Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
I have to say I think he would find it very hard to lead in that way without shedding further support in other directions, from what I can see. It needs to be consensus but with strong and focused leadership, I think.
Some strange results in Scotland with clear tactical voting in some areas and no sign of that in others . The SNP majority is still on a knife edge.
On the Edinburgh Central swing the SNP would win a majority but that is a very Remain area.
However if the Banffshire and Buchan South seat is replicated in its neighbouring seat in the more Leave seat of Moray the Tories would gain it and if Labour hold Dumbarton, the LDs win Caithness and Sutherland which they hold at Westminster and the SNP lose list seats to the Greens then there could yet be no SNP majority
The SNP have already held Moray.
Apologies, they have, though there was a small swing to the SCons.
The Tories top target in Scotland, Perthshire South and Kinrosshire has yet to declare
(No, teachers are not opposed. The article is misleading to that extent. Some unions are, especially those representing cleaning staff. Why, I don’t know, as the children are trawling their masks over desks, touching them and then chairs, dropping them on the floor...)
I'm not opposed either, that vast majority of our staff are vaccinated and the local infection rate is currently nil.
Some strange results in Scotland with clear tactical voting in some areas and no sign of that in others . The SNP majority is still on a knife edge.
On the Edinburgh Central swing the SNP would win a majority but that is a very Remain area.
If Labour hold Dumbarton and the Tories hold their remaining constituency seats and the SNP lose list seats to the Greens then there could yet be no SNP majority
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
The problem though, is I genuinely believe any of the other candidates would have had the same reaction. Starmer remains the best Labour have got but it is depressing how badly Labour is perceived by many.
I am increasingly of the view that Burnham should find a way back into Parliament.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
The Tories appear to have won Havering & Redbridge, possibly by a clear margin, which is remarkable given the demographics, especially in the latter, as well as Labour’s renowned ground game there.
That's a good sign for the Tories, to state the obvious.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
Think Khan is going to under-perform. Because his "leadership" has been rather under-whelming.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
Andy isn't my hero whatsoever, I've only even considered him today. I am just honestly speaking out loud in terms of potential successors with more charisma than Starmer and something of a higher profile.
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
The Tories appear to have won Havering & Redbridge, possibly by a clear margin, which is remarkable given the demographics, especially in the latter, as well as Labour’s renowned ground game there.
That's a good sign for the Tories, to state the obvious.
Likely almost entirely down to Havering, which is strong Leave and Andrew Rosindell country.
(No, teachers are not opposed. The article is misleading to that extent. Some unions are, especially those representing cleaning staff. Why, I don’t know, as the children are trawling their masks over desks, touching them and then chairs, dropping them on the floor...)
I'm not opposed either, that vast majority of our staff are vaccinated and the local infection rate is currently nil.
Masks in schools were a bloody fool idea. A government that prized message over substance and particularly over the welfare of both children and teachers.
The Conservatives have taken control of Cornwall for the first time - won 46 of the 87 seats.
In Surrey, 60 results in - 35 Conservatives and 25 non-Conservatives.
Bit of a shock as Julie Iles lost her seat.. big conservative figure down here
Not a shock in the slightest - It was a certainty. I live in the ward.
Lot of history re the Tories in Guildford over the last few years. They got slaughtered in the Boroughs as a consequence. They also fell out with the Mole Valley Tories. This ward is in Guildford Borough, but Mole Valley constituency.
Several years ago when this was all exploding there was a Borough by election in Ripley (also in this ward). It has been Tory held forever. The LD (Colin Cross) took it with 70% of the vote. As the scandals festered on a residents group got set up. Colin and a number of Tories defected to it, as well as there being a lot of new blood. The residents group walked the Borough wards in this county seat (with 1 exception that was a LD with a lot of local support) in the Borough election.
There was no way Colin wasn't going to win it.
PS I voted for him also rather than the LD whom I would normally vote for.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
Andy isn't my hero whatsoever, I've only even considered him today. I am just honestly speaking out loud in terms of potential successors with more charisma than Starmer and something of a higher profile.
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
Goes back way before that imho. Why did Blair win? Because he was a good leader. Therefore. Why didn't Brown, Ed M, Corbyn or Starmer? Because they weren't.
However. If you answer why did Blair win? Because he had popular policies, a very strong, capable team around him, iron Party discipline, and the added superb bonus of unpopular and divided opponents. Then you get a totally different answer for why the others didn't. Proof. John Smith would have won in 97. Because he had all those too. Not because Smith and Blair were uniquely good leaders.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
Andy isn't my hero whatsoever, I've only even considered him today. I am just honestly speaking out loud in terms of potential successors with more charisma than Starmer and something of a higher profile.
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
Nandy doesn't appeal?
I don't buy that she has charisma. She has some ideas, I think she needs more experience.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
Andy isn't my hero whatsoever, I've only even considered him today. I am just honestly speaking out loud in terms of potential successors with more charisma than Starmer and something of a higher profile.
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
The trouble is that the Labour Party is structured in a way that makes it difficult for anyone to lead in a different direction, or indeed to change at al without generating considerable resistance.
Starmer needs to do two things with the sleaze allegations swirling round Number 10. First, he needs to nail Boris to the wall so that he must resign. More importantly though, he needs to get the message across to voters that the issue is corruption not wallpaper. The evidence of the yesterday's election results is that he has failed on the politics, even if he can eventually topple the Prime Minister.
The Times story is interesting but is paywalled. What can be seen looks like a loose, easy-come culture, even if there is nothing legally wrong.
There was also a suggestion a couple of days ago that Boris's brother Jo had landed a job with Dyson which if nothing else might explain how they knew each other's mobile numbers.
Labour are really going to struggle to get Boris out over wallpapergate or anything else that came out pre-election now. The Tories will be hanging onto Boris for dear life given these results.
They could still wound him if the drip-drip continues (which could help them in the next elections/2024), but as for anything else, the office of PM is self regulating (save for the boys in blue turning up at Number 10 and taking an incumbent away!) and the pressure to resign goes hand in hand with political pressure, and labours political credibility has taken yet another blow. I don’t think they’ve got the strength to force a PM out of office now, particularly one who has just had a decent night at the polls.
Starmer's platform must be Parliament. He needs to use his forensic legal skills to nail the aura of sleaze and corruption around Number 10, and Boris's tenuous relationship with the truth. He has six questions each week to do so.
This didn’t work for William Hague, who had substantially more wit and spontaneity than Starmer does. There’s just no way his target voter base is going to be turned on even slightly, by the oh so clever barrister tricks and niggles that he comes up with. Starmer’s leadership is actually beyond repair, if indeed it ever stood a chance after the shambles of his time as Brexit Shadow Sec.
Labour should start again or they’re going to waste another 18-24 months, by which time BJ will be limbering up for a snap election.
Island Tories now speculating that they may have lost control of the county.
The count is held up because a batch of postal votes was put in the box for the wrong ward. Council is suggesting all 39 wards may need to be recounted, which to me (I am not actually there) seems an overreaction.
Just keep those island line railway extensions coming.
I'd vote for anyone who delivered on Newport/Ventnor.
Anyone.
I was discussing the possible Ventnor extension just last week. We are keen to see it happen, but there are some technical issues as well as the minor issue of funding
Send me a message. I'm a civil engineer and I do railways - major project/programme management.
(PS. yes, we've been dicks to each other in the past but let's ignore that: this is more important)
We’re expecting a feasibility study to go to Parliament from Ian Birch any day now. Once we see that - assuming it’s made public - we’ll have a better idea where things stand.
(1) Need to relocate Ventnor industrial estate somewhere else (2) Wroxall - a few gardens, and maybe a couple of houses, need totalling (won't be popular) (3) Need some sort of connectivity shuttle down from Ventnor to town centre/bay
I think the water pipes in the tunnel are something that can be accommodatedbut I haven't seen the detailed dimensions. I think the bridge over the road at Shanklin and reshuffling of access to Lower Hyde holiday park should be able to be done.
£60-£80m project. Possibly a bit more with optimism bias.
Which is a lot for a town of population fewer than 5,000
There’s a local guy who thinks a water-powered funicular could be built up the hill. Doesn’t sound likely to me.
Losing the Tory council to tap the Tory government for pork is probably a setback for an already unlikely project , if that is what has happened.
You guys need to show more ambition and connect IoW to Southampton so you can go all the way from Newport to Newport.
We had a teacher (at the school I now teach at) who managed to convince a group of sixth-formers on a school trip to the IoW that the trains were the far end of the Central line...
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
If Starmer can't resolve them though, it is ultimately his responsibility and he should go.
True. But then your hero Andy hadnt a single noteworthy idea nor very much charisma when he ran for the job. He certainly has grown into the mayoral role, but is there any evidence he would return to Parliament able to lead?
Andy isn't my hero whatsoever, I've only even considered him today. I am just honestly speaking out loud in terms of potential successors with more charisma than Starmer and something of a higher profile.
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
The trouble is that the Labour Party is structured in a way that makes it difficult for anyone to lead in a different direction, or indeed to change at al without generating considerable resistance.
I genuinely think Starmer has a lot of power to change the party should he actually want to. The MPs aren't going to VONC him and they ultimately have the power.
It's actually odd the membership seemingly have the power because in actual reality they have none. Keir should show some backbone and tell them where to go.
Haven't got all the numbers in front of me but I think Abolish in Wales are kyboshed. Look like may well end up with no seats. Hopefully they will get the message.
"Beginning their analysis of the results, Welsh Conservatives say their vote share has gone up but disappointing Plaid Cymru performances prevented them from taking their target seats from Labour."
Island Tories now speculating that they may have lost control of the county.
The count is held up because a batch of postal votes was put in the box for the wrong ward. Council is suggesting all 39 wards may need to be recounted, which to me (I am not actually there) seems an overreaction.
Just keep those island line railway extensions coming.
I'd vote for anyone who delivered on Newport/Ventnor.
Anyone.
I was discussing the possible Ventnor extension just last week. We are keen to see it happen, but there are some technical issues as well as the minor issue of funding
Send me a message. I'm a civil engineer and I do railways - major project/programme management.
(PS. yes, we've been dicks to each other in the past but let's ignore that: this is more important)
We’re expecting a feasibility study to go to Parliament from Ian Birch any day now. Once we see that - assuming it’s made public - we’ll have a better idea where things stand.
(1) Need to relocate Ventnor industrial estate somewhere else (2) Wroxall - a few gardens, and maybe a couple of houses, need totalling (won't be popular) (3) Need some sort of connectivity shuttle down from Ventnor to town centre/bay
I think the water pipes in the tunnel are something that can be accommodatedbut I haven't seen the detailed dimensions. I think the bridge over the road at Shanklin and reshuffling of access to Lower Hyde holiday park should be able to be done.
£60-£80m project. Possibly a bit more with optimism bias.
Which is a lot for a town of population fewer than 5,000
There’s a local guy who thinks a water-powered funicular could be built up the hill. Doesn’t sound likely to me.
Losing the Tory council to tap the Tory government for pork is probably a setback for an already unlikely project , if that is what has happened.
You guys need to show more ambition and connect IoW to Southampton so you can go all the way from Newport to Newport.
We had a teacher (at the school I now teach at) who managed to convince a group of sixth-formers on a school trip to the IoW that the trains were the far end of the Central line...
The 1938 underground carriages are certainly a talking point, if also a very bouncy ride. I believe they originate from the Bakerloo Line, although they used them as standins on the Northern Line in the late 1980s, while they were waiting for new stock, and I remember travelling on them now and again when I lived in Archway.
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
If we are looking at the same responses then I see nothing about kicking out loony lefties or getting Labour back to the centre.
Recount in Dumbarton, squeaky bum time for Jackie Baillee.
Do you suppose it's Messrts Johnson and Williamson going all warmonger down in London that has had any effect on people's views of Faslane/Coulport and Ms Baillie's support thereof?
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
The Tories appear to have won Havering & Redbridge, possibly by a clear margin, which is remarkable given the demographics, especially in the latter, as well as Labour’s renowned ground game there.
Is this surprising though? According to this link, Zac won that borough in 2016 by 75k to 60k on first preferences.
May be mistaken, but it appears SCons are more likely to vote tactically Unionist than SLab (which of course may simply reflect greater support for the Union among SCon voters):
Those responses make for very depressing reading in Starmer. Some clearly still there because of the shadow of Corbyn but most don't seem to like Starmer much at all.
He's got a year to turn it around and seemingly what these people want is leadership, i.e. to kick out the loony lefties and get Labour back to the centre. Can he do it? I am honestly doubtful at this point.
Part of the problem is that all the focus on Corbyn has left a legacy that the fault is always with the leader. Whereas the faults are more structural, even if Starmer has been lacklustre about addressing them
Goes back way before that imho. Why did Blair win? Because he was a good leader. Therefore. Why didn't Brown, Ed M, Corbyn or Starmer? Because they weren't.
However. If you answer why did Blair win? Because he had popular policies, a very strong, capable team around him, iron Party discipline, and the added superb bonus of unpopular and divided opponents. Then you get a totally different answer for why the others didn't. Proof. John Smith would have won in 97. Because he had all those too. Not because Smith and Blair were uniquely good leaders.
The problem, though, is that the Blairite formula suddenly stopped working between 2005 and 2007, before he left. The party started shedding large numbers of votes during this time, and so although Blair and Mandelson had a great tactical and structural blueprint for the party, their ideological blueprint, which they were sure would be permanent, and about which New Labour-era policians still struggle to see as anything other than an entitlement, suddenly began to fail.
May be mistaken, but it appears SCons are more likely to vote tactically Unionist than SLab (which of course may simply reflect greater support for the Union among SCon voters):
Yes, and he'll be fine on the second ballot. The electoral system and the huge range of candidates made an open invitation to put a minor candidate first and Khan second - I know several Labour people who did that in order to show they were pro-EU, pro-environment, etc.
IIRC. Jarvis didn't stand because he has young children. 2 of whom lost their mother at a tragically young age. Whether he will consider it later? Who knows? But I wouldn't blame anyone not wanting the gig given the levels of vitriol they would inevitably face.
May be mistaken, but it appears SCons are more likely to vote tactically Unionist than SLab (which of course may simply reflect greater support for the Union among SCon voters):
My distinct impression is that for Tories, the Union is all important and maintaining that trumps everything.
For Labour, in particular, other considerations are much more important (not least, kicking the Tories) and the Union should only be maintained if it is of material benefit to them, which quite a large chunk think it isn’t.
Therefore, there is every reason to think Labour voters would vote tactically *for the SNP* in at least as great a number as for the Tories.
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
The Tories appear to have won Havering & Redbridge, possibly by a clear margin, which is remarkable given the demographics, especially in the latter, as well as Labour’s renowned ground game there.
Is this surprising though? According to this link, Zac won that borough in 2016 by 75k to 60k on first preferences.
There is a lot of lazy psephology applied to London. It's a Labour city: young and multicultural so Labour enjoys a permanent hegemony. It ignores that Boris was mayor as recently as five years back and that Ken Livingstone won as an independent, not for Labour first time round.
I'm just wondering whether the problem for Khan in London may be that a lot of Green voters, and voters for other minor left-wing parties, have refused to give him their second preference as expected.
Would we know that yet? Have second preferences been published or are they held back until we know who has been eliminated, in case a sudden surge for Count Binface?
Both main parties have been saying Khan hasn't done as well as expected. It may be total nonsense of course once we get the results.
The Tories appear to have won Havering & Redbridge, possibly by a clear margin, which is remarkable given the demographics, especially in the latter, as well as Labour’s renowned ground game there.
Is this surprising though? According to this link, Zac won that borough in 2016 by 75k to 60k on first preferences.
The Conservatives have taken control of Cornwall for the first time - won 46 of the 87 seats.
In Surrey, 60 results in - 35 Conservatives and 25 non-Conservatives.
Bit of a shock as Julie Iles lost her seat.. big conservative figure down here
Not a shock in the slightest - It was a certainty. I live in the ward.
Lot of history re the Tories in Guildford over the last few years. They got slaughtered in the Boroughs as a consequence. They also fell out with the Mole Valley Tories. This ward is in Guildford Borough, but Mole Valley constituency.
Several years ago when this was all exploding there was a Borough by election in Ripley (also in this ward). It has been Tory held forever. The LD (Colin Cross) took it with 70% of the vote. As the scandals festered on a residents group got set up. Colin and a number of Tories defected to it, as well as there being a lot of new blood. The residents group walked the Borough wards in this county seat (with 1 exception that was a LD with a lot of local support) in the Borough election.
There was no way Colin wasn't going to win it.
PS I voted for him also rather than the LD whom I would normally vote for.
Interesting. Waverley are in talks with Guildford on close cooperation (I'm involved), perhaps even eventual merger, and anti-Tory residents' groups are significant in both.
IIRC. Jarvis didn't stand because he has young children. 2 of whom lost their mother at a tragically young age. Whether he will consider it later? Who knows? But I wouldn't blame anyone not wanting the gig given the levels of vitriol they would inevitably face.
He seems like a very decent guy, and would get dogs abuse from pillocks in his own party who think he's a Tory because reasons.
I do not blame him, Andy Burnham and presumably Tracy Brabin from washing their hands of the situation.
Elizabeth Buffy Williams (Labour) 54.7 (+18.8) Leanne Wood (Plaid) 31.3 (-19.3)
Labour gain
Terrible night for Plaid in Wales, they are going backwoods in contrast to the SNP in Scotland who will still be largest party comfortably majority or not
May be mistaken, but it appears SCons are more likely to vote tactically Unionist than SLab (which of course may simply reflect greater support for the Union among SCon voters):
My distinct impression is that for Tories, the Union is all important and maintaining that trumps everything.
For Labour, in particular, other considerations are much more important (not least, kicking the Tories) and the Union should only be maintained if it is of material benefit to them, which quite a large chunk think it isn’t.
Therefore, there is every reason to think Labour voters would vote tactically *for the SNP* in at least as great a number as for the Tories.
That is also my impression.
In the final analysis, the continuing existence of the Union is everything to Scots Tories, but English ones would be hugely advantaged by being shot of it. I'm not sure what the determination of the party in London not to heave Scotland over the side is really more about: a genuine commitment, or just not wanting to be the ones in charge when it all falls apart.
Elizabeth Buffy Williams (Labour) 54.7 (+18.8) Leanne Wood (Plaid) 31.3 (-19.3)
Labour gain
Not sure why Plaid are doing badly. It does feel as though the independence mood is growing. There are now several alternative options with Gwlad and Neil McEvoy's Propel as pro-independence.
Comments
The Tories top target in Scotland, Perthshire South and Kinrosshire has yet to declare
I miss him and want him back.
Lab hold
Lab +10%, Con -14%
I am increasingly of the view that Burnham should find a way back into Parliament.
@BallotBoxScot
·
3m
Glasgow Pollok Constituency Vote:
SNP ~ 18163 (53.7%,-1.1)
Lab ~ 11058 (32.7%,+1.1)
Con ~ 1849 (5.5%,-4)
Grn ~ 1651 (4.9%,+4.9)
LD ~ 522 (1.5%,-0.5)
UKIP ~ 185 (0.5%,-1.4)
LBT ~ 157(0.5%,+0.5)
REC ~ 114(0.3%,+0.3)
Ind ~ 94(0.3%,+0.3)
I don't think Phillips is necessarily bad in the long run but she did have a woeful time last time she stood.
Dan Jarvis is always my preferred. But will he stand?
Good Tory result though
The sooner they’re scrapped, the better.
@BallotBoxScot
·
3m
Greenock & Inverclyde (West) Constituency Vote:
SNP ~ 19713 (54.2%, +0.5)
Labour ~ 11539 (31.7%, +4)
Conservative ~ 3313 (9.1%, -5)
Lib Dem ~ 1033 (2.8%, -1.6)
Independent ~ 776 (2.1%, 2.1)
Lot of history re the Tories in Guildford over the last few years. They got slaughtered in the Boroughs as a consequence. They also fell out with the Mole Valley Tories. This ward is in Guildford Borough, but Mole Valley constituency.
Several years ago when this was all exploding there was a Borough by election in Ripley (also in this ward). It has been Tory held forever. The LD (Colin Cross) took it with 70% of the vote. As the scandals festered on a residents group got set up. Colin and a number of Tories defected to it, as well as there being a lot of new blood. The residents group walked the Borough wards in this county seat (with 1 exception that was a LD with a lot of local support) in the Borough election.
There was no way Colin wasn't going to win it.
PS I voted for him also rather than the LD whom I would normally vote for.
They’ve been in there ten hours now, and not a single result (other than the council leader predicting his own demise)
Doesn't really seem like the kind of result whereby Bailey is going to win. Labour is going forward in these traditional blue areas.
West Central (Hammersmith, Chelsea, Kensington, Westminster)
First prefs
Bailey 38.5% (-7.5)
Khan 36.9% (+0.8)
Berry 7.3% (+2.1)
Parrit 4.7% (+0.4)
@BallotBoxScot
·
58s
Moray (Highlands & Islands) Constituency Vote:
SNP ~ 19987 (48.6%, +1.5)
Conservative ~ 16823 (40.9%, +2.4)
Labour ~ 2972 (7.2%, -3.4)
Lib Dem ~ 1165 (2.8%, -1)
UKIP ~ 188 (0.5%, +0.5)
Why did Blair win? Because he was a good leader.
Therefore.
Why didn't Brown, Ed M, Corbyn or Starmer? Because they weren't.
However. If you answer why did Blair win?
Because he had popular policies, a very strong, capable team around him, iron Party discipline, and the added superb bonus of unpopular and divided opponents.
Then you get a totally different answer for why the others didn't.
Proof. John Smith would have won in 97. Because he had all those too. Not because Smith and Blair were uniquely good leaders.
It is a very anti Brexit area and it looks like the Tory vote in West London is down even more than it was in Edinburgh Central
Labour should start again or they’re going to waste another 18-24 months, by which time BJ will be limbering up for a snap election.
Scotland is a standstill (?) and the North/Red Wall is a disaster.
So it's an improvement on 2019 Corbyn, not by much.
It's actually odd the membership seemingly have the power because in actual reality they have none. Keir should show some backbone and tell them where to go.
Lab 48.2% (+4.4)
Con 34.9% (+5.9)
Labour holds also in Newport East and Aberavon
So never mind Labour backers, you may have lost the Red Wall but you might make inroads with the Made in Chelsea set!
The vaccines are in full swing and BoJo continues to be popular. You're welcome.
Decent leadership could resolve much of this.
Well that's an encouraging sign for the Jewish vote.
The SNP's Kevin Stewart has held Aberdeen Central with an increased majority of 6,594 over the Conservatives.
Labour slipped to third.
(from BBC feed)
Meanwhile this is desperate Tory spin.
https://twitter.com/adrianmasters84/status/1390733953728909315?s=24
"Beginning their analysis of the results, Welsh Conservatives say their vote share has gone up but disappointing Plaid Cymru performances prevented them from taking their target seats from Labour."
https://www.londonelects.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-09/Havering & Redbridge.pdf
Edinburgh Southern (Scottish parliament) results:
LAB: 45.9% (+10.3)
SNP: 37.0% (+4.4)
CON: 11.6% (-14.5)
LDEM: 4.8% (-1.0)
Labour HOLD.
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1390734095379009537?s=20
LAB hold, 13k to 8k
Mayor
Bailley 106k Khan 44k
Edit:
indeed
Bailley +3 Khan -1.4 In B&B
Whether he will consider it later? Who knows?
But I wouldn't blame anyone not wanting the gig given the levels of vitriol they would inevitably face.
For Labour, in particular, other considerations are much more important (not least, kicking the Tories) and the Union should only be maintained if it is of material benefit to them, which quite a large chunk think it isn’t.
Therefore, there is every reason to think Labour voters would vote tactically *for the SNP* in at least as great a number as for the Tories.
Labour down 15% and Tories up 6% and SNP up 6% so clearly some Labour voters tactically voted Tory to beat the SNP in Eastwood even if others went SNP
Sedgley (Bury) council result:
Lab: 56.6% (+13.5)
Con: 38.2% (-6.5)
LDem: 5.2% (-1.0)
No Grn (-4.4) as prev.
Lab GAIN from Con
33.9% Jewish (2011 demographics)
Hapton with Park (Burnley) council result:
Con: 78.4% (+67.5)
Lab: 15.0% (-22.9)
Grn: 6.6% (+6.6)
No UKIP (-43.1) as prev.
Con GAIN from UKIP*
*Conservative candidate was the UKIP councillor
Canterbury City North (Kent) council result:
Lab: 43.3% (+18.0)
Con: 23.9% (-11.3)
LDem: 22.1% (-2.0)
Grn: 10.6% (+0.4)
Lab GAIN from Con
I do not blame him, Andy Burnham and presumably Tracy Brabin from washing their hands of the situation.
https://twitter.com/tombradby/status/1390738400244903937?s=20
Elizabeth Buffy Williams (Labour) 54.7 (+18.8)
Leanne Wood (Plaid) 31.3 (-19.3)
Labour gain
In the final analysis, the continuing existence of the Union is everything to Scots Tories, but English ones would be hugely advantaged by being shot of it. I'm not sure what the determination of the party in London not to heave Scotland over the side is really more about: a genuine commitment, or just not wanting to be the ones in charge when it all falls apart.
A good performance - against national trend - might give him a strong base to launch a Kier ouster.