Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Gordon Brown already saved the union last time round. During Cameron's SindyRef, it was only when Brown (and, to give her her due, Ruth Davidson) began to make a positive case for the union that the seemingly inexorable rise of Yes was checked. The official Bitter Together's negative campaign, that Scotland was too wee, too poor, too stupid, seemed destined to break up the United Kingdom. Another reason Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
I suspect that Starmer and metropolitan Labour thought that 2019 was as bad as it could get in the old industrial areas and so they could be ignored.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
That is similar to how a certain Irish airline ‘employs’ British pilots and cabin crew. Facilitating using foreigners as directors is likely aiding and abetting tax evasion for the HR company though.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
The "Team UK" summit sounds rather like similar get-togethers in Canada between the Prime Minister and provincial premiers. In which the former is not necessarily or even usual predominant but instead barely first among equals.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
The media interviewed voters in the red wall seats and they were united on saying the wallpaper issue was irrelevant, one of them saying that Keir Starmer was more interested in Boris Johnson's wallpaper than them
Richard Nixon was elected President by what is still a record margin, after Watergate.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Cameron and Osborne's gerrymandering scheme was, I believe, minted by them and then adopted by the American GOP.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
I’ll stick my neck out, and predict that knee-taking at sporting events doesn’t last many weeks once crowds are back in stadia.
The European Cup Final should of course be held at Wembley - although I have rather good memories of the last time it was held in Istanbul!
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
He’s not up to it.
So you in short you think he should go because he needs to be better on TV and more Brexity in candidate selection?
That is similar to how a certain Irish airline ‘employs’ British pilots and cabin crew. Facilitating using foreigners as directors is likely aiding and abetting tax evasion for the HR company though.
I really do need to find a salesman (I can't sell for toffee) and get the project I've been working on launched.
But yep this is one of the more common fraud types within that industry. It's by no means the worst scheme however I've seen a few recently where the paperwork sent to HMRC bears zero relationship to what the worker is being sent.
Literally everything looks above board until HMRC trigger a report and goes hang on......
Impressive that he refused to accept parole on the grounds his sentence was unconstitutional and therefore the restrictions parole placed on him were wrong
Impressive that he refused to accept parole on the grounds his sentence was unconstitutional and therefore the restrictions parole placed on him were wrong
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Gordon Brown already saved the union last time round. During Cameron's SindyRef, it was only when Brown (and, to give her her due, Ruth Davidson) began to make a positive case for the union that the seemingly inexorable rise of Yes was checked. The official Bitter Together's negative campaign, that Scotland was too wee, too poor, too stupid, seemed destined to break up the United Kingdom. Another reason Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
Gordon Brown saved the world, surely saving the Union was just a minor miracle.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
They wont sweep the North because the cities are safe Labour but there are numerous towns and conurbation sprawl seats that the Conservatives can advance in.
There is great variety in the North.
I don't think that Starmer has any particular interest in or empathy towards northern towns.
That's not unusual among London based politicians - neither did Blair or Brown or the Cameroons or many of the Labour MPs who were given seats in them, the Milibands and Balls-Coopers for example.
But the Conservatives are (or at least seem to be) and they have a number of northern MPs now who certainly are.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
That is similar to how a certain Irish airline ‘employs’ British pilots and cabin crew. Facilitating using foreigners as directors is likely aiding and abetting tax evasion for the HR company though.
I really do need to find a salesman (I can't sell for toffee) and get the project I've been working on launched.
But yep this is one of the more common fraud types within that industry. It's by no means the worst scheme however I've seen a few recently where the paperwork sent to HMRC bears zero relationship to what the worker is being sent.
Literally everything looks above board until HMRC trigger a report and goes hang on......
Wait until the guys paid £150 to set up and resign as directors from half a dozen companies start getting some very nasty letters from HMRC and Companies House, and need to hire accountants and lawyers.
The real targets should be the directors of G4S, for what’s clearly intended as tax evasion.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
The "Team UK" summit sounds rather like similar get-togethers in Canada between the Prime Minister and provincial premiers. In which the former is not necessarily or even usual predominant but instead barely first among equals.
I hope thats the case. There needs to be an open and frank discussion about the way forward because the union in its current form is unsustainable.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Gordon Brown already saved the union last time round. During Cameron's SindyRef, it was only when Brown (and, to give her her due, Ruth Davidson) began to make a positive case for the union that the seemingly inexorable rise of Yes was checked. The official Bitter Together's negative campaign, that Scotland was too wee, too poor, too stupid, seemed destined to break up the United Kingdom. Another reason Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
Gordon Brown saved the world, surely saving the Union was just a minor miracle.
Gordon Brown saved the world, saved the pound, saved the union.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
We have no idea how politics would have worked out without covid and speculating on something that did not happen does not add to the debate of what has happened, because covid has happened and like all things in politics unexpected events arise
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Gordon Brown already saved the union last time round. During Cameron's SindyRef, it was only when Brown (and, to give her her due, Ruth Davidson) began to make a positive case for the union that the seemingly inexorable rise of Yes was checked. The official Bitter Together's negative campaign, that Scotland was too wee, too poor, too stupid, seemed destined to break up the United Kingdom. Another reason Cameron was our worst Prime Minister since Lord North.
Gordon Brown saved the world, surely saving the Union was just a minor miracle.
Gordon Brown saved the world, saved the pound, saved the union.
On topic, it's still too early for me to bet on the outcome of the next GE - which is 3 (very long) years away.
It's not too early for me to bet against who will be next PM, and that's where I'm focussing my main effort. I will switch tact about Autumn/Winter 2022.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
The "Team UK" summit sounds rather like similar get-togethers in Canada between the Prime Minister and provincial premiers. In which the former is not necessarily or even usual predominant but instead barely first among equals.
I hope thats the case. There needs to be an open and frank discussion about the way forward because the union in its current form is unsustainable.
I actually agree with you but independence is not the answer
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
"Risks" is putting it mildly. That's arguably the single biggest factor behind the Tories losing Oxfordshire yesterday.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
My biggest issue with laying a Labour majority is tieing cash up with Betfair for years. I've not seen a more hopeless position for an opposition party since about 1998. The local election performance is beyond disastrous.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
It can't survive in its current form, I do not know what the solution is but something needs to radically change.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Blair and Brown were in different ways outstanding politicians. Today we are dealing with Mail front page spats between two Labour leaders with no record of decent election performance and a strategy/policy gap which means Labour at 13% to win next time is highly flattering.
Not great. And the LDs and Greens are gathering to attack the same younger wokish ground that is Labour's best prospect for now.
BTW, don't write off Labour for Batley and Spen. Tories need to lower expectations fast. And if Labour do well there, and LDs win the Hams it will change the picture a bit. Boris has yet to achieve an obvious and monumental fail (in public perception). The fall out when he does will be intriguing.
The Tories have two modes: (1) supreme confidence and complacency, and, (2) Blind panic, riddled with ruthless factionalism.
If Labour win Batley & Spen we'll see (1) turn into (2) on the head of a pin.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
You kneel before God. You nod to your Sovereign (true Brits don’t bow at the waist)
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
I am afraid that the idea that the leaders in W, S and NI plan to help the Tories by assisting Boris to 'forge a new consensus' is strictly for those who believe politics is about playing non competitive games nicely.
I doubt if a less 'crucial' meeting will be happening all month.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
They wont sweep the North because the cities are safe Labour but there are numerous towns and conurbation sprawl seats that the Conservatives can advance in.
There is great variety in the North.
I don't think that Starmer has any particular interest in or empathy towards northern towns.
That's not unusual among London based politicians - neither did Blair or Brown or the Cameroons or many of the Labour MPs who were given seats in them, the Milibands and Balls-Coopers for example.
But the Conservatives are (or at least seem to be) and they have a number of northern MPs now who certainly are.
Ironically, in the 1990s, the complaint was that Labour's Northern and Scottish establishment (and yes, I know Neil Kinnock was neither) did not understand the aspirations of London voters.
I do think there is a social values disconnection between Labour and their erstwhile supporters who can feel the party is no longer on their side. It is not principally about Brexit, or race, however. It is a politically fatal mistake to dismiss as racist those people who have voted for BAME (sorry) Home Secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer, let alone a part-Turkish Prime Minister. And Brexit is only relevant as a reminder that it was principally not Boris but Dominic Cummings who first reengaged many disadvantaged voters.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I have little interest in the wallpaper. And no one I know does either.
Nor have I. I have a great deal of interest in lying about where he got the money from, though.
We've said on here before that our PM comes across as someone with whom it would fun to have a drink. Until it came to his turn to pay.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
You kneel before God. You nod to your Sovereign (true Brits don’t bow at the waist)
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
It can't survive in its current form, I do not know what the solution is but something needs to radically change.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
More people have twigged that it is not in their interests either to always back the same party at all times, or to back the same party at each political level at one time.
Loads of people (I suspect) would vote Green in local election but not a GE. Look at the pattern of Euro election voting (now history of course). Didn't the Tories get 9% recently? (Full disclosure: I generally vote Labour in local but not General elections).
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
"Risks" is putting it mildly. That's arguably the single biggest factor behind the Tories losing Oxfordshire yesterday.
HMG is at least talking about building in the north, though the risk is that a bonfire of regulations will mean more ticky-tacky in the south-east. Investment in new housing and even new towns should be directed up north and wherever else the local economy needs rejuvenation.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
It can't survive in its current form, I do not know what the solution is but something needs to radically change.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
Which is why the post yesterday extrapolating local election results into the forthcoming by election in Batley and Spen as a close run thing was pointless and meaningless.
That is similar to how a certain Irish airline ‘employs’ British pilots and cabin crew. Facilitating using foreigners as directors is likely aiding and abetting tax evasion for the HR company though.
I really do need to find a salesman (I can't sell for toffee) and get the project I've been working on launched.
But yep this is one of the more common fraud types within that industry. It's by no means the worst scheme however I've seen a few recently where the paperwork sent to HMRC bears zero relationship to what the worker is being sent.
Literally everything looks above board until HMRC trigger a report and goes hang on......
Wait until the guys paid £150 to set up and resign as directors from half a dozen companies start getting some very nasty letters from HMRC and Companies House, and need to hire accountants and lawyers.
The real targets should be the directors of G4S, for what’s clearly intended as tax evasion.
The directors here are always innocent saps overseas being paid a few quid to sign paperwork.
The real organisers are sat in Malta / Cyprus with their name no where near any of this.
And the number of positive tests is also increasing.
Fortunately with the vaccination program such a success it will have little effect.
But I wonder if the zero covid sociopaths will demand a continuation of restrictions.
It'd be good to know the vaccination status, even in aggregate, of those that have Covid. Perhaps we all need to catch it, even vaccinated to attain the true sterlising immunity ? If so we should open up fully (internally).
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
I personally find it concerning that they can't find more important things to do... Election fraud is so far down the list of issues that it wouldn't be in the first 100 pages of things that need to be fixed.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
It can't survive in its current form, I do not know what the solution is but something needs to radically change.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
Which is why the post yesterday extrapolating local election results into the forthcoming by election in Batley and Spen as a close run thing was pointless and meaningless.
Absolutely, but I doubt there is an area as extreme as Eastleigh with an MP with such a huge majority , but with just 5% of Council seats.
In the neighbouring Council Southampton, which is much more working class with large Council Estates in Thornhill, Weston, Northam & Millbrook, the tories made big gains and now control the Council. Its hard to compute.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
You kneel before God. You nod to your Sovereign (true Brits don’t bow at the waist)
No. It is an entirely submissive act.
Which is why you don’t kneel before your sovereign.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
He’s not up to it.
So you in short you think he should go because he needs to be better on TV and more Brexity in candidate selection?
Starmer is very politically naive. He doesn't like to think on his feet. As a lawyer he isn't Rumpole of the Bailey. On TV he doesn't inspire, but neither is he tongue tied.
Now let's look at Johnson, Anything that is not pre-scripted is punctuated with "ums" and "errs". He cannot react to a question, either with reality or bulls""t, the interviewer is often met with silence and a blank expression. Some of Johnson's scripted speeches are OK, others appear to have been written by Eric Cantona. But all this is not a weakness apparantly, it is a strength.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
"Risks" is putting it mildly. That's arguably the single biggest factor behind the Tories losing Oxfordshire yesterday.
HMG is at least talking about building in the north, though the risk is that a bonfire of regulations will mean more ticky-tacky in the south-east. Investment in new housing and even new towns should be directed up north and wherever else the local economy needs rejuvenation.
Up North we don't need houses - that's a southern issue.
There is a simple test to housing - are houses prices above 2004 levels - if so you haven't built enough.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
Another classic Charles bijou. I hope someone is preparing a book.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
You kneel before God. You nod to your Sovereign (true Brits don’t bow at the waist)
No. It is an entirely submissive act.
Real men don't kneel. It's as wimpy as eating quiche.
A new shadow is struggling on R4. Gabbling nonsense frankly under pressure from Robinson.
A cracking start then...
Yes, heard it. Not great. Time for a reshuffle.
Of policies.
Every Lab person on the airwaves has said how Lab must change. But none has answered the question - what was wrong before and what would you do different in future.
And the number of positive tests is also increasing.
Fortunately with the vaccination program such a success it will have little effect.
But I wonder if the zero covid sociopaths will demand a continuation of restrictions.
It'd be good to know the vaccination status, even in aggregate, of those that have Covid. Perhaps we all need to catch it, even vaccinated to attain the true sterlising immunity ?....
There is absolutely no evidence for that. Vaccination plus booster appears to generate a more robust immune response than does prior infection. Prior infection followed by a single vaccine dose has a similar effect.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
Another classic Charles bijou. I hope someone is preparing a book.
Prince of the Silver Tower is interestingly non-googleable.
Anyway the big news today and I hope everyone is looking forward to it as much as I am - the Prime Minister telling us whether we are going to be allowed to hug our families.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
The media interviewed voters in the red wall seats and they were united on saying the wallpaper issue was irrelevant, one of them saying that Keir Starmer was more interested in Boris Johnson's wallpaper than them
Richard Nixon was elected President by what is still a record margin, after Watergate.
Wallpapergate is not about wallpaper.
I have a very good Russian friend.
At the very height of the MP's expenses scandal -- flipping second homes, duck houses & moats, wallpaper and curtains, Chaytor, Moran & Devine -- he said to me:
"This is not corruption. You guys don't even understand what real corruption is."
OK, there were some MPs, who did some silly things, some little dodges, tiny acts of grift, fiddling the photocopying receipts, employing the relatives.
Not good, I agree. But, that is not what real corruption is.
It is possible that the Labour can get the Tories on corruption, but if so, it won't be on silly little things, like Wallpaper-gate. To compare Watergate to Wallpaper-gate is to misunderstand grossly what corruption is.
What Cameron did is corrupt. Or stupid. Or both.
Any yet again, there is plenty of real corruption in Corruption Bay, where the Labour party presides over the only the UK Parliament without a register of lobbyists, and has done for over a quarter of a century.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's quite transparent why they are doing so. A day after the Conservatives lose but two mayoralties they decide, let's change the system to our advantage.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I have little interest in the wallpaper. And no one I know does either.
Nor have I. I have a great deal of interest in lying about where he got the money from, though.
We've said on here before that our PM comes across as someone with whom it would fun to have a drink. Until it came to his turn to pay.
And Good Morning all.
Exactly. The "wallpaper" badging is an attempt to trivialize. It's not the wallpaper scandal. It's the undercover funding scandal.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
Another classic Charles bijou. I hope someone is preparing a book.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
It might mean something different in the USA, so I’m been charitable to people from there who do it, but here it means you are allowing yourself to be subjugated. It works in the context of asking for permission to get married, but even that dates itself to subjugating yourself to the nobleman.
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
You kneel before God. You nod to your Sovereign (true Brits don’t bow at the waist)
No. It is an entirely submissive act.
It is simply the American Football version of taking the ball to the corner flag and shielding it.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
We have no idea how politics would have worked out without covid and speculating on something that did not happen does not add to the debate of what has happened, because covid has happened and like all things in politics unexpected events arise
So how does that make me bitter?
I can *speculate* about how the published Tory policies would have played out. A significant number of people other than me have commentated on the transformation in Tory fiscal policies. That transformation plainly has an impact on how people see the government.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
Another classic Charles bijou. I hope someone is preparing a book.
Prince of the Silver Tower is interestingly non-googleable.
That’s my rough translation - I think it is Menghu-Khan or something like that in Turkish (?)
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
It can't survive in its current form, I do not know what the solution is but something needs to radically change.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
Which is why the post yesterday extrapolating local election results into the forthcoming by election in Batley and Spen as a close run thing was pointless and meaningless.
Absolutely, but I doubt there is an area as extreme as Eastleigh with an MP with such a huge majority , but with just 5% of Council seats.
In the neighbouring Council Southampton, which is much more working class with large Council Estates in Thornhill, Weston, Northam & Millbrook, the tories made big gains and now control the Council. Its hard to compute.
It’s all about the election cycle and where they fall. It’s slightly complicated… councillor terms are four years. Some councils elect all their councillors at once and some elect in thirds. Some areas have two council tiers, in which one elects in thirds and one all out.
This is important because it means the cycle of elections for some councils can be continuously out of step with the overall feeling of the area. Council elections get 30% ish and general election high 60% turnouts. Only the committed come out with a well organised gotv to get anyone else needed.
Until Corbyn the pattern was normally governing party at Westminster does well in constituencies it holds when the election is held to coincide with the general election, might do ok or hold own the following year, but years two three and four of the government are often really tough.
If your council elects only every four years, its good luck when you get a GE, but more often then not you are fighting the pasty tax or a 50p increase in pensions.
The counter, if you elect in thirds it’s even more difficult. Because not only is your chance of success limited by only a third of councillors been available for that one good year, there is a chance that the general election is held on one of the fallow years in which the GE doesn’t take place.
Corbyn changed all this as the pattern of opposition parties, no matter how unsuitable for government (think Hague, ids, miliband) would still make huge gains.
Up until very early this year it was expected the pattern with SKS was going to be the order of massive gains, not Corbyn style dislike.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
I also think Starmer should go.
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
He’s not up to it.
He has the ability (in terms of potential) but not the experience.
His biggest problem now is that, once people have settled on a view of a new leader - generally towards the end of their first year - it is exceptionally difficult for them to reinvent themselves in the public mind
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
The media interviewed voters in the red wall seats and they were united on saying the wallpaper issue was irrelevant, one of them saying that Keir Starmer was more interested in Boris Johnson's wallpaper than them
Richard Nixon was elected President by what is still a record margin, after Watergate.
Wallpapergate is not about wallpaper.
I have a very good Russian friend.
At the very height of the MP's expenses scandal -- flipping second homes, duck houses & moats, wallpaper and curtains, Chaytor, Moran & Devine -- he said to me:
"This is not corruption. You guys don't even understand what real corruption is."
OK, there were some MPs, who did some silly things, some little dodges, tiny acts of grift, fiddling the photocopying receipts, employing the relatives.
Not good, I agree. But, that is not what real corruption is.
It is possible that the Labour can get the Tories on corruption, but if so, it won't be on silly little things, like Wallpaper-gate. To compare Watergate to Wallpaper-gate is to misunderstand grossly what corruption is.
What Cameron did is corrupt. Or stupid. Or both.
Any yet again, there is plenty of real corruption in Corruption Bay, where the Labour party presides over the only the UK Parliament without a register of lobbyists, and has done for over a quarter of a century.
You must be quite disappointed by the Welsh results?
I have a feeling your ideal result would have had ALL parties move backwards somewhat. Instead, Drake has wind in his sails and you’re stuck with RT for the foreseeable too.
Will PC dump Price? What ministry will Llafur give Dodds, if any?
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
20 allegations imply it's not a big problem that people are caring about.
Now NI does have a similar scheme already but it did have historic problems with fraud so it was required. Here it seems completely pointless and creates a silo.
If Boris / the Tories want a photo ID card could they kindly just ask for it - I can see a pile of reasons for having them provided the rules are properly set over who can use it to access exactly what.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
The "Team UK" summit sounds rather like similar get-togethers in Canada between the Prime Minister and provincial premiers. In which the former is not necessarily or even usual predominant but instead barely first among equals.
I hope thats the case. There needs to be an open and frank discussion about the way forward because the union in its current form is unsustainable.
I actually agree with you but independence is not the answer
No it isn't. Again I campaigned for the LibDems AGAINST independence. But independence is what a majority of votes have been cast for.
So we either engage head on and reshape a country that works. Or we deploy the HYUFD / Craft Cockney / Leon approach and tell Scotland they can't have it and thus make independence inevitable.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
A friend of mine’s Grandfather still has the title Khan of the Golden Horde (my friend is the Prince of the Silver Tower). They’ve been in exile since Catherine the Great conquered Crimea and currently live in Petersham…
Another classic Charles bijou. I hope someone is preparing a book.
Prince of the Silver Tower is interestingly non-googleable.
That’s my rough translation - I think it is Menghu-Khan or something like that in Turkish (?)
Sounds exotic. Google tells me that there doesn't seem to be a current Khan of the Golden Horde.
Anyway the big news today and I hope everyone is looking forward to it as much as I am - the Prime Minister telling us whether we are going to be allowed to hug our families.
On 18 Apr I posted that I'd backed Reeves at 50/1 for Next Labour Leader (as a trading bet at least) as I'd noticed that she was raising her profile significantly. The price reduced to a top-priced 25/1 a day or two later. I commented that if she was made Shadow Chancellor the price would fall further. Despite her appointment yesterday this hasn't yet happened, at least with a couple of bookies who still have her at 25/1. I've topped up on her at those odds this morning.
Burnham heads the market at a top-priced 7/2. This is a clear lay*. He is surely committed as mayor for three years which takes us up to the latest possible date for the next GE. If Starmer resigns or is ousted prior to the GE Burnham cannot succeed him. If Starmer contests the GE and loses he would probably resign but Burnham would not be in a position to succeed then either (should he even want to) because he would have to wait for a winnable by-election. 7/2 is ridiculously short unless you think that Burnham will decide to resign his mayoral position mid- term - and even then he would have to be selected and win a by-election.
*edit: can lay at 6.8 with BF and Smarkets, but market is thin.
On topic, it's still too early for me to bet on the outcome of the next GE - which is 3 (very long) years away.
It's not too early for me to bet against who will be next PM, and that's where I'm focussing my main effort. I will switch tact about Autumn/Winter 2022.
You think there'll be a change in PM within those three long years?
Anyway the big news today and I hope everyone is looking forward to it as much as I am - the Prime Minister telling us whether we are going to be allowed to hug our families.
Be still my beating heart...
A further refinement of the absurd was Nadine Dorries on the R4 this morning, without a trace of irony telling us that we should wait with baited breath to find out whether the PM would announce it this afternoon.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I have little interest in the wallpaper. And no one I know does either.
Nor have I. I have a great deal of interest in lying about where he got the money from, though.
We've said on here before that our PM comes across as someone with whom it would fun to have a drink. Until it came to his turn to pay.
And Good Morning all.
Exactly. The "wallpaper" badging is an attempt to trivialize. It's not the wallpaper scandal. It's the undercover funding scandal.
Yes, good morning.
It is a chaotic mess. It was a mistake for SKS to make it all about the wallpaper. It allowed Boris to come back with the “while you are making a fuss about wallpaper we are doing xyz”.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's quite transparent why they are doing so. A day after the Conservatives lose but two mayoralties they decide, let's change the system to our advantage.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Give over. Thats a sticking plaster at best. The towns deal at best pays for one project in one of the winning towns. And "levelling up funds" are what exactly? These areas needed hosing with cash - happened because of Covid and wouldn't have happened otherwise.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
A new shadow is struggling on R4. Gabbling nonsense frankly under pressure from Robinson.
A cracking start then...
Yes, heard it. Not great. Time for a reshuffle.
Of policies.
Every Lab person on the airwaves has said how Lab must change. But none has answered the question - what was wrong before and what would you do different in future.
Yes, the leader is important. So is the team. Also the tone, the visuals, message discipline, media management, organization, all of that. But policies are key. They'll tell us (I hope) what Labour under Starmer are about. It's a massive challenge - with the WWC going bad - but it's also a great opportunity. I'm really looking forward to seeing what comes forth. I'm going to submit some ideas myself, in fact. I have some terrific ones.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
"Risks" is putting it mildly. That's arguably the single biggest factor behind the Tories losing Oxfordshire yesterday.
HMG is at least talking about building in the north, though the risk is that a bonfire of regulations will mean more ticky-tacky in the south-east. Investment in new housing and even new towns should be directed up north and wherever else the local economy needs rejuvenation.
Up North we don't need houses - that's a southern issue.
There is a simple test to housing - are houses prices above 2004 levels - if so you haven't built enough.
Surely there are towns where you can find an entire street given away in a box of cornflakes? HMG should refurbish or replace them and then (almost) give them away, in order to stimulate the local economy.
In the south-east and particularly in London there are huge distortions caused by posh homes being bought off plan as investments, often from overseas, displacing people outwards if they are left empty or replacing ownership with private tenancies.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Give over. Thats a sticking plaster at best. The towns deal at best pays for one project in one of the winning towns. And "levelling up funds" are what exactly? These areas needed hosing with cash - happened because of Covid and wouldn't have happened otherwise.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
Bishop Auckland lost out on the Towns deal fund because it had a whole pile of projects it wanted the money for and couldn't justify one above the others (mainly because the Auckland Project is liked and disliked in equal measure so the projects couldn't be just centred either around it nor away from it)
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
20 allegations imply it's not a big problem that people are caring about.
Now NI does have a similar scheme already but it did have historic problems with fraud so it was required. Here it seems completely pointless and creates a silo.
If Boris / the Tories want a photo ID card could they kindly just ask for it - I can see a pile of reasons for having them provided the rules are properly set over who can use it to access exactly what.
Given the effort taken by the police not to record a crime when my flat mate had his vote stolen in Tower Hill, it is quite surprising that *any* fraud was "found".
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
The problem was that people kept turning out to vote Labour. Patel might want to rethink this scheme to disenfranchise the poor now that they are largely voting Tory.
A new shadow is struggling on R4. Gabbling nonsense frankly under pressure from Robinson.
A cracking start then...
Yes, heard it. Not great. Time for a reshuffle.
Of policies.
Every Lab person on the airwaves has said how Lab must change. But none has answered the question - what was wrong before and what would you do different in future.
Yes, the leader is important. So is the team. Also the tone, the visuals, message discipline, media management, organization, all of that. But policies are key. They'll tell us (I hope) what Labour under Starmer are about. It's a massive challenge - with the WWC going bad - but it's also a great opportunity. I'm really looking forward to seeing what comes forth. I'm going to submit some ideas myself, in fact. I have some terrific ones.
Can hardly wait. Forget the hugging thing.
What did Lab do wrong previously that you would have them change?
Anyway the big news today and I hope everyone is looking forward to it as much as I am - the Prime Minister telling us whether we are going to be allowed to hug our families.
Be still my beating heart...
Haven't seen my parents in 15 months. Expected them to die if they got Covid. Trust me, there are many of us whose heart is absolutely beating at the prospect of a hug from their mum.
For those on Twitter, there's a hacking scam going around. Looks like official support is asking for details (having been hacked) and you'll be screwed if you give them.
Comments
You take the knee for your Sovereign and the woman you wish to marry. Anything else is a sign of immense weakness and cowardice.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
A cracking start then...
And the reason is this: all the evidence we have suggests he has no ability to lead the party toward recovery.
He’s terrible on TV: robotic, banal, insincere, slightly fearful.
His candidate selection in Hartlepool, and his farcical “reshuffle” shows he can’t do strategy or tactics. He has no political cunning.
He’s done us all a great service by ejecting Corbyn and removing the anti-semitic stain from Labour, but he now needs to step aside.
He’s not up to it.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
In short, anti-SNP tactical voting by unionist voters denied the SNP an overall majority.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/scottish-election-2021-how-the-snp-was-denied-a-majority-by-tactical-voting-professor-john-curtice-3230002
Wallpapergate is not about wallpaper.
The problem could be that Sir Keir Starmer is simply not a politician after all
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/05/10/problem-could-sir-keir-starmer-simply-not-politician/
The European Cup Final should of course be held at Wembley - although I have rather good memories of the last time it was held in Istanbul!
But yep this is one of the more common fraud types within that industry. It's by no means the worst scheme however I've seen a few recently where the paperwork sent to HMRC bears zero relationship to what the worker is being sent.
Literally everything looks above board until HMRC trigger a report and goes hang on......
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
There is great variety in the North.
I don't think that Starmer has any particular interest in or empathy towards northern towns.
That's not unusual among London based politicians - neither did Blair or Brown or the Cameroons or many of the Labour MPs who were given seats in them, the Milibands and Balls-Coopers for example.
But the Conservatives are (or at least seem to be) and they have a number of northern MPs now who certainly are.
She should have insisted on a big portfolio
The real targets should be the directors of G4S, for what’s clearly intended as tax evasion.
It's not too early for me to bet against who will be next PM, and that's where I'm focussing my main effort. I will switch tact about Autumn/Winter 2022.
What I am most pleased about from Thursday is that those deprived areas which have voted Labour en masse for decades and yet have remain deprived have finally realised that having a Labour Council has not helped them.
I defintely live in one of the weirdest Council areas, Eastleigh. We have a Tory MP with a majority of 15,500, Yet of the 39 seats on the Council the tories hold just 2 and the Lib Dems 32. Work that one out.
If Labour win Batley & Spen we'll see (1) turn into (2) on the head of a pin.
I doubt if a less 'crucial' meeting will be happening all month.
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
And the number of positive tests is also increasing.
Fortunately with the vaccination program such a success it will have little effect.
But I wonder if the zero covid sociopaths will demand a continuation of restrictions.
I do think there is a social values disconnection between Labour and their erstwhile supporters who can feel the party is no longer on their side. It is not principally about Brexit, or race, however. It is a politically fatal mistake to dismiss as racist those people who have voted for BAME (sorry) Home Secretary and Chancellor of the Exchequer, let alone a part-Turkish Prime Minister. And Brexit is only relevant as a reminder that it was principally not Boris but Dominic Cummings who first reengaged many disadvantaged voters.
We've said on here before that our PM comes across as someone with whom it would fun to have a drink.
Until it came to his turn to pay.
And Good Morning all.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
Loads of people (I suspect) would vote Green in local election but not a GE. Look at the pattern of Euro election voting (now history of course). Didn't the Tories get 9% recently? (Full disclosure: I generally vote Labour in local but not General elections).
The real organisers are sat in Malta / Cyprus with their name no where near any of this.
If so we should open up fully (internally).
In the neighbouring Council Southampton, which is much more working class with large Council Estates in Thornhill, Weston, Northam & Millbrook, the tories made big gains and now control the Council. Its hard to compute.
Now let's look at Johnson, Anything that is not pre-scripted is punctuated with "ums" and "errs". He cannot react to a question, either with reality or bulls""t, the interviewer is often met with silence and a blank expression. Some of Johnson's scripted speeches are OK, others appear to have been written by Eric Cantona. But all this is not a weakness apparantly, it is a strength.
I expected Hartlepool but not by such a margin. I've therefore revised my next GE ratings a bit.
Con maj 60%
Hung parl 33%
Lab maj 7%
The housing problem is waay more complicated than just planning.
The solution is for the government to get back into the game of housebuilding.
As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
Voter ID: An Expensive Distraction
The government plans to spend millions banning people who don't have the right ID from voting.
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/upgrading-our-democracy/voter-id/
There is a simple test to housing - are houses prices above 2004 levels - if so you haven't built enough.
I hope someone is preparing a book.
Every Lab person on the airwaves has said how Lab must change. But none has answered the question - what was wrong before and what would you do different in future.
Vaccination plus booster appears to generate a more robust immune response than does prior infection. Prior infection followed by a single vaccine dose has a similar effect.
Be still my beating heart...
At the very height of the MP's expenses scandal -- flipping second homes, duck houses & moats, wallpaper and curtains, Chaytor, Moran & Devine -- he said to me:
"This is not corruption. You guys don't even understand what real corruption is."
OK, there were some MPs, who did some silly things, some little dodges, tiny acts of grift, fiddling the photocopying receipts, employing the relatives.
Not good, I agree. But, that is not what real corruption is.
It is possible that the Labour can get the Tories on corruption, but if so, it won't be on silly little things, like Wallpaper-gate. To compare Watergate to Wallpaper-gate is to misunderstand grossly what corruption is.
What Cameron did is corrupt. Or stupid. Or both.
Any yet again, there is plenty of real corruption in Corruption Bay, where the Labour party presides over the only the UK Parliament without a register of lobbyists, and has done for over a quarter of a century.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
Yes, good morning.
I can *speculate* about how the published Tory policies would have played out. A significant number of people other than me have commentated on the transformation in Tory fiscal policies. That transformation plainly has an impact on how people see the government.
Edit: sorry Giray Khan.
Menghu is his surname.
This is important because it means the cycle of elections for some councils can be continuously out of step with the overall feeling of the area. Council elections get 30% ish and general election high 60% turnouts. Only the committed come out with a well organised gotv to get anyone else needed.
Until Corbyn the pattern was normally governing party at Westminster does well in constituencies it holds when the election is held to coincide with the general election, might do ok or hold own the following year, but years two three and four of the government are often really tough.
If your council elects only every four years, its good luck when you get a GE, but more often then not you are fighting the pasty tax or a 50p increase in pensions.
The counter, if you elect in thirds it’s even more difficult. Because not only is your chance of success limited by only a third of councillors been available for that one good year, there is a chance that the general election is held on one of the fallow years in which the GE doesn’t take place.
Corbyn changed all this as the pattern of opposition parties, no matter how unsuitable for government (think Hague, ids, miliband) would still make huge gains.
Up until very early this year it was expected the pattern with SKS was going to be the order of massive gains, not Corbyn style dislike.
His biggest problem now is that, once people have settled on a view of a new leader - generally towards the end of their first year - it is exceptionally difficult for them to reinvent themselves in the public mind
You must be quite disappointed by the Welsh results?
I have a feeling your ideal result would have had ALL parties move backwards somewhat. Instead, Drake has wind in his sails and you’re stuck with RT for the foreseeable too.
Will PC dump Price?
What ministry will Llafur give Dodds, if any?
Now NI does have a similar scheme already but it did have historic problems with fraud so it was required. Here it seems completely pointless and creates a silo.
If Boris / the Tories want a photo ID card could they kindly just ask for it - I can see a pile of reasons for having them provided the rules are properly set over who can use it to access exactly what.
So we either engage head on and reshape a country that works. Or we deploy the HYUFD / Craft Cockney / Leon approach and tell Scotland they can't have it and thus make independence inevitable.
Is it something like the King of France?
...
On 18 Apr I posted that I'd backed Reeves at 50/1 for Next Labour Leader (as a trading bet at least) as I'd noticed that she was raising her profile significantly. The price reduced to a top-priced 25/1 a day or two later. I commented that if she was made Shadow Chancellor the price would fall further. Despite her appointment yesterday this hasn't yet happened, at least with a couple of bookies who still have her at 25/1. I've topped up on her at those odds this morning.
Burnham heads the market at a top-priced 7/2. This is a clear lay*. He is surely committed as mayor for three years which takes us up to the latest possible date for the next GE. If Starmer resigns or is ousted prior to the GE Burnham cannot succeed him. If Starmer contests the GE and loses he would probably resign but Burnham would not be in a position to succeed then either (should he even want to) because he would have to wait for a winnable by-election. 7/2 is ridiculously short unless you think that Burnham will decide to resign his mayoral position mid- term - and even then he would have to be selected and win a by-election.
*edit: can lay at 6.8 with BF and Smarkets, but market is thin.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
In the south-east and particularly in London there are huge distortions caused by posh homes being bought off plan as investments, often from overseas, displacing people outwards if they are left empty or replacing ownership with private tenancies.
What did Lab do wrong previously that you would have them change?
For those on Twitter, there's a hacking scam going around. Looks like official support is asking for details (having been hacked) and you'll be screwed if you give them.
https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1391651387256229889