pettifogging. I remember pointing out a mistake in one Bill which reversed the obvious meaning of the clause. The senior clerk in the Table Office who I queried it with said "Well, thank you, but backbenchers aren't usually supposed to worry about this sort of thing - no doubt it would have been picked up later in the proceedings." One would get a similar response in Committee stages - polite acceptance in a tone of exasperated irony. If you wanted to disagree with the principle of the Bill, fine, it was accepted that that's what you were there for. But suggestions on wording to avoid problems in interpretation - I'm not talking about missing commas and suchliker but actual flaws - were seen as annoying.
This explains so much of the legislation the courts struggle with. Keeps me and others in employment though.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
To be fair, Brexit didnt have to be stupid, it is this particular form and mood of Brexit that is. The cleverness of the leave campaign was to allow the voters to decide their own desired brexit and think they were voting for that.
The saying voters didnt know what they were voting for is one of the most contentious of the whole debate. I think it is true, but not for the reasons the originators of the saying claim.
Voters, by and large, understood there was an economic downside which they were happy to trade off for a social/values upside. So in that sense the saying is false.
But the vagueness allowed people to believe they were getting Singapore on Thames with global, not regional, immigration, at the same time as others thinking they were getting zero immigrants, maybe even sending a few back, and others still thinking we would move to EEA with little change.
Not all of those groups could be right, but they all existed, hence leave voters really didnt know what they were voting for!
District polling is supporting a strong shift to Biden state wise In 2016 when the state polls showed Clinton leading, the district polling was showing a different picture with Trump winning. Seems the polling as is so localised they picked up the education gap that national and state polling missed.
I do, but it's missing a couple of the district level polls that came out today - which, by the way, paint the same picture.
Though that data also shows Trump still leading in most Florida districts still and Biden only ahead by 2% in the 2 Michigan districts with 6% or 8% respectively refusing to declare who they are voting for, so may well be silent Trumps.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
'Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.'
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
District polling is supporting a strong shift to Biden state wise In 2016 when the state polls showed Clinton leading, the district polling was showing a different picture with Trump winning. Seems the polling as is so localised they picked up the education gap that national and state polling missed.
Though that data also shows Trump still leading in most Florida districts still and Biden only ahead by 2% in the 2 Michigan districts with 6% or 8% respectively refusing to declare who they are voting for, so may well be silent Trumps.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.
Seems my attempt to embed a tweet failed and caused issues with quoting here. Removed the tweet and just put in the OneDrive link instead.
The district polling does lend more evidence that current state polling is more in tune than 2016. State polling was going against what district polling was showing. Currently national, state and district all pointing the same way.
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
Agree with this. Brexit has proved the ultimate wedge issue and has played big time for the Tories and against Labour. We now have in the blue corner a "base" of 40% of voters who for all their differences are united by a sense of X - I won't define what X is since I don't wish to offend anybody this morning - and it will take a rocket to shift them.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
I think this for better or worse might be where we're heading and "Labour" - or whatever we want to call ourselves - can do well in such a landscape.
You’ll never squeeze out the lib dems by forcing them to choose between two corrupt parties. They will rebuild starting in May.
Every sympathy but I think for the LDs electoral reform is becoming a must. If we stick with FPTP I see an increasingly polarized and binary politics where 2 tribes go to war and 1 is all that you can score.
That is a can of worms I wouldn't have opened. I doubt every single future off-colour comment from any Conservative MP will elicit an apology from Johnson. The stuff last night from Ben Bradley is really not nice, but it's hardly for the PM to apologise for him. The signatories of that letter haven't thought this through.
If you're going to write a letter like that, and are genuine in your reasons for writing it, the one thing you don't do is release it to the press.
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
Your assertion that ALL undecided voters are going to vote Trump is based on what evidence exactly?
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
Your assertion that ALL undecided voters are going to vote Trump is based on what evidence exactly?
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
The quote is actually the love of money is the..... but yes Germans can go as I posted yesterday it would be easier to have a family Xmas in canaries than the Uk but my guess is that this window will be short lived.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
Agree with this. Brexit has proved the ultimate wedge issue and has played big time for the Tories and against Labour. We now have in the blue corner a "base" of 40% of voters who for all their differences are united by a sense of X - I won't define what X is since I don't wish to offend anybody this morning - and it will take a rocket to shift them.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
I think this for better or worse might be where we're heading and "Labour" - or whatever we want to call ourselves - can do well in such a landscape.
You’ll never squeeze out the lib dems by forcing them to choose between two corrupt parties. They will rebuild starting in May.
Every sympathy but I think for the LDs electoral reform is becoming a must. If we stick with FPTP I see an increasingly polarized and binary politics where 2 tribes go to war and 1 is all that you can score.
I'm going to say I am pretty relaxed about that, hopefully before anyone else!
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
Nobody cares about fishing.
Anyway I heard both Keir and Lisa speak and Lisa got it better than Keir did. They were both good though, just Nandy was better.
They do in the fishing ports from Peterhead and Grimsby to Hastings
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Their system is limited to the EEA. There's nothing spiteful about continuing to enforce their existing rules, however much it offends your sense of entitlement.
No it isn't. I literally just went through Naples airport and it had US, Australia and NZ flags (among others) on the e-gates at arrivals. None of those countries have any formal trade deal with the EU and aren't in the EEA/EFTA.
So it's not up to the EU then? What are we even arguing about. 🤷♂️
So I may be wrong and I'm sure it's fully of complications but if I've got this right what's happening is that the EU (or Schengen?) rules say you have to have a human check, and that's what the British think should be replaced (not augmented) by an automatic gate, so we're arguing about that part. It's not just that the British love going through the gates, albeit it's pretty fun and could be further gamified.
Also I don't know whether the Italians are really doing a proper human check, or whether they're really doing the whole thing with the automatic gate and the human is just there too wave you through so they can pretend they're following the rules.
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
Agree with this. Brexit has proved the ultimate wedge issue and has played big time for the Tories and against Labour. We now have in the blue corner a "base" of 40% of voters who for all their differences are united by a sense of X - I won't define what X is since I don't wish to offend anybody this morning - and it will take a rocket to shift them.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
I think this for better or worse might be where we're heading and "Labour" - or whatever we want to call ourselves - can do well in such a landscape.
You’ll never squeeze out the lib dems by forcing them to choose between two corrupt parties. They will rebuild starting in May.
Every sympathy but I think for the LDs electoral reform is becoming a must. If we stick with FPTP I see an increasingly polarized and binary politics where 2 tribes go to war and 1 is all that you can score.
I'm going to say I am pretty relaxed about that, hopefully before anyone else!
I'm not sure why Leavers are surprised by the antipathy felt towards them by Remainers. It seems quite logical. Remainers for the most part see them as neanderthal racists and however big their majority it doesn't make them any more palatable.
Then enjoy opposition - it could last a long time.
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
Your assertion that ALL undecided voters are going to vote Trump is based on what evidence exactly?
We know in Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016 most 'undecideds' went Trump or were silent Trumps all along, hence Trump won both states despite being behind in every poll in Wisconsin and every poll bar Trafalgar in Michigan
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
Your assertion that ALL undecided voters are going to vote Trump is based on what evidence exactly?
We know in Michigan and Wisconsin in 2016 most 'undecideds' went Trump or were silent Trumps all along, hence Trump won both states despite being behind in every poll in Wisconsin and every poll bar Trafalgar in Michigan
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
Which is why Starmer has near zero chance of winning a Labour majority, if he becomes PM it will be propped up by the SNP and LDs unless he makes major gains in Scotland as well as England and Wales
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
There is so much that needs ripping up and starting again, from our voting system and the House of Lords, through the relationship between central and local government, tax and NI, the way property is taxed, and so on.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
If people want to see or understand why Labour have not "broken through" they need do no more than read @Cyclefree 's piece.
The inbuilt and unwarranted assumptions are just alien to the majority of this country. Remainer angst is redolent in every sentence. How could the people have been so stupid as to vote for Brexit and then, when the remainer Parliament lied and lied, kicked them out on their arses giving Boris an 80 strong majority? How deluded and stupid people are. How could anyone believe that anyone who thought Brexit was a good idea was right about anything, ever? Or competent? How can they not see this (gnashing of teeth).
The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election) really don't see it that way. We see a government struggling with a pandemic that has caused chaos around the world, who is trying to negotiate with the EU with a significant chunk of its own country cheering the EU on, tweeting every contemptuous aside with glee. It pisses us off. And it makes it us overlook the many, many flaws of this government.
Just a thought.
Eh? There is no reference to Brexit at all in the piece. Quite why you need to replay your Brexit angst is a mystery.
And my very first reason says pretty much what you have - namely that people are giving the government the benefit of the doubt because we need it to succeed, regardless of whether we support it or not. That is my view and it is incidentally my view on Brexit - namely that I want a deal with the EU and for Brexit not to be a failure because if it is it is me and mine who suffer if it is a failure.
People are not really rushing to Labour because they don’t see any need to and because, as @Casino_Royale has said, many of them probably feel that it does not share their values.
Come on @Cyclefree , are you really saying that your contempt for this government isn't based on this fundamental difference of view? One of the values Labour doesn't share is Brexit. SKS tries hard not to talk about it but people remember the role he played in the remainer Parliament. He is trying hard to move on from it and, maybe, after January he will be able to but right now its giving Boris the same bedrock of support that Sturgeon gets from Independence supporters who back her no matter how ridiculous it gets.
You have me wrong. My contempt for this government is because I think it does not really value those things which make a democracy work and thrive - the rule of law, free speech, the value of scrutiny, independent civic institutions, integrity and responsibility. I have much more sympathy for why people voted for Brexit than you assume - as my articles in 2016 and 2017 would have shown you.
My views on the political values I cherish and which I think this government does not are best set out here:-
A senior minister said ... "[Companies] are reporting that productivity is going down, they can't bring in new clients because it's not something you can really do over Zoom, and people aren't sparking off each other and having ideas because they're all stuck at home.
The choice, in the long run, for many people is between working from the office (WFO) and being unemployed at home, not between WFO and WFH. This has been so hard to accept, but the reality is starting to bite.
As far as Labour is concerned, voters are looking at Wales where nonessential purchases in shops and many English visitors are banned, and at London where the Mayor is trying to push down the economy and the transport system even more. If this shows what a Labour government would be like, it is not an enticing prospect. The Labour vision seems to involve shutting down much of the country and huge public borrowing, which is not realistic. They have not shown how they would control the public deficits.
The Welsh government comes over as a petty and spiteful bunch of Little Hitlers. They are not a good advertisement for Labour (Andy Burnham is a much better advertisement for Labour).
District polling is supporting a strong shift to Biden state wise In 2016 when the state polls showed Clinton leading, the district polling was showing a different picture with Trump winning. Seems the polling as is so localised they picked up the education gap that national and state polling missed.
Though that data also shows Trump still leading in most Florida districts still and Biden only ahead by 2% in the 2 Michigan districts with 6% or 8% respectively refusing to declare who they are voting for, so may well be silent Trumps.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.
Seems my attempt to embed a tweet failed and caused issues with quoting here. Removed the tweet and just put in the OneDrive link instead.
The district polling does lend more evidence that current state polling is more in tune than 2016. State polling was going against what district polling was showing. Currently national, state and district all pointing the same way.
Not all, Rasmussen has Biden's national lead down to 3%, IBID/TIPP down to 4%, Trafalgar has Trump ahead in Michigan, many polls have Trump still ahead in Florida and Ohio etc
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
Agree with this. Brexit has proved the ultimate wedge issue and has played big time for the Tories and against Labour. We now have in the blue corner a "base" of 40% of voters who for all their differences are united by a sense of X - I won't define what X is since I don't wish to offend anybody this morning - and it will take a rocket to shift them.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
I think this for better or worse might be where we're heading and "Labour" - or whatever we want to call ourselves - can do well in such a landscape.
Maybe. 40% of the electorate don't value decency, competence and the truth when choosing their politicians, which means Starmer is substantially wasting his time going on that pitch to current Conservative Party supporters. But presumably the 40% of support he has now, does value those things and would turn against him if he adopted the Johnson/Cummings playbook.
The problem is the electoral system The Conservatives can happily have an outright majority in parliament from a minority of voters on a ticket of incompetence, dishonesty and moral turpitude as long as they have more votes than the next biggest bloc , ie Labour. Starmer needs to get more votes than Johnson, either by himself or in coalition.
Yes. Electoral reform transforms things. With that we get a more mature, pluralistic politics with every vote counting and room for multiple political identities. But I'm assuming it's not happening. In which case I do think Labour needs to build their own progressive base coalition 40% of voters rather than chase the Red Wall. And I also see this in rather stark "good v bad" terms like you do, however I didn't want to stress that since my point is about the best strategy to win power.
So you'll get shot if you try and cross the border?
A little less hyperbole.
Yes, I think the East/West Berlin comparison with Wales is slightly offensive.
I'd also note that many people thought Dominic Cummings should be locked up for ever for travelling up and down the country in violation of travel restrictions. Many of those same people now seem to take the view that the Welsh government imposing travel restrictions is tantamount to fascism.
The difference is that back then, we were all supposed to stay at home - a clear message that every PB’er bar one managed to understand and apply. The situation now isn’t the same.
District polling is supporting a strong shift to Biden state wise In 2016 when the state polls showed Clinton leading, the district polling was showing a different picture with Trump winning. Seems the polling as is so localised they picked up the education gap that national and state polling missed.
Though that data also shows Trump still leading in most Florida districts still and Biden only ahead by 2% in the 2 Michigan districts with 6% or 8% respectively refusing to declare who they are voting for, so may well be silent Trumps.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.
Seems my attempt to embed a tweet failed and caused issues with quoting here. Removed the tweet and just put in the OneDrive link instead.
The district polling does lend more evidence that current state polling is more in tune than 2016. State polling was going against what district polling was showing. Currently national, state and district all pointing the same way.
Not all, Rasmussen has Biden's national lead down to 3%, IBID/TIPP down to 4%, Trafalgar has Trump ahead in Michigan, many polls have Trump still ahead in Florida and Ohio etc
I was meaning the averages, there will always be outliers on both ends, that doesn't mean they are wrong of course. District polling "suggests" the averages are a bit more solid this time round.
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Their system is limited to the EEA. There's nothing spiteful about continuing to enforce their existing rules, however much it offends your sense of entitlement.
No it isn't. I literally just went through Naples airport and it had US, Australia and NZ flags (among others) on the e-gates at arrivals. None of those countries have any formal trade deal with the EU and aren't in the EEA/EFTA.
So it's not up to the EU then? What are we even arguing about. 🤷♂️
So I may be wrong and I'm sure it's fully of complications but if I've got this right what's happening is that the EU (or Schengen?) rules say you have to have a human check, and that's what the British think should be replaced (not augmented) by an automatic gate, so we're arguing about that part. It's not just that the British love going through the gates, albeit it's pretty fun and could be further gamified.
Also I don't know whether the Italians are really doing a proper human check, or whether they're really doing the whole thing with the automatic gate and the human is just there too wave you through so they can pretend they're following the rules.
Even if there is a final human check, surely the point is that nations retain control of who does and doesn't get to use e-gates rather than the EU. I didn't check whether there was another check after the e-gates in Italy, though I can't see how there could have been because after it let you through there were no desks or border agents.
Let's assume that there is a final check though and the UK is given the same e-gate access as Australia or the US, you're no longer in the same queue as Indian, Chinese or other nationals which is surely the point of not wanting to be in the "all other" queue.
It feels like an argument over nothing to me considering the UK will have the ability to sign reciprocal deals on entry gates with the individual nations. I don't see why the individual nations wouldn't want to do it even if the EU is against it on an EU level, it just helps manage arrival halls full of British tourists.
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
There is so much that needs ripping up and starting again, from our voting system and the House of Lords, through the relationship between central and local government, tax and NI, the way property is taxed, and so on.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
It is sad though arriving at Rome Paris or Nice airport and watching all the stylish people drifting through the EU only barrier and realising you're no longer longer part of it. You're with the Brexiteers
TBF our dress sense gave us away well before we were forced to queue separately.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
There's a distinction between those seats which are genuinely marginal, like High Peak, Darlington, Calder Valley, Bishop Auckland, Colne Valley; those where the Conservative victory just looks like a fluke, such as Leigh, or Burnley, And those where the Labour vote has been dropping sharply over several elections, like the Stoke seats, Morley & Outwood, or those in South Yorkshire. The latter may be won back in a very good year for Labour, but not otherwise.
Good article, but I don't think it's quite right. I'd argue the Government have had several mini Black Wednesday type events - there has been plenty for the opposition to get their teeth into.
The bigger problem is that the electorate at large (or at least the section that decides elections) isn't convinced that Labour shares their values.
That’s you projecting your preferred battlefield onto the conflict. There are more pertinent reasons why the government is getting something of a free pass and the opposition not yet being treated as a ready for government alternative.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
It's a hilarious idea. Let's just bypass Scotland, the North...... Vote Labour - no bigots accepted - you listening Gillies Duffy!
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
It's a hilarious idea. Let's just bypass Scotland, the North...... Vote Labour - no bigots accepted - you listening Gillies Duffy!
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
It's a hilarious idea. Let's just bypass Scotland, the North...... Vote Labour - no bigots accepted - you listening Gillies Duffy!
There's plenty of Labour seats in the North.
And an awful lot of them are marginal now - all 3 in Sunderland now. Not a sentence I ever expected to write.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
To be fair, Brexit didnt have to be stupid, it is this particular form and mood of Brexit that is. The cleverness of the leave campaign was to allow the voters to decide their own desired brexit and think they were voting for that.
The saying voters didnt know what they were voting for is one of the most contentious of the whole debate. I think it is true, but not for the reasons the originators of the saying claim.
Voters, by and large, understood there was an economic downside which they were happy to trade off for a social/values upside. So in that sense the saying is false.
But the vagueness allowed people to believe they were getting Singapore on Thames with global, not regional, immigration, at the same time as others thinking they were getting zero immigrants, maybe even sending a few back, and others still thinking we would move to EEA with little change.
Not all of those groups could be right, but they all existed, hence leave voters really didnt know what they were voting for!
True on the genius of the Leave campaign- though the blank screen thing only works as a single shot project. Even a successful Brexit would let down many of its supporters.
The other thing, which I think pretty much all of us missed, was that there isn't really a "one step outside" position, other than the Norway/Switzerland approach, both of which are fairly theoretical in how much control they have. If a country wants control of its borders, those borders have to be non-trivial.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
From what I saw in Europe last month, the Germans are the only people travelling at the moment, in large numbers at least.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
The quote is actually the love of money is the..... but yes Germans can go as I posted yesterday it would be easier to have a family Xmas in canaries than the Uk but my guess is that this window will be short lived.
That's true, of course, about the love of money. I suspect you're right about the short life of this 'window"! We were hoping for a family Christmas in Thailand, but while Thais can come here we can't go there.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
From what I saw in Europe last month, the Germans are the only people travelling at the moment, in large numbers at least.
British as well, we met a lot of Brits in Italy and anecdotally loads of my friends have been to Italy and Greece.
Still Brexit, I think, although that's as much a point of view as a policy act. Anyone who values decency, competence and the truth has abandoned the Conservative Party. We're at a 40% bedrock, who won't shift their views for any of those things.
Agree with this. Brexit has proved the ultimate wedge issue and has played big time for the Tories and against Labour. We now have in the blue corner a "base" of 40% of voters who for all their differences are united by a sense of X - I won't define what X is since I don't wish to offend anybody this morning - and it will take a rocket to shift them.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
I think this for better or worse might be where we're heading and "Labour" - or whatever we want to call ourselves - can do well in such a landscape.
Eh? Wasn't that exactly the Corbyn strategy? Far from being a magic electoral bullet, it barely works in the US, where the underlying demographics are far more favourable to it than they are in the UK. Biden is winning by pinching former Republican voters and not giving two hoots about what the young, blue-haired 'progressives' want, even to the extent of vetting Republicans that he might wish to serve in his Cabinet! Classic triangulation.
But Biden is running on a progressive platform. Corbyn shows it doesn't work here? Not really. Corbyn shows that Corbyn doesn't work here. I think in the context of binary polarized politics there is a potential progressive base out there that is at least the equal of the Brexit base that Johnson & Cummings have put together. Then it comes down to leadership and policies. The sucker move for Labour would be to chase the Red Wall on "values". If they do that they risk turning off their new base. Better to appeal and add to it.
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
I think I would qualify as one of the site's "Arch Remainers", but I have said many times that I would be happy enough with an EEA deal.
It is a stupid thing to give up full membership for, but it is way, way better than being a 3rd country.
More frustrating to me are the UK-centric threads by the regulars on here. Don't Alastair, Cyclefree, David Herdson etc. study US politics? We're reliant on Mike and Robert, who are excellent.
Sorry, not meaning to snipe but we're days away from the biggest betting event of the year, probably in the next four years. It also happens to be incredibly fascinating at Presidential, Senate, Congressional, Governor and issue level. There are some amazing battles taking place with stacks of polls. Any one of a score of Senate battles is worthy of a thread in its own right, and then some. It's also a result which will dramatically determine the UK's position.
Come on guys, please step up. Let's leave our myopia and focus on America for another week.
Speak for yourself, I personally don't give a toss for any senate battle and can only hope the Americans are not as thick as the English and vote in the nasty party again.
This is a betting site, in case you forgot the fact.
I did not see a mention of betting anywhere in your whinge.
Love the way Tories claim that airport queues are not a problem because they’ve shut down the economy.
If you’ve arrived in Frankfurt on a A319 just after an A380 has arrived from China you know the value of the EU passport lane.
The economic shutdown has occurred across much of the world - to pretend it's a Tory thing helps to understand the cut through failure the header described. Why great swathes of the UK population would care if comfortably off jetsetters from China or any where else have to wait in a queue is beyond me. We'll have Polly Toynbee up next worried about getting back and forth from her Tuscany villa.
Tories may not have caused Corona, but they mishandled it and here they are again complacently saying it’s not a problem that business travel is restricted. You couldn’t make this stuff up.
They did some things right and some things wrong - much the same as everywhere else. The only people talkng at any length about this as a problem seem to be m/c business travellers like you. There are things people care about a lot in this world - saving a few minutes at an airport for a well heeled, expense account business traveller is not one of them.
I love the way you seem unconvinced that the Tories 'may' not have caused Covid. Such a concession - we feel your pain.
More Tory “fuck business” policy. You should care about business travellers. They tend to make investment decisions that create work that pay tax bills. Tories used to care about this before they went all ideological and nationalist.
To be fair, i think that's missing the point. Yes it will be economically damaging. But lots about Brexit is economically damaging. This is hardly a clincher for "Brexit is bad for business", that ship sailed long ago. The thrust of the argument here however, is that the UK Govt is suddenly panicking that UK holiday makers are suddenly going to discover they can't go through the e-gates, have to queue, and are going to get very angry about it, and change their minds about the whole business. Which they won't. Either they won't care. Or they will put it down to the EU being petty (which is the sort of thing which bolsters support for Brexit in the average Brexiteer mind - in fact even "eurosceptic" remainers)
Once tourism gets going again I really do think the mega delays will become a significant talking point. Remember that Brexit was supposed to make things better. "Blame the EU" won't wash for long - it will be pretty clear that EU/EEA/CH isn't us and than means join the mega queue. So the solution would be simple - "we need to be like the EEA/CH bit".
People won't want an Australian or Canadian deal. They'll want a Swiss deal...
You really think there will be "mega" delays? I rather doubt it to be honest. Not after a few weeks/months of "making a point". If people can't use e-gates (which as i say are hardly universally taken advantage of at the moment - even where they exist) then airports will employ additional staff to speed up progress. Countries/regions which rely on UK tourism as a major source of income, aren't going to want them hanging around in airports for hours not spending money.
But we'll see.
You see the mega queues at UK airports for non EU/EEA/CH travellers? Do we employ additional staff? The queues in American airports for any foreigner? Do they employ additional staff? Queues and waiting are simply a normal part of air travel from which we have been insulated for a while. We can't use e-gates to enter the EU as we'll need to have our passports stamped. Just as Americans can't use our e-gates at Heathrow.
Airports will have the same challenges as ports like Dover. Any delay will create a backlog which devours space that doesn't exist. For the Channel we are hastily building vast lorry parks. For airports they won't have that luxury.
Kent is looking great, pity any poor sod who lives there.
If people want to see or understand why Labour have not "broken through" they need do no more than read @Cyclefree 's piece.
The inbuilt and unwarranted assumptions are just alien to the majority of this country. Remainer angst is redolent in every sentence. How could the people have been so stupid as to vote for Brexit and then, when the remainer Parliament lied and lied, kicked them out on their arses giving Boris an 80 strong majority? How deluded and stupid people are. How could anyone believe that anyone who thought Brexit was a good idea was right about anything, ever? Or competent? How can they not see this (gnashing of teeth).
The majority of us (as established by a referendum and an election) really don't see it that way. We see a government struggling with a pandemic that has caused chaos around the world, who is trying to negotiate with the EU with a significant chunk of its own country cheering the EU on, tweeting every contemptuous aside with glee. It pisses us off. And it makes it us overlook the many, many flaws of this government.
Just a thought.
Eh? There is no reference to Brexit at all in the piece. Quite why you need to replay your Brexit angst is a mystery.
And my very first reason says pretty much what you have - namely that people are giving the government the benefit of the doubt because we need it to succeed, regardless of whether we support it or not. That is my view and it is incidentally my view on Brexit - namely that I want a deal with the EU and for Brexit not to be a failure because if it is it is me and mine who suffer if it is a failure.
People are not really rushing to Labour because they don’t see any need to and because, as @Casino_Royale has said, many of them probably feel that it does not share their values.
Come on @Cyclefree , are you really saying that your contempt for this government isn't based on this fundamental difference of view? One of the values Labour doesn't share is Brexit. SKS tries hard not to talk about it but people remember the role he played in the remainer Parliament. He is trying hard to move on from it and, maybe, after January he will be able to but right now its giving Boris the same bedrock of support that Sturgeon gets from Independence supporters who back her no matter how ridiculous it gets.
You have me wrong. My contempt for this government is because I think it does not really value those things which make a democracy work and thrive - the rule of law, free speech, the value of scrutiny, independent civic institutions, integrity and responsibility. I have much more sympathy for why people voted for Brexit than you assume - as my articles in 2016 and 2017 would have shown you.
My views on the political values I cherish and which I think this government does not are best set out here:-
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
There's a distinction between those seats which are genuinely marginal, like High Peak, Darlington, Calder Valley, Bishop Auckland, Colne Valley; those where the Conservative victory just looks like a fluke, such as Leigh, or Burnley, And those where the Labour vote has been dropping sharply over several elections, like the Stoke seats, Morley & Outwood, or those in South Yorkshire. The latter may be won back in a very good year for Labour, but not otherwise.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
There's a distinction between those seats which are genuinely marginal, like High Peak, Darlington, Calder Valley, Bishop Auckland, Colne Valley; those where the Conservative victory just looks like a fluke, such as Leigh, or Burnley, And those where the Labour vote has been dropping sharply over several elections, like the Stoke seats, Morley & Outwood, or those in South Yorkshire. The latter may be won back in a very good year for Labour, but not otherwise.
A point made well and worth repeating many many times. Politicians and posters on both sides of the divide often miss this. The Red Wall is not a monolith by any means. And the Midlands are as important to Labour as the North.
On topic, I think Cyclefree's analysis is good, and notably fair. My main recommendation to Starmer at this stage is to do more presentations jointly with colleagues, especially Dodds - he has done enough to show he's a plausible PM, now he needs to show Labour has strength in depth.
A new economic settlement - just to cope with the aftermath of the virus crisis, not to mention the glaring flaws in the current one - will be the most pressing issue after the virus subsides. You can’t seriously think that Dodds is the best person for the challenge?
So you'll get shot if you try and cross the border?
A little less hyperbole.
Yes, I think the East/West Berlin comparison with Wales is slightly offensive.
Maybe we could build some castles on the Welsh coastline and borders to keep the Welsh in? I believe there are a few lying around unused from a similar project in the 13th/14th Century
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
Just realised that auto-correct has changed 'Canarian' ....... pertaining to the Canary Islands...... to Canadian. MUST remember to check for sneaky gremlin attacks.
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
It is the biggest failure of May’s premiership. She assumed she didn’t have the political capital to aim for a soft Brexit, yet had she used her honeymoon to set out some home truths to both extremes and reached out for a cross-party consensus on some sort of CU/SM Brexit, we could so easily be in a better position now. Instead, she frittered away her political capital on a serious of mistakes and ended up achieving nothing.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
There's a distinction between those seats which are genuinely marginal, like High Peak, Darlington, Calder Valley, Bishop Auckland, Colne Valley; those where the Conservative victory just looks like a fluke, such as Leigh, or Burnley, And those where the Labour vote has been dropping sharply over several elections, like the Stoke seats, Morley & Outwood, or those in South Yorkshire. The latter may be won back in a very good year for Labour, but not otherwise.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
I wouldn't give up to easily, on what is better termed the Purple wall.
There's a distinction between those seats which are genuinely marginal, like High Peak, Darlington, Calder Valley, Bishop Auckland, Colne Valley; those where the Conservative victory just looks like a fluke, such as Leigh, or Burnley, And those where the Labour vote has been dropping sharply over several elections, like the Stoke seats, Morley & Outwood, or those in South Yorkshire. The latter may be won back in a very good year for Labour, but not otherwise.
A point made well and worth repeating many many times. Politicians and posters on both sides of the divide often miss this. The Red Wall is not a monolith by any means. And the Midlands are as important to Labour as the North.
Indeed, Blair was an exception as he was able to win southern and London seats like Braintree and Finchley and Dorset South at a general election no other Labour leader had, however before that Wilson and Attlee won majorities for Labour by combining winning the North and Midlands with winning in Wales and Scotland and London.
Labour are in such trouble now as not only do they no longer have a Blair with his exceptional appeal to voters south of Watford, they have also lost their traditional heartlands in the North and Midlands and Scotland which Wilson and Attlee used to win their majorities too
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
If I were Starmer I would replace Dodds with Ed Miliband or Yvette Cooper, she has been over promoted in my view
Yvette Cooper , we can ignore your guidance if you seriously think she could do anything , totally useless.
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
From what I saw in Europe last month, the Germans are the only people travelling at the moment, in large numbers at least.
British as well, we met a lot of Brits in Italy and anecdotally loads of my friends have been to Italy and Greece.
In nearly a month I only saw three other British cars, and everywhere I stayed said they hadn’t seen any British visitors this year. On the Eurotunnel returning home, German cars were in a clear majority.
Ken Clarke was a lawyer, too. Don’t know how good, but he was pretty competent by all your other measures.
Yes he was - still is, I expect, if he wanted to bother. Anna Soubry was a lawyer too, and good at attacking rhetoric with no prisoners taken (even if her own party(ies). Every party needs a few of those too - Rayner is our closest at the moment. Parties need to convince at both intellectual and gut levels. The ability of an intellectual leader to work well with a rougher colleague (Blair/Prescott is an example) is important.
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
It is the biggest failure of May’s premiership. She assumed she didn’t have the political capital to aim for a soft Brexit, yet had she used her honeymoon to set out some home truths to both extremes and reached out for a cross-party consensus on some sort of CU/SM Brexit, we could so easily be in a better position now. Instead, she frittered away her political capital on a serious of mistakes and ended up achieving nothing.
If May had done that and kept free movement and prevented us doing our own trade deals then Farage would have surged at the last general election and we would likely still be in a hung parliament rather than with a Tory majority of 80 under Boris. She would also have been toppled after only a year by her own MPs not 3 years.
It needed the Tories to get a majority to deliver Brexit but only a Labour PM would ever deliver a CU/SM Brexit and it is unrealistic to expect otherwise
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
There is so much that needs ripping up and starting again, from our voting system and the House of Lords, through the relationship between central and local government, tax and NI, the way property is taxed, and so on.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
Have Labour committed to PR yet?
No - they are hiding behind some vague words implying there will be some sort of review of the constitution under a Labour government, and trying to hint to reformers that this could open the door to fairer voting, whilst telling opponents that it won’t.
The best hope is that HY is right (never thought I’d be typing that) and despite a heroic effort by Starmer they don’t clear the majority bar, and not only are forced to deal with the LibDems and others after an election, but actually come to the view that achieving a majority themselves alone is no longer a realistic objective.
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
Good post, what you describe is probably both the median position of the country and also the one that would get the highest proportion "willing to accept it" even if wasnt their preferred option. The people with the power to have taken us there were three consecutive Tory PMs, none of whom have had any interest in delivering it, not the voting public who were given a binary choice.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
To be fair, Brexit didnt have to be stupid, it is this particular form and mood of Brexit that is. The cleverness of the leave campaign was to allow the voters to decide their own desired brexit and think they were voting for that.
The saying voters didnt know what they were voting for is one of the most contentious of the whole debate. I think it is true, but not for the reasons the originators of the saying claim.
Voters, by and large, understood there was an economic downside which they were happy to trade off for a social/values upside. So in that sense the saying is false.
But the vagueness allowed people to believe they were getting Singapore on Thames with global, not regional, immigration, at the same time as others thinking they were getting zero immigrants, maybe even sending a few back, and others still thinking we would move to EEA with little change.
Not all of those groups could be right, but they all existed, hence leave voters really didnt know what they were voting for!
Totally.
If you voted Leave to shake things up, to deliver one in the eye to the liberal political establishment, to promote reactionary values and social conservatism, to make it harder for people and things to get into Britain, then you have not been stupid and you have not been conned.
But if your reasons were to make the country richer, freer, more influential, more democratic, you have and you have.
Perhaps Labour's best bet is therefore to (almost) forget these 40% and start growing an equal and opposite base. This means they should always seek to polarize rather than unite or (worse) triangulate. Argue for activist government. BIG focus on green. More identity politics. Push not play down socially progressive values. Given they face an English equivalent of the Trump Republicans, assemble a voting coalition similar to the Dems, the young, ethnic minorites, educated metropolitans, urban liberals, etc. Squeeze out the Lib Dems, force all LD voters to choose which side they're on.
This undoubtedly where we are heading; a US style realignment of British politics. Although you can add unions to your progressive phalanx that will face off against the tory coalition of ignorami + big capital.
What is often missing in the caricature of Brexiters and Remainers, is the substantial number of people who voted Remain because they anticipated the sh*tshow it would become. Not because they had a love for the EU. Who would have been quite happy with a Norway type relationship, with the inevitable additional clout from being a such a big economically important nation whose position could not realistically be ignored in future, even if excluded from the formal EU decision making process, but just didn't think that it would come about. But might have voted for it if it did (eg. the referendum vote was contingent on the seeking of such a relationship)
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
I think I would qualify as one of the site's "Arch Remainers", but I have said many times that I would be happy enough with an EEA deal.
It is a stupid thing to give up full membership for, but it is way, way better than being a 3rd country.
That's not quite the sort of person i was talking about. Obviously somebody pro EU would prefer EEA to what's happening. What i'm talking about are people who might well have voted for an EEA/Norway plus (the plus coming from simply being a far more economically important country than Norway and therefore having more clout to influence EU decision making) type arrangement in a straight referendum option vs Remain. But voted Remain because they didn't think it would happen, but just anticipated a big sh*tshow (without even putting all the blame on those implementing it).
Interesting bit of 'cakeism' yesterday; the Government apparently, belatedly, realises that from Jan 1st travellers to Europe will have to go through the 'non-EU passports' channel, and that will take longer.
And when they experience that, people aren't going to like it. So it asked for the status quo to be maintained and the EU, understandably, said No.
In this context, now one can travel to the Canary Islands again, people are trying to do so, and, in the event that that situation will prevail over Christmas, many people are going to be coming back after New Year. Wonder if there are going to stories of hold-ups while returning.
This is a classic example of Remainers warning that something could happen because of Brexit, Brexiteers saying it wouldn't, and now Brexiteers moaning about how terrible it is. People will soon find out that a passport's colour is its least important characteristic.
The EU have worked out that most Britons only really go to the EU on holiday and so this is the most effective way of sticking it to them and making them feel the consequences of Brexit.
There's absolutely no reason for it. We aren't doing it to EU visitors, nor Japanese, American or Australian/NZ visitors now. They don't do it to Iceland/Norway or Swiss visitors.
It's pure spite. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Must be an element of making a point in it. On the other hand, we are asking for a much less close economic and security arrangement than Iceland, Norway or Switzerland has with the EU so you can see their logic. It will be a massive ball-ache when I am travelling to the EU on business again, on the other hand the thought of all those leave voters looking at their blue passports while they queue at Spanish immigration will warm my heart. Sorry to be petty but as Leavers like to say, we voted out, get over it.
Yes, this is right. The UTOA Remainers on here can barely conceal their delight: they are thrilled that Britons post-Brexit might be treated with unnecessary bureaucratic pedantry at the border.
It satisfies their desire for vengeance. It also shows why they are so widely despised.
The despising is entirely mutual, believe me! It is hilarious to see Brexiteers who argued that we needed to exert more control over our border complaining about the EU doing the same thing. The arrogance of it is just staggering. What does UTOA stand for?
Does this mean that ministers will now need to have three houses? One in their constituency, one at Westminster and one where their ministerial job is?
How can ministers work in the North when they could be required to vote in the House of Commons at a moment's notice?
Not sure why the canaries want to risk their low covid numbers by having a load of Brits coming with higher rates and an inability to follow rules, will end in tears I’m afraid.
Money, 'tis said, is the root of all evil. I suspect the Canadian tourist trade is suffering without us. Are Germans allowed to travel, incidentally; there are usually quite a few of them there. Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
From what I saw in Europe last month, the Germans are the only people travelling at the moment, in large numbers at least.
British as well, we met a lot of Brits in Italy and anecdotally loads of my friends have been to Italy and Greece.
In nearly a month I only saw three other British cars, and everywhere I stayed said they hadn’t seen any British visitors this year. On the Eurotunnel returning home, German cars were in a clear majority.
That's strange because we met loads in Sicily and again in Naples, Germans as well but loads of Brits in the bars and restaurants.
Very interesting header, thanks @Cyclefree. I think more should be made of the situation with Dodds. I believe there are mutterings within the party over her lack of impact. She's only been in post a few months but it's a cruel game politics. She has been promoted rapidly under Starmer and doesn't appear to have found her feet yet.
Generally in opposition, only the leader and the shadow chancellor make any kind of impact on the general public.
If I were Starmer I would replace Dodds with Ed Miliband or Yvette Cooper, she has been over promoted in my view
Yvette Cooper , we can ignore your guidance if you seriously think she could do anything , totally useless.
I agree with MalcolmG.
Blair won with a completely fresh team, unassociated with the failures of the Labour Govts of the 1970s. Cooper & Balls and Ed Miliband now reek of the past & failure. In politics, you must never look back to rejects of the past.
After all, it was Miliband who lost Scotland, and changed the Labour voting rules with consequences that were entirely predictable. Cooper couldn't make a success of HIPs, so it is laughable that she could make a success of something like Test & Trace. Cooper in fact is just not very good. Miliband in fact is not very good.
SKS has got some very competent MPs. He needs to promote new fresh faces. If Dodds isn't working, he needs to replace her.
(Also, I don't myself think SKS will be up against Boris in 2024.)
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
There is so much that needs ripping up and starting again, from our voting system and the House of Lords, through the relationship between central and local government, tax and NI, the way property is taxed, and so on.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
Have Labour committed to PR yet?
No - they are hiding behind some vague words implying there will be some sort of review of the constitution under a Labour government, and trying to hint to reformers that this could open the door to fairer voting, whilst telling opponents that it won’t.
The best hope is that HY is right (never thought I’d be typing that) and despite a heroic effort by Starmer they don’t clear the majority bar, and not only are forced to deal with the LibDems and others after an election, but actually come to the view that achieving a majority themselves alone is no longer a realistic objective.
Blair, of course, set up the Jenkins Commission, having expected to need Ashdown's support. My understanding is that he was sympathetic towards the ideas proposed by Prescott wasn't; indeed, vituperatively hostile.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
A non-Red Wall path would involve some kind of alliance with the Liberals.
However incompetent the Tory govt has been on handling Corvid there is no reason to believe Labour would have handled it any better.Their shadow cabinet has hardly anyone who has any kind of executive CV.What Labour should do is try to recognise that and call for the govt to bring in recognisable successful figures from the worlds of business culture or sport into the govt. In the 2nd world war. Churchill brought in a highly regarded Labour figure from the unions Ernest Bevin to be minister of employment.It was a big success.
My cynicism tells me that a Labour government would be no better. Similar one law for you, none for me. Similar cronyism. Similar pissing money up against the wall. Probably more authoritarianism. Maybe not so much cronyism with the private sector but a similar effect due to incompetence dealing with it. No more likely to make the right decisions whatever they are. Contempt for the needs of business. More of a "government is right" attitude. These are diseases of the political left as well as the right. And don't forget the alternative was having a regime that many people found deeply unpalatable. Starmer is looking more like someone I might vote for if I decide the Tories need a kicking, but that will be a decision I make on the way to the polling station. Not now.
The specific problems that the UK have with dealing with the pandemic are greater than one set of incompetent Govt ministers, and encompass all areas of public administration and national life, going back decades.
Indeed. As my Dad used to say, we wrote the (West) German constitution for them, why can't we have it for ourselves? We need a revolution, not a Labour government
I was thinking this the other day...I'm not sure there's any potential candidate to be PM willing to talk about enacting necessary constitutional change. Politics has become short termist which has been massively to the deteriment of the country. Where's a Bevan character or - more controversially- a Thatcher type.
There is so much that needs ripping up and starting again, from our voting system and the House of Lords, through the relationship between central and local government, tax and NI, the way property is taxed, and so on.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
Have Labour committed to PR yet?
No - they are hiding behind some vague words implying there will be some sort of review of the constitution under a Labour government, and trying to hint to reformers that this could open the door to fairer voting, whilst telling opponents that it won’t.
The best hope is that HY is right (never thought I’d be typing that) and despite a heroic effort by Starmer they don’t clear the majority bar, and not only are forced to deal with the LibDems and others after an election, but actually come to the view that achieving a majority themselves alone is no longer a realistic objective.
Blair, of course, set up the Jenkins Commission, having expected to need Ashdown's support. My understanding is that he was sympathetic towards the ideas proposed by Prescott wasn't; indeed, vituperatively hostile.
Yes, it was vetoed within Labour, despite its manifesto promise, and shelved. Those supporters of reform within Labour simply rolled over.
How our politics could be different had that been a promise kept.
God, it truly is PATHETIC how the same Remoaner posters are going through this thread 'liking' every crap argument put by fellow Remoaners, regardless of how shite they are (and almost are of them are).
Incels, losers and rejects who need to get a life.
This site truly has gone down the toilet.
I have better things to do with my day. So long, saddos.
I'm sensing the guilt of an intelligent person who realises they voted for something stupid.
To be fair, Brexit didnt have to be stupid, it is this particular form and mood of Brexit that is. The cleverness of the leave campaign was to allow the voters to decide their own desired brexit and think they were voting for that.
The saying voters didnt know what they were voting for is one of the most contentious of the whole debate. I think it is true, but not for the reasons the originators of the saying claim.
Voters, by and large, understood there was an economic downside which they were happy to trade off for a social/values upside. So in that sense the saying is false.
But the vagueness allowed people to believe they were getting Singapore on Thames with global, not regional, immigration, at the same time as others thinking they were getting zero immigrants, maybe even sending a few back, and others still thinking we would move to EEA with little change.
Not all of those groups could be right, but they all existed, hence leave voters really didnt know what they were voting for!
So... leave voters DID know what they were voting for. They just didn't know what other leave voters were voting for. That's probably true in some elections too. Judging by how fractious some of the Conservative voters on here have been with each other recently, that might well be the case. I think it was the case in 1997 too.
There's probably a conclusion we can draw from this, but I won't spell it out.
Lol, Johnson and conservative values don't belong in the same sentence.
But yes, there are two problems with Starmer's Labour; Corbynism runs deep and hasn't been totally excised, but also Starmer isn't the best cultural fit to bring red wall voters back.
Don't blame me, I voted for Nandy.
She is a lightweight, for the moment Starmer has Remainers and has won back LD 2019 voters, including in the North but he will not win over Red Wall Leave voters unless we go to No Deal which turns out to be devastating economically or the Tories kept free movement or compromised over fishing which is not happening, though in the latter case many of them would go to Farage
I would hope that Starmer's strategists are looking at a plan that by-passes the Red wall. There may be ways to win in the South that avoid spending too much time chasing these lost voters in seats like Mansfield.
Is there a path for Labour to win a majority without both Scotland & the Red Wall seats? I doubt it. (Remember the Welsh seats will be significantly reduced in number as well by the next GE).
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
A non-Red Wall path would involve some kind of alliance with the Liberals.
It could see a Labour and LD majority without the Red Wall if the Liberals made big gains in the Home Counties and Labour made some gains in Scotland but there is near zero chance of a Labour majority alone without regaining the Red Wall or most of Scotland
Comments
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1319698900069076994?s=19
I don't know what will happen in Cardiff West. I certainly would vote for McEvoy, though, if I lived there.
I can't honestly say how much responsibility I really think the government has for the operational aspects of it, but the appointments and contract awards of this government are certainly... questionable.
I think that's all the political mileage Labour can get out of this: "it's not working because you gave it to your clueless chums". It's a cut but not a serious wound.
It does though have Biden ahead in every Pennsylvania district, up by 15% in one and ahead in every district from a Hillary state and also leading in 2 Texas districts to 1 for Trump and in NE02
Yeah, but those MI-3 was won by the GOP by 9.4 points in 2016
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.
It is hilarious to see Brexiteers who argued that we needed to exert more control over our border complaining about the EU doing the same thing. The arrogance of it is just staggering.
What does UTOA stand for?
Don’t know how good, but he was pretty competent by all your other measures.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
I think Labour must be close to maxing out the metropolitan/University seats in the South.
They need either Scotland or Red Wall. And maybe substantial chunks of both.
Must confess that I'd love to go, but the thought of the plane trip is somewhat off-putting.
The saying voters didnt know what they were voting for is one of the most contentious of the whole debate. I think it is true, but not for the reasons the originators of the saying claim.
Voters, by and large, understood there was an economic downside which they were happy to trade off for a social/values upside. So in that sense the saying is false.
But the vagueness allowed people to believe they were getting Singapore on Thames with global, not regional, immigration, at the same time as others thinking they were getting zero immigrants, maybe even sending a few back, and others still thinking we would move to EEA with little change.
Not all of those groups could be right, but they all existed, hence leave voters really didnt know what they were voting for!
So even if all the refused going to Trump that is still sufficient swing for Biden to win the state.'
There are 8% 'undecided' in MI3 with DCCC,Trump is on 45% there, if they all went Trump he would be on 53% actually ie more than the 51% he got in the district in 2016
The district polling does lend more evidence that current state polling is more in tune than 2016. State polling was going against what district polling was showing. Currently national, state and district all pointing the same way.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/23/i-wouldnt-vote-tory-again-frustration-newly-blue-heywood-covid
Also I don't know whether the Italians are really doing a proper human check, or whether they're really doing the whole thing with the automatic gate and the human is just there too wave you through so they can pretend they're following the rules.
But the Tories won’t touch any of these. Instead they are trying to trash the BBC, the civil service, the powers of the courts, the planning system.....
Let's assume that there is a final check though and the UK is given the same e-gate access as Australia or the US, you're no longer in the same queue as Indian, Chinese or other nationals which is surely the point of not wanting to be in the "all other" queue.
It feels like an argument over nothing to me considering the UK will have the ability to sign reciprocal deals on entry gates with the individual nations. I don't see why the individual nations wouldn't want to do it even if the EU is against it on an EU level, it just helps manage arrival halls full of British tourists.
It seems that often the most vituperative criticism of "remainers" comes from Brexiters who held the same basic opinion on preferred relationship with the EU (and indeed accept (or at least did at the time) that no deal type arrangements would be a disaster, but voted Brexit to achieve it. I suppose they blame the "Eurosceptic remainers" for not doing more, somehow, to bring the preferred outcome about.
The other thing, which I think pretty much all of us missed, was that there isn't really a "one step outside" position, other than the Norway/Switzerland approach, both of which are fairly theoretical in how much control they have. If a country wants control of its borders, those borders have to be non-trivial.
I suspect you're right about the short life of this 'window"! We were hoping for a family Christmas in Thailand, but while Thais can come here we can't go there.
It is a stupid thing to give up full membership for, but it is way, way better than being a 3rd country.
Have a good day all.
Politicians and posters on both sides of the divide often miss this. The Red Wall is not a monolith by any means. And the Midlands are as important to Labour as the North.
Labour are in such trouble now as not only do they no longer have a Blair with his exceptional appeal to voters south of Watford, they have also lost their traditional heartlands in the North and Midlands and Scotland which Wilson and Attlee used to win their majorities too
It needed the Tories to get a majority to deliver Brexit but only a Labour PM would ever deliver a CU/SM Brexit and it is unrealistic to expect otherwise
The best hope is that HY is right (never thought I’d be typing that) and despite a heroic effort by Starmer they don’t clear the majority bar, and not only are forced to deal with the LibDems and others after an election, but actually come to the view that achieving a majority themselves alone is no longer a realistic objective.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2020/10/portugal-pre-qualifying-2020.html
If you voted Leave to shake things up, to deliver one in the eye to the liberal political establishment, to promote reactionary values and social conservatism, to make it harder for people and things to get into Britain, then you have not been stupid and you have not been conned.
But if your reasons were to make the country richer, freer, more influential, more democratic, you have and you have.
How can ministers work in the North when they could be required to vote in the House of Commons at a moment's notice?
Blair won with a completely fresh team, unassociated with the failures of the Labour Govts of the 1970s. Cooper & Balls and Ed Miliband now reek of the past & failure. In politics, you must never look back to rejects of the past.
After all, it was Miliband who lost Scotland, and changed the Labour voting rules with consequences that were entirely predictable. Cooper couldn't make a success of HIPs, so it is laughable that she could make a success of something like Test & Trace. Cooper in fact is just not very good. Miliband in fact is not very good.
SKS has got some very competent MPs. He needs to promote new fresh faces. If Dodds isn't working, he needs to replace her.
(Also, I don't myself think SKS will be up against Boris in 2024.)
How our politics could be different had that been a promise kept.
That's probably true in some elections too. Judging by how fractious some of the Conservative voters on here have been with each other recently, that might well be the case. I think it was the case in 1997 too.
There's probably a conclusion we can draw from this, but I won't spell it out.