Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why the likely CON win in Hartlepool won’t be as big a deal as some are saying – politicalbetting.co

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 6 in General
imageWhy the likely CON win in Hartlepool won’t be as big a deal as some are saying – politicalbetting.com

There’s a good by James Johnson in the Times on why the likely CON victory tonight in Hartlepool won’t be as dramatic as it sounds. He argues:

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,844
    1st
  • LeonLeon Posts: 10,353
    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 43,398
    I'm going to bed.

    I will be up at 5am anyway and will check the results then.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486
    IanB2 said:

    Hartlepool is not won until the declaration

    However the following pointers are interesting

    A pollster gave a 17% conservative lead in the most recent constituency poll

    Private labour polling indicated they were retaining just 40% of their 2019 vote

    The pollster who established the 17% conservative lead said he will never do another constituency poll if Labour win it

    Canvassers and the media suggesting today the votes need weighing for the conservatives

    Smarkets have just jumped to 92.59% conservative win

    Surely a Labour hold would be extraordinary

    Objectively, it’s won at 10pm; we just don’t have the proof for a while.
    Its fucking won. Question is whether the Tories push through a 5k majority or not. Labour are not turning out. For the by-election, for council seats up for election, for the mayoral, for the PCC. For none of them. All Tory, the only question is by what margin.
  • sladeslade Posts: 1,213
    It has been raining in West Yorkshire since 4pm. This will keep a lot of people at home - bad for Labour?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 19,632
    I disagree. A Tory win is quite big. Look at the result of the Corby by-election in 2012:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Corby_by-election

    Even if one considers Hartlepool to be a Tory seat from 2019, Labour ought to be able to win it in a by-election.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    FPT

    If Yvette is the answer you're asking the wrong questions.

    Been saying for a long time the Tories didn't succeed by retreading those who were leftover from the past. Clarke would have made an amazing Shadow Chancellor, but the Tories were ready when Cameron & Osborne were ready. Similarly Brown himself was not a retread from the seventies.

    Cooper is a Brownite retread from the past. Where's their Osborne? Where's their Brown?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016

    True, but it's funny how it's not a big deal that the Tories take it as soon as it looks like actually happening.

    It's been Labour for decades and we're mid-term of a Government that's been in power for 11 years.

    It is a big deal, but not unexpected and doesnt change much for 2024. Assuming Labour keep Starmer, the Tories will win unless they significantly cock things up by then (which they might well do).

    The reality is there is no-one in Labour who can win if the govt do well or even averagely, so they should stick with Starmer, but try to bring through some more talented MPs into the public eye, assuming they have some!
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    FPT, re: antipathy of hard-core Corbynites versus Yvette Cooper.

    "We love her for the enemies she's made"?

    That was the famous phrase (substitute he for she) uttered at the Democratic National Convention of 1884 in support of then-Governor of New York for the Democratic presidential nomination. Because he was strong opponent of - and opposed as strongly by - Tammany Hall.

    In the subsequent election, Tammany Hall sat on its hands and did NOT exert itself in support of Cleveland. Which was a BIG problem, because New York State was key to the election.

    However, an over-eager supporter of the Republican nominee, James G. Blaine, made a speech in New York City a few days before Election Day, attacking the Democrats as the party of "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion".

    Blaine was in the audience, but did NOT object to this statement. Which was noted AND publicized by the Cleveland campaign in NYC. Which had a LARGE contingent of Irish Catholic voters.

    The result? Grover Cleveland won New York State (with 36 out of 401 electoral votes) by a popular vote margin of +1,047 votes over Blaine out of over 1m cast.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    It'II be interesting if Khan goes below 40% on first prefs, after he was expected to get more than 50% only a few weeks ago.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,327
    "Hopefully the count will be completed relatively quickly and we’ll be able to get some sleep."
    Perchance to dream eh?
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,224
    Anecdote from Edinburgh Pentlands. Long socially distanced queue to get in to vote at our polling station around 5pm. My kids and wife not telling me how they voted, which I approve of.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,214
    One just needs to look at the candidates faces at 10pm...
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,195
    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486
    On topic, the guy in the Thunderer is talking out his backside. We're 11 years into a Tory government of one description or another. Labour have already been demolished in a stack of former heartlands and the second wave is about to strike and will wipe them out in even more places.

    Not a big deal? It has completed a seismic shift from Labour / Tory to Leave / Remain. Remember that as was pointed out the other day the Tories are now the Labour Party of old and Labour are the aloof detached southerners patronising everyone Tories of old.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 35,355
    Anna Soubry: Who would I vote for if I lived in #Hartlepool Don’t want to say and scupper his chances .... !
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,214

    True, but it's funny how it's not a big deal that the Tories take it as soon as it looks like actually happening.

    It's been Labour for decades and we're mid-term of a Government that's been in power for 11 years.

    It is a big deal, but not unexpected and doesnt change much for 2024. Assuming Labour keep Starmer, the Tories will win unless they significantly cock things up by then (which they might well do).

    The reality is there is no-one in Labour who can win if the govt do well or even averagely, so they should stick with Starmer, but try to bring through some more talented MPs into the public eye, assuming they have some!
    It rather depends on whether the Labour vote completely collapses. A win with a majority of say 10,000 really would be something.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,417
    IanB2 said:

    Anna Soubry: Who would I vote for if I lived in #Hartlepool Don’t want to say and scupper his chances .... !

    And nobody cares....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 67,843
    edited May 6
    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    Well, Yvette seems to have the first name factor based on responses here, which some people persist in pretending is like how people think Boris is their best mate or some such rubbish, so she is clearly the candidate to go for based on that alone.

    One day you will understand the point I make about the Boris brand and how the ubiquitous use of his first name in a spirit of false intimacy is a key part of it.

    But until then you will write more posts like this.
    I understand the point completely, I just think it is fundamentally flawed, insulting to the electorate by suggesting one element of a person's brand is so powerful, and therefore disagree with it and so like to make fun of it.

    That people have indeed being mentioning Yvette (and indeed Keir) rather makes the point that a brand is a lot more than some claptrap about false intimacy - since even if a politician gets known by an 'intimate' name, it is not enough on its own.

    Put simply, yes, people calling him Boris is part of his brand, but I think it is utterly absurd to suggest that merely using the name is as powerful as you appear to think it is, even when people who detest him use it, and I personally think obsession with people using the name he is known by is ridiculous and focusing on the wrong thing. How much energy wasted by people moaning about others calling the man Boris?

    We disagree about that and will continue to do so, so no, there will be no enlightenment as the point is pretty darn easy to grasp. It's ok to disagree.

    But thank you for 'one day you will understand', that certainly helps makes your point.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 6,499
    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 3,816
    An article stating the obvious really. Politics wonks are aware that a change has taken place and that a Tory win at Hartlepool (if it happens) is evidence that the change is not reversing and that Brexit voters have no immediate plans to return to Labour in large numbers. The GE polling evidence has said all this for months on the subject of Lab/Con vote split. Evidence about the behaviour of Brexit voters would be fairly new and interesting.

    Wonks also know that Hartlepool (and its hinterland) is not quite the sink estate gasworks sewage farm rust belt monkey hanger football fat chav joke of the fevered Southern imagination.

    However news and journalism know or care for none of this. It is a fabulous story and it will be milked understandably for all it is worth (if it happens).

    So yes, is is predictable and possible - ask the bookies from day one for they thought so too. It is also sensational and potentially career ending. That's how news works. Labour wins London: dog bites man. Tories win northern hell hole (which it isn't): man bites dog.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 10,353

    I think it will be mind-blowingly catastrophic for Labour. Losing a by-election to a long-in-the-tooth government in a seat that they've held for aeons is not something that oppositions should ever do. Labour should be expecting to overthrow solidly Tory seats at this juncture; not surrendering their own - least of all places like Hartlepool.

    I agree entirely. It's absurd to say an almost-unheard-of political event - a long-in-power government seizing a by-election from the Oppo - is somehow predictable and everyday. It simply is not.

    Or rather, it is predictable and everyday in the same way we have got used to the SNP sweeping every seat in Glasgow, and Scottish Labour trailing far behind

    That was a revolution, with great consequences for the nation. So, potentially, is this. The Red Wall might never come back
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,417
    edited May 6
    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Count binface as a late entry....
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    IanB2 said:

    Anna Soubry: Who would I vote for if I lived in #Hartlepool Don’t want to say and scupper his chances .... !

    And nobody cares....
    Perhaps NP xMP has a slight interest?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,195
    edited May 6
    And while I'm here: I expect Tories to sail home in Hartlepool with a majority of around 6,000. It will be a Labour massacre, but still unsurprising. Labour will lose some 2019 votes through indifference, some 2019 Labour will go Tory, and virtually all of the 2019 Brexit voters that bother to turn out will go Tory. Bad news for Labour, but not signifying a great deal in the medium to long term.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214

    If Andy Burnham is the answer, you are asking the wrong question.

    The question is who is King of the North
    Bugzy Malone
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    It'II be interesting if Khan goes below 40% on first prefs, after he was expected to get more than 50% only a few weeks ago.
    As a gambler who thinks in terms of expected value, in a first preference voting system, I would never vote for a clear fav as my first preference, even if they were my first choice.

    Voting for a minor party/joke candidate first and Khan second is a free extra vote that you can use to promote a cause or show displeasure with the political establishment. Why waste it?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    I think Nandy would win
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,327
    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    I think that covers it.

  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486

    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

    I would have agreed with you right up until the conversation where a very good source told me that she is going for him. An apocalypse-o-fuck result and then the deputy saying time's up? I agree that had a challenge come from Dicky B then it would have been laughed off. Not from Rayner.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,224
    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    If labour want to win, they need a leader that will win over undecideds and soft Tories. Blair got me to vote for him in 97 and I was a Maggie fan.

    I said on here years ago that the Tories had to elect Boris as leader because he was good for soundbites and campaigning on TV. I stand by that. Labour don't need a new Blair. They need a Boris. They will feel dirty but it is the only way.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 19,632

    I suspect if Labour looked like winning this with a comfortable majority, Mike would be running a thread saying red wall crumbling, disaster for Boris, etc.

    I’m sure I’ve read many times on here that you can’t simply assume BXP votes go to the Tories.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,206
    edited May 6
    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
  • TazTaz Posts: 1,629
    IanB2 said:

    Anna Soubry: Who would I vote for if I lived in #Hartlepool Don’t want to say and scupper his chances .... !

    Anna Soubry, now there’s someone who is no longer relevant.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    My view on Hartlepool: It is a big deal as it is another potent symbol of a historic realignment however it isn't surprising, and those are two different things.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 10,353
    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016

    True, but it's funny how it's not a big deal that the Tories take it as soon as it looks like actually happening.

    It's been Labour for decades and we're mid-term of a Government that's been in power for 11 years.

    It is a big deal, but not unexpected and doesnt change much for 2024. Assuming Labour keep Starmer, the Tories will win unless they significantly cock things up by then (which they might well do).

    The reality is there is no-one in Labour who can win if the govt do well or even averagely, so they should stick with Starmer, but try to bring through some more talented MPs into the public eye, assuming they have some!
    It rather depends on whether the Labour vote completely collapses. A win with a majority of say 10,000 really would be something.
    Obviously that would be note worthy, but imo it doesnt change anything in terms of correct strategies/leadership for 2024 or the odds for that election. (Tories are value, Labour a lay and NMO a small lay)
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,036
    On Topic Brexits done

    Labour should be able to win as it has done every time since it came into existence in 1974

    The selection by Starmer was a complete disaster

    Starmer does not inspire WC or MC voters and has worstened the divisions with neither the right or left of the Party willing to be the foot soldiers

    Morale is at a historic low

    He needs to go before the task for the next leader is completely impossible
  • mickydroymickydroy Posts: 11

    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
    Nandy, I think and hope
  • FossFoss Posts: 417
    Both Raynor and Nandy are about 1000 vote ahead of Con + Brexit. On that basis both maybe too concerned about loosing their seats to go for the leadership. Just because decapitation failed for the Lib Dems in ’05 doesn’t mean it’s not at threat to them in ’24.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,214

    Whatever isn't it great to be having real elections again

    I did my duty Mike to keep the Tories in check:::::;;
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    Leon said:

    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?

    This is what would have happened here if Toby Young and his fellow Lockdown Sceptics/Covid deniers would have had their way.
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 1,623

    FPT

    If Yvette is the answer you're asking the wrong questions.

    Been saying for a long time the Tories didn't succeed by retreading those who were leftover from the past. Clarke would have made an amazing Shadow Chancellor, but the Tories were ready when Cameron & Osborne were ready. Similarly Brown himself was not a retread from the seventies.

    Cooper is a Brownite retread from the past. Where's their Osborne? Where's their Brown?

    Part of the problem is that a lot of Lab candidates tend to be Union functionary types or public sector workers. They don't seem to attract a wide-range of candidates or high flyers. I don't think the all-women shortlists have helped either

    While there are some weak members of the cabinet, the Tories have a lot of talent in the lower ranks and on the back benches. The best possible Tory cabinet would be a lot stronger than the best possible Labour cabinet.

    Also Corbyn was successful at getting a number of young Corbynites elected to safe seats last time round.
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,224
    mickydroy said:

    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
    Nandy, I think and hope
    Nandy seems safer to me - but I know some of her positions are on the edge and I may change my view.
    Khan or Burnham would be preferable to either.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 64,417
    edited May 6
    Leon said:

    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?

    Of course its even worse, hard to get a test in the major cities, let alone what the the situation is like in 2nd tier cities and the rural areas.

    What's the true rate? A million a day?

    And 40k aren't getting into hospital...they might need hospital, but the vast majority are going to instead be in the back of a car being driven around to try and buy another oxygen cylinder from the black market.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,195

    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

    I would have agreed with you right up until the conversation where a very good source told me that she is going for him. An apocalypse-o-fuck result and then the deputy saying time's up? I agree that had a challenge come from Dicky B then it would have been laughed off. Not from Rayner.
    I wonder if your very good source is as reliable as my very good sources that tell me Rayner has absolutely no intention of challenging Starmer, whatever the outcomes of today's elections. I write as a current Labour member, rather than as a Lib Dem who, understandably, seeks to slag off Labour at every opportunity.
  • GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 1,623
    Leon said:

    I think it will be mind-blowingly catastrophic for Labour. Losing a by-election to a long-in-the-tooth government in a seat that they've held for aeons is not something that oppositions should ever do. Labour should be expecting to overthrow solidly Tory seats at this juncture; not surrendering their own - least of all places like Hartlepool.

    I agree entirely. It's absurd to say an almost-unheard-of political event - a long-in-power government seizing a by-election from the Oppo - is somehow predictable and everyday. It simply is not.

    Or rather, it is predictable and everyday in the same way we have got used to the SNP sweeping every seat in Glasgow, and Scottish Labour trailing far behind

    That was a revolution, with great consequences for the nation. So, potentially, is this. The Red Wall might never come back
    I suspect the Times are not big fans of Boris so have good reason to talk down Hartlepool
  • BournvilleBournville Posts: 107
    I have heard rumours that the West Midlands Mayoral election will be closer than the polls are saying - turnout in the strongly Labour parts of east Birmingham is allegedly strong which will offset the Conservative advantage in the suburbs.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214

    I have heard rumours that the West Midlands Mayoral election will be closer than the polls are saying - turnout in the strongly Labour parts of east Birmingham is allegedly strong which will offset the Conservative advantage in the suburbs.

    That would just be a further sign of Labour's vote inefficiency.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214

    mickydroy said:

    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
    Nandy, I think and hope
    Nandy seems safer to me - but I know some of her positions are on the edge and I may change my view.
    Khan or Burnham would be preferable to either.
    I thought everyone agreed Khan is useless?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,195

    My view on Hartlepool: It is a big deal as it is another potent symbol of a historic realignment however it isn't surprising, and those are two different things.

    Yes, but the realignment isn't new; it dates from the 2019 GE, when Tories and BXP between them got 7,000 more votes than Labour. See the table in the thread header.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Foss said:

    Both Raynor and Nandy are about 1000 vote ahead of Con + Brexit. On that basis both maybe too concerned about loosing their seats to go for the leadership. Just because decapitation failed for the Lib Dems in ’05 doesn’t mean it’s not at threat to them in ’24.

    Cooper too.

    Ed Milliband 2,500 ahead in Doncaster North with 8,000 UKIP last time.

    Imagine Labour lost Raynor, Nandy, Cooper and Milliband in the same night. With things as they are this is possible.
    It may even be likely.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    It'II be interesting if Khan goes below 40% on first prefs, after he was expected to get more than 50% only a few weeks ago.
    As a gambler who thinks in terms of expected value, in a first preference voting system, I would never vote for a clear fav as my first preference, even if they were my first choice.

    Voting for a minor party/joke candidate first and Khan second is a free extra vote that you can use to promote a cause or show displeasure with the political establishment. Why waste it?
    Agree PROVIDED that you are certain your 1st choice will in fact make it through.

    Have done similar to what you suggest voting in US primaries.

    For example in Seattle mayor's race a couple cycles ago, under the WA State "Top Two"primary system where top vote-getters advance to the general election.

    In 2013 voted for a non-hope candidate for mayor with good ideas, as it was obvious that my (final) 1st choice was definitely gonna make the final.

    Was a 4-point plus for yours truly because

    1. candidate I supported in primary did get a decent vote for an also-ran;

    2. candidate I preferred among the only two with a real shot made the Top Two, and went on to win the election;

    3. I registered my (slight by real) disinclination to go with the follow (and the establishment in this instance) UNTIL it was unavoidable; and

    4. I concealed my support for Candidate A from Candidate B, knowing all the while that (provided the God Lord was willing & the creeks didn't rise) I was gonna vote for A and give B a kick in the ass (or arse if you insist).
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,648

    I disagree completely that its no big deal if the Tories win tonight, its massive. For quite a few reasons.

    1. These Brexit Party voters are not-Tories, traditionally Labour, that were not prepared to vote Tory even in 2019 to "Get Brexit Done".
    2. This is far from the only seat that would fall if BXP voters go blue. It'll be the case for eg Yvette Cooper's too.
    3. A baseline majority would be 110 instead of 80 if Hartlepool and comparable falls.
    4. This is midterms, the government should be losing.
    5. It shows that "Get Brexit Done" wasn't a one-off two years ago.
    6. It shows that Corbyn wasn't the be all and end all either.
    7. Even if the political layout "just" keeps the landscape the same as it was in 2019, that's incredibly good news for the Tories.
    And bad news for the country and bad news for people who believe in truth and integrity.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214

    My view on Hartlepool: It is a big deal as it is another potent symbol of a historic realignment however it isn't surprising, and those are two different things.

    Yes, but the realignment isn't new; it dates from the 2019 GE, when Tories and BXP between them got 7,000 more votes than Labour. See the table in the thread header.
    Oh I know. But this is a midterm by election. We will probably look back at this day as the point where the Labour northern suburban hegemony was finally broken.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 3,719
    Leon said:

    I think it will be mind-blowingly catastrophic for Labour. Losing a by-election to a long-in-the-tooth government in a seat that they've held for aeons is not something that oppositions should ever do. Labour should be expecting to overthrow solidly Tory seats at this juncture; not surrendering their own - least of all places like Hartlepool.

    I agree entirely. It's absurd to say an almost-unheard-of political event - a long-in-power government seizing a by-election from the Oppo - is somehow predictable and everyday. It simply is not.

    Or rather, it is predictable and everyday in the same way we have got used to the SNP sweeping every seat in Glasgow, and Scottish Labour trailing far behind

    That was a revolution, with great consequences for the nation. So, potentially, is this. The Red Wall might never come back
    Sure- but it's also an event where the decisive bit has already happened. Maybe it happened years ago.

    Think of Hartlepool Labour as the condemned man facing the firing squad. There's that bit of time where the bullets have been fired, but haven't reached their target yet. Depending on how hammy the screenplay is, you might slow down the motion to emphasise the dead-not-dead moment.

    To make the torture more exquisite, the first bullet, labelled December 2019, bounced off a cigarette case, a gift from the Brexit Party. Now the second bullet is arriving, and this one is going to do what it was fired to do.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Leon said:

    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?

    This is what would have happened here if Toby Young and his fellow Lockdown Sceptics/Covid deniers would have had their way.
    Yeah like it did in Florida and South Dakota, where they did have their way.

    Oh wait...
  • felixfelix Posts: 13,532

    I suspect if Labour looked like winning this with a comfortable majority, Mike would be running a thread saying red wall crumbling, disaster for Boris, etc.

    The grapes are very bitter indeed tonight.....
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016

    mickydroy said:

    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
    Nandy, I think and hope
    Nandy seems safer to me - but I know some of her positions are on the edge and I may change my view.
    Khan or Burnham would be preferable to either.
    I thought everyone agreed Khan is useless?
    Not an upgrade on Starmer, similar quality and mix of competent but dull, but Khan motivates the culture warriors more for obvious reasons.
  • FossFoss Posts: 417

    Foss said:

    Both Raynor and Nandy are about 1000 vote ahead of Con + Brexit. On that basis both maybe too concerned about loosing their seats to go for the leadership. Just because decapitation failed for the Lib Dems in ’05 doesn’t mean it’s not at threat to them in ’24.

    Cooper too.

    Ed Milliband 2,500 ahead in Doncaster North with 8,000 UKIP last time.

    Imagine Labour lost Raynor, Nandy, Cooper and Milliband in the same night. With things as they are this is possible.
    It may even be likely.
    There's a big difference between a party loosing a former leader and a party potentially loosing the current leader and their main rival.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,036

    Foss said:

    Both Raynor and Nandy are about 1000 vote ahead of Con + Brexit. On that basis both maybe too concerned about loosing their seats to go for the leadership. Just because decapitation failed for the Lib Dems in ’05 doesn’t mean it’s not at threat to them in ’24.

    Cooper too.

    Ed Milliband 2,500 ahead in Doncaster North with 8,000 UKIP last time.

    Imagine Labour lost Raynor, Nandy, Cooper and Milliband in the same night. With things as they are this is possible.
    It may even be likely.
    Yep

    I might ask my MP what his plans are for 2024 because likely he loses too

    A change of leader is essential now IMO
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186

    Leon said:

    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?

    Of course its even worse, hard to get a test in the major cities, let alone what the the situation is like in 2nd tier cities and the rural areas.

    What's the true rate? A million a day?
    I saw a news report the other day where the oxygen supply failed at a hospital - people died - the staff (allegedly at the urging of the hospital director) fled ICU and hid

    https://twitter.com/SreenivasanJain/status/1389829718954844164

    Then this

    https://twitter.com/TOIBengaluru/status/1390122922606358531

    and this

    https://twitter.com/ikasnik/status/1389877836039688193

  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    mickydroy said:

    Stocky said:

    In previous thread I asked who would win a leadership contest contested by only Raynor and Nandy.

    BJO said Raynor and Northern Al said Nandy.

    Any other views?

    Should be Nandy - would be Rayner
    Nandy, I think and hope
    Nandy seems safer to me - but I know some of her positions are on the edge and I may change my view.
    Khan or Burnham would be preferable to either.
    I thought everyone agreed Khan is useless?
    Appears to be the consensus. London's answer to Mayor Quimby?
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,648
    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    So right wing loonies do live in London. Rare as hen's teeth but still surviving in our great capital!
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016

    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    It'II be interesting if Khan goes below 40% on first prefs, after he was expected to get more than 50% only a few weeks ago.
    As a gambler who thinks in terms of expected value, in a first preference voting system, I would never vote for a clear fav as my first preference, even if they were my first choice.

    Voting for a minor party/joke candidate first and Khan second is a free extra vote that you can use to promote a cause or show displeasure with the political establishment. Why waste it?
    Agree PROVIDED that you are certain your 1st choice will in fact make it through.

    Have done similar to what you suggest voting in US primaries.

    For example in Seattle mayor's race a couple cycles ago, under the WA State "Top Two"primary system where top vote-getters advance to the general election.

    In 2013 voted for a non-hope candidate for mayor with good ideas, as it was obvious that my (final) 1st choice was definitely gonna make the final.

    Was a 4-point plus for yours truly because

    1. candidate I supported in primary did get a decent vote for an also-ran;

    2. candidate I preferred among the only two with a real shot made the Top Two, and went on to win the election;

    3. I registered my (slight by real) disinclination to go with the follow (and the establishment in this instance) UNTIL it was unavoidable; and

    4. I concealed my support for Candidate A from Candidate B, knowing all the while that (provided the God Lord was willing & the creeks didn't rise) I was gonna vote for A and give B a kick in the ass (or arse if you insist).
    Agree, I specified it was when its a clear fav, as in the London mayoral election. If it was in the french presidential election the margins are too narrow and you need to vote for your first preference, or tactically for your preferred candidate who has a plausible chance to reach the run off.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,036

    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

    2. Because he was supposed to be a vote winner and promised to unite


    Failed miserably on both fronts

    PLP knives will be out IMO
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016

    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

    2. Because he was supposed to be a vote winner and promised to unite


    Failed miserably on both fronts

    PLP knives will be out IMO
    He is a vote winner but only if the govt makes a mess of the economy.

    Labour do not have and will not have a vote winner whilst the govt does well or okay for their voting coalition.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,168
    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 8,380
    Why on Earth would anyone vote “Lozza”?
    I think we can safely ignore Leon’s attempts to pose as a sentient poster.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219

    I disagree completely that its no big deal if the Tories win tonight, its massive. For quite a few reasons.

    1. These Brexit Party voters are not-Tories, traditionally Labour, that were not prepared to vote Tory even in 2019 to "Get Brexit Done".
    2. This is far from the only seat that would fall if BXP voters go blue. It'll be the case for eg Yvette Cooper's too.
    3. A baseline majority would be 110 instead of 80 if Hartlepool and comparable falls.
    4. This is midterms, the government should be losing.
    5. It shows that "Get Brexit Done" wasn't a one-off two years ago.
    6. It shows that Corbyn wasn't the be all and end all either.
    7. Even if the political layout "just" keeps the landscape the same as it was in 2019, that's incredibly good news for the Tories.
    Brexit Party was a half-way house for hereditary Labour voters increasingly disaffected - disenchanted - disconnected from their old allegiance.

    As with actual half-way houses, some recidivism but most end up passing through and not looking back.

    Unless of course something subsequently happens (to them and or society) to re-alter their political trajectory.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898

    My view on Hartlepool: It is a big deal as it is another potent symbol of a historic realignment however it isn't surprising, and those are two different things.

    Yes, but the realignment isn't new; it dates from the 2019 GE, when Tories and BXP between them got 7,000 more votes than Labour. See the table in the thread header.
    Errr, in 2015 Con plus UKIP got 5,000 more votes than Labour.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    What people don't get about Nandy is that she does get the anti-woke sentiment, or at least that's what she articulated in a private Q&A with Labour activists at Northumbria University back in 2019.

    The reason why I voted for her for leader is because she did get it.

    She might have had her own woke views, but she understood that not everyone shared those views, and that was fair enough.
  • felixfelix Posts: 13,532
    Robert Peston
    @Peston
    ·
    5m
    Tories are briefing that Labour has got its vote out in Hartlepool and is doing better than expected throughout England. I have zero idea if this is mind games or real.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    DavidL said:

    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.

    Is high turnout definitely good for the nats?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201

    Foss said:

    Both Raynor and Nandy are about 1000 vote ahead of Con + Brexit. On that basis both maybe too concerned about loosing their seats to go for the leadership. Just because decapitation failed for the Lib Dems in ’05 doesn’t mean it’s not at threat to them in ’24.

    Cooper too.

    Ed Milliband 2,500 ahead in Doncaster North with 8,000 UKIP last time.

    Imagine Labour lost Raynor, Nandy, Cooper and Milliband in the same night. With things as they are this is possible.
    It may even be likely.
    Cooper's is the 12th easiest seat on the Tories "target list". Imagine the number of activists putting in some time to unseat the Shadow Chancellor.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    Well, Yvette seems to have the first name factor based on responses here, which some people persist in pretending is like how people think Boris is their best mate or some such rubbish, so she is clearly the candidate to go for based on that alone.

    One day you will understand the point I make about the Boris brand and how the ubiquitous use of his first name in a spirit of false intimacy is a key part of it.

    But until then you will write more posts like this.
    I understand the point completely, I just think it is fundamentally flawed, insulting to the electorate by suggesting one element of a person's brand is so powerful, and therefore disagree with it and so like to make fun of it.

    That people have indeed being mentioning Yvette (and indeed Keir) rather makes the point that a brand is a lot more than some claptrap about false intimacy - since even if a politician gets known by an 'intimate' name, it is not enough on its own.

    Put simply, yes, people calling him Boris is part of his brand, but I think it is utterly absurd to suggest that merely using the name is as powerful as you appear to think it is, even when people who detest him use it, and I personally think obsession with people using the name he is known by is ridiculous and focusing on the wrong thing. How much energy wasted by people moaning about others calling the man Boris?

    We disagree about that and will continue to do so, so no, there will be no enlightenment as the point is pretty darn easy to grasp. It's ok to disagree.

    But thank you for 'one day you will understand', that certainly helps makes your point.
    The inanity of people obsessing over someone's first name is completely ridiculous.

    People have been talking about Keir and Yvette, Joe and more.

    Its 2021, people use first names quite frequently. Why people act like we're still in the 1950s is beyond me.
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 14,755

    Re-posted from end of last thread:

    1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.

    2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.

    3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.

    2. Because he was supposed to be a vote winner and promised to unite


    Failed miserably on both fronts

    PLP knives will be out IMO
    He is a vote winner but only if the govt makes a mess of the economy.

    Labour do not have and will not have a vote winner whilst the govt does well or okay for their voting coalition.
    Exactly this. The best chance Labour has is the Tories imploding or screwing up which is the only way they will lose. Keir is best for that scenario.

    Until somebody better comes along he has my support. End of.
  • felixfelix Posts: 13,532
    Mark Wallace suggesting that Labour could be in for a drubbing in Sunderland tonight - all 3 seats are currently Labour and marginal........
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 18,105
    Labour losing Hartlepool to the Tories is no big deal? Riiiiiggggghhhhtttt lol!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,022
    edited May 6
    Nothing beats election day rumours. 😊
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186
    Forgive me for laughing my head off

    https://twitter.com/CityAM/status/1390381863521374212

    Taxman chasing Gary Lineker for £5m over IR35 dispute

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 41,201
    felix said:

    Robert Peston
    @Peston
    ·
    5m
    Tories are briefing that Labour has got its vote out in Hartlepool and is doing better than expected throughout England. I have zero idea if this is mind games or real.

    This is Peston. Everybody fucks with Peston's mind. Because it is so easy to do....
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898

    Leon said:

    India

    414,443 cases. In one day

    10% of them can expect to end up in hospital.

    40,000 daily. Theoretically. Add in a collapsing health system?

    This is what would have happened here if Toby Young and his fellow Lockdown Sceptics/Covid deniers would have had their way.
    Yeah like it did in Florida and South Dakota, where they did have their way.

    Oh wait...
    Florida had local municipality restrictions.

    Try going into Disneyworld without a mask.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    felix said:

    Mark Wallace suggesting that Labour could be in for a drubbing in Sunderland tonight - all 3 seats are currently Labour and marginal........

    It will give us a steer but it wont be conclusive. The young don't vote in council elections.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 13,923

    DavidL said:

    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.

    Is high turnout definitely good for the nats?
    What he's moaning about is that the young (students etc) have actually got out of bed to vote Green and to some extent also SNP.

    I thought he was in favour of getting the young interested in politics.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,214
  • ExiledInScotlandExiledInScotland Posts: 1,224
    Oh God. Bercow on Question Time tonight. What are the odds on everyone except the Conservative blaming Boris for the French Fishermens action?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 6,985
    The London result will be interesting.

    There are three ballot papers. The Mayoral one is supplementary vote with two columns. Then there is a Regional vote (for 12 GLA members FPTP) and a List vote (de Hondt method) for 12 List members of the GLA. It's hideously complex. Three different coloured ballot papers with three different methods of voting.

    LibDems are voting enthusiastically. Tories seem to unenthusiastic about Bailey for Mayor and therefore many are not bothering to vote at all. Don't know about Labour.

    I think the LibDem will double, and perhaps treble their representation on the GLA. But no betting opportunities as far as I can see.

    I've laid Khan getting between 40-45% first preferences at 1.7 ( now moved to 1.99).
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.181958375
    I think he will do better than that.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 39,168

    DavidL said:

    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.

    Is high turnout definitely good for the nats?
    Yes. The Tory vote always turns out. Whether it wins or not depends on how many SNP supporters can be arsed.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,036
    Am going to the verification shortly so i will leave you with my predictions

    Labour to retain its 7 of 9 in Chesterfield

    Labour to reduce Tory Maj on Derbyshire CC but not by much Tories retain control

    Labour to Lose Derbyshire PCC to the Tories

    Labour to lose Hartlepool by at least 4,000
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898

    DavidL said:

    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.

    Is high turnout definitely good for the nats?
    No, lower constituency turnout is correlated with a higher Nat vote share.

    In 2016 turnout was up 5% from 2011, the Tories captured almost the entirety of that extra turnout.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 16,895
    Just back from a few hours' telling in my ward to show the flag (mixed wealthy, middle-class and one council estate - County seat is LibDem held) - very light poll, around 40 people an hour. No other tellers. Reports from across the constituency say a few candidates are doing telling but nobody is knocking up, on the basis that unnecessary visits will still be unwelcome. Postal vote also light, as reported earlier.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,214
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Well voting is beyond brisk in my village. Over 60% turnout at 8pm and going like a fair. Can't say that this is good news for Unionists. The army of the dead (in the head) that follow Nicola have apparently risen from their pits. Bah.

    Is high turnout definitely good for the nats?
    Yes. The Tory vote always turns out. Whether it wins or not depends on how many SNP supporters can be arsed.
    Well it will be great craic for us south of the border I'm sorry to say.

    Popcorn.gif
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 5,219
    murali_s said:

    Leon said:

    Saw a couple of voting queues this evening, but that could easily be the Lurgy


    I delivered my postal vote in person in sunny but chilly Primrose Hill

    I went:

    Lozza

    Binface

    Tories

    So right wing loonies do live in London. Rare as hen's teeth but still surviving in our great capital!
    Trumpsky got 9% in Seattle, and 22% in King County (city plus east & south burbs).

    Reckon similar right-wing support in central & Greater London?
This discussion has been closed.