Keir Starmer asked for concrete policy changes Labour will now make in response to these election results, tells the BBC that he will "change the things that need changing and that is the change that I will bring about."
The change will be "him gone this summer" must be shooting up the probability index after sacking Rayner.
He looks a lay at 5.0 for next pm.
At this rate, he may be a lay for tomorrow afternoon...
I've been laying Rishi and Starmer like an absolute mother since Christmas.
Keir Starmer asked for concrete policy changes Labour will now make in response to these election results, tells the BBC that he will "change the things that need changing and that is the change that I will bring about."
The change will be "him gone this summer" must be shooting up the probability index after sacking Rayner.
He looks a lay at 5.0 for next pm.
At this rate, he may be a lay for tomorrow afternoon...
@Leon and Mrs @Leon might be pretty disappointed if he turns up as a late replacement for Mark Drakeford.
Angela Rayner is one of the Labour Party’s most authentic communicators, and with a northern accent. Not totally clear tonight how her sacking helps win back the red wall.
Patrick Maguire @patrickkmaguire · 4m Angela Rayner has been sacked as chairman of the Labour Party, source confirms
ITS ON! "Like Fat Pat's thong"
Can you please tell me what it all means.
I was told - by a trusted source who got it from someone unnamed high up (and literally everyone has been to Hartlepool repeatedly campaigning) that Rayner was going to make a push to remove Starmer.
We all saw that Starmer interview. He would do Whatever It Takes to sort out the Labour Party. That means purges. And apparently the first action is to sack his deputy from her roles as Chair and Campaign Head.
So lets see what happens next.
That makes sense. It effectively neutralises that threat, as it will just look like revenge/sour grapes now. I can't see any other good reason.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
Incidentally, it's obvious Count Binface is centre-left (the anti-Boris/Priti, monarchy-sceptic and pro-EU stars etc.) but I don't care.
He's fun and funny - our politics needs much more of that.
He's really in the tradition of Lord Sutch, which is not either progressive or conservative, and yes I definitely agree a good thing. 1960s British pantomime.
Were you also saddened (if not shocked or appalled, that neither John Major nor Tony Blair saw fit to advise the Queen to grant Screaming Lord Sutch a genuine peerage? For services to electoral democracy and the jollification of the nation. Also for the immense good will and positive PR he engendered for his native land.
Certainly deserved a peerage far more than 90% of the boys & girls actually in the House of Lords.
He was after all Britain's longest serving party leader. And one of nature's noblemen.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
Hmm. I think part of the issue was the narrative hyping up an SNP majority, the “both votes snp” strategy. I didn’t expect pro unionist parties to get a higher % of vote share overall.
Hence the the stalemate..
There is no stalemate. Various parties have a manifesto pledge to independence, and for the first time since the 2011 parliament we have a majority of MSPs for it. And a record number of MSPs for independence.
We’re pretty much where we were in 2016.
How is Sturgeon going to get the vote?
How are we where we were in 2016? The Greens were not pro-indy in 2016. They ARE pro-indy in 2021 and they are going from 6 seats to 9 seats.
Of course the greens were pro Indy in 2016..
Not sure you can argue they weren’t. Pretty clear as to the green view.
Their position has evolved. In 2016 they were in favour of independence if there was a 2nd referendum - but were't pushing for one. In 2021 they are up front about the need for a referendum.
Either way, they look to have picked up more seats!
Labour sources have confirmed that the deputy leader of the Labour Party, Angela Rayner, has been removed from her roles as party chair and campaign co-ordinator. This isn't expected to effect her role as deputy leader of the party, which is an elected position.
Not sure how that one works out...be some tension in the meetings.
So Cameron in 2015 scraped a majority on 37% of the vote which included a promise to hold an EU ref . The SNP and Greens will command close to 50% and a bigger relative majority on a promise to hold a second Indy ref and yet they should be denied that . The Tories in here need to stop embarrassing themselves and stop defending the indefensible.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The SNP would push for a 3rd, and a 4th. It is all consuming.
So Cameron in 2015 scraped a majority on 37% of the vote which included a promise to hold an EU ref . The SNP and Greens will command close to 50% and a bigger relative majority on a promise to hold a second Indy ref and yet they should be denied that . The Tories in here need to stop embarrassing themselves and stop defending the indefensible.
Misleading, the Tories and UKIP got a 50% voteshare combined in 2015 on an EUref platform, the SNP and Greens currently only have 48% of the Holyrood vote for indyref2
Angela Rayner is one of the Labour Party’s most authentic communicators, and with a northern accent. Not totally clear tonight how her sacking helps win back the red wall.
Who would you make Labour chair? Who has the best chance of reconnecting to the lost voters?
Could he persuade Alan Johnson out of retirement?
Failing that...well, who?
Binface ?
They’ve already got loads of rubbish in the shadow cabinet, they don’t need another one.
Real talk, binface has a higher public profile than the Shadow Home secretary. Shocking state of affairs.
There was a member of the Shadow cabinet on the radio this morning, listening I thought "How come I haven't heard of them before?" I can't even recall their name and role now, which may be down to my memory, but I think is equally likely down to the complete lack of impact their time on the air had on me. I don't mind Starmer, but he is surrounded by nonentities.
Incidentally, it's obvious Count Binface is centre-left (the anti-Boris/Priti, monarchy-sceptic and pro-EU stars etc.) but I don't care.
He's fun and funny - our politics needs much more of that.
He's really in the tradition of Lord Sutch, which is not either progressive or conservative, and yes I definitely agree a good thing. 1960s British pantomime.
Were you also saddened (if not shocked or appalled, that neither John Major nor Tony Blair saw fit to advise the Queen to grant Screaming Lord Sutch a genuine peerage? For services to electoral democracy and the jollification of the nation. Also for the immense good will and positive PR he engendered for his native land.
Certainly deserved a peerage far more than 90% of the boys & girls actually in the House of Lords.
He was after all Britain's longest serving party leader. And one of nature's noblemen.
He did die just at the time when honours were changing a bit - he could have got a gong for cultural services if he'd lived just a bit longer, I think. As mentioned in the previous thread, he really was woven into the fabric of the British 60's, with Mick Jagger imitating him, and almost a sort of radical-reactionary mascot of the time. Definitely added something very unique, which has become permanent.
if he had been elected and performed as Labour leader then there wouldn’t have been an election in 2017. That election was called only because May and her advisors believed that Corbyn would be beaten to a pulp. If he was elected and failed to perform, why would the result be any different on the upside?
Either way, Burnham would not have won in 2017 in the way that’s being suggested here. That’s incredibly lazy thinking.
With Angela Rayner and Keir Starmer, reminded of Gordon Brown's quote about Damian McBride: “I take full responsibility for what happened. That's why the person who was responsible went immediately.”
Keir Starmer asked for concrete policy changes Labour will now make in response to these election results, tells the BBC that he will "change the things that need changing and that is the change that I will bring about."
The change will be "him gone this summer" must be shooting up the probability index after sacking Rayner.
He looks a lay at 5.0 for next pm.
At this rate, he may be a lay for tomorrow afternoon...
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
HYUFD has a point here - for all my ridiculing of him in the past. Had the SNP got an outright majority, hard to deny a referendum. Both sides will argue this both ways - hence, stalemate
But I'm sure she can't refuse. Even if it means she is being tied into a UK-wide recovery package....
Sneaky Boris.
Yep. And it will be all this way now. SNP embraced to the warm bossom of Mother Britannia at every opportunity, no longer able to pick fights with the UK Government and have the UK Government obediently play their part in a UK vs. Scotland spat. Thank goodness.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The SNP would push for a 3rd, and a 4th. It is all consuming.
Yes, and with majorities they would have every right to. But the public would get bored. The don’t like being asked the same question repeatedly. That’s the electoral risk they’d be taking.
One Starmer ally offers this version of events: "She is not being sacked. She is being used differently in the team because of her working class appeal." Stresses Rayner is still deputy leader and will get a new shadow cabinet role. "She is not being sacked from the team."
With Angela Rayner and Keir Starmer, reminded of Gordon Brown's quote about Damian McBride: “I take full responsibility for what happened. That's why the person who was responsible went immediately.”
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
HYUFD has a point here - for all my ridiculing of him in the past. Had the SNP got an outright majority, hard to deny a referendum. Both sides will argue this both ways - hence, stalemate
One Starmer ally offers this version of events: "She is not being sacked. She is being used differently in the team because of her working class appeal." Stresses Rayner is still deputy leader and will get a new shadow cabinet role. "She is not being sacked from the team."
Keir Starmer asked for concrete policy changes Labour will now make in response to these election results, tells the BBC that he will "change the things that need changing and that is the change that I will bring about."
The change will be "him gone this summer" must be shooting up the probability index after sacking Rayner.
He looks a lay at 5.0 for next pm.
At this rate, he may be a lay for tomorrow afternoon...
Keir today, gone tomorrow.
I'm beginning to see your point about not wanting to trounce Sir Keir so badly that he actually leaves his post prematurely. Maybe the Government can arrange a quick gaffe to take the heat off him for now.
NEW: Rayner ally leaks this email in which David Evans invites colleagues to election post-mortem Zoom led by him and Starmer. Rayner notably nowhere, which, they say, is curious given her role as campaigns coordinator - and more evidence she had "nothing" to do with the campaign
So Cameron in 2015 scraped a majority on 37% of the vote which included a promise to hold an EU ref . The SNP and Greens will command close to 50% and a bigger relative majority on a promise to hold a second Indy ref and yet they should be denied that . The Tories in here need to stop embarrassing themselves and stop defending the indefensible.
You do know labour and lib dems oppose indyref2 as well
With Angela Rayner and Keir Starmer, reminded of Gordon Brown's quote about Damian McBride: “I take full responsibility for what happened. That's why the person who was responsible went immediately.”
Starmer could reuse some of Brown's other famous lines: "People want me to get on with the job, and I'm getting on with the job of supporting the government on the vaccine rollout, reopening, levelling up..."
It is also not helping that they usually repeat the same footage and pieces of interviews 300 times during half a day. So I am seeing the same bits of Burnham on and on and on
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The way forward is simple. The Scottish government will publish a bill for an independence referendum. It will pass thanks to the record majority for independence in Holyrood.
Westminster then has 4 weeks to make a choice.
1 Strike down the bill by a Section 35 order 2 Refer the bill to the Supreme Court with a Section 33 order expecting them to strike it down 3 Do nothing and let it become an act of the Scottish parliament
Whether they use S33 or S35, if Westminster overrules the Scottish Parliament who are acting on the express elected mandate from the Scottish people, then Yes will see a big spike in support that will never go away.
As other posters have said, I expect that a referendum held in the next few years would be a win for No. If Westminster overrules the electorate then independence is guaranteed.
Angela Rayner is one of the Labour Party’s most authentic communicators, and with a northern accent. Not totally clear tonight how her sacking helps win back the red wall.
One Starmer ally offers this version of events: "She is not being sacked. She is being used differently in the team because of her working class appeal." Stresses Rayner is still deputy leader and will get a new shadow cabinet role. "She is not being sacked from the team."
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The SNP would push for a 3rd, and a 4th. It is all consuming.
Yes, and with majorities they would have every right to. But the public would get bored. The don’t like being asked the same question repeatedly. That’s the electoral risk they’d be taking.
Nicola's little speech today was noteworthy for one thing: she is already accusing the government of declining a request she hasn't made and wishes to defer. The current tactic seems to be to pretend that it is for Westminster to agree with something. It isn't, it is for the Scottish parliament to legislate.
Boris at the moment holds the cards as long as he is careful not to get cornered.
One Starmer ally offers this version of events: "She is not being sacked. She is being used differently in the team because of her working class appeal." Stresses Rayner is still deputy leader and will get a new shadow cabinet role. "She is not being sacked from the team."
One Starmer ally offers this version of events: "She is not being sacked. She is being used differently in the team because of her working class appeal." Stresses Rayner is still deputy leader and will get a new shadow cabinet role. "She is not being sacked from the team."
Just spoke to a source who suggests rumours of impending demotion for Lisa Nandy by Keir Starmer are true. Even though the pair still speak four or five times a week. Not a good day for northern women it would seem. https://twitter.com/lmharpin/status/1391100732380745732
Whether Labour knows how to win Manchester is very much of the same importance as whether the Tories know how to win South Holland. And if Burnham had got 99.5% of the vote Labour's problem would be unchanged.
More significant are other questions. Would he have won Hartlepool? Would he be willing to stand in such a seat? Does he know how to begin winning 125 extra seats, nearly all in England?
The Tories can win without the big cities voting for them. Can Labour win without a winning level of seats in middle England?
You're ignoring the fact that GM contains several deprived towns. Not too dissimilar to Hartlepool. It also contains several Tory seats easily describable as Middle England. It is not just a big urban centre.
Fingers being pointed at Baroness Jenny Chapman. One senior Labour MP, tongue firmly in cheek, tells me: “She’s showing the political deftness that she’s demonstrated with every intervention in recent weeks”.
Just spoke to a source who suggests rumours of impending demotion for Lisa Nandy by Keir Starmer are true. Even though the pair still speak four or five times a week. Not a good day for northern women it would seem. https://twitter.com/lmharpin/status/1391100732380745732
Perhaps it's a core metropolitan elite vote strategy?
Patrick Maguire @patrickkmaguire · 4m Angela Rayner has been sacked as chairman of the Labour Party, source confirms
ITS ON! "Like Fat Pat's thong"
Can you please tell me what it all means.
I was told - by a trusted source who got it from someone unnamed high up (and literally everyone has been to Hartlepool repeatedly campaigning) that Rayner was going to make a push to remove Starmer.
We all saw that Starmer interview. He would do Whatever It Takes to sort out the Labour Party. That means purges. And apparently the first action is to sack his deputy from her roles as Chair and Campaign Head.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The way forward is simple. The Scottish government will publish a bill for an independence referendum. It will pass thanks to the record majority for independence in Holyrood.
Westminster then has 4 weeks to make a choice.
1 Strike down the bill by a Section 35 order 2 Refer the bill to the Supreme Court with a Section 33 order expecting them to strike it down 3 Do nothing and let it become an act of the Scottish parliament
Whether they use S33 or S35, if Westminster overrules the Scottish Parliament who are acting on the express elected mandate from the Scottish people, then Yes will see a big spike in support that will never go away.
As other posters have said, I expect that a referendum held in the next few years would be a win for No. If Westminster overrules the electorate then independence is guaranteed.
But there's no need to campaign in it, or to change anything in light of the result. It should be made clear that constitutional change would only result from an officially sanctioned referendum - if the SNP want a massive democratic exercise (others would call it a vanity referendum), that's fine, but the UK Government should express no more than a casual interest.
To seek to overrule and stop it even happening would, as you suggest, be provocative, and counter-productive, and actually give the proposed poll more legitimacy than it deserves.
Brexit has had no significant electoral effect then, except the Greens have 2-3 more (potentially).
LibDems on the brink of being stuck on 4 (constituency) seats, meaning no automatic place on committees, for First Minister’s questions, representation on the parliament’s business bureau etc. How will poor wee Willie Rennie cope?
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
Now on the fifth recount for the final Oxford City ward.
The crazy thing is that it's a two-member ward... they're just arguing about who came first. (Boundary changes mean that first place will serve 3 years, second place will serve just 1.)
Just spoke to a source who suggests rumours of impending demotion for Lisa Nandy by Keir Starmer are true. Even though the pair still speak four or five times a week. Not a good day for northern women it would seem. https://twitter.com/lmharpin/status/1391100732380745732
Ha.
Shows what I know. I predicted her a move upwards in the week as she was a decent communicator.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
Fingers being pointed at Baroness Jenny Chapman. One senior Labour MP, tongue firmly in cheek, tells me: “She’s showing the political deftness that she’s demonstrated with every intervention in recent weeks”.
She is personally and directly responsible for Paul Williams' imposition. "LOTO" imposed him, and whilst Starmer put his name to it, LOTO in this case is Baroness Chapman.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
So none of this is about addressing the issues with the party, it's just to shore up his position.
Whether Labour knows how to win Manchester is very much of the same importance as whether the Tories know how to win South Holland. And if Burnham had got 99.5% of the vote Labour's problem would be unchanged.
More significant are other questions. Would he have won Hartlepool? Would he be willing to stand in such a seat? Does he know how to begin winning 125 extra seats, nearly all in England?
The Tories can win without the big cities voting for them. Can Labour win without a winning level of seats in middle England?
You're ignoring the fact that GM contains several deprived towns. Not too dissimilar to Hartlepool. It also contains several Tory seats easily describable as Middle England. It is not just a big urban centre.
As said before, Burnham won because he was high profile. It would be interesting to see the breakdown in GM and his position in the Northern part of GM, which is poorer.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
So none of this is about addressing the issues with the party, it's just to shore up his position.
I think it might play well. It's nothing more than what BoJo did and is presumably aimed at cultivating a strong man image.
Not looking like a good result for us LibDems in Scotland - kept our constituency seats but going to struggle on the list. We do get a change around thanks to the SNP winning more constituency seats and votes cast than ever before, so list seats allocated will be different. Had hoped to pick seats up off the Tories, but the big winners on the list seats will be pro-indy Greens.
I agree, not looking good. I seem to have been continuously depressed for 11 years from the Orange/Yellow viewpoint.
Annoyingly the Tory list vote looks likely to have held up despite going backwards in constituencies. So the Greens will pick seats up in regions like mine in the NE, but from us not the Tories.
Odd that people are still trying to argue that a leap into the 70s of independence MSPs and a record haul in constituency seats and votes for the SNP after 3 terms in government is somehow a defeat for them and for independence. I'm a federalist (so neither a unionist nor a secessionist) but you can't deny how the votes have stacked up both to give nippy a 4th term and to give a thumping majority for a new referendum.
52% of Scots have voted against indyref2 and for Unionist parties, only 48% for, even before the 2016 EU referendum the Tories and UKIP won 50% of the vote in 2015
Got it. A record 72 seats (forecasted) for independence is people voting against independence.
You really are a tool aren't you.
Yeah, I find the mental gymnastics demonstrated to try and deny the moral case for a new referendum baffling. My conclusion from these results and other polling is that Sturgeon would be terrified to have her bluff called. And even if I’m wrong and the referendum was lost, why do other Englishmen want Scotland kept in the Union against the will of her people?
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
The way forward is simple. The Scottish government will publish a bill for an independence referendum. It will pass thanks to the record majority for independence in Holyrood.
Westminster then has 4 weeks to make a choice.
1 Strike down the bill by a Section 35 order 2 Refer the bill to the Supreme Court with a Section 33 order expecting them to strike it down 3 Do nothing and let it become an act of the Scottish parliament
Whether they use S33 or S35, if Westminster overrules the Scottish Parliament who are acting on the express elected mandate from the Scottish people, then Yes will see a big spike in support that will never go away.
As other posters have said, I expect that a referendum held in the next few years would be a win for No. If Westminster overrules the electorate then independence is guaranteed.
But there's no need to campaign in it, or to change anything in light of the result. It should be made clear that constitutional change would only result from an officially sanctioned referendum - if the SNP want a massive democratic exercise (others would call it a vanity referendum), that's fine, but the UK Government should express no more than a casual interest.
To seek to overrule and stop it even happening would, as you suggest, be provocative, and counter-productive, and actually give the proposed poll more legitimacy than it deserves.
When Holyrood passes the referendum bill the government either overrules and stops it, OR it becomes an officially sanctioned referendum. They can't just ignore it, otherwise the Queen sticks her signature on the bill and the referendum is official.
Patrick Maguire @patrickkmaguire · 4m Angela Rayner has been sacked as chairman of the Labour Party, source confirms
ITS ON! "Like Fat Pat's thong"
Can you please tell me what it all means.
I was told - by a trusted source who got it from someone unnamed high up (and literally everyone has been to Hartlepool repeatedly campaigning) that Rayner was going to make a push to remove Starmer.
We all saw that Starmer interview. He would do Whatever It Takes to sort out the Labour Party. That means purges. And apparently the first action is to sack his deputy from her roles as Chair and Campaign Head.
So lets see what happens next.
Thanks v interesting. V unlabour.
Given the Nandy news, looks like we have our answer
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
So none of this is about addressing the issues with the party, it's just to shore up his position.
I think it might play well. It's nothing more than what BoJo did and is presumably aimed at cultivating a strong man image.
But it doesn't do anything to address the issues the party faces. At least what Johnson did cleared the log-jam and got things through parliament.
Angela Rayner is one of the Labour Party’s most authentic communicators, and with a northern accent. Not totally clear tonight how her sacking helps win back the red wall.
Ugh, I hate sentiments like that. As someone with a northern accent, I can't stand how she speaks! Like, we all have telephone voices and perhaps she should use hers when on the TV. As to authentic, I couldn't say but she's authentically rubbish. She strikes entirely the wrong tone and her bullish attitude towards 'Tory cronyism' certainly turned me off (momentarily) from that issue. The further away the angry shoutey contingency are away from the levers of power in the Labour Party, the better. She might be useful on the attack, and it's useful to have a partisan who can go low, but I do not rate her.
Starmer has to go. Why? Because this afternoon the narrative moved on. Labour had won Wales, then GM massively, West of England and Cambs, completely blindsiding everyone. With a London win to come. So what does he do? No political instinct at all.
Pippa Crerar @PippaCrerar · 3m Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
So none of this is about addressing the issues with the party, it's just to shore up his position.
I think it might play well. It's nothing more than what BoJo did and is presumably aimed at cultivating a strong man image.
The difference is that BoJo did it on a very clear policy issue that had created deadlock in parliament for years and it was in response to voting against the government.
Comments
I've already written three threads for tomorrow.
Don't make me ditch some of my threads.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/1391094017497210881?s=20
The proper safety valve on referendums is that if they lost the second, the SNP really couldn’t push for a third for many, many years without electoral consequences.
Certainly deserved a peerage far more than 90% of the boys & girls actually in the House of Lords.
He was after all Britain's longest serving party leader. And one of nature's noblemen.
Sneaky Boris.
Either way, they look to have picked up more seats!
Labour sources have confirmed that the deputy leader of the Labour Party, Angela Rayner, has been removed from her roles as party chair and campaign co-ordinator. This isn't expected to effect her role as deputy leader of the party, which is an elected position.
Not sure how that one works out...be some tension in the meetings.
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1391096281611874305?s=20
Angela Rayner talking nonsense...
They've perfected both the Cloak of Invisibility AND the Cone of Silence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloak_of_invisibility
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_of_Silence_(Get_Smart)
if he had been elected and performed as Labour leader then there wouldn’t have been an election in 2017. That election was called only because May and her advisors believed that Corbyn would be beaten to a pulp. If he was elected and failed to perform, why would the result be any different on the upside?
Either way, Burnham would not have won in 2017 in the way that’s being suggested here. That’s incredibly lazy thinking.
https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1391097672291991553?s=20
Like Laurel and Hardy this side of the Atlantic (and Pacific).
https://twitter.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1391098005521055744?s=20
If that was the case you'd announce her new role before announcing she'd lost her old one...
It is the Somalia of modern politics.
EDIT: On reflection, that is rather harsh. On Somalia. Which has at least been trying to get its shit together in recent years.
NEW: Rayner ally leaks this email in which David Evans invites colleagues to election post-mortem Zoom led by him and Starmer. Rayner notably nowhere, which, they say, is curious given her role as campaigns coordinator - and more evidence she had "nothing" to do with the campaign
https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1391099806500675590?s=20
https://twitter.com/quatremer/status/1391100468936511491?s=20
Given they've only just started vaccinating the 60+ not entirely clear that's wise....
It is also not helping that they usually repeat the same footage and pieces of interviews 300 times during half a day. So I am seeing the same bits of Burnham on and on and on
Westminster then has 4 weeks to make a choice.
1 Strike down the bill by a Section 35 order
2 Refer the bill to the Supreme Court with a Section 33 order expecting them to strike it down
3 Do nothing and let it become an act of the Scottish parliament
Whether they use S33 or S35, if Westminster overrules the Scottish Parliament who are acting on the express elected mandate from the Scottish people, then Yes will see a big spike in support that will never go away.
As other posters have said, I expect that a referendum held in the next few years would be a win for No. If Westminster overrules the electorate then independence is guaranteed.
I'd assume Keir wants to pick a fight now, which he can win, rather than save up even more trouble for later.
Boris at the moment holds the cards as long as he is careful not to get cornered.
https://twitter.com/lmharpin/status/1391100732380745732
4 Con
2 Lab
1 Green
same as 2016
It is not just a big urban centre.
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1391101273592717316?s=20
Wonder how the Lib Dems do on IoD? Guessing there's still some ill feeling re: Rinka?
(As avid recycler believe in recycling my jokes!)
To seek to overrule and stop it even happening would, as you suggest, be provocative, and counter-productive, and actually give the proposed poll more legitimacy than it deserves.
@PippaCrerar
·
3m
Hearing from one shad cab min that Lisa Nandy is “definitely next” to be sacked because “people around Keir think she’s disloyal”.
The crazy thing is that it's a two-member ward... they're just arguing about who came first. (Boundary changes mean that first place will serve 3 years, second place will serve just 1.)
Shows what I know. I predicted her a move upwards in the week as she was a decent communicator.
Make her Campaign Coordination! She's top...
Why? Because this afternoon the narrative moved on. Labour had won Wales, then GM massively, West of England and Cambs, completely blindsiding everyone. With a London win to come.
So what does he do?
No political instinct at all.