Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Hartlepool by-election is a must win for both Johnson and Starmer – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 17 in General
imageThe Hartlepool by-election is a must win for both Johnson and Starmer – politicalbetting.com

The above Ordnance Survey map shows the boundaries of the Hartlepool Westminster constituency which is set to be the first by-election of the 2019 Parliament and the first since both Starmer and Johnson became leaders of their parties. It is in a part of the world where I started my journalistic career and which I know very well. Indeed in a month’s time, assuming the lockdown easing goes to plan, I will be driving through the constituency on my way to a vacation on the Northumberland coast.

Read the full story here

«13456711

Comments

  • TazTaz Posts: 52
    First again
  • TazTaz Posts: 52
    I expect labour to hold. To me it’s inconceivable they will lose and much depends on the candidate either party picks but Hartlepool is the sort of left behind town that modern labour and it’s supporters, certainly of the online variety, has little time for and the people it seems to hold in contempt. It will be interesting.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 36,437
    Is anyone offering odds on the LibDems keeping their deposit?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,796
    Third!
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    edited March 17
    I on the other hand don't expect Labour to hold Hartlepool. It's astonishing to write that though: as Mike says it ought to be 'ludicrous fantasy'. I see the Conservatives as a solid odds-on to take the seat. Expectation management may mean that would diminish the story but it shouldn't. It would be a seismic win, perhaps the ultimate defenestration of the modern Labour Party whose Peter Mandleson held the seat. Whether the famous guacamole story has any basis in truth it's both funny and close to the mark.

    In other news, the damage that the EU are doing to its own citizens and others around the world is incalculable. They are now climbing down on AZ but it's the shoddiest and most appalling chapter in a story of political dog-fighting and downright incompetence.

    I expect all the Conservative candidate in Hartlepool needs to do is mention the UK vaccine success and the disgraceful scenes across the channel and he or she will tick all the right boxes for the denizens of Hartlepool.

    If it happens then I'm not sure Keir Starmer will recover from the loss.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 10,316
    O/T

    "McKinsey: how private-sector technocracy took over
    The pandemic-driven surge in management consultants is a serious threat to democracy.
    Fraser Myers"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/15/mckinsey-how-private-sector-technocracy-took-over/
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    tlg86 said:

    It is the expectation that this should be a CON gain from LAB which puts the pressure on the Tories and Johnson.
    if it’s held on the same day as the locals then it will probably get lost in all the results.

    I'm not so sure about that. Won't the by-election result come in well before the local results?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,914

    tlg86 said:

    It is the expectation that this should be a CON gain from LAB which puts the pressure on the Tories and Johnson.
    if it’s held on the same day as the locals then it will probably get lost in all the results.

    I'm not so sure about that. Won't the by-election result come in well before the local results?
    Most people will be in bed! Or at work if the counts are during the day.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,577
    The result here is going to be genuinely close, a lot will depend on the candidates chosen by the two main contenders, and any high-profile others such as Tice - as opposed to national political swings.

    A great opportunity for the government to win a by-election gain, which doesn’t happen very often.

    The pressure will be on Starmer if Labour lose the seat though, especially if they also lose control of Wales, overshadowing a successful night at the locals.
  • LindonLightLindonLight Posts: 96
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It is the expectation that this should be a CON gain from LAB which puts the pressure on the Tories and Johnson.
    if it’s held on the same day as the locals then it will probably get lost in all the results.

    I'm not so sure about that. Won't the by-election result come in well before the local results?
    Most people will be in bed! Or at work if the counts are during the day.
    Again I am not so sure that's correct. I think I'm right in saying that this year, because of the pandemic, many of the local counts will be held the following day? If the by-election count is still held in the evening then the result will dominate the morning's headlines on all the news channels.

    If the Conservatives take the seat it will be seismic. It was Peter Mandleson's seat, the High Priest of Blairism.

    Unlike Sandpit I'm not convinced it will be close.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,914

    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    It is the expectation that this should be a CON gain from LAB which puts the pressure on the Tories and Johnson.
    if it’s held on the same day as the locals then it will probably get lost in all the results.

    I'm not so sure about that. Won't the by-election result come in well before the local results?
    Most people will be in bed! Or at work if the counts are during the day.
    Again I am not so sure that's correct. I think I'm right in saying that this year, because of the pandemic, many of the local counts will be held the following day? If the by-election count is still held in the evening then the result will dominate the morning's headlines on all the news channels.

    If the Conservatives take the seat it will be seismic. It was Peter Mandleson's seat, the High Priest of Blairism.

    Unlike Sandpit I'm not convinced it will be close.
    I’d be amazed if the by-election is counted before the mayor, PCC and local council votes in the same place.
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,583
    Hartlepool is not really similar to BA which has been trending blue for years. It is much more like Easington or the Sunderland seats - I think it could go blue but unlikely - the idea that it's a 'must win' for the Tories is carrying the idea of spin to the next level. Pressure is all on Labour here - but I expect a win for Laboue unless they select Pidcock or worse.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,244
    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    "McKinsey: how private-sector technocracy took over
    The pandemic-driven surge in management consultants is a serious threat to democracy.
    Fraser Myers"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/15/mckinsey-how-private-sector-technocracy-took-over/

    Wouldn’t be so bad if they were any good at their job. The vast waste of money on test and trace last year shows that all they are interested in is how much of it sticks to them.

    And McKinsey, of course, are the firm involved in the Oxycontin scandal in the US, advising the Sackler’s Purdue Pharma on cash incentives to pharmacies for pushing prescriptions.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,925
    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969
    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    "McKinsey: how private-sector technocracy took over
    The pandemic-driven surge in management consultants is a serious threat to democracy.
    Fraser Myers"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/15/mckinsey-how-private-sector-technocracy-took-over/

    Wouldn’t be so bad if they were any good at their job. The vast waste of money on test and trace last year shows that all they are interested in is how much of it sticks to them.

    And McKinsey, of course, are the firm involved in the Oxycontin scandal in the US, advising the Sackler’s Purdue Pharma on cash incentives to pharmacies for pushing prescriptions.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html
    It’s a little harsh to blame McKinsey for Purdue. They were asked how to increase sales and they gave an answer. It’s the directors of Purdue Frederick who are to blame for the choices they made.

    (FWIW the Pharma industry was well aware of the risks that Purdue was running - they turned up their nose at the company on multiple occasions)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,577
    Bloody Hell! Well done David Davis.

    What a weird situation that’s been allowed to develop, with regard to separation of powers and privilege of proceedings.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 30,577

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    Didn’t they elect the football team’s mascot as mayor, a few years ago? :D
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,583

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    If you have to go back to the 50s or even the 60s you are really struggling.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,244
    edited March 17
    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    "McKinsey: how private-sector technocracy took over
    The pandemic-driven surge in management consultants is a serious threat to democracy.
    Fraser Myers"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/15/mckinsey-how-private-sector-technocracy-took-over/

    Wouldn’t be so bad if they were any good at their job. The vast waste of money on test and trace last year shows that all they are interested in is how much of it sticks to them.

    And McKinsey, of course, are the firm involved in the Oxycontin scandal in the US, advising the Sackler’s Purdue Pharma on cash incentives to pharmacies for pushing prescriptions.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html
    It’s a little harsh to blame McKinsey for Purdue. They were asked how to increase sales and they gave an answer. It’s the directors of Purdue Frederick who are to blame for the choices they made.

    (FWIW the Pharma industry was well aware of the risks that Purdue was running - they turned up their nose at the company on multiple occasions)
    Sure, Charles.
    That’s why they paid several hundred million dollars in fines.

    Of course the company was to blame, but so were McKinsey.

    I’m aware of the history - of course McKinsey showed rather less qualms than the rest of the pharma industry.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 7,798
    Sandpit said:

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    Didn’t they elect the football team’s mascot as mayor, a few years ago? :D
    Yep, H'Angus the Monkey. And, as others have pointed out, the Labour group has been reduced to a small minority in a very diverse and fragmented borough council.

    OTOH, local elections and parliamentary elections in the same area are capable of producing wildly different results, and I don't think that we can infer too much from the local authority in this instance.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    "McKinsey: how private-sector technocracy took over
    The pandemic-driven surge in management consultants is a serious threat to democracy.
    Fraser Myers"

    https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/03/15/mckinsey-how-private-sector-technocracy-took-over/

    Wouldn’t be so bad if they were any good at their job. The vast waste of money on test and trace last year shows that all they are interested in is how much of it sticks to them.

    And McKinsey, of course, are the firm involved in the Oxycontin scandal in the US, advising the Sackler’s Purdue Pharma on cash incentives to pharmacies for pushing prescriptions.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/business/mckinsey-opioids-settlement.html
    It’s a little harsh to blame McKinsey for Purdue. They were asked how to increase sales and they gave an answer. It’s the directors of Purdue Frederick who are to blame for the choices they made.

    (FWIW the Pharma industry was well aware of the risks that Purdue was running - they turned up their nose at the company on multiple occasions)
    Sure, Charles.
    That’s why they paid several hundred million dollars in fines.

    Of course the company was to blame, but so were McKinsey.

    I’m aware of the history - of course McKinsey showed rather less qualms than the rest of the pharma industry.
    Consultants are just guns for hire - don’t associate them with the industry.

    But the settlement was just a classic US shakedown. I remember David Brennan telling me used to budget for $1bn a year in settlement payments
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,280
    Good morning, everyone.

    Surprised the Davis story isn't higher up the agenda. About number six on the BBC's politics page.

    F1: there are some Ladbrokes specials on season long (all 23 races occurring) win/podium/points markets. The only one I'm considering is Perez at 2.25 to be over 11.5. That's 12/23, just over 50%.

    If the Red Bull and Mercedes are roughly equal and far ahead of the rest, that's value, even with low odds and a long time.

    Last year, of 17, Albon got 2 podium finishes (2 DNFs), Verstappen got 11, but had 5 DNFs so that's really 11 from 12.

    Perez had 2, incidentally (and would've had at least one more but for the Bahrain DNF. He had 2 DNFs).
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 7,798
    felix said:

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    If you have to go back to the 50s or even the 60s you are really struggling.
    Hartlepool has been Labour for the entire period since the War, save for the 1959 GE when the Tories captured it with a wafer-thin majority of less than 200 votes. Labour's majorities over the Tories (save in the period 1997-2005) haven't been enormous, but certainly since the modern constituency was created in 1974 they've never struggled to keep hold of it.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 7,798

    Good morning, everyone.

    Surprised the Davis story isn't higher up the agenda. About number six on the BBC's politics page.

    Parliamentary procedure isn't sexy, and everyone's obsessing over the European idiocy re: the AZ vaccine at the moment.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,280
    Mr. Rook, aye. But the claim is incredibly serious.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 30,969

    felix said:

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    If you have to go back to the 50s or even the 60s you are really struggling.
    Hartlepool has been Labour for the entire period since the War, save for the 1959 GE when the Tories captured it with a wafer-thin majority of less than 200 votes. Labour's majorities over the Tories (save in the period 1997-2005) haven't been enormous, but certainly since the modern constituency was created in 1974 they've never struggled to keep hold of it.
    You’re completely missing the point @Black_Rook

    The intention is to frame the narrative that Boris is a failure by setting him an unreasonably high hurdle
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,925
    felix said:

    Good morning everyone. Hartlepool, and it's predecessor seat, The Hartlepools, could not by any stretch of the imagination be described as 'safe'. Most of the time anyway; in the fifties it was a Conservative seat.
    I suspect there's an a strong 'awkward squad' tradition there.

    If you have to go back to the 50s or even the 60s you are really struggling.
    That's the result of living so long and remembering! I did look up the figures, though, and the election of H'Angus does suggest a certain amount of 'awkward squaddery".
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 32,796
    Fishing said:

    I don't think it's a must win for the Conservatives at all:

    a) it's very unusual for governments to pick up seats in mid-term by-elections
    b) it wasn't even Labour's most vulnerable seat
    c) a government with an 80-seat majority doesn't need more seats anyway - a bigger majority just encourages the awkward squad of backbenchers to get more awkward.

    Nor, more controversially, do I think it's a must win for Starmer. Obviously it'll be hugely damagnig to Labour morale if he loses, but there isn't any credible alternative to him as leader, in the same way that the Conservatives have Sunak, Truss and one or two others. The Conservatives aren't exactly drowning in good senior ministers, but Labour's talent pool is barely even puddle-deep - Brown then Corbyn have seen to that.

    On Betfair both Labour and the Tories are now odds on
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 16,914
    Sandpit said:

    Bloody Hell! Well done David Davis.

    What a weird situation that’s been allowed to develop, with regard to separation of powers and privilege of proceedings.
    Not weird at all when you consider who enacted devolution. Remember, Labour never contemplated losing power there.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 47,560
    Simon Palethorpe Carnival UK CEO says round U.K. cruises to start with those who have been vaccinated (one week after second jab). Pre-embarkation testing. Wasn’t asked about crew vaccinations.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,951
    It's a question of whether it's like the 2017 Stoke Central By-election or the 2019 Stoke Central General Election.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242
    Fishing said:

    I don't think it's a must win for the Conservatives at all:

    a) it's very unusual for governments to pick up seats in mid-term by-elections
    b) it wasn't even Labour's most vulnerable seat
    c) a government with an 80-seat majority doesn't need more seats anyway - a bigger majority just encourages the awkward squad of backbenchers to get more awkward.

    Nor, more controversially, do I think it's a must win for Starmer. Obviously it'll be hugely damagnig to Labour morale if he loses, but there isn't any credible alternative to him as leader, in the same way that the Conservatives have Sunak, Truss and one or two others. The Conservatives aren't exactly drowning in good senior ministers, but Labour's talent pool is barely even puddle-deep - Brown then Corbyn have seen to that.

    Agreed, for the Tories its a free shot, if they win great, if they dont, as long as they are competitive it keeps the pressure on Labour. For Starmer, if they win great, if they dont it gives him more power to call for pragmatism and policies that appeal to towns rather than just cities.

    There will obviously be lots of attention from the bubble, but its miles away from make or break for either leader.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,301
    Fishing said:

    I don't think it's a must win for the Conservatives at all:

    a) it's very unusual for governments to pick up seats in mid-term by-elections
    b) it wasn't even Labour's most vulnerable seat
    c) a government with an 80-seat majority doesn't need more seats anyway - a bigger majority just encourages the awkward squad of backbenchers to get more awkward.

    Nor, more controversially, do I think it's a must win for Starmer. Obviously it'll be hugely damagnig to Labour morale if he loses, but there isn't any credible alternative to him as leader, in the same way that the Conservatives have Sunak, Truss and one or two others. The Conservatives aren't exactly drowning in good senior ministers, but Labour's talent pool is barely even puddle-deep - Brown then Corbyn have seen to that.

    Putting aside the generosity of seeing the likes of Sunak and Truss as talents, your point is very well made. To spark a leadership challenge, enough Tory MPs have to express no confidence in their leader in a private letter to the chairman of the 1922 committee. Labour MPs have to publicly back an alternative. It's a much higher bar to get over. So, in order for Starmer to face a challenge, 40 Labour MPs would have to unite around someone else. That someone else does not exist. A far-left candidate might get the support of 25 to 30 MPs, but that's it - and even then it's hard to see who the far-left could unite around. No other wing of the party has any interest in a challenge.

  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 188
    Dutch elections.A win for the current Dutch leader would make him the longest serving Dutch leader ever but wonder how many of the British Political Classes could name the current Dutch leader (never mind the public) or which Dutch party has the second highest amount of seats?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,301
    The Hartlepool by-election is clearly not a must-win for Johnson, but from the reports we have had so far it does sound as if it is one that many Tory MPs expect to win. If it doesn't happen, it will not be a body blow, but it may puncture some of the hubris that currently seems to have the Tories in its grip.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242

    Simon Palethorpe Carnival UK CEO says round U.K. cruises to start with those who have been vaccinated (one week after second jab). Pre-embarkation testing. Wasn’t asked about crew vaccinations.

    One week after second jab is most curious.

    My understanding is protection from the first jab is (slightly) declining by then?
    Does the second jab also take two-three weeks post jab to have an impact?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242
    Metatron said:

    Dutch elections.A win for the current Dutch leader would make him the longest serving Dutch leader ever but wonder how many of the British Political Classes could name the current Dutch leader (never mind the public) or which Dutch party has the second highest amount of seats?

    About the same proportion of Dutch political classes who could name the current Moldovan leader?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 52,426
    If the Government does take Hartlepool it will be doing the almost impossible and gaining a seat from the Opposition in a by-election more than a decade after the party took Downing Street, has that ever happened before in modern times?

    Though which will the London based media talk about more? This seat or the Mayor of London?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    edited March 17
    Fishing said:

    I don't think it's a must win for the Conservatives at all:

    a) it's very unusual for governments to pick up seats in mid-term by-elections
    b) it wasn't even Labour's most vulnerable seat
    c) a government with an 80-seat majority doesn't need more seats anyway - a bigger majority just encourages the awkward squad of backbenchers to get more awkward.

    Nor, more controversially, do I think it's a must win for Starmer. Obviously it'll be hugely damagnig to Labour morale if he loses, but there isn't any credible alternative to him as leader, in the same way that the Conservatives have Sunak, Truss and one or two others. The Conservatives aren't exactly drowning in good senior ministers, but Labour's talent pool is barely even puddle-deep - Brown then Corbyn have seen to that.

    But surely, the return of the Pidocck - the Queen of the North - will give them that talent so clearly missing within Labour's Westminster ranks?

    *snigger*

    Tories will win because the 1 in 4 who voted Brexit Party will continue their political journey away from Labour to:

    - reward Boris for getting Brexit done

    - reward Boris for bringing jobs and investment to the NE. Including keeping Nissan in the NE, something that was still uncertain in December 2019.

    - reward Boris for getting the jab to their granny, to their mam - and by voting day, to themselves. (If you want to see some REALLY cynical politics, expect to see the end of restrictions on meeting people advanced from 17th to 3rd May. Oh, is that just before voting on the 6th? Who knew....)

    - stick the boot into Sir Keir Starmer for trying to use every wrinkle he could to get their Brexit vote overturned. The folk of Hartlepool are a liberal lot, Roger. They voted for that caricature embodiment of the homosexual, metrosexual London politico spin doctor, Peter Mandelson. But he hadn't tried to do them out of their Brexit result. Most things are taken in their stride in Hartlepool. But that? No way....
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 9,422
    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,943
    edited March 17

    If the Government does take Hartlepool it will be doing the almost impossible and gaining a seat from the Opposition in a by-election more than a decade after the party took Downing Street, has that ever happened before in modern times?

    Though which will the London based media talk about more? This seat or the Mayor of London?

    In fairness, the Mayor of London represents nine million people and has considerable executive power, while the MP for Hartlepool represents about 1% as many and can do the square root of fuck all.

    There are plenty of examples of London-centrism in the media - not convinced that this would be one of them.
  • isamisam Posts: 35,492
    edited March 17
    Trying to my best to correct Labour supporters deceit (or ignorance if we are being kind)

    https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1371920028682043392?s=21

    https://twitter.com/asfarasdelgados/status/1372093441543442433?s=21
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 40,951
    I'd say, at present Reform 10-20%, Tories 25-35% and Labour 30-35%. Others 10-15%.

    However, it's impossible to guess this one. 'Rona europhia could give the Tories a big boost - other Governments have benefited from this around the world - and Hartlepool is also part of the Towns Fund (and I wouldn't rule out the Tories making a big/bigger play out of that for the seat) so it's possible they get comfortably over 40% too.

    It's probably about evens at present and 10/11 is good enough for me to back the Tories given the potential upside factor this year.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 14,112
    Fishing said:

    If the Government does take Hartlepool it will be doing the almost impossible and gaining a seat from the Opposition in a by-election more than a decade after the party took Downing Street, has that ever happened before in modern times?

    Though which will the London based media talk about more? This seat or the Mayor of London?

    In fairness, the Mayor of London represents nine million people and has considerable executive power, while the MP for Hartlepool represents about 1% as many and can do the square root of fuck all.

    There are plenty of examples of London-centrism in the media - not convinced that this would be one of them.
    The MP for Hartlepool could in theory become Prime Minister whilst the Mayor of London can't. ;)
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 3,137
    Sandpit said:

    The result here is going to be genuinely close, a lot will depend on the candidates chosen by the two main contenders, and any high-profile others such as Tice - as opposed to national political swings.

    A great opportunity for the government to win a by-election gain, which doesn’t happen very often.

    The pressure will be on Starmer if Labour lose the seat though, especially if they also lose control of Wales, overshadowing a successful night at the locals.

    A comfortable win for Sadiq Khan could end up looking like the sole shining beacon of hope for Labour.

    I think that makes him one to watch for future leader of the Labour Party.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 9,422
    What could be a factor shortly - the government refusing a public enquiry into its handing of the Covid disaster. I understand why they want to avoid it. They're getting plaudits for the NHS vaccination success. They don't want to have to explain the mountains of corpses...

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/16/pressure-mounts-on-boris-johnson-to-launch-coronavirus-inquiry
  • eekeek Posts: 11,669

    The Hartlepool by-election is clearly not a must-win for Johnson, but from the reports we have had so far it does sound as if it is one that many Tory MPs expect to win. If it doesn't happen, it will not be a body blow, but it may puncture some of the hubris that currently seems to have the Tories in its grip.

    Were I a Tory MP around here I would expect the Tories to win it.

    But whether they win it or not that doesn't matter for Boris but losing it will be a blow to Starmer even though Labour realistically has little chance:

    1) the local Labour party is in disarray, with a lot of in fighting and the saner (more centralist) members have left
    2) they don't control the local council and that isn't going to change
    3) the Conservative regional mayor is going to walk his re-election because he has delivered everything he promised.

    Hartlepool and Darlington have always had a local rivalry (both our Football teams are crap but the towns are the same size and aren't Boro). While it's not accurate to say - look what you could have had and point at Darlington getting the Treasury (now estimated to be a 1000+ Government jobs btw as other departments send some of their treasury lobbying teams north) I'm sure that may encourage a few people to decide that pork belly politics could work for them
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695
    Toms said:
    Some might say the UK could do with a liberal party too.....
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 14,112
    Everyone criticises Labour for taking their "heartlands" for granted however the same could very well happen to the Conservatives. All this attention on the "red wall" could very well lead, in the long run, to traditional Conservative seats thinking that the Party is now for urban town dwellers and not for them. Especially if Brexit ends up being a negative for agriculture etc.

    Not something likely to happen in the near future but it's certainly a possibility in the long run. It's difficult juggling multiple competing priorities.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,695

    Everyone criticises Labour for taking their "heartlands" for granted however the same could very well happen to the Conservatives. All this attention on the "red wall" could very well lead, in the long run, to traditional Conservative seats thinking that the Party is now for urban town dwellers and not for them. Especially if Brexit ends up being a negative for agriculture etc.

    Not something likely to happen in the near future but it's certainly a possibility in the long run. It's difficult juggling multiple competing priorities.

    That requires Labour to fill the void in the Shires.

    Or the LibDems.

    Either of those notions looks decades away.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 14,112

    Everyone criticises Labour for taking their "heartlands" for granted however the same could very well happen to the Conservatives. All this attention on the "red wall" could very well lead, in the long run, to traditional Conservative seats thinking that the Party is now for urban town dwellers and not for them. Especially if Brexit ends up being a negative for agriculture etc.

    Not something likely to happen in the near future but it's certainly a possibility in the long run. It's difficult juggling multiple competing priorities.

    That requires Labour to fill the void in the Shires.

    Or the LibDems.

    Either of those notions looks decades away.
    I mean, that is what I said. It certainly isn't something that could happen in the short term.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,943

    What could be a factor shortly - the government refusing a public enquiry into its handing of the Covid disaster. I understand why they want to avoid it. They're getting plaudits for the NHS vaccination success. They don't want to have to explain the mountains of corpses...

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/16/pressure-mounts-on-boris-johnson-to-launch-coronavirus-inquiry

    I have to say I don't think a public inquiry will be very useful. Much of it will be devoted to second-guessing the government's actions a year ago, and what it should have done will probably be debated by academics for years, even decades, without coming to any robust conclusions. So even if the panel is completely impartial and independent, they won't add anything useful to the debate.

    There IS merit in asking questions about public procurement and the test and trace fiasco, but that's what the NAO and the PAC are for - we don't need an inquiry for that.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 9,422

    Everyone criticises Labour for taking their "heartlands" for granted however the same could very well happen to the Conservatives. All this attention on the "red wall" could very well lead, in the long run, to traditional Conservative seats thinking that the Party is now for urban town dwellers and not for them. Especially if Brexit ends up being a negative for agriculture etc.

    Not something likely to happen in the near future but it's certainly a possibility in the long run. It's difficult juggling multiple competing priorities.

    Absolutely. The LibDems will come back...
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242
    edited March 17
    Fishing said:

    What could be a factor shortly - the government refusing a public enquiry into its handing of the Covid disaster. I understand why they want to avoid it. They're getting plaudits for the NHS vaccination success. They don't want to have to explain the mountains of corpses...

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/16/pressure-mounts-on-boris-johnson-to-launch-coronavirus-inquiry

    I have to say I don't think a public inquiry will be very useful. Much of it will be devoted to second-guessing the government's actions a year ago, and what it should have done will probably be debated by academics for years, even decades, without coming to any robust conclusions. So even if the panel is completely impartial and independent, they won't add anything useful to the debate.

    There IS merit in asking questions about public procurement and the test and trace fiasco, but that's what the NAO and the PAC are for - we don't need an inquiry for that.
    An inquiry would have been useful after the first wave so we didnt make the same mistakes for the second wave but we were denied that.

    Guess it could still be useful if another different pandemic occurs in the next couple of decades, but after that the lessons will be forgotten.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,669

    Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    Local Labour controlled councils presided over decades of slow decline.

    A decline that was seemingly immediately reversed by a Tory regional mayor (if you ignore the end of austerity from Whitehall). And this then accelerated as the local councils started to shift away from Labour.

    And if you look at things that way it's fully understandable why Labour is dying around here. The irony is that hald the reason they are suffering is the consequence of national (Osbourne / Tory) policies they had no control over.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,301

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

  • eekeek Posts: 11,669

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

    In which case even less chance of Labour winning. Those going out to vote will be voting for their none Labour councilor and a Tory mayor.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 1,943

    Fishing said:

    What could be a factor shortly - the government refusing a public enquiry into its handing of the Covid disaster. I understand why they want to avoid it. They're getting plaudits for the NHS vaccination success. They don't want to have to explain the mountains of corpses...

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/16/pressure-mounts-on-boris-johnson-to-launch-coronavirus-inquiry

    I have to say I don't think a public inquiry will be very useful. Much of it will be devoted to second-guessing the government's actions a year ago, and what it should have done will probably be debated by academics for years, even decades, without coming to any robust conclusions. So even if the panel is completely impartial and independent, they won't add anything useful to the debate.

    There IS merit in asking questions about public procurement and the test and trace fiasco, but that's what the NAO and the PAC are for - we don't need an inquiry for that.
    An inquiry would have been useful after the first wave so we didnt make the same mistakes for the second wave but we were denied that.
    Even assuming they came up with robust conclusions, unlikely given the lack of consensus on these points, public inquiries usually take years. There's no way it would have been concluded in time.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 47,560
    Which would be worse for Labour - a Tory win, or a Piddock win?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 14,112
    eek said:

    Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    Local Labour controlled councils presided over decades of slow decline.

    A decline that was seemingly immediately reversed by a Tory regional mayor (if you ignore the end of austerity from Whitehall). And this then accelerated as the local councils started to shift away from Labour.

    And if you look at things that way it's fully understandable why Labour is dying around here. The irony is that hald the reason they are suffering is the consequence of national (Osbourne / Tory) policies they had no control over.

    Probably a decade of focusing on class warfare and not the real issues.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 91,491
    edited March 17
    isam said:

    Trying to my best to correct Labour supporters deceit (or ignorance if we are being kind)

    https://twitter.com/siennamarla/status/1371920028682043392?s=21

    https://twitter.com/asfarasdelgados/status/1372093441543442433?s=21

    She was never a cabinet minister, she got as far as Sol Gen, which isn't a cabinet job.

    I mean if you're going to chastise others for deceit or ignorance.....

    Edit - Upon checking, she was retained as Victims' Commissioner by Boris Johnson, so it might be fair to say this government.

    I mean he could have replaced her.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,301

    Which would be worse for Labour - a Tory win, or a Piddock win?

    Pidcock will not be the candidate. The NEC will decide the shortlist. She will not be on it. That said, if I were Starmer, I could see a lot of benefit in having her stand. If she wins, she has won under his leadership when she lost under Corbyn's; if she loses, it will be another repudiation of the far-left. It's a kind of win-win. However, it's not going to happen.

  • On topic, success equals performance minus anticipation, on that basis and the early betting markets if Labour hold this seat it will be a success for Labour and Starmer and not quite the success for Boris Johnson, but if failing to take a seat from the opposition is considered a failure then Boris Johnson will take that.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 35,301
    eek said:

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

    In which case even less chance of Labour winning. Those going out to vote will be voting for their none Labour councilor and a Tory mayor.

    I agree - and they will tend to be older voters, too, which will only reinforce Labour's difficulties. It's going to be a very difficult night for Starmer. As ever, the Midlands will be where it is worse.

  • Sandpit said:

    The result here is going to be genuinely close, a lot will depend on the candidates chosen by the two main contenders, and any high-profile others such as Tice - as opposed to national political swings.

    A great opportunity for the government to win a by-election gain, which doesn’t happen very often.

    The pressure will be on Starmer if Labour lose the seat though, especially if they also lose control of Wales, overshadowing a successful night at the locals.

    A comfortable win for Sadiq Khan could end up looking like the sole shining beacon of hope for Labour.

    I think that makes him one to watch for future leader of the Labour Party.
    Nah, the King of the North, Andy Burnham, is the one to watch.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 40,058

    Which would be worse for Labour - a Tory win, or a Piddock win?

    Pidcock will not be the candidate. The NEC will decide the shortlist. She will not be on it. That said, if I were Starmer, I could see a lot of benefit in having her stand. If she wins, she has won under his leadership when she lost under Corbyn's; if she loses, it will be another repudiation of the far-left. It's a kind of win-win. However, it's not going to happen.

    Sounds risky to me. If she wins her cult will be pushing for a leadership challenge within months.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,669
    edited March 17

    eek said:

    Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    Local Labour controlled councils presided over decades of slow decline.

    A decline that was seemingly immediately reversed by a Tory regional mayor (if you ignore the end of austerity from Whitehall). And this then accelerated as the local councils started to shift away from Labour.

    And if you look at things that way it's fully understandable why Labour is dying around here. The irony is that hald the reason they are suffering is the consequence of national (Osbourne / Tory) policies they had no control over.

    Probably a decade of focusing on class warfare and not the real issues.
    Not locally - it's interesting to compare Darlington with say South Shields.

    Both labour run councils yet South Shields (which for reasons I don't know, had money) spent money on libraries, improving the sea front....

    Darlington council spent 3 years trying to close the local Library so it could save a £1m a year and try to keep the swimming pool open.

    Class warfare really wasn't the issue here - it was a lack of money and a lack of imagination. And the rest of Teesside was the same
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 9,242
    Fishing said:

    Fishing said:

    What could be a factor shortly - the government refusing a public enquiry into its handing of the Covid disaster. I understand why they want to avoid it. They're getting plaudits for the NHS vaccination success. They don't want to have to explain the mountains of corpses...

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/16/pressure-mounts-on-boris-johnson-to-launch-coronavirus-inquiry

    I have to say I don't think a public inquiry will be very useful. Much of it will be devoted to second-guessing the government's actions a year ago, and what it should have done will probably be debated by academics for years, even decades, without coming to any robust conclusions. So even if the panel is completely impartial and independent, they won't add anything useful to the debate.

    There IS merit in asking questions about public procurement and the test and trace fiasco, but that's what the NAO and the PAC are for - we don't need an inquiry for that.
    An inquiry would have been useful after the first wave so we didnt make the same mistakes for the second wave but we were denied that.
    Even assuming they came up with robust conclusions, unlikely given the lack of consensus on these points, public inquiries usually take years. There's no way it would have been concluded in time.
    Inquiries can have different timetables, no reason it couldnt have been agreed last May, started in July and reported back in September, if that meant it was an inquiry rather than a formal public inquiry so be it.
  • TazTaz Posts: 52

    eek said:

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

    In which case even less chance of Labour winning. Those going out to vote will be voting for their none Labour councilor and a Tory mayor.

    I agree - and they will tend to be older voters, too, which will only reinforce Labour's difficulties. It's going to be a very difficult night for Starmer. As ever, the Midlands will be where it is worse.



    Does the labour candidate for Mayor really stand little chance ?

    She seems quite hopeless but there is talk that local party bigwigs openly mock her and that makes me feel a little sorry for her.

    I saw something she did on Twitter with Jet from Gladiators (it wasn’t a millennium barn dance in Yeovil aerodrome) which just seemed bizarre.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 13,261
    DavidL said:

    David Davis speech was interesting if rather wordy. The essential point is one that I have been making repeatedly, that in Scotland there is no effective separation of powers, no independence on the part of the Civil Service and serious limits on the ability of the Scottish Parliament to hold ministers and civil servants to account. The additional point, which I confess I thought was just a justification for his speech originally but came to be of central importance, is that these failures were built into the Scotland Act and can be corrected by Westminster.

    This is something that Westminster really needs to pick up and deal with. Members of the Scottish Parliament should have the same rights of privilege as MPs so that they cannot be bullied by a Lord Advocate who seems to have lost all judgment about the public interest. Civil Servants who lie and connive on behalf of their political masters must be sacked. The current role of the Lord Advocate is indefensible and needs to be changed.

    Some things cannot be done. It is a matter for the SNP if Peter Murrell is a fit and proper person to be their chief executive although it is a matter for the Scottish Parliament as to whether or not he lied to them. It is a matter for the Scottish Parliament whether it has confidence in Nicola Sturgeon. But an institutional set up that has allowed the current abuses to go unchecked would embarrass a banana republic and has no place in a western democracy.

    One problem of a long term government by one party is that officials start to identify government interest as the public interest.

    Hence a Cabinet Sec who quite honestly believed that an opposition MP embarrassing the Government with leaks should be arrested. He believed this, because the leaks were coming out ahead of the spin doctors attempts to spin stories in the press. This meant that the spin doctors were failing to control a story. Which meant that the spin doctors (technically civil servants) were unable to do their jobs "properly".
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 22,639

    Toms said:
    Some might say the UK could do with a liberal party too.....
    After last night's Police Bill vote that criminalised any protest at the whim of a police commander there is certainly no place for a liberal or libertarian in the Conservative Party.

    I think that this will be a low turnout low energy by-election with a Tory win. Labour will draw the wrong conclusion and double down on fun with flags.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 6,630
    Fishing said:

    I don't think it's a must win for the Conservatives at all:

    a) it's very unusual for governments to pick up seats in mid-term by-elections
    b) it wasn't even Labour's most vulnerable seat
    c) a government with an 80-seat majority doesn't need more seats anyway - a bigger majority just encourages the awkward squad of backbenchers to get more awkward.

    Nor, more controversially, do I think it's a must win for Starmer. Obviously it'll be hugely damagnig to Labour morale if he loses, but there isn't any credible alternative to him as leader, in the same way that the Conservatives have Sunak, Truss and one or two others. The Conservatives aren't exactly drowning in good senior ministers, but Labour's talent pool is barely even puddle-deep - Brown then Corbyn have seen to that.

    Not Brown, whose Cabinets were packed with potential leaders. Nor even Corbyn. Labour's problem is that so many refused to work with Corbyn and in opting for the backbenches sabotaged their own prospects, and Labour's.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 4,052

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

    My council sent everyone a postal voting application a few weeks ago. I'd be surprised if most councils didn't do likewise. In fact I'm surprised the Government didn't make these elections postal-only.
  • eekeek Posts: 11,669
    Taz said:

    eek said:

    I have already set out why I believe the Tories can take the seat. That they have already taken the council thanks to the collapse of Labour shows the direction of travel in the town. Yes I know that the council is a Tory / Independents coalition. Thats what happens with "independents" on Teesside - they break apart the former Labour vote and back the Tories because eugh Labour.

    Candidate selection will be crucial. If the Tories can find a local pick that would help. Labour aren't - its either a Paul Williams fix or la Pidcock gets onto the shortlist thanks to hard left elements on the NEC. Either way neither is local. And local is very much an issue in Hartlepool looking at the warring factions of Hartlepool Independent councillors they now have.

    I do wonder if a Paul Williams parachuting might play to Labour's favour though. OK so it loses them any chance of winning the PCC, but he is a well respected doctor. Play the health card - "I've been battling to save people from Covid and the Tories are scared of a public enquiry because they know what it will find". Might work. The entire campaign will be posted leaflets written elsewhere because have I mentioned that Hartlepool CLP is bonkers?

    Ultimately it comes down to this. Its Super Thursday so turnout will be high. Most people will vote Tory for Mayor. Many of them will vote for their local flavour of anti-Labour for council. If the Labour candidate for MP is Paul Williams they will vote for the Tory for PCC. To then "loyally" vote Labour for MP is a stretch - once people start voting against, they keep voting against. And it is "AGAINST" Labour and not "FOR" any other candidate. Labour has become toxic on Teesside in a way that I can scarcely believe.

    That all makes sense - except for one thing: turnout is going to be very low, even lower than it would usually be for local council elections. Covid will see to that.

    In which case even less chance of Labour winning. Those going out to vote will be voting for their none Labour councilor and a Tory mayor.

    I agree - and they will tend to be older voters, too, which will only reinforce Labour's difficulties. It's going to be a very difficult night for Starmer. As ever, the Midlands will be where it is worse.



    Does the labour candidate for Mayor really stand little chance ?

    She seems quite hopeless but there is talk that local party bigwigs openly mock her and that makes me feel a little sorry for her.

    I saw something she did on Twitter with Jet from Gladiators (it wasn’t a millennium barn dance in Yeovil aerodrome) which just seemed bizarre.
    Ben Houchen promised to save the airport and create jobs.

    He has:-

    Saved the airport and brought in both local flights (Belfast, Bristol, London) and Ryanair.
    Started to sort out Teesworks (you may remember that is why the Lib Dems won Redcar in 2010)
    Definitely brought in local jobs (2000 in Boro building turbines, Treasury to Darlington)

    So the odds of him not winning the election are zero and the vote won't be going to the second run. The only question is going to be the size of the victory.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,280
    *raises an eyebrow*

    Northern Independence?

    New one to me.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 6,488
    The NIPs will be popular in Hardtopoo. Now that Brexit has done precisely nothing for them they will go for NEXIT.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,381

    DavidL said:

    David Davis speech was interesting if rather wordy. The essential point is one that I have been making repeatedly, that in Scotland there is no effective separation of powers, no independence on the part of the Civil Service and serious limits on the ability of the Scottish Parliament to hold ministers and civil servants to account. The additional point, which I confess I thought was just a justification for his speech originally but came to be of central importance, is that these failures were built into the Scotland Act and can be corrected by Westminster.

    This is something that Westminster really needs to pick up and deal with. Members of the Scottish Parliament should have the same rights of privilege as MPs so that they cannot be bullied by a Lord Advocate who seems to have lost all judgment about the public interest. Civil Servants who lie and connive on behalf of their political masters must be sacked. The current role of the Lord Advocate is indefensible and needs to be changed.

    Some things cannot be done. It is a matter for the SNP if Peter Murrell is a fit and proper person to be their chief executive although it is a matter for the Scottish Parliament as to whether or not he lied to them. It is a matter for the Scottish Parliament whether it has confidence in Nicola Sturgeon. But an institutional set up that has allowed the current abuses to go unchecked would embarrass a banana republic and has no place in a western democracy.

    One problem of a long term government by one party is that officials start to identify government interest as the public interest.

    Hence a Cabinet Sec who quite honestly believed that an opposition MP embarrassing the Government with leaks should be arrested. He believed this, because the leaks were coming out ahead of the spin doctors attempts to spin stories in the press. This meant that the spin doctors were failing to control a story. Which meant that the spin doctors (technically civil servants) were unable to do their jobs "properly".
    Yes, it can and does happen anywhere. But a proper democratic system has safeguards built into it which at the very least highlights the flaws and the lies. Scotland doesn't have that which is why the head of the Scottish Civil Service is still in post and will be for as long as Nicola is minded to protect her.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 36,381
  • *raises an eyebrow*

    Northern Independence?

    New one to me.

    I've mentioned them on here before.

    WHAT WE'RE FIGHTING FOR

    To build a better, fairer and freer North for all.
    To campaign for a referendum on the independence of the North, to be decided by the people of the North.
    A green industrial rebirth.

    WHO WE ARE

    The Northern Independence Party is a democratic socialist party, who are committed to uplifting the voices of our members. We were founded in 2020 to combat the injustice of the north/south divide. We stand opposed to all forms of ideology based on hatred and bigotry.

    https://www.freethenorth.co.uk/

    I don't think Democratic Socialism appeals to either of us nor does Northern Independence.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 6,630
    Shameless from Shadsy.

    10/11 each of two, and that is without the fringe parties running for him.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 65,092
    I have placed my bets.
Sign In or Register to comment.