Chesham & Amersham is the third-least deprived constituency in the country according to this table. CHB's backyard of NE Hampshire is number two, with Wokingham at number one.
Lib Dems need a informal pact with Labour and the Greens, if they are to have a serious chance of taking Amersham & Chesham.
Keir would agree this, too, but only if he realised that it shows a determination to actually win the next election. Which he doesn’t.
2019 Results:
Con, 55.4 LDm, 26.3 Lab, 12.9 Grn, 5.5
To win, the Liberals need to pick up, say, 20% of the Tory vote and 50% of the Lab/Green vote.
V difficult.
Labour has to fight Chesham seriously. Obviously it has no chance of winning or even finishing second but there is a serious risk of it finishing fourth, behind the Greens. Given that Batley is far from a banker to hold, to be beaten by the Greens in C&A would just add to the narrative of a party going nowhere (or backwards).
By the way, there is another parliamentary by-election next week, in a seat Labour needs to win if it's serious about recovering in Scotland (they came within 200 votes in 2017).
Surely they treat Chesham & Amersham like they did Newbury and Christchurch by elections in 1993 where they polled 2% in each.
If they were double-digits ahead in the opinion polls and winning other elections happily - and were the Greens not taking core Labour votes in a worryingly large number of places - yes. But Labour doesn't have that luxury at the moment.
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Not that I buy it, but I happened to glance at a copy of the Sunday Express yesterday. There was some gushing coverage of her. Presumably she's already grooming the editorial staff.
A single dose of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine lowers a person’s risk of death from Covid-19 by 80 per cent - a figure that rises to 97 per cent for two shots of the Pfizer jab, new analysis shows.
The latest data, from Public Health England, further highlights the effectiveness of the UK’s two main vaccines in protecting against coronavirus. According to estimates, the jabs have already saved at least 10,000 lives since the beginning of the rollout.
Separate analysis from PHE also confirms that one dose of the AstraZeneca or Pfizer vaccine is highly effective in reducing the risk of hospitalisation, especially in those aged 70 and over.
Nothing controversial about making such a claim on this occasion.
I don't think you win "off" anyone . I think the word is "from".
You do if the ball bounces off them into the goal, etc. I suppose the psephological equivalent wouild be to win off a Tory/UKIP or Tory/Labour split. Not so easy now.
On topic, I think there's a difference in the voting behaviour of those who voted Remain for economic reasons as opposed to values reasons.
On the Tory side, particularly in the Shires, they tend more to the former and therefore, as the four horsemen of the apocalypse fail to materialise, it will tend to decrease in salience over time.
I think this is far less so for Labour who have (perhaps unintentionally) ending up radicalising their voting coalition over Brexit, and the Liberal Democrats still want to turn it up to eleven.
Yes, there's a tendency to assume everyone who voted Remain is as furious as Gina Miller. Many, if not most remainers, voted Remain as they saw it as the low-risk or most mainstream option, rather than because of any great cultural identity with the EU. That said, when we say the Leave/Remain divide is not just about Brexit, that's true of the shires as well as the red wall. There are a lot (and some of them are here) of broadly Cameroony Tories whose ambivalence to the current lot is not just (or even primarily) about Brexit. If the Lib Dems can stop banging on about transsexuals and siding with the French when we are in disputes with them, they should be well-placed to hoover up votes where Cameroonies were most common.
Seats which voted for Cameron in 2010 and 2015 but now have LD MPs eg Oxford West and Abingdon, Richmond Park, Kingston and Surbiton, Twickenham, Bath, St Albans etc tend to be amongst the wealthiest, most educated and poshest in the country.
They voted Remain largely for economic reasons and are fiscally conservative but socially liberal (ie the opposite of Northern and Midlands Redwall seats). As the Tories increasingly move to RedWall values they have left a gap in other similar Cameroon Remain seats like Tunbridge Wells, Cheltenham, Guildford, Henley, Esher and Walton as last week's results showed and they are where the LDs will be focusing on
Doesn't help the Labour Party of course
It does as the LDs are more likely to back Starmer's Labour Party over Boris' Tories if 2024 produces a hung parliament
That's what people said in 2009.
If LD seats are in Cameroon areas, then even in a Hung Parliament it might end up depending upon the results like it did in 2010. Especially now Brexit won't be an issue anymore.
Davey was comfortable in the Coalition.
LD voters and LD members want to return to the single market or as closely aligned to it as possible, there is no prospect of that under Boris who LDs hate in a way they did not hate Cameron, the LDs will back Labour now Corbyn has gone whoever has most seats.
The Tories have to win another majority or enough seats to stay in government with the DUP in 2024 to remain in office
Davey is not LD members.
If the Tories end up significantly north of 300 MPs but shy of a majority, then its entirely possible a Rishi or other led Tory Party could get at the very least Confidence from Davey's LDs. They might claim Boris's scalp as part of the agreement, a price the Tories would pay to maintain control of Downing Street.
Davey would face an immediate vote of confidence if he did that and likely lose the leadership to say Layla Moran.
In any case the price of LD support would be single market membership or as close as possible to it which no Tory leader could agree for a generation as it would mean immediately loss of the Red Wall seats again and mass defections of Leave voters back to Reform UK and UKIP
I seriously doubt the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market membership unless things were looking economically glum. It would result in too much upheaval AGAIN.
The LDs whole core message at the moment is based on being anti Boris' 'hard Brexit' which is why they voted against his Brexit deal, of course they would refuse to support the Tories if there was anything less than single market alignment and it is absurd to suggest otherwise. They would lose almost all their voters to Labour and the Greens if they did not
Do we know what the LD's "core" national message is right now?
I voted Lib Dems on Thursday and there was no mention of "Brexit" on any literature.
It was a local election, based on the local LD message of no new housing anywhere at any time
Yes. So I disagree with you. I don't think the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market alignment unless the economy was looking rocky. If the economy is booming, even the most ardent remainers are going to be talking about other things. You're discussing the last war.
LD voters nationally and LD members are ideologically anti Brexit and ideologically anti Boris' Brexit in particular, if they were not they would be voting Tory.
It does not matter what the economy looks like in 2024, they will not support the Tories unless they move to a softer Brexit deal with the EU at minimum
Rubbish. Brexit is over. It's done. They may not support the Tories because they are anti Boris but that doesn't mean they want to reopen the can of worms.
If Brexit is by and large going well by 2024, there will be no demand for single market or whatever, the focus will be on other issues.
Why are they anti Boris? As they are anti his Brexit Deal mainly.
That is the defining issue which differentiates the LDs from the Tories at the moment, opposition to a hard Brexit, they are not going to back down on that and it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
To stay in power in a hung parliament the Tories would have to win over the DUP again and try and remove the border in the Irish Sea, the LDs will not touch them with a bargepole while they remain a party of hard Brexit under Boris
Well I think you're wrong.
It's not just Brexit, it's everything surrounding Brexit and the political realignment that has occured. I think that once the immigration system has bedded in and trade has stabilised with the EU, no party will be proposing to rip it up and start again. It will be mere tinkering around the edges, and perhaps a change to the NI protocol, but that's it. Maybe we'll join Erasmus and have closer integration in some areas, but no wholesale change.
Of course if the economy is in the doldrums, then all bets are off.
So on that basis you think the LDs will effectively merge themselves into the Tories too then
Are you that lacking in imagination that "Brexit" is the only differentiator you can fathom between the Conservative Party and the Lib Dems?
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
On topic, I think there's a difference in the voting behaviour of those who voted Remain for economic reasons as opposed to values reasons.
On the Tory side, particularly in the Shires, they tend more to the former and therefore, as the four horsemen of the apocalypse fail to materialise, it will tend to decrease in salience over time.
I think this is far less so for Labour who have (perhaps unintentionally) ending up radicalising their voting coalition over Brexit, and the Liberal Democrats still want to turn it up to eleven.
Yes, there's a tendency to assume everyone who voted Remain is as furious as Gina Miller. Many, if not most remainers, voted Remain as they saw it as the low-risk or most mainstream option, rather than because of any great cultural identity with the EU. That said, when we say the Leave/Remain divide is not just about Brexit, that's true of the shires as well as the red wall. There are a lot (and some of them are here) of broadly Cameroony Tories whose ambivalence to the current lot is not just (or even primarily) about Brexit. If the Lib Dems can stop banging on about transsexuals and siding with the French when we are in disputes with them, they should be well-placed to hoover up votes where Cameroonies were most common.
Seats which voted for Cameron in 2010 and 2015 but now have LD MPs eg Oxford West and Abingdon, Richmond Park, Kingston and Surbiton, Twickenham, Bath, St Albans etc tend to be amongst the wealthiest, most educated and poshest in the country.
They voted Remain largely for economic reasons and are fiscally conservative but socially liberal (ie the opposite of Northern and Midlands Redwall seats). As the Tories increasingly move to RedWall values they have left a gap in other similar Cameroon Remain seats like Tunbridge Wells, Cheltenham, Guildford, Henley, Esher and Walton as last week's results showed and they are where the LDs will be focusing on
Doesn't help the Labour Party of course
It does as the LDs are more likely to back Starmer's Labour Party over Boris' Tories if 2024 produces a hung parliament
That's what people said in 2009.
If LD seats are in Cameroon areas, then even in a Hung Parliament it might end up depending upon the results like it did in 2010. Especially now Brexit won't be an issue anymore.
Davey was comfortable in the Coalition.
LD voters and LD members want to return to the single market or as closely aligned to it as possible, there is no prospect of that under Boris who LDs hate in a way they did not hate Cameron, the LDs will back Labour now Corbyn has gone whoever has most seats.
The Tories have to win another majority or enough seats to stay in government with the DUP in 2024 to remain in office
Davey is not LD members.
If the Tories end up significantly north of 300 MPs but shy of a majority, then its entirely possible a Rishi or other led Tory Party could get at the very least Confidence from Davey's LDs. They might claim Boris's scalp as part of the agreement, a price the Tories would pay to maintain control of Downing Street.
Davey would face an immediate vote of confidence if he did that and likely lose the leadership to say Layla Moran.
In any case the price of LD support would be single market membership or as close as possible to it which no Tory leader could agree for a generation as it would mean immediately loss of the Red Wall seats again and mass defections of Leave voters back to Reform UK and UKIP
I seriously doubt the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market membership unless things were looking economically glum. It would result in too much upheaval AGAIN.
The LDs whole core message at the moment is based on being anti Boris' 'hard Brexit' which is why they voted against his Brexit deal, of course they would refuse to support the Tories if there was anything less than single market alignment and it is absurd to suggest otherwise. They would lose almost all their voters to Labour and the Greens if they did not
Do we know what the LD's "core" national message is right now?
I voted Lib Dems on Thursday and there was no mention of "Brexit" on any literature.
It was a local election, based on the local LD message of no new housing anywhere at any time
Yes. So I disagree with you. I don't think the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market alignment unless the economy was looking rocky. If the economy is booming, even the most ardent remainers are going to be talking about other things. You're discussing the last war.
LD voters nationally and LD members are ideologically anti Brexit and ideologically anti Boris' Brexit in particular, if they were not they would be voting Tory.
It does not matter what the economy looks like in 2024, they will not support the Tories unless they move to a softer Brexit deal with the EU at minimum
Rubbish. Brexit is over. It's done. They may not support the Tories because they are anti Boris but that doesn't mean they want to reopen the can of worms.
If Brexit is by and large going well by 2024, there will be no demand for single market or whatever, the focus will be on other issues.
Why are they anti Boris? As they are anti his Brexit Deal mainly.
That is the defining issue which differentiates the LDs from the Tories at the moment, opposition to a hard Brexit, they are not going to back down on that and it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
To stay in power in a hung parliament the Tories would have to win over the DUP again and try and remove the border in the Irish Sea, the LDs will not touch them with a bargepole while they remain a party of hard Brexit under Boris
Well I think you're wrong.
It's not just Brexit, it's everything surrounding Brexit and the political realignment that has occured. I think that once the immigration system has bedded in and trade has stabilised with the EU, no party will be proposing to rip it up and start again. It will be mere tinkering around the edges, and perhaps a change to the NI protocol, but that's it. Maybe we'll join Erasmus and have closer integration in some areas, but no wholesale change.
Of course if the economy is in the doldrums, then all bets are off.
So on that basis you think the LDs will effectively merge themselves into the Tories too then
Are you that lacking in imagination that "Brexit" is the only differentiator you can fathom between the Conservative Party and the Lib Dems?
At the moment as far as I can see it effectively is nationally, bar the LDs opposed compulsory vaccine passports which the government did not introduce anyway
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
Lib Dems need a informal pact with Labour and the Greens, if they are to have a serious chance of taking Amersham & Chesham.
Keir would agree this, too, but only if he realised that it shows a determination to actually win the next election. Which he doesn’t.
2019 Results:
Con, 55.4 LDm, 26.3 Lab, 12.9 Grn, 5.5
To win, the Liberals need to pick up, say, 20% of the Tory vote and 50% of the Lab/Green vote.
V difficult.
Labour has to fight Chesham seriously. Obviously it has no chance of winning or even finishing second but there is a serious risk of it finishing fourth, behind the Greens. Given that Batley is far from a banker to hold, to be beaten by the Greens in C&A would just add to the narrative of a party going nowhere (or backwards).
By the way, there is another parliamentary by-election next week, in a seat Labour needs to win if it's serious about recovering in Scotland (they came within 200 votes in 2017).
Surely they treat Chesham & Amersham like they did Newbury and Christchurch by elections in 1993 where they polled 2% in each.
If they were double-digits ahead in the opinion polls and winning other elections happily - and were the Greens not taking core Labour votes in a worryingly large number of places - yes. But Labour doesn't have that luxury at the moment.
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Labour does not have the luxury of ignoring the Lib Dems. A Labour government without them is beyond unlikely.
all university students to return to in person teaching.
Term has all but finished
Yes. My eldest has finished a 3 year degree. Slightly less than 5 of the 9 scheduled terms...
I have exams starting Wednesday and finish next week...
Best of luck with them! Eldest didn't even get that. First year exams only. My youngest has the most GCSE's in the family despite never sitting an exam.
Well done! Eagerly awaiting my appointment. Hoping that I'll be able to book my second within a few weeks too.
Not to play one-up on you, Max, but I've had my 2nd jab now and am therefore pretty much immune. And what a boost it gives you. I feel so strong, so powerful. Gonna go out there soon and give all the people a big fat kiss. I'll kiss the men, I'll kiss the beautiful women, I'll kiss EVERYONE on the Finchley Road!
Careful, there's some very dodgy people on Finchley Road.
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She has already gone
I am surprised at that.
It's a mayoral + PCC role and the PCC element precludes double jobbing (apparently).
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
1) She's already gone
2) Not a good precedent, because the law prohibits her from being concurrently an MP and West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She legally couldn't stay as an MP, even if she hadn't already quit.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
I'd love to know if the Bolton outbreak is spreading amongst the vaxxed or the unvaxxed. If it's the unvaxxed and they've been eligible, it's their own stupid fault.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
1) She's already gone
2) Not a good precedent, because the law prohibits here from being concurrently an MP and West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She legally couldn't stay as an MP, even if she hadn't already quit.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She legally couldn't stay as an MP, even if she hadn't already quit.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
That's fine as long as Portugal doesn't also get red listed.
I am surprised nobody has pointed out how stupid it is that Spain is on the red list, but Portugal and Gibraltar aren't, so it is trivial to go on holiday to Spain if you choose to do so.
"About 2,000 serving French military personnel have signed a letter to President Macron warning that France is on the brink of collapse and civil war because the state has “surrendered” to radical Muslims.
The online letter follows an incendiary threat of a possible military takeover two weeks ago from 20 retired generals and hundreds of former officers that was backed by Marine Le Pen, the far right leader. The armed forces are taking disciplinary action against 20 serving personnel who signed the first letter." (£)
I usually defend the press, but these questions are so poor... who will you hug first, ffs... will anyone push him on the late red flagging of India given the jump in variant numbers...
The option of moving the Champions League final to Portugal instead of Wembley Stadium is looking increasingly likely after talks between Uefa and the British government failed to overcome some major issues.
Lib Dems need a informal pact with Labour and the Greens, if they are to have a serious chance of taking Amersham & Chesham.
Keir would agree this, too, but only if he realised that it shows a determination to actually win the next election. Which he doesn’t.
2019 Results:
Con, 55.4 LDm, 26.3 Lab, 12.9 Grn, 5.5
To win, the Liberals need to pick up, say, 20% of the Tory vote and 50% of the Lab/Green vote.
V difficult.
Labour has to fight Chesham seriously. Obviously it has no chance of winning or even finishing second but there is a serious risk of it finishing fourth, behind the Greens. Given that Batley is far from a banker to hold, to be beaten by the Greens in C&A would just add to the narrative of a party going nowhere (or backwards).
By the way, there is another parliamentary by-election next week, in a seat Labour needs to win if it's serious about recovering in Scotland (they came within 200 votes in 2017).
Surely they treat Chesham & Amersham like they did Newbury and Christchurch by elections in 1993 where they polled 2% in each.
If they were double-digits ahead in the opinion polls and winning other elections happily - and were the Greens not taking core Labour votes in a worryingly large number of places - yes. But Labour doesn't have that luxury at the moment.
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Though 'Ravindra Gupta, professor of clinical microbiology at the University of Cambridge and one of the study’s authors, told a press conference on Monday the variant discovered in India has mutations that "enable immune escape" and that "we should be assuming it’s as transmissible" as the one first identified in the UK. To be sure, the vaccines "will still protect against severe disease,” he added.'
I'd love to know if the Bolton outbreak is spreading amongst the vaxxed or the unvaxxed. If it's the unvaxxed and they've been eligible, it's their own stupid fault.
What utter bollocks as usual from Zero Hedge, from the WHO scientist they quote.
I have been misquoted. I said B1.617 is more transmissible, based on which it is a VOC. There is no data on its impact on diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccine effectiveness yet. @WHO updating variant data continously
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She legally couldn't stay as an MP, even if she hadn't already quit.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
Johnson's combined his position as London Mayor and MP for Uxbridge & South Ruislip for more than a year - May 2015 - May 2016 . That gives Brabin a good precedent were she inclined to delay her departure.
She legally couldn't stay as an MP, even if she hadn't already quit.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
Thanks for that!
The situation is quite opaque. The role of the PCC is 'subsumed' in that of the mayor but she can choose a deputy who will provide assistance. What I think this means is that the Mayor is the legal officer but the deputy effectively is in operational charge by giving a policy framework to the Chief Constable. Each of the candidates made public their choice of deputy before the election. I need to check but I think Brabin nominated the existing PCC.
In the Times Radio interview (Does anyone else follow them on twitter? Interesting stuff on there) John Curtice says Labour under Starmer have become too Conservative, and worried about upsetting voters, whilst Boris's Tories are radicals who are prepared to piss off their usual voters to get things done.
Seems fair to me, but the biggest change in politics in my lifetime, one that I am no closer to understanding now that at any other time, is that the Labour Party, in allowing Freedom of Movement to the A8, put the low paid jobs of those the party was set up to look out for out to tender to millions of people who had a huge incentive to undercut them.
Labour basically deregulated the Labour market in a way no right wing, free marketeer could have dreamed of getting away with, opening up gold mines for exploitative capitalists to the detriment of the working class, and their refusal to admit they made a mistake, or that it was any kind of big deal - let alone apologise - has led to Old Etonian, Bullingdon Boy Boris ripping through the northern heartlands like a bushfire.
Curtice is right that pretending it never happened is not an option for Labour. How on earth they put the bloke in charge who was trying to stop the Leave vote being respected beggars belief
Much truth in this. Assume for a moment that voters are sorts of spectrums, which can be described in a number of ways: from richest to poorest, from PhD to no qualifications; Remain and Rejoin to Ardent Hard Brexit and so on.
To win general elections you need 40%+ of the spectrum to vote for you. More people cluster round the middle of the spectrum than anywhere else - that's a general law of maths and reality - we are mostly middling sorts.
The best way of getting 40%+ to vote for you it to be around the middle, and you can shift your centre a fair way either side of the middle depending on circumstances.
That's what Tories do. The hostility to them comes from some but not all of the ends of the spectrums: least and highest educated, most urban, richest and poorest, most remainy, the loony left the fascist right. None of it comes from the centre.
IMHO they have shifted focus to move their spectrum so as to gain a lot of WWC and to lose Putney and Cambridge, but still occupy a central piece of the spectrum - from Henley to Hartlepool. All their opponents occupy smaller and detached chunks.
One of the best examples is the West Midlands. For instance, Sutton Coldfield and Cannock Chase have totally different demographics but they're now both very safe Tory seats. Solihull and Newcastle-under-Lyme are another such pairing.
What utter bollocks as usual from Zero Hedge, from the WHO scientist they quote.
I have been misquoted. I said B1.617 is more transmissible, based on which it is a VOC. There is no data on its impact on diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccine effectiveness yet. @WHO updating variant data continously
What utter bollocks as usual from Zero Hedge, from the WHO scientist they quote.
I have been misquoted. I said B1.617 is more transmissible, based on which it is a VOC. There is no data on its impact on diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccine effectiveness yet. @WHO updating variant data continously
Lib Dems need a informal pact with Labour and the Greens, if they are to have a serious chance of taking Amersham & Chesham.
Keir would agree this, too, but only if he realised that it shows a determination to actually win the next election. Which he doesn’t.
2019 Results:
Con, 55.4 LDm, 26.3 Lab, 12.9 Grn, 5.5
To win, the Liberals need to pick up, say, 20% of the Tory vote and 50% of the Lab/Green vote.
V difficult.
Labour has to fight Chesham seriously. Obviously it has no chance of winning or even finishing second but there is a serious risk of it finishing fourth, behind the Greens. Given that Batley is far from a banker to hold, to be beaten by the Greens in C&A would just add to the narrative of a party going nowhere (or backwards).
By the way, there is another parliamentary by-election next week, in a seat Labour needs to win if it's serious about recovering in Scotland (they came within 200 votes in 2017).
Surely they treat Chesham & Amersham like they did Newbury and Christchurch by elections in 1993 where they polled 2% in each.
If they were double-digits ahead in the opinion polls and winning other elections happily - and were the Greens not taking core Labour votes in a worryingly large number of places - yes. But Labour doesn't have that luxury at the moment.
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Labour does not have the luxury of ignoring the Lib Dems. A Labour government without them is beyond unlikely.
Who is Labour's candidate in Airdrie and Shotts? A Momentum type, a Paul Williams type, or someone who might be electorally attractive?
On topic, I think there's a difference in the voting behaviour of those who voted Remain for economic reasons as opposed to values reasons.
On the Tory side, particularly in the Shires, they tend more to the former and therefore, as the four horsemen of the apocalypse fail to materialise, it will tend to decrease in salience over time.
I think this is far less so for Labour who have (perhaps unintentionally) ending up radicalising their voting coalition over Brexit, and the Liberal Democrats still want to turn it up to eleven.
Yes, there's a tendency to assume everyone who voted Remain is as furious as Gina Miller. Many, if not most remainers, voted Remain as they saw it as the low-risk or most mainstream option, rather than because of any great cultural identity with the EU. That said, when we say the Leave/Remain divide is not just about Brexit, that's true of the shires as well as the red wall. There are a lot (and some of them are here) of broadly Cameroony Tories whose ambivalence to the current lot is not just (or even primarily) about Brexit. If the Lib Dems can stop banging on about transsexuals and siding with the French when we are in disputes with them, they should be well-placed to hoover up votes where Cameroonies were most common.
Seats which voted for Cameron in 2010 and 2015 but now have LD MPs eg Oxford West and Abingdon, Richmond Park, Kingston and Surbiton, Twickenham, Bath, St Albans etc tend to be amongst the wealthiest, most educated and poshest in the country.
They voted Remain largely for economic reasons and are fiscally conservative but socially liberal (ie the opposite of Northern and Midlands Redwall seats). As the Tories increasingly move to RedWall values they have left a gap in other similar Cameroon Remain seats like Tunbridge Wells, Cheltenham, Guildford, Henley, Esher and Walton as last week's results showed and they are where the LDs will be focusing on
Doesn't help the Labour Party of course
It does as the LDs are more likely to back Starmer's Labour Party over Boris' Tories if 2024 produces a hung parliament
That's what people said in 2009.
If LD seats are in Cameroon areas, then even in a Hung Parliament it might end up depending upon the results like it did in 2010. Especially now Brexit won't be an issue anymore.
Davey was comfortable in the Coalition.
LD voters and LD members want to return to the single market or as closely aligned to it as possible, there is no prospect of that under Boris who LDs hate in a way they did not hate Cameron, the LDs will back Labour now Corbyn has gone whoever has most seats.
The Tories have to win another majority or enough seats to stay in government with the DUP in 2024 to remain in office
Davey is not LD members.
If the Tories end up significantly north of 300 MPs but shy of a majority, then its entirely possible a Rishi or other led Tory Party could get at the very least Confidence from Davey's LDs. They might claim Boris's scalp as part of the agreement, a price the Tories would pay to maintain control of Downing Street.
Davey would face an immediate vote of confidence if he did that and likely lose the leadership to say Layla Moran.
In any case the price of LD support would be single market membership or as close as possible to it which no Tory leader could agree for a generation as it would mean immediately loss of the Red Wall seats again and mass defections of Leave voters back to Reform UK and UKIP
I seriously doubt the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market membership unless things were looking economically glum. It would result in too much upheaval AGAIN.
The LDs whole core message at the moment is based on being anti Boris' 'hard Brexit' which is why they voted against his Brexit deal, of course they would refuse to support the Tories if there was anything less than single market alignment and it is absurd to suggest otherwise. They would lose almost all their voters to Labour and the Greens if they did not
Do we know what the LD's "core" national message is right now?
I voted Lib Dems on Thursday and there was no mention of "Brexit" on any literature.
It was a local election, based on the local LD message of no new housing anywhere at any time
Yes. So I disagree with you. I don't think the LDs would arbitrarily ask for single market alignment unless the economy was looking rocky. If the economy is booming, even the most ardent remainers are going to be talking about other things. You're discussing the last war.
LD voters nationally and LD members are ideologically anti Brexit and ideologically anti Boris' Brexit in particular, if they were not they would be voting Tory.
It does not matter what the economy looks like in 2024, they will not support the Tories unless they move to a softer Brexit deal with the EU at minimum
Rubbish. Brexit is over. It's done. They may not support the Tories because they are anti Boris but that doesn't mean they want to reopen the can of worms.
If Brexit is by and large going well by 2024, there will be no demand for single market or whatever, the focus will be on other issues.
Why are they anti Boris? As they are anti his Brexit Deal mainly.
That is the defining issue which differentiates the LDs from the Tories at the moment, opposition to a hard Brexit, they are not going to back down on that and it is ludicrous to suggest otherwise.
To stay in power in a hung parliament the Tories would have to win over the DUP again and try and remove the border in the Irish Sea, the LDs will not touch them with a bargepole while they remain a party of hard Brexit under Boris
Well I think you're wrong.
It's not just Brexit, it's everything surrounding Brexit and the political realignment that has occured. I think that once the immigration system has bedded in and trade has stabilised with the EU, no party will be proposing to rip it up and start again. It will be mere tinkering around the edges, and perhaps a change to the NI protocol, but that's it. Maybe we'll join Erasmus and have closer integration in some areas, but no wholesale change.
Of course if the economy is in the doldrums, then all bets are off.
You're 100% correct. That's why there was such fire and fury over Brexit, because it was a dramatic transformation and unlikely to be one that would be refought once it was done.
If Brexit is a failure then the LDs and Labour will campaign to change things - and the Tories will be out on their ears and not get a say.
If Brexit is going well, then this is not something anyone will have the inclination to refight.
People will go into 2024 fighting new battles different to 2019. They may be tangential to Brexit issues, but they won't be refighting 2019 all over again.
To be fair to Zerohedge (yes yes, I know) it was blue-tick Indian media that first ran with this story
Even I don't believe anything on Zerohedge mate. That's where you are right now.
Then you are foolish. Sometimes Zerohedge spouts gibberish, and sometimes it gets remarkable scoops, hours before anyone else. It is an odd site, but always worth checking
In the Times Radio interview (Does anyone else follow them on twitter? Interesting stuff on there) John Curtice says Labour under Starmer have become too Conservative, and worried about upsetting voters, whilst Boris's Tories are radicals who are prepared to piss off their usual voters to get things done.
Seems fair to me, but the biggest change in politics in my lifetime, one that I am no closer to understanding now that at any other time, is that the Labour Party, in allowing Freedom of Movement to the A8, put the low paid jobs of those the party was set up to look out for out to tender to millions of people who had a huge incentive to undercut them.
Labour basically deregulated the Labour market in a way no right wing, free marketeer could have dreamed of getting away with, opening up gold mines for exploitative capitalists to the detriment of the working class, and their refusal to admit they made a mistake, or that it was any kind of big deal - let alone apologise - has led to Old Etonian, Bullingdon Boy Boris ripping through the northern heartlands like a bushfire.
Curtice is right that pretending it never happened is not an option for Labour. How on earth they put the bloke in charge who was trying to stop the Leave vote being respected beggars belief
You don't scan for me.
With your views on free movement I get completely why you'd vote Leave and then vote Tory to see it implemented. But what I don't understand, given your professed driver of concern for the material betterment of the low paid, is why you'd still now, with Brexit done, be pro-Tory and so incredibly anti-Labour.
There is no way, no way on earth, the Tories can be considered better on this issue than Labour. Just look at their respective records and manifestos since year dot. Even the Blair government who you castigate for free movement. Ok, they allowed that, but they also (against Tory opposition) brought in the minimum wage. You really think the positive impact of this on the low paid didn't dwarf that of free movement? C'mon.
It makes no sense, the way Starmer and Labour can do nothing right for you and Johnson's mob no wrong. There's something else going on. It's bugging me. So tell me please.
Hmm, I have read the opposite elsewhere that it doesn't show major immune escape and a care home which had an outbreak of this variant saw no deaths and no major symptoms with 15 infections among the vaccinated.
In the Times Radio interview (Does anyone else follow them on twitter? Interesting stuff on there) John Curtice says Labour under Starmer have become too Conservative, and worried about upsetting voters, whilst Boris's Tories are radicals who are prepared to piss off their usual voters to get things done.
Seems fair to me, but the biggest change in politics in my lifetime, one that I am no closer to understanding now that at any other time, is that the Labour Party, in allowing Freedom of Movement to the A8, put the low paid jobs of those the party was set up to look out for out to tender to millions of people who had a huge incentive to undercut them.
Labour basically deregulated the Labour market in a way no right wing, free marketeer could have dreamed of getting away with, opening up gold mines for exploitative capitalists to the detriment of the working class, and their refusal to admit they made a mistake, or that it was any kind of big deal - let alone apologise - has led to Old Etonian, Bullingdon Boy Boris ripping through the northern heartlands like a bushfire.
Curtice is right that pretending it never happened is not an option for Labour. How on earth they put the bloke in charge who was trying to stop the Leave vote being respected beggars belief
Much truth in this. Assume for a moment that voters are sorts of spectrums, which can be described in a number of ways: from richest to poorest, from PhD to no qualifications; Remain and Rejoin to Ardent Hard Brexit and so on.
To win general elections you need 40%+ of the spectrum to vote for you. More people cluster round the middle of the spectrum than anywhere else - that's a general law of maths and reality - we are mostly middling sorts.
The best way of getting 40%+ to vote for you it to be around the middle, and you can shift your centre a fair way either side of the middle depending on circumstances.
That's what Tories do. The hostility to them comes from some but not all of the ends of the spectrums: least and highest educated, most urban, richest and poorest, most remainy, the loony left the fascist right. None of it comes from the centre.
IMHO they have shifted focus to move their spectrum so as to gain a lot of WWC and to lose Putney and Cambridge, but still occupy a central piece of the spectrum - from Henley to Hartlepool. All their opponents occupy smaller and detached chunks.
One of the best examples is the West Midlands. For instance, Sutton Coldfield and Cannock Chase have totally different demographics but they're now both very safe Tory seats. Solihull and Newcastle-under-Lyme are another such pairing.
I'd like to believe that most people cluster around the centre of the Leave/Remain spectrum - yes, but... and no, but... - but that's not the perception I have, which is that everyone has firmly picked their side. Is this just a case of the loudest voices being the least representative?
Once everyone is vaxxed up, you probably want to let something like the Indian or Kent variant rip; if you lock down till a vax resistant strain is the dominant type, well that puts you back about 10 spaces.
Conservative 45% (+5) Labour 34% (-4) Liberal Democrat 8% (+1) Scottish National Party 4% (–) Green 5% (–) Reform UK 2% (-1)
Changes +/- 3 May
But, the wallpaper?
This is juvenile. Just because the public, on the whole don't care, that doesn't mean it isn't important objectively, even if it isn't important electorally. There are standards to maintain.
Hmm, I have read the opposite elsewhere that it doesn't show major immune escape and a care home which had an outbreak of this variant saw no deaths and no major symptoms with 15 infections among the vaccinated.
TSE is right, the WHO doc was misquoted. They don't have enough data yet to decide
Hmm, I have read the opposite elsewhere that it doesn't show major immune escape and a care home which had an outbreak of this variant saw no deaths and no major symptoms with 15 infections among the vaccinated.
Re the care home: all the Indian variant cases in the double vaccinated were asymptomatic. Given these were old people, with weakened immune systems, that's highly encouraging.
Hmm, I have read the opposite elsewhere that it doesn't show major immune escape and a care home which had an outbreak of this variant saw no deaths and no major symptoms with 15 infections among the vaccinated.
Yes, all the virologists/immunologists I've seen commenting have been increasingly bullish about all of the vaccines.
In the Times Radio interview (Does anyone else follow them on twitter? Interesting stuff on there) John Curtice says Labour under Starmer have become too Conservative, and worried about upsetting voters, whilst Boris's Tories are radicals who are prepared to piss off their usual voters to get things done.
Seems fair to me, but the biggest change in politics in my lifetime, one that I am no closer to understanding now that at any other time, is that the Labour Party, in allowing Freedom of Movement to the A8, put the low paid jobs of those the party was set up to look out for out to tender to millions of people who had a huge incentive to undercut them.
Labour basically deregulated the Labour market in a way no right wing, free marketeer could have dreamed of getting away with, opening up gold mines for exploitative capitalists to the detriment of the working class, and their refusal to admit they made a mistake, or that it was any kind of big deal - let alone apologise - has led to Old Etonian, Bullingdon Boy Boris ripping through the northern heartlands like a bushfire.
Curtice is right that pretending it never happened is not an option for Labour. How on earth they put the bloke in charge who was trying to stop the Leave vote being respected beggars belief
Much truth in this. Assume for a moment that voters are sorts of spectrums, which can be described in a number of ways: from richest to poorest, from PhD to no qualifications; Remain and Rejoin to Ardent Hard Brexit and so on.
To win general elections you need 40%+ of the spectrum to vote for you. More people cluster round the middle of the spectrum than anywhere else - that's a general law of maths and reality - we are mostly middling sorts.
The best way of getting 40%+ to vote for you it to be around the middle, and you can shift your centre a fair way either side of the middle depending on circumstances.
That's what Tories do. The hostility to them comes from some but not all of the ends of the spectrums: least and highest educated, most urban, richest and poorest, most remainy, the loony left the fascist right. None of it comes from the centre.
IMHO they have shifted focus to move their spectrum so as to gain a lot of WWC and to lose Putney and Cambridge, but still occupy a central piece of the spectrum - from Henley to Hartlepool. All their opponents occupy smaller and detached chunks.
One of the best examples is the West Midlands. For instance, Sutton Coldfield and Cannock Chase have totally different demographics but they're now both very safe Tory seats. Solihull and Newcastle-under-Lyme are another such pairing.
I'd like to believe that most people cluster around the centre of the Leave/Remain spectrum - yes, but... and no, but... - but that's not the perception I have, which is that everyone has firmly picked their side. Is this just a case of the loudest voices being the least representative?
Lib Dems need a informal pact with Labour and the Greens, if they are to have a serious chance of taking Amersham & Chesham.
Keir would agree this, too, but only if he realised that it shows a determination to actually win the next election. Which he doesn’t.
2019 Results:
Con, 55.4 LDm, 26.3 Lab, 12.9 Grn, 5.5
To win, the Liberals need to pick up, say, 20% of the Tory vote and 50% of the Lab/Green vote.
V difficult.
Labour has to fight Chesham seriously. Obviously it has no chance of winning or even finishing second but there is a serious risk of it finishing fourth, behind the Greens. Given that Batley is far from a banker to hold, to be beaten by the Greens in C&A would just add to the narrative of a party going nowhere (or backwards).
By the way, there is another parliamentary by-election next week, in a seat Labour needs to win if it's serious about recovering in Scotland (they came within 200 votes in 2017).
Surely they treat Chesham & Amersham like they did Newbury and Christchurch by elections in 1993 where they polled 2% in each.
If they were double-digits ahead in the opinion polls and winning other elections happily - and were the Greens not taking core Labour votes in a worryingly large number of places - yes. But Labour doesn't have that luxury at the moment.
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Labour does not have the luxury of ignoring the Lib Dems. A Labour government without them is beyond unlikely.
Who is Labour's candidate in Airdrie and Shotts? A Momentum type, a Paul Williams type, or someone who might be electorally attractive?
Kenneth Stevenson. FE engineering teacher. Grew up in Shotts. Left school to do an apprenticeship. Local councillor. No idea about his political positions. But it is a start at least.
Hmm, I have read the opposite elsewhere that it doesn't show major immune escape and a care home which had an outbreak of this variant saw no deaths and no major symptoms with 15 infections among the vaccinated.
Re the care home: all the Indian variant cases in the double vaccinated were asymptomatic. Given these were old people, with weakened immune systems, that's highly encouraging.
I think there's a metric tonne of higher transmission rate/vaccine resistance confusion going on.
In the Times Radio interview (Does anyone else follow them on twitter? Interesting stuff on there) John Curtice says Labour under Starmer have become too Conservative, and worried about upsetting voters, whilst Boris's Tories are radicals who are prepared to piss off their usual voters to get things done.
Seems fair to me, but the biggest change in politics in my lifetime, one that I am no closer to understanding now that at any other time, is that the Labour Party, in allowing Freedom of Movement to the A8, put the low paid jobs of those the party was set up to look out for out to tender to millions of people who had a huge incentive to undercut them.
Labour basically deregulated the Labour market in a way no right wing, free marketeer could have dreamed of getting away with, opening up gold mines for exploitative capitalists to the detriment of the working class, and their refusal to admit they made a mistake, or that it was any kind of big deal - let alone apologise - has led to Old Etonian, Bullingdon Boy Boris ripping through the northern heartlands like a bushfire.
Curtice is right that pretending it never happened is not an option for Labour. How on earth they put the bloke in charge who was trying to stop the Leave vote being respected beggars belief
Much truth in this. Assume for a moment that voters are sorts of spectrums, which can be described in a number of ways: from richest to poorest, from PhD to no qualifications; Remain and Rejoin to Ardent Hard Brexit and so on.
To win general elections you need 40%+ of the spectrum to vote for you. More people cluster round the middle of the spectrum than anywhere else - that's a general law of maths and reality - we are mostly middling sorts.
The best way of getting 40%+ to vote for you it to be around the middle, and you can shift your centre a fair way either side of the middle depending on circumstances.
That's what Tories do. The hostility to them comes from some but not all of the ends of the spectrums: least and highest educated, most urban, richest and poorest, most remainy, the loony left the fascist right. None of it comes from the centre.
IMHO they have shifted focus to move their spectrum so as to gain a lot of WWC and to lose Putney and Cambridge, but still occupy a central piece of the spectrum - from Henley to Hartlepool. All their opponents occupy smaller and detached chunks.
One of the best examples is the West Midlands. For instance, Sutton Coldfield and Cannock Chase have totally different demographics but they're now both very safe Tory seats. Solihull and Newcastle-under-Lyme are another such pairing.
I'd like to believe that most people cluster around the centre of the Leave/Remain spectrum - yes, but... and no, but... - but that's not the perception I have, which is that everyone has firmly picked their side. Is this just a case of the loudest voices being the least representative?
30% hard leavers 20% moderate leavers 40% moderate remainers 10% hard remainers. Anyway its done.
Comments
In Newbury (and Christchurch, Winchester etc), Labour could say "our voters made a tactical decision" with the implicit follow-on "which will be replicated in reverse to Labour's advantage in many other places; that won't necessarily apply in C&A because it's not clear Labour can command such a pre-eminent position on the left-of-centre - and if it can't, then that brings into question how tactical these Lab-to-Grn/LD votes are.
Hmm.
Plus 9 points from last poll
https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1391785162430717960?s=19
lol
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/champions-league-final-could-be-played-in-portugal-instead-of-wembley-8nbfw9sv9
Eldest didn't even get that. First year exams only.
My youngest has the most GCSE's in the family despite never sitting an exam.
There’s a decent Conservative vote to tactically pillage.
Will they?
2) Not a good precedent, because the law prohibits her from being concurrently an MP and West Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner.
UEFA wanted loads of sponsors, hangers on, and media to be allowed to come over without having to quarantine.
Edit. Oops it doesn't seem to be contiguous.
The W Yorks mayor has PCC powers. You cannot serve both as a PCC and an MP. Johnson, as London mayor (as Jarvis in S Yorks) didn't have those powers. London is a bit of an oddity in that respect as the mayor shares his powers with the Home Sec but it seems that's sufficient to allow double-hatting.
EDIT - I see TSE has already said this. Must type faster.
If it's the unvaxxed and they've been eligible, it's their own stupid fault.
And - all other things equal - you'd need about 2/3 of Tory + LD to vote Labour.
Actually bump that up a little as no Green this time, so that is some TV for the SNP (not a lot).
The online letter follows an incendiary threat of a possible military takeover two weeks ago from 20 retired generals and hundreds of former officers that was backed by Marine Le Pen, the far right leader. The armed forces are taking disciplinary action against 20 serving personnel who signed the first letter." (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/civil-war-is-brewing-warn-serving-soldiers-in-open-letter-to-macron-n90nb05tj
Are we being cued up for an eternal quasi-lockdown?
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/indian-covid-strain-declared-global-concern-data-show-its-vaccine-resistant
Not sure everyone is in agreement.
https://www.google.com/search?q=https://www.ft.com/content/0afb53f0-f382-442a-9a32-02824ce8bb70
Drone the bastards.
Then 3 days a week from the 20th of September.
Then working from home 13th of December through to mid February 2022.
New leadership from Anas.
I’m not, by the way, saying they *will*, but that they *should* if we are see any proof that Labour are viable north of the border.
I have been misquoted. I said B1.617 is more transmissible, based on which it is a VOC. There is no data on its impact on diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccine effectiveness yet.
@WHO updating variant data continously
https://twitter.com/doctorsoumya/status/1391783186926084098
I believe the govt was doing door-by-door testing at the postcode next to mine.
If the vax can beat this last Indian variant then we can - surely - kiss goodbye to Covid.
To be fair to Zerohedge (yes yes, I know) it was blue-tick Indian media that first ran with this story
If Brexit is a failure then the LDs and Labour will campaign to change things - and the Tories will be out on their ears and not get a say.
If Brexit is going well, then this is not something anyone will have the inclination to refight.
People will go into 2024 fighting new battles different to 2019. They may be tangential to Brexit issues, but they won't be refighting 2019 all over again.
With your views on free movement I get completely why you'd vote Leave and then vote Tory to see it implemented. But what I don't understand, given your professed driver of concern for the material betterment of the low paid, is why you'd still now, with Brexit done, be pro-Tory and so incredibly anti-Labour.
There is no way, no way on earth, the Tories can be considered better on this issue than Labour. Just look at their respective records and manifestos since year dot. Even the Blair government who you castigate for free movement. Ok, they allowed that, but they also (against Tory opposition) brought in the minimum wage. You really think the positive impact of this on the low paid didn't dwarf that of free movement? C'mon.
It makes no sense, the way Starmer and Labour can do nothing right for you and Johnson's mob no wrong. There's something else going on. It's bugging me. So tell me please.
Look forward to a thread-header on this polling.
/IronyMode
No idea about his political positions.
But it is a start at least.
@PoliticsForAlI
NEW: Patrick Vallance has warned that Winter is coming, and face masks may be necessary on public transport then
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1391791121848836100?s=20
Redfield & Wilton Strategies @RedfieldWilton
Boris Johnson Approval Rating (10 May):
Approve: 48% (+6)
Disapprove: 31% (-5)
Net: +17% (+11)
Changes +/- 3 May
Highest Net Approval Rating for Johnson since 22 March 2021.