Howdy, Stranger!

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

These elections remind us that leader ratings and supplementaries are a better predictor of electora

123457»

Comments

  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547

    A surprising opinion from Andrew Adonis:

    "@Andrew_Adonis
    For what it’s worth, it is my judgement that the only Labour leader likely to be able to win the next election is Tony Blair"

    I bet there are quiet moments where Blair thinks “I wonder...”.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Where you and I probably disagree is on the union. I think the union in its current form is finished. I think that a new form of union can be founded that gives all the nations - including England - the autonomy they clearly want. But I am hugely doubtful that the current Blue Labour government has the imagination to actually propose it.

    Uniquely, Johnson could do so and get away with it. He has reshaped the Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. NI thrown literally off the bus which absolutely no other Tory leader could have done and got away with.

    Will he have the balls to go for it? He isn't showing any sign of it so far.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,013

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Brexit was not sabotaged by Remainers, as has been covered exhaustively and around 468,000 times since 2016 on this forum. The governing party, part of which initiated Brexit, failed to agree internally on what form Brexit would even take, resulting in four years of incoherence and wrangling.
    Brexit is leaving the European Union. Thats it. What happens afterwards is what they were trying to "sabotage" and that's because the 2017 parliament was not bound by the 2015 parliament.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,730

    A surprising opinion from Andrew Adonis:

    "@Andrew_Adonis
    For what it’s worth, it is my judgement that the only Labour leader likely to be able to win the next election is Tony Blair"

    The Sunday Times said Blair was "hostile" to Starmer's leadership today
  • Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Brexit was not sabotaged by Remainers, as has been covered exhaustively and around 468,000 times since 2016 on this forum. The governing party, part of which initiated Brexit, failed to agree internally on what form Brexit would even take, resulting in four years of incoherence and wrangling.
    Whether or not you are factually correct (and I could argue with you) the important point is that Boris’ winning voting coalition sees 2017-19 as having been Government by Benn/Starmer/Swindon/etc. And Boris as the new broom that swept them away and carried out the 2016 vote. That’s the perceived truth of those whose votes determine who is PM.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited May 2021

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Brexit was not sabotaged by Remainers, as has been covered exhaustively and around 468,000 times since 2016 on this forum. The governing party, part of which initiated Brexit, failed to agree internally on what form Brexit would even take, resulting in four years of incoherence and wrangling.
    Brexit is leaving the European Union. Thats it. What happens afterwards is what they were trying to "sabotage" and that's because the 2017 parliament was not bound by the 2015 parliament.
    The only significant sabotage was self-sabotage, I would sau ; the Tories passed Brexit but still couldn't agree internally on what it even was, which is the only reason opposition forces outside the Tory party were significant.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,140
    DavidL said:

    Leon said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    You can argue it both ways. I am content that by a tiny fraction the Scots voted for more pro-indy parties. I accept the arithmetic.

    Yet we were also told that the SNP getting an outright majority was the clincher. They did not. They came very close - like the votes - but they failed.

    The Greens' major issue is the environment, they are not like the SNP.

    It's like saying the Tories of the noughties were the same as UKIP, and votes for both should be added together. You can't do that, yes they were both eurosceptic and most in both parties wanted a referendum, but for UKIP an EU vote was THE overriding issue.

    Anyway we are where we are. Neither side wants a vote yet, so it won't happen for quite a while whatever. My guess is that the Tories will justifiably long grass it (we are recovering from Covid!) past the 2023-4 election, so as to hand the mess over to someone else, while also hoping that the SNP make a big mistake in their frustration, and the appeal of YES diminishes interim. Boris won't say a flat No, as that will inflame opinion.

    It's a policy, but it worries me that this is their only policy

    We have a few precious years to save the UK. A referendum is coming, probably in the 2nd half of the decade. During that time the government should set up a grand convention, as I've said, to examine all the options. From Federalism to Devomax to Indy and the other way, too. Let the indy side explicitly state their plans on currency, bank, the EU, debt, let the NO side come up with an attractive model for the future UK.

    Then, fully apprised, let the nation decide and let the Scots vote.

    Does the government have the wit and courage to do something like this? I doubt it. They are just gonna kick the ball away and pray

    I also think that the SNP vote has been boosted by the Nicola, mother of the nation, nonsense that has come out of Covid, as has the standing of Boris and Drakeford. It was a weird campaign and a weird election and the polling shows fairly comfortable majorities against Independence at the moment (although they showed the opposite for quite a lot of last year).

    As a Unionist I can only hope that as politics returns to its normal tedium, as the disasters continue to clock up on the SNP watch in education, those Gupta guarantees, the restrictions on University admission for Scots because of the "free" nonsense and its implications for our University budgets, that the dial continues to turn against Sturgeon. But the power, money and influence of the Scottish government will once again be in the leave camp and once again they will give no quarter and blush at no lies. The UK government must this time stand up for itself and make the case for the Union.

    Arer you not confusing 2014 with 2017? There was plenty of UKG in evidence in Scotland, from Mr Cameron downward.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    ydoethur said:

    ping said:

    50 dead in Kabul - and it doesn’t even make the headlines.

    The Taliban have won, haven’t they?

    Yup. Best not to dwell on the young men and women we lost fighting over there.

    The first day of the war, November 2001, I was asked by my flat mate (we’d just started uni together) why I was so upset and angry at the invasion.

    I replied, ‘Because nobody has ever won a war in Afghanistan, but thousands of lives have been lost trying.’

    If I could see that as an 18-year-old, how come Bush, Blair, Howard, Musharraf and Putin couldn’t? Especially Putin!
    I remember flying over 'The Boulevard' through Pakistan from the Arabian Sea that night. As we got over Afghanistan I thought my night vision goggles had failed because I couldn’t see anything on the terrain; it was just black. Then I realised that there was almost nothing in most of the country and what little there was had no electricity. I recall thinking that this did not look like a country of centrist dads ready for liberal democracy.

    By 3am we were over Kabul airport and thousands of angry bearded men were firing weapons of every possible calibre with great profligacy at us. We yearned for the silent darkness of the south at that point.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,742

    A surprising opinion from Andrew Adonis:

    "@Andrew_Adonis
    For what it’s worth, it is my judgement that the only Labour leader likely to be able to win the next election is Tony Blair"

    In fairness, he is the only Labour leader elected within 60 years of 2024 to win an election, or even not lose one.*

    *Yes, Corbyn lost in 2017. Badly. Just less badly than was expected.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,742
    tlg86 said:

    My dad is not surprised about Chipping Norton going Labour. He reckons it’s a dump.

    Well, look at the people who live there. Cameron, Brooks, Clarkson - must be a right den of crooks and has beens.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,763

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Where you and I probably disagree is on the union. I think the union in its current form is finished. I think that a new form of union can be founded that gives all the nations - including England - the autonomy they clearly want. But I am hugely doubtful that the current Blue Labour government has the imagination to actually propose it.

    Uniquely, Johnson could do so and get away with it. He has reshaped the Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. NI thrown literally off the bus which absolutely no other Tory leader could have done and got away with.

    Will he have the balls to go for it? He isn't showing any sign of it so far.
    The Scottish Parliament is much more powerful than it was in 1998. It has done nothing to reduce the demand for independence. It is now the most powerful subordinate Parliament in the western world. Ditto.

    There comes a point when devolution simply breaks up the whole. I fear we are close to it. As our tax systems, benefits systems, grants, prescription and other charges, availability of cancer drugs, differentiate what holds us together?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,742
    edited May 2021
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:

    ping said:

    50 dead in Kabul - and it doesn’t even make the headlines.

    The Taliban have won, haven’t they?

    Yup. Best not to dwell on the young men and women we lost fighting over there.

    The first day of the war, November 2001, I was asked by my flat mate (we’d just started uni together) why I was so upset and angry at the invasion.

    I replied, ‘Because nobody has ever won a war in Afghanistan, but thousands of lives have been lost trying.’

    If I could see that as an 18-year-old, how come Bush, Blair, Howard, Musharraf and Putin couldn’t? Especially Putin!
    I remember flying over 'The Boulevard' through Pakistan from the Arabian Sea that night. As we got over Afghanistan I thought my night vision goggles had failed because I couldn’t see anything on the terrain; it was just black. Then I realised that there was almost nothing in most of the country and what little there was had no electricity. I recall thinking that this did not look like a country of centrist dads ready for liberal democracy.

    By 3am we were over Kabul airport and thousands of angry bearded men were firing weapons of every possible calibre with great profligacy at us. We yearned for the silent darkness of the south at that point.
    I’m glad they all missed you.

    I am sorry for those others of all nationalities including their own that they didn’t miss.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited May 2021

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Brexit was not sabotaged by Remainers, as has been covered exhaustively and around 468,000 times since 2016 on this forum. The governing party, part of which initiated Brexit, failed to agree internally on what form Brexit would even take, resulting in four years of incoherence and wrangling.
    Whether or not you are factually correct (and I could argue with you) the important point is that Boris’ winning voting coalition sees 2017-19 as having been Government by Benn/Starmer/Swindon/etc. And Boris as the new broom that swept them away and carried out the 2016 vote. That’s the perceived truth of those whose votes determine who is PM.
    Now there I do agree with you. Perception is everything, and Johnson is a master of the gesture and first impression.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited May 2021
    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all. Betfair should put up a Starmer exit date market. It'd be quite active.

    Further to Labour, @CarlottaVance posted on PT this piece by Curtice -

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/newe.12228

    He describes the 2 competing visions for where the party goes post Brexit.

    "The Dominant Narrative": Leave/Remain will fade as a political identity. Left/Right and Class will reassert itself. So get back to the knitting. Win back the WWC. Left. Big State. Patriotism.

    "The Alternative Narrative": Leave/Remain is here to stay. So make the choice as the Cons have done. Be the party of Remainers and proud of it. Centrist. Liberal. Internationalist.

    I find this interesting because it shows how big the challenge is. For example, I personally, as a Labour member and voter, can't easily decide which of the above I prefer. I like and dislike bits of both. And maybe Starmer feels the same because it's not totally clear to me right now where he's at.

    Fwiw, forgetting everything apart from winning elections, and if SKS were to fall on his sword and the party were to replace him with me, I think I would go full fat with the Alternative Narrative. Bye bye working class, hello social liberals (any class welcome).

    But I'm not sure.

    David Herdson, on twitter the other day, asked "Why should Labour even be 'about' the 'working class' (whatever that means)? Why not define itself by values and ideology instead?"

    Which seems like a similar theme.

    I was quite taken aback by it to be honest. Labour, to me, by definition should always be about whats best for the working class/low paid workers, that is the reason why I have never been able to comprehend their love for FOM, which as Maurice Glasman put it (I think), is "The biggest capitalist con trick invented by man"

    ...from about 20 mins in, very interesting analysis of the effects of global capitalism on the working class from a left wing perspective, which I pretty much 100% agree with

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa5vsa1FLKY
    Tricky one, isn't it. However I manage to be Left and also a Globalist. Here's how. Free movement and globalization increases global GDP and reduces inequality between countries. Both good. But if unfettered it increases inequality within countries and this is bad. Therefore in mitigation the UK government should legislate domestically in favour of labour and against capital. Which I support. That's how I square the circle.

    And colours to the mast, I see 'free movement' as a great great thing. That people can move painlessly across national borders to live and work as they wish - for me that's a wonderful aspiration to always be progressing towards, Europe and elsewhere. Of course there are problems with it - eg unbalanced flows, wage distortions, housing, culture clashes, etc - but like I say that's where governments come in. Stop pandering and scapegoating. Address those issues.

    What's the point otherwise? Just hunker down and park the bus? No. Not for me. Let's elevate. The beautiful game.
    Apart from it is easy to say legislate and regulate. Not so easy however to come up with anything that addresses the issues of unlimited immigration causing for example a race to the bottom on wages.

    Let me guess you are going to say higher minimum wage - all you do then he attract even more of a flow from countries with low minimum wage to those with higher as we saw in eastern european migration

    Ah you will say then we set a global minimum wage - well apart from the obvious absurdity of getting the whole world to agree then all you do is change the flow from countries with high costs of living to those with low.

    The other problem of course with high minimum wages is the more jobs you drag into the minimum wage net the less value people see in doing those jobs. If I could get the same being a barista as I get for my current job for example I would quit in an instant.

    As I said easy to wave your hand airily and say legislate/ regulate not so easy to actually come up with anything to solve the issues
    TBF - to me - I'm not dismissing the difficulties. Free movement in a world of such appalling wealth inequality is utopian. But it's a great aspiration and should be embraced when and where possible, ie if people can be convinced that the social & economic benefits outweigh the costs. The hope would be that as time passes we see more "FM" areas being created in various regions around the world. If this doesn't happen it would be a bit depressing. Even more so if we go in the other direction. Which we seem to be atm.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 3,949
    Odd glitch on the F1 live leaderboard website. Hardly seems fair to allow Max Verstappen's identical twin to drive as well.


  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,742
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Where you and I probably disagree is on the union. I think the union in its current form is finished. I think that a new form of union can be founded that gives all the nations - including England - the autonomy they clearly want. But I am hugely doubtful that the current Blue Labour government has the imagination to actually propose it.

    Uniquely, Johnson could do so and get away with it. He has reshaped the Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. NI thrown literally off the bus which absolutely no other Tory leader could have done and got away with.

    Will he have the balls to go for it? He isn't showing any sign of it so far.
    The Scottish Parliament is much more powerful than it was in 1998. It has done nothing to reduce the demand for independence. It is now the most powerful subordinate Parliament in the western world. Ditto.

    There comes a point when devolution simply breaks up the whole. I fear we are close to it. As our tax systems, benefits systems, grants, prescription and other charges, availability of cancer drugs, differentiate what holds us together?
    Arguably, the current Scottish Parliament is much more powerful than the old Estates of Scotland were in 1706. They have a lot more power over laws, and much the same rights over taxation.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,140
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    I was out campaigning for No, so the laughable suggestions that I am an SNP fanboi are pretty desperate. One good skill I have is the ability to add. @Big_G_NorthWales asked if we were arguing over 13k votes.

    No, we are not. The result is clear and unambiguous. If delusional wazzocks want to try and argue the result isn't the result then that's pretty embarrassing for them. We - the forces of No - lost.

    The highest every turnout in both % of the electorate AND actual number of votes cast
    The highest number of votes ever for the SNP
    The highest number of MSPs elected on a manifesto pledge for independence

    What else is there to argue? The most number of people ever voted for the biggest majority ever for Yes. It is done. We need to move onto making the argument for how the United Kingdom of the next few centuries can remain united, not make petulant idiotic arguments there is no mandate.
    I agree. We are a part of one of the best and most democratic countries in the world built on mutual respect and tolerance. Denying the people their choice is not a part of that. I felt that very strongly when those morons were trying so hard to sabotage Brexit in the remainer Parliament. They paid the price and rightly so. Unionists must not let the likes of @HYUFD or Boris do the same for them.

    Unionists can, should and will win this argument again if they are not sabotaged.
    Where you and I probably disagree is on the union. I think the union in its current form is finished. I think that a new form of union can be founded that gives all the nations - including England - the autonomy they clearly want. But I am hugely doubtful that the current Blue Labour government has the imagination to actually propose it.

    Uniquely, Johnson could do so and get away with it. He has reshaped the Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. NI thrown literally off the bus which absolutely no other Tory leader could have done and got away with.

    Will he have the balls to go for it? He isn't showing any sign of it so far.
    The Scottish Parliament is much more powerful than it was in 1998. It has done nothing to reduce the demand for independence. It is now the most powerful subordinate Parliament in the western world. Ditto.

    There comes a point when devolution simply breaks up the whole. I fear we are close to it. As our tax systems, benefits systems, grants, prescription and other charges, availability of cancer drugs, differentiate what holds us together?
    The key problem is "subordinate". It could be erased tomorrow at Mr Johnson's whim. The Tories' tearing up of the Sewel figleaf has caused huge mistrust.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    "@HugoGye
    637,631 vaccinations in the UK yesterday

    England 137,003 1st doses / 404,510 2nd doses
    Scotland 14,591 / 17,498
    Wales 26,883 / 27,004 (think this is for 2 days)
    NI 4,211 / 5,931"
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    "@HugoGye
    637,631 vaccinations in the UK yesterday

    England 137,003 1st doses / 404,510 2nd doses
    Scotland 14,591 / 17,498
    Wales 26,883 / 27,004 (think this is for 2 days)
    NI 4,211 / 5,931"

    Smashing it
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Labour seemingly making progress in the South, quite good progress in fact

    Labour will have a large net loss of councillors in southern England.

    They've done well in Worthing.

    Labour's problem is that they need an area to become sufficiently 'trendy' for them to do well in but if it becomes too 'trendy' they then start losing to the Greens.

    Meanwhile Labour continues to lose working class votes
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    India situation continues to be horrific

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1391238139314847744

    ndia reports another 400,000+ cases, 4000+ death day

    A sustained level of horribleness

    And its not correct

    True number surely closer to 25,000 deaths, 2-5 million infections today

    Lots of ways to estimate but here's a simple one

    Look at the crematoriums


    Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH
    @ashishkjha
    ·
    9h
    During non-pandemic year 2019

    About 27,000 Indians died on typical day

    Crematoriums handle that level of deaths every day

    Additional 4,000 deaths won't knock them off their feet

    Crematoriums across the country reporting 2-4X normal business

    Indian healthcare system has collapsed,

    People dying for lack of oxygen

    So IFR of 1% is reasonable, may even too low

    Which would put daily infections at 2.5 to 5M / day
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited May 2021

    Labour seemingly making progress in the South, quite good progress in fact

    Labour will have a large net loss of councillors in southern England.

    They've done well in Worthing.

    Labour's problem is that they need an area to become sufficiently 'trendy' for them to do well in but if it becomes too 'trendy' they then start losing to the Greens.

    Meanwhile Labour continues to lose working class votes
    I partly agree with this, but some of the Labour gains in places like Tunbridge Wells, Surrey, and elsewhere are a bit more interesting than these, though.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 66,742
    Floater said:

    India situation continues to be horrific

    https://twitter.com/ashishkjha/status/1391238139314847744

    ndia reports another 400,000+ cases, 4000+ death day

    A sustained level of horribleness

    And its not correct

    True number surely closer to 25,000 deaths, 2-5 million infections today

    Lots of ways to estimate but here's a simple one

    Look at the crematoriums


    Ashish K. Jha, MD, MPH
    @ashishkjha
    ·
    9h
    During non-pandemic year 2019

    About 27,000 Indians died on typical day

    Crematoriums handle that level of deaths every day

    Additional 4,000 deaths won't knock them off their feet

    Crematoriums across the country reporting 2-4X normal business

    Indian healthcare system has collapsed,

    People dying for lack of oxygen

    So IFR of 1% is reasonable, may even too low

    Which would put daily infections at 2.5 to 5M / day

    It isn’t that long ago that we were talking about Indian demographics saving it from the worst CFR.

    This virus hasn’t read the rulebook on good virus behaviour, has it?

    Lockdown sceptics - this is what *could* have happened here. As it did in Mexico, in Brazil and probably in Wuhan itself.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    NEW THREAD

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,629
    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all. Betfair should put up a Starmer exit date market. It'd be quite active.

    Further to Labour, @CarlottaVance posted on PT this piece by Curtice -

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/newe.12228

    He describes the 2 competing visions for where the party goes post Brexit.

    "The Dominant Narrative": Leave/Remain will fade as a political identity. Left/Right and Class will reassert itself. So get back to the knitting. Win back the WWC. Left. Big State. Patriotism.

    "The Alternative Narrative": Leave/Remain is here to stay. So make the choice as the Cons have done. Be the party of Remainers and proud of it. Centrist. Liberal. Internationalist.

    I find this interesting because it shows how big the challenge is. For example, I personally, as a Labour member and voter, can't easily decide which of the above I prefer. I like and dislike bits of both. And maybe Starmer feels the same because it's not totally clear to me right now where he's at.

    Fwiw, forgetting everything apart from winning elections, and if SKS were to fall on his sword and the party were to replace him with me, I think I would go full fat with the Alternative Narrative. Bye bye working class, hello social liberals (any class welcome).

    But I'm not sure.

    David Herdson, on twitter the other day, asked "Why should Labour even be 'about' the 'working class' (whatever that means)? Why not define itself by values and ideology instead?"

    Which seems like a similar theme.

    I was quite taken aback by it to be honest. Labour, to me, by definition should always be about whats best for the working class/low paid workers, that is the reason why I have never been able to comprehend their love for FOM, which as Maurice Glasman put it (I think), is "The biggest capitalist con trick invented by man"

    ...from about 20 mins in, very interesting analysis of the effects of global capitalism on the working class from a left wing perspective, which I pretty much 100% agree with

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa5vsa1FLKY
    Tricky one, isn't it. However I manage to be Left and also a Globalist. Here's how. Free movement and globalization increases global GDP and reduces inequality between countries. Both good. But if unfettered it increases inequality within countries and this is bad. Therefore in mitigation the UK government should legislate domestically in favour of labour and against capital. Which I support. That's how I square the circle.

    And colours to the mast, I see 'free movement' as a great great thing. That people can move painlessly across national borders to live and work as they wish - for me that's a wonderful aspiration to always be progressing towards, Europe and elsewhere. Of course there are problems with it - eg unbalanced flows, wage distortions, housing, culture clashes, etc - but like I say that's where governments come in. Stop pandering and scapegoating. Address those issues.

    What's the point otherwise? Just hunker down and park the bus? No. Not for me. Let's elevate. The beautiful game.
    Apart from it is easy to say legislate and regulate. Not so easy however to come up with anything that addresses the issues of unlimited immigration causing for example a race to the bottom on wages.

    Let me guess you are going to say higher minimum wage - all you do then he attract even more of a flow from countries with low minimum wage to those with higher as we saw in eastern european migration

    Ah you will say then we set a global minimum wage - well apart from the obvious absurdity of getting the whole world to agree then all you do is change the flow from countries with high costs of living to those with low.

    The other problem of course with high minimum wages is the more jobs you drag into the minimum wage net the less value people see in doing those jobs. If I could get the same being a barista as I get for my current job for example I would quit in an instant.

    As I said easy to wave your hand airily and say legislate/ regulate not so easy to actually come up with anything to solve the issues
    TBF - to me - I'm not dismissing the difficulties. Free movement in a world of such appalling wealth inequality is utopian. But it's a great aspiration and should be embraced when and where possible, ie if people can be convinced that the social & economic benefits outweigh the costs. The hope would be that as time passes we see more "FM" areas being created in various regions around the world. If this doesn't happen it would be a bit depressing. Even more so if we go in the other direction. Which we seem to be atm.
    The difficulties though are far from being merely economic. They are cultural. How would you feel for example after throwing our borders open if we had a massive influx of sub saharan black christians and muslims, say for the sake of argument 15 million or so.....enough to shift the voting balance. Then with their voting power they start voting for a repeal of gay marriage. They are after all not known for their liberal views on homosexuality.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    edited May 2021
    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:

    ping said:

    50 dead in Kabul - and it doesn’t even make the headlines.

    The Taliban have won, haven’t they?

    Yup. Best not to dwell on the young men and women we lost fighting over there.

    The first day of the war, November 2001, I was asked by my flat mate (we’d just started uni together) why I was so upset and angry at the invasion.

    I replied, ‘Because nobody has ever won a war in Afghanistan, but thousands of lives have been lost trying.’

    If I could see that as an 18-year-old, how come Bush, Blair, Howard, Musharraf and Putin couldn’t? Especially Putin!
    I remember flying over 'The Boulevard' through Pakistan from the Arabian Sea that night. As we got over Afghanistan I thought my night vision goggles had failed because I couldn’t see anything on the terrain; it was just black. Then I realised that there was almost nothing in most of the country and what little there was had no electricity. I recall thinking that this did not look like a country of centrist dads ready for liberal democracy.

    By 3am we were over Kabul airport and thousands of angry bearded men were firing weapons of every possible calibre with great profligacy at us. We yearned for the silent darkness of the south at that point.
    Almost poetic.
    Ever thought of writing a memoir, an anti Bravo Two Zero if you will?
    Why should those pseudonymous erses grift all the cash?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    This thread has been demoted.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    isam said:

    A surprising opinion from Andrew Adonis:

    "@Andrew_Adonis
    For what it’s worth, it is my judgement that the only Labour leader likely to be able to win the next election is Tony Blair"

    The Sunday Times said Blair was "hostile" to Starmer's leadership today
    Here’s an idea for Starmer to get behind that would both help people at the bottom of society and simultaneously reframe Labour’s reputation both to many of its former traditional voters and possible converts, namely actively promote policies that incentivise two parent families. The evidence is overwhelmingly clear that it benefits children and probably can do more to reduce a lot of the social problems than chucking cash in benefits. Politically, it would send a powerful message to many that Labour is prepared to stand up for traditional values and ignore the bleating from professional middle class wokeists who claim, against all evidence, that issues such as structural racism, rather than family breakdown, are at the cause of the inner-city problems.

    Of course they won’t do it because the middle class leftists (who usually raise their children in stable long term relationships) would kick up a fuss but it would be both a positive policy and politically would send a very powerful signal.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    ydoethur said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    ydoethur said:

    ping said:

    50 dead in Kabul - and it doesn’t even make the headlines.

    The Taliban have won, haven’t they?

    Yup. Best not to dwell on the young men and women we lost fighting over there.

    The first day of the war, November 2001, I was asked by my flat mate (we’d just started uni together) why I was so upset and angry at the invasion.

    I replied, ‘Because nobody has ever won a war in Afghanistan, but thousands of lives have been lost trying.’

    If I could see that as an 18-year-old, how come Bush, Blair, Howard, Musharraf and Putin couldn’t? Especially Putin!
    I remember flying over 'The Boulevard' through Pakistan from the Arabian Sea that night. As we got over Afghanistan I thought my night vision goggles had failed because I couldn’t see anything on the terrain; it was just black. Then I realised that there was almost nothing in most of the country and what little there was had no electricity. I recall thinking that this did not look like a country of centrist dads ready for liberal democracy.

    By 3am we were over Kabul airport and thousands of angry bearded men were firing weapons of every possible calibre with great profligacy at us. We yearned for the silent darkness of the south at that point.
    I’m glad they all missed you.

    I am sorry for those others of all nationalities including their own that they didn’t miss.
    Aviation losses in OEF were very light. Like all good imperialist ventures, it was the locals who did most of the fighting and dying.

    In hindsight the US should have just toppled the Musharraf regime and installed a biddable Pakistani general as President who would have cut off the FATA to the Taliban, sealed the Afghan border and collapsed the Taliban regime that way.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    Andy_JS said:

    It's 50/50 on independence in terms of votes. Slightly one way on the list and slightly the other on the constituency vote.

    A situation way too fragile for Nicola to gamble. She’ll spin things out in the hope that the Uk government resumes making mistakes
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited May 2021

    kinabalu said:

    Another thought about the "where should Labour go?" question.

    The argument against centrist-liberal-internationalist parties is they get squashed in the soggy centre. SDP, CUK, RIP.

    But that position isn't centrist any more. Given where BoJo has taken the Conservatives, it's more the other pole of the axis.

    It's making UK politics more American, which can't be good, but Trumpism didn't, in the end, play out to the Republican's advantage.

    Except:

    Trump was miles behind in the polls throughout his presidency. Not the case here.
    Trump was seen to have handled the pandemic disastrously. Not the case here.
    The USA's demographics give an electoral advantage to the left/liberals. Not the case here.

    Biden would have lost rather badly without all those factors in his favour.

    It's simply delusional to think that Boris is presiding over some sort of extremist polity unacceptable to the mainstream of British society. On the contrary, the loss of Remainery Tories both in GE2019 and now in 2021 has been remarkably mild, especially when the replacement of Corbyn by the Starmer The Great Moderate Hope was supposed to make it safe for them to flood en masse to the 'sensible' alternative to Boris. Ooops!
    The party of Leave, antiwokery, Eng Nat?

    Or that of small state, sound money, free enterprise?

    These things are impossible to fuse together for long, "Boris" or no "Boris".
    How long is 'for long'? Want to stake your superforecaster rep on it? I'm hardly representative - though I've been a better guide to the national mood for the last few years than most - but as a Thatcherite metropolitan elitist I've had no problem with the party's recent turn, and have been really quite delighted with the results...
    By "long", I mean for much beyond the next GE. Not that I'm conceding the next GE quite yet. This is Peak Con - that Boris Blimp was Corbo Glasto - and it's only the shape of the slope in question.

    Ok, so you're happy, but it's because you're winning. That's circular. It's like everyone buying an asset because they think it'll go up in value, ignoring the instrinsics. Works for a while, then it doesn't. The acid test will be when policies come along which you dislike. Untory things like interventionist government and high taxes (or the fiscal ruin alternative). This is where intrinsics kick in and many people who are onboard now will have to ask themselves whether to hold or sell.

    There'll be some selling, trust me. And maybe a crash.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,342
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    Kudos for your honesty.

    I think you can put Independent Green Voice on the Union side of the balance sheet, they're run by the bloke below. It looks like they may have denied the Greens one or two list MSP so they've probably been more effective than all the other smaller parties put together.


    On the other hand, as you have often pointed out many Labour voters would probably be in favour of a second referendum, and would have voted for the SNP had they thought they were able to deliver one.

    That’s an aside. The fact remains that however you look at it it’s impossible to argue against a vote in favour of a second referendum on these numbers. Exactly what Johnson will do next is interesting. Does he shaft his voters, shaft the Scots or shaft everyone?
    At the moment Johnson doesn't have to do anything. If Scotland wants a Ref2 then it can start the process. When cards are on the table Boris can start bidding.

    It is perfectly possible to argue against Ref2. The case is nicely balanced. Simply this: If it were a matter for Scotland only then it would be a matter the Scottish parliament had power over. It doesn't. It requires Westminster legislation.

    Therefore the deal enshrined in the Scotland Act assumes a wider set of concerns. These are at least twofold: Scotland separating from rUK is also rUK separating from Scotland but without our consent. England separating from Scotland does not have my consent (I can see Scotland from where I live) and while we may not have the determinative voice, England (and Wales and NI) should not be voiceless.

    Secondly there has to be a limit on the number and frequency of referendums, and this is a legitimate interest for the UK as a whole as well as Scotland.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Charles said:

    kinabalu said:

    isam said:

    kinabalu said:

    Morning all. Betfair should put up a Starmer exit date market. It'd be quite active.

    Further to Labour, @CarlottaVance posted on PT this piece by Curtice -

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/newe.12228

    He describes the 2 competing visions for where the party goes post Brexit.

    "The Dominant Narrative": Leave/Remain will fade as a political identity. Left/Right and Class will reassert itself. So get back to the knitting. Win back the WWC. Left. Big State. Patriotism.

    "The Alternative Narrative": Leave/Remain is here to stay. So make the choice as the Cons have done. Be the party of Remainers and proud of it. Centrist. Liberal. Internationalist.

    I find this interesting because it shows how big the challenge is. For example, I personally, as a Labour member and voter, can't easily decide which of the above I prefer. I like and dislike bits of both. And maybe Starmer feels the same because it's not totally clear to me right now where he's at.

    Fwiw, forgetting everything apart from winning elections, and if SKS were to fall on his sword and the party were to replace him with me, I think I would go full fat with the Alternative Narrative. Bye bye working class, hello social liberals (any class welcome).

    But I'm not sure.

    David Herdson, on twitter the other day, asked "Why should Labour even be 'about' the 'working class' (whatever that means)? Why not define itself by values and ideology instead?"

    Which seems like a similar theme.

    I was quite taken aback by it to be honest. Labour, to me, by definition should always be about whats best for the working class/low paid workers, that is the reason why I have never been able to comprehend their love for FOM, which as Maurice Glasman put it (I think), is "The biggest capitalist con trick invented by man"

    ...from about 20 mins in, very interesting analysis of the effects of global capitalism on the working class from a left wing perspective, which I pretty much 100% agree with

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pa5vsa1FLKY
    Tricky one, isn't it. However I manage to be Left and also a Globalist. Here's how. Free movement and globalization increases global GDP and reduces inequality between countries. Both good. But if unfettered it increases inequality within countries and this is bad. Therefore in mitigation the UK government should legislate domestically in favour of labour and against capital. Which I support. That's how I square the circle.

    And colours to the mast, I see 'free movement' as a great great thing. That people can move painlessly across national borders to live and work as they wish - for me that's a wonderful aspiration to always be progressing towards, Europe and elsewhere. Of course there are problems with it - eg unbalanced flows, wage distortions, housing, culture clashes, etc - but like I say that's where governments come in. Stop pandering and scapegoating. Address those issues.

    What's the point otherwise? Just hunker down and park the bus? No. Not for me. Let's elevate. The beautiful game.
    The problem is that you are asking the current residents to the country to find that.

    Let’s assume that all incomers are entitled to the full benefits of healthcare, welfare etc from the day they arrive. You can, of course, say that they receive no recourse to public funds but personally I believe that is unethical and damaging to society as a whole.

    So if you have completely free movement and arrivals benefit then you are creating a magnet: the welfare benefits that many in this country regard as too low are way above the standard of living for the vast majority in Africa, for example. Hence you will have massive immigration flows but be asking those who can afford it - the current residents - to fund that out of tax as well as accepting a reduction in their access to services (crowding in houses, healthcare, public transport etc)

    It just doesn’t work in a practical world
    But it can work where it works, and those situations can increase over time. Nobody is saying the free movement of people around the world is feasible next week.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Charles said:

    kinabalu said:

    I think the adverse impact of FM on the wages of the low paid was overstated relative to other factors. And I absolutely hate how politicians of the populist right who don't care two figs about raising the living standards of the poor weaponized the issue, framing it as a 'zero sum' contest between people who were born here and people who weren't. But I accept there was an impact - logic says so - and I agree we should have taken steps to mitigate it.
    .

    As an aside, Cobbett used to excoriate Wiberforce for prioritising the abolition of slavery vs lifting living standards for UK working men and women
    There you go. A neat illustration of how a global imperative can conflict with parochial self-interest.

    Politics is all about choices. There's no win/win.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    edited May 2021
    isam said:

    Nunu3 said:

    Yesterday we discussed the poor design of the London Mayor ballot paper. In particular the instructions around columns A and B when the candidates were listed in two columns. It was suggested one test of whether voters were actually confused would be the number of spoiled ballots, especially those with too many X's. Helpfully, these have been detailed on the official return. (Hat-tip to countbinface.com for the picture.)



    The number of ballot papers rejected on first preference votes was as follows:-
    (a) Unmarked 18,071
    (b) Uncertain 8,672
    (c) Voting for too many 87,214
    (d) Writing identifying voter 167
    (e) Want of official mark 77
    Total 114,201

    The number of ballot papers rejected on second preference votes was as follows:-
    (a) Uncertain 965
    (b) Voting for too many 7,037
    Total 8,002

    In particular, those voters who expressed no first preference or who voted for too many candidates were very likely confused by the ballot paper. That is 112,232 voters.

    In addition, it was acceptable and logical for supporters of Sadiq Khan and Shaun Bailey in particular to cast only a first preference vote. This was done by 319,978 voters. However, it is arguable that the 265,343 voters who cast the same first and second preference votes misunderstood either the process or the ballot paper.

    That is a terrible design. Come to think of it, I can't remember if I voted the right way myself.
    We had the same sort of issue in the Surrey PCC election. IIRC 880000 voters voted for two different people in column A, rather than one in A and one in B.
    Watching Canterbury, Surrey and Chipping Norton go Red whilst Hartlepool and the Midlands go blue, is it time for those who argued the Leave vote wasn't a working class thing to admit they were wrong/have a rethink?

    Well of course it is... but they won't
    The project was led by the reactionary right. They managed to sell it to the plebs.
  • The_ApocalypseThe_Apocalypse Posts: 7,830
    edited May 2021

    A surprising opinion from Andrew Adonis:

    "@Andrew_Adonis
    For what it’s worth, it is my judgement that the only Labour leader likely to be able to win the next election is Tony Blair"

    🤣

    Andrew Adonis is something else. He also said he thinks he’s too radical for Starmer.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,674
    edited May 2021
    MaxPB said:

    DavidL said:

    I agree with @RochdalePioneers arithmetic. To complicate matters a little further Alba got 44,913 on the list, All for Uniity got 23,299 Reform UK 5793 and UKIP 4,547. The other parties I can identify are "neutral" on the question and there are sundry independents I cannot identify but it seems likely that the small balance of 13k would increase marginally if the odds and sods are taken into account.

    I repeatedly said that this was going to be close and it is but Scotland has voted very narrowly for a second referendum. I am gutted.

    Don't worry too much, Scotland is a nation of bottlers. You will once again vote for the apron strings. It's a nation that likes to talk but won't vote to lose all of the UK funded sweeties like free prescriptions and free university tuition.
    bollox , you lying dumb horse's arse
    PS: At least we are not Richard pullers.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The worrying thing is that Starmer is looking at personalities, not policy.

    Labour needs a leader that stands up to middle class metropolitans and tells them how it is. If they want power, they are going to have to make accommodations, or brexit is just the start.

    He should rewatch Blackadder and learn:

    'We are fighting this election on issues, not personalities.'

    'Why is that?'

    (Indicates Baldrick) 'Because our candidate doesn't have a personality.'
    Giving vent to his frustration by lashing out at a woman suggests his apparent lack of personality is just a disguise for something much worse.
    It is a serious point though. Labour are never going to beat Johnson on personality. He's Boris. The cheery, avuncular, amusing, rather eccentric love rat who puts on TV documentaries on weird subjects and makes a complete fool of himself on Have I Got News For You and Top Gear. OK, he's a phoney and it's all sham, but it's amazing sham. You can see why people lap it up, not least with his own guarded admissions of it ('I think you should allow for the possibility that under this carefully crafted exterior of a blithering idiot is, in fact, a blithering idiot.')

    They need to beat him on policy. And there he's actually very weak. He's confused, incoherent, contradictory. Many of his policies are actually impossible (changes to the school year spring to mind, as does Boris Bridge to Northern Ireland). His government is accident prone and stuffed with time servers. He changes his mind as it suits his purpose (i.e. staying popular and therefore in power).

    A forensic Opposition with a serious programme could challenge on this. Sure, maybe not enough to get back to a majority. But it is 51 years since a majority of more than 20 was overturned in a single election, and that was indeed the only time it had happened since 1906. A serious programme, with an understanding of how that could be used in coalition negotiations, could provide a pathway to power.

    That's what Starmer could - should - have been doing. He's been incredibly unlucky with the pandemic. But if he wants to sort matters out, he needs solid policy and he needs it right now.

    So far, the signs are discouraging. At the moment, Labour are losing out on charisma *and* policy.

    Which, bluntly, is quite extraodinary.
    A Tory majority of 100 was overturned in 1964. In 1945 a National Govt majority of circa 250 was easily overturned - admittedly after an almost 10 year Parliament and the exceptional post World War2 circumstances. In 1929 Baldwin's huge majority achieved in 1924 disappeared.
This discussion has been closed.