Howdy, Stranger!

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

The by-election battle for Jo Cox’s old seat shouldn’t be as challenging for LAB as Hartlepool – pol

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 11 in General
imageThe by-election battle for Jo Cox’s old seat shouldn’t be as challenging for LAB as Hartlepool – politicalbetting.com

The Batley and Spen parliamentary constituency is the former seat of the Labour MP Jo Cox – who on 16 June 2016, died after being shot and stabbed multiple times in the street where she had been due to hold a surgery. In the ensuing by-election the main parties stood aside and Tracy Brabin retained the seat for LAB with an 86% vote share.

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 6,844
    Tesr
  • eekeek Posts: 14,199
    edited May 11
    the Heavy Woollen District votes were Brexit votes in all but name. Add them to the Brexit party and you have 15.4% of the votes who didn't vote Tory that are likely to vote for Boris's candidate.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,199
    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486
    Its all kicking off in Middlesbrough. I have just been sent a copy of a letter to (independent) Mayor Andy Preston demanding his resignation due to alleged financial shenanigans.

    The letter is signed by five out of six executive committee members - all of whom were personally appointed by Preston.

    If the Mayor refuses to go, they will call an EGM of the council and have the numbers to no confidence him.

    Good News for Dr Paul Williams! He's always been a dedicated and committed local champion for Boro...
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486
    eek said:

    the Heavy Woollen District votes were Brexit votes in all but name. Add them to the Brexit party and you have 15.4% of the votes who didn't vote Tory that are likely to vote for Boris's candidate.

    Brexit in all but name? Practically fascists...
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103
    The big question is where the Heavy Woollen independents vote goes (and indeed if they restand). I can't claim anything like enough local knowledge to know.
    On a separate point, this is, in the words of Stuart Maconie, deep Yorkshire terroir. There are few places in England, outside Cornwall, where you can tell where you are from the place names as much as you can here. Heckmondwike. Liversedge. Cleckheaton. Wonderful place names. Even the broader name of the heavy woollen district is a beautiful and poetic description.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,739
    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
    Maybe, although it's worth remembering that the LDs are famously ruthless and excellent at by-elections in small town Tory seats, while the Conservatives aren't.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 3,503
    ‘It’s all kicking off in Middlesbrough’. That’s less news, and more it’s Saturday night again?
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 11,016
    Fishing said:

    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
    Maybe, although it's worth remembering that the LDs are famously ruthless and excellent at by-elections in small town Tory seats, while the Conservatives aren't.
    Tory complacency must be a runner after their successes?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    Not impressed:

    Disgraceful, opportunistic @MichelBarnier interview this AM

    All of the principles he defended & spoke for during the Brexit negs chucked out of the window to serve his political ambitions. Not too dissimilar to @BorisJohnson then?

    No wonder there's so much cynicism about the European Union


    https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1392054825693683713?s=20
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    edited May 11
    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 67,844
    edited May 11

    Not impressed:

    Disgraceful, opportunistic @MichelBarnier interview this AM

    All of the principles he defended & spoke for during the Brexit negs chucked out of the window to serve his political ambitions. Not too dissimilar to @BorisJohnson then?

    No wonder there's so much cynicism about the European Union


    https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1392054825693683713?s=20

    I have no idea what Barnier's politics were before, but why would anyone think the things he said during the Brexit negotiations was all about principle? He was a lead negotiator, it was his job to get a good deal for his side - principles would be a useful tool to deploy, but hardly driving anything.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 13,804

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
    I must say, as a complete amateur observer, that a house is being built close by. There seem to be twice as many machines on site as people.
    Bob, Wendy, Scoop, Muck and Dizzy and Roly too.
    It wasn't like that when I was a kid. The sites my Dad worked on were a hive of folk.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 4,441
    edited May 11
    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot in mid-term would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Unofficial encouragement for Labour tactical voting could be crucial, and a very early test case of whether Starmer finally understands the importance of co-operation.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    What was the Foreign Office smoking when they appointed Craig Murray a Her Majesty’s Most Excellent Ambassador Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary?

    Serves him right though, there would be anarchy if we allowed doxxing of complainants of alleged sexual crimes.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Brexit Party voters weren't typical Brexit voters either. That's why I expected Labour to hold Hartlepool.

    Typical Brexit voters voted Conservative.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,134
    Fishing said:

    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
    Maybe, although it's worth remembering that the LDs are famously ruthless and excellent at by-elections in small town Tory seats, while the Conservatives aren't.
    This is a myth, or at least, a dying echo of what was once true.

    The Lib Dems have taken precisely one seat off the Tories at a by-election outside London in the last TWENTY years.

    There remains this lingering belief in the Lib Dems' by-election prowess but it's not one really borne out by the facts since 2010 (and in fact, since some time before then). Being "not the other two" isn't enough, now the Lib Dems have more baggage, there are more 'others' to choose from, and they are no longer as equidistant as they once were in being able to attract tactical votes.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 15,355
    @montie: What a thin Queen’s Speech. This is a government without any big ideas.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 13,804
    Cookie said:

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
    Here is what they say. And yes they are standing.

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    Scott_xP said:

    @montie: What a thin Queen’s Speech. This is a government without any big ideas.

    26 bills seems pretty typical for me for one year.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818
    Cookie said:

    The big question is where the Heavy Woollen independents vote goes (and indeed if they restand). I can't claim anything like enough local knowledge to know.
    On a separate point, this is, in the words of Stuart Maconie, deep Yorkshire terroir. There are few places in England, outside Cornwall, where you can tell where you are from the place names as much as you can here. Heckmondwike. Liversedge. Cleckheaton. Wonderful place names. Even the broader name of the heavy woollen district is a beautiful and poetic description.

    It is vaguely reminiscent of a Manhattan area like the Meatpacking District or the Garment District.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    Cookie said:

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
    This is an area where the BNP were active, they haven’t gone away.

    This a bunch of people who think Farage is a woke liberal.

    They go where Farage doesn’t go, things like gypsies and some of their members talk of forced repatriations.

    I think if they stand they hold enough of their vote. They aren’t like Brexit party voters in Hartlepool.

    I believe they call the Brexit deal a surrender/appeasement.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186
    Scott_xP said:

    @montie: What a thin Queen’s Speech. This is a government without any big ideas.

    If you hadn't have moaned I would have been surprised
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    Floater said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @montie: What a thin Queen’s Speech. This is a government without any big ideas.

    If you hadn't have moaned I would have been surprised
    Ditto Montie, I can't recall when Mr Continuity IDS was last happy.

    The day the party goes the Full Montie is the day I probably join the Lib Dems.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103
    dixiedean said:

    Cookie said:

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
    Here is what they say. And yes they are standing.

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm
    Doesn't look like there's likely to be much HW-Lab switching, based on that.

    But you never know with voters.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579
    dixiedean said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
    I must say, as a complete amateur observer, that a house is being built close by. There seem to be twice as many machines on site as people.
    Bob, Wendy, Scoop, Muck and Dizzy and Roly too.
    It wasn't like that when I was a kid. The sites my Dad worked on were a hive of folk.
    If you contrast the UK with France, UK sites are still very manual. Even a small site in France will have a crane, for example. In the UK, a procession of Polish blokes carrying stuff...
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,739
    edited May 11

    Fishing said:

    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
    Maybe, although it's worth remembering that the LDs are famously ruthless and excellent at by-elections in small town Tory seats, while the Conservatives aren't.
    This is a myth, or at least, a dying echo of what was once true.

    The Lib Dems have taken precisely one seat off the Tories at a by-election outside London in the last TWENTY years.

    Well, how many such by-elections have there been over the last couple of decades? There are far fewer be-elections generally than there used to be.

    Some people say the Lib Dems are starting to be forgiven for the coalition years. There was no sign of it in 2019, but I guess we'll find out soon if it's true in the home counties or not.

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 3,719

    Cookie said:

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
    This is an area where the BNP were active, they haven’t gone away.

    This a bunch of people who think Farage is a woke liberal.

    They go where Farage doesn’t go, things like gypsies and some of their members talk of forced repatriations.

    I think if they stand they hold enough of their vote. They aren’t like Brexit party voters in Hartlepool.

    I believe they call the Brexit deal a surrender/appeasement.
    The other factor is that there is a Lib Dem vote here; they pretty much own Cleckheaton (my smalls used to go to a dance class there). If the Lib-Lab back channels are less blocked than they have been recently, Labour might- repeat might- be in with a chance.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    What might help the Tories here is that according to my friends who live here is that Labour has picked up a small residual sympathy vote since Jo Cox died, if that goes.

    But West Yorkshire backed Brexit but they still elected a Labour Super Mayor last week.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266

    dixiedean said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
    I must say, as a complete amateur observer, that a house is being built close by. There seem to be twice as many machines on site as people.
    Bob, Wendy, Scoop, Muck and Dizzy and Roly too.
    It wasn't like that when I was a kid. The sites my Dad worked on were a hive of folk.
    If you contrast the UK with France, UK sites are still very manual. Even a small site in France will have a crane, for example. In the UK, a procession of Polish blokes carrying stuff...
    And people wonder why the UK has less productivity ...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 28,980
    kle4 said:

    Not impressed:

    Disgraceful, opportunistic @MichelBarnier interview this AM

    All of the principles he defended & spoke for during the Brexit negs chucked out of the window to serve his political ambitions. Not too dissimilar to @BorisJohnson then?

    No wonder there's so much cynicism about the European Union


    https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1392054825693683713?s=20

    I have no idea what Barnier's politics were before, but why would anyone think the things he said during the Brexit negotiations was all about principle? He was a lead negotiator, it was his job to get a good deal for his side - principles would be a useful tool to deploy, but hardly driving anything.
    I'm also not sure what dog whistles he's blowing (not very pleasant ones by the sound of it) to further French political ambitions have to do with the EU. Rather a sign that the EU is not the oppressive, homogenising institution that some claim?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186
    Wait, I thought free movement was everything to the EU

    https://twitter.com/Caroline_Roux/status/1392003190439227394

    "We must suspend #immigration for 3 or 5 years and discuss #Schengen with our European partners."


    @MichelBarnier
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103

    Cookie said:

    The big question is where the Heavy Woollen independents vote goes (and indeed if they restand). I can't claim anything like enough local knowledge to know.
    On a separate point, this is, in the words of Stuart Maconie, deep Yorkshire terroir. There are few places in England, outside Cornwall, where you can tell where you are from the place names as much as you can here. Heckmondwike. Liversedge. Cleckheaton. Wonderful place names. Even the broader name of the heavy woollen district is a beautiful and poetic description.

    It is vaguely reminiscent of a Manhattan area like the Meatpacking District or the Garment District.
    Yes, and a better description than the other way of describing one of the area's principal manufactures: 'the shoddy district'.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,199

    dixiedean said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
    I must say, as a complete amateur observer, that a house is being built close by. There seem to be twice as many machines on site as people.
    Bob, Wendy, Scoop, Muck and Dizzy and Roly too.
    It wasn't like that when I was a kid. The sites my Dad worked on were a hive of folk.
    If you contrast the UK with France, UK sites are still very manual. Even a small site in France will have a crane, for example. In the UK, a procession of Polish blokes carrying stuff...
    And people wonder why the UK has less productivity ...
    because (imported) labour was cheaper than tech -
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 87,889
    edited May 11
    It seems like some of the Heavy Woollens were ex UKIP or even BNP ie very pro Brexit.

    If they stand again in the by election and take some of the Leave vote then as the Tories + Brexit Party share in Batley in Spen in 2019 was still less than the Labour Party share (unlike in Hartlepool) then Labour could scrape home
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 28,980
    What level does the chokey count as?


  • eekeek Posts: 14,199

    Cookie said:

    I’ve been banging on for a while that the Heavy Woolen Independents aren’t your typical Brexit voters.

    Go on - what do the Heavy Woollens want?
    And will they stand again, and if not are their votes transferable, and if so to whom?
    This is an area where the BNP were active, they haven’t gone away.

    This a bunch of people who think Farage is a woke liberal.

    They go where Farage doesn’t go, things like gypsies and some of their members talk of forced repatriations.

    I think if they stand they hold enough of their vote. They aren’t like Brexit party voters in Hartlepool.

    I believe they call the Brexit deal a surrender/appeasement.
    So if they stand - Labour wins otherwise the Tories do.

  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186
    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898
    edited May 11
    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    sarissa said:

    One last story from the Scottish Parliament election.

    "Independent Green Voice was a tiny (list) party whose five candidates included two former British National Party activists and a man accused of Holocaust denial (he denies the allegation). But did all Scottish voters know this? There are plenty of signs that they didn’t.

    While far-Right candidates such as Britain First leader Jayda Fransen won just 46 votes in Glasgow, the anti-immigrant, anti-EU Independent Green Voice won thousands of votes. How come? How many of these voters thought they were voting for the Scottish Greens?

    These voters mattered. In Glasgow, for example, where Independent Green Voice took 2,210 votes, the Green Party fell 914 votes short of a second seat on the regional list. In South of Scotland, the Greens were just 115 votes short of taking a seat. Independent Green Voice won 1,690."

    I thought the Registration of Political Parties Act 1998 (following the 'Literal Democrats' case in 1994 was supposed to stop this tactic?

    The logog change was the key thing for me. Their new logo had the word Green in massively bigger font than Independent and Voice.

    It ended up being a larger Green text logo than the genuine Scottish Green party logo.

    Undoubtedly cost the Greens 1 seat and almost certainly 2.
    I just don't see why this isn't heading to a court challenge pronto.

    What would be the remedy? This was region wide votes, so votes across dozens of constituencies. And the end result is Conservatives and Labour losing seats to the Greens if you were to re-apportion votes.

    Someone at the Electoral Comission needs to have a talking too and their bollocks "We didn't see how it would cause confusion" defence should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

    But there is nothing that can be done now to change the outcome of the election.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 377
    kle4 said:

    Not impressed:

    Disgraceful, opportunistic @MichelBarnier interview this AM

    All of the principles he defended & spoke for during the Brexit negs chucked out of the window to serve his political ambitions. Not too dissimilar to @BorisJohnson then?

    No wonder there's so much cynicism about the European Union


    https://twitter.com/Mij_Europe/status/1392054825693683713?s=20

    I have no idea what Barnier's politics were before, but why would anyone think the things he said during the Brexit negotiations was all about principle? He was a lead negotiator, it was his job to get a good deal for his side - principles would be a useful tool to deploy, but hardly driving anything.
    you would have a point if, after the negotiations he didn't go around telling everyone how important it was to stick to those principles and how he is a man of principle, unlike those perfidious losers Boris and Frost who only thought about the political side of things and were buccaneers being fast and loose with important points of principle, which he, a serious man of principle, considers vital for a laws-based organisation.
  • eekeek Posts: 14,199
    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    sarissa said:

    One last story from the Scottish Parliament election.

    "Independent Green Voice was a tiny (list) party whose five candidates included two former British National Party activists and a man accused of Holocaust denial (he denies the allegation). But did all Scottish voters know this? There are plenty of signs that they didn’t.

    While far-Right candidates such as Britain First leader Jayda Fransen won just 46 votes in Glasgow, the anti-immigrant, anti-EU Independent Green Voice won thousands of votes. How come? How many of these voters thought they were voting for the Scottish Greens?

    These voters mattered. In Glasgow, for example, where Independent Green Voice took 2,210 votes, the Green Party fell 914 votes short of a second seat on the regional list. In South of Scotland, the Greens were just 115 votes short of taking a seat. Independent Green Voice won 1,690."

    I thought the Registration of Political Parties Act 1998 (following the 'Literal Democrats' case in 1994 was supposed to stop this tactic?

    The logog change was the key thing for me. Their new logo had the word Green in massively bigger font than Independent and Voice.

    It ended up being a larger Green text logo than the genuine Scottish Green party logo.

    Undoubtedly cost the Greens 1 seat and almost certainly 2.
    I just don't see why this isn't heading to a court challenge pronto.

    What would be the remedy? This was region wide votes, so votes across dozens of constituencies. And the end result is Conservatives and Labour losing seats to the Greens if you were to re-apportion votes.

    Someone at the Electoral Comission needs to have a talking too and their bollocks "We didn't see how it would cause confusion" defence should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

    But there is nothing that can be done now to change the outcome of the election.
    It also doesn't really impact the election - the Green party are down 2 seats compared to where they should be but still have enough seats to have a material impact on the day to day running of the Scottish Parliament.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 23,883
    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang

    This is a country which for decades had a one child policy. If that's tolerated, then it makes it easier to move on to a no child policy.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 4,403
    Scott_xP said:

    @montie: What a thin Queen’s Speech. This is a government without any big ideas.

    It's not the government's job to legislate. You should only change the law when you need to.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,186

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang

    This is a country which for decades had a one child policy. If that's tolerated, then it makes it easier to move on to a no child policy.
    Read the article - they are relaxing the rules elsewhere.

    This is aimed at one demographic
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103
    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 16,134
    Fishing said:

    Fishing said:

    eek said:

    Fishing said:

    Winning two by-elections from the Opposition on the trot would be truly remarkable, especially if the Conservatives manage to retain Chesham and Amersham.

    Chesham and Amersham will be a not quite Lib Dem win - with Labour being either a bad third or a sensibly didn't try third (their vote will be the same regardless).

    50% Tory
    40% Lib Dem
    10% other would be my estimate
    Maybe, although it's worth remembering that the LDs are famously ruthless and excellent at by-elections in small town Tory seats, while the Conservatives aren't.
    This is a myth, or at least, a dying echo of what was once true.

    The Lib Dems have taken precisely one seat off the Tories at a by-election outside London in the last TWENTY years.

    Well, how many such by-elections have there been over the last couple of decades? There are far fewer be-elections generally than there used to be.

    Some people say the Lib Dems are starting to be forgiven for the coalition years. There was no sign of it in 2019, but I guess we'll find out soon if it's true in the home counties or not.

    Neither of the two seats the Lib Dems did gain off the Tories in that time were 'small town Tory seats'. One was in ultra-rural Wales, the other in rich SW London.

    But since Romsey (2000), the Tory defences have been:

    Bromley & Chislehurst
    Henley
    Haltemprice & Howden (special circumstances; LDs did not compete)
    Corby
    Newark
    Clacton
    Rochester & Strood
    Witney
    Richmond Park
    Sleaford & Hykeham
    Brecon & Radnor

    Most of those were small-town seats. If we're talking about 'small-town seats in the South of England where there was already a strongish LD vote and it leaned towards Remain', then yes, there've not been all that many but then that's quite a niche sector.

    Maybe the LDs do stand a chance in C&A but if so, that's because it's the exception not the rule.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,630
    LabourList says that one candidate favoured by Labour leadership for their nomination is Leeds Cllr Salma Arif.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,739
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 32,735
    Cookie said:

    Cookie said:

    The big question is where the Heavy Woollen independents vote goes (and indeed if they restand). I can't claim anything like enough local knowledge to know.
    On a separate point, this is, in the words of Stuart Maconie, deep Yorkshire terroir. There are few places in England, outside Cornwall, where you can tell where you are from the place names as much as you can here. Heckmondwike. Liversedge. Cleckheaton. Wonderful place names. Even the broader name of the heavy woollen district is a beautiful and poetic description.

    It is vaguely reminiscent of a Manhattan area like the Meatpacking District or the Garment District.
    Yes, and a better description than the other way of describing one of the area's principal manufactures: 'the shoddy district'.
    Or the mungo municipality...
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579
    eek said:

    dixiedean said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    It is very weird, this concept, that “my village/town has taken more than its share”, with all of these plans presumably imposed from on high.

    We essentially have a Soviet-style planning system, comprising tractor-style production targets, runaway unaffordability, and acres of Barrett shite.

    However, sprawl is not the answer for all the obvious reasons (obvious to all except @Philip_Thompson).

    This is why its such a big issue on the doorstep. Places like Stockton have built north of 10,000 homes all across the borough over the last decade or so, yet is told by the government they are not building enough houses.

    You do not have a local plan unless you build your government-imposed quota. You cannot shape what developers build and where they build them without a local plan. But the developers sit on the planning permission you give so that despite you having greenlit enough homes to hit the quota you can't hit it as the developers refuse, they can then overrule you and do what the fuck they like.

    I have no objection to new houses being built, only to the anarchic way its is done at the moment. Let the community plan housing development zones - building where it makes sense, where the roads can cope, where there are school places. Building the homes needed for that community. Give planning permission. Then tender construction out to the developers.
    10,000 homes is a great start. And what is the house price to income ratio in Stockton?

    Ideally there should be no quota, just a complete free for all so that planning permission can never be refused, its not even needed to be asked for.

    If we're going to have a planning permission system then refusal should only be permitted if house price to earnings ratios are ~3x income, no higher than that. So yes, Stockton should keep building, everywhere should.
    As Rochdale correcly pointed out it is not planning permission that is the problem, planning permission has already been given by most councils through local plans in suitable areas with the infrastructure to cope.

    It is developers land banking and not developing in areas where they already have planning permission that is the issue and where they need to be taken to task and fined if they do not follow through and develop there
    And whilst a house price = 3 x earnings rough principle may well be a desirable thing, that ship sailed long ago in many places. I'm in Romford, Zone 6 edge of London. The cheapest 3 bedroom house I can quickly find on the internet is ex-council house, on a big estate with no train or tube access.

    £280 000.

    That bubble isn't deflating without hurting a lot of people.
    We need a period of significant wage inflation - but I'm not sure that can be pulled off.
    Without massive construction that will just feed into house price inflation and not reduce the ratio.

    If we have inflation plus construction then we can see real house prices go down, but without negative equity.
    A relative works in construction. They are massively investing in mechanisation - even at the individual house reconstruction level. Small crane, conveyers, diggers etc.

    The assumption is that post-Brexit, labour will be hard to find. That combined with the massive inceptive to invest in equipment at the moment....
    I must say, as a complete amateur observer, that a house is being built close by. There seem to be twice as many machines on site as people.
    Bob, Wendy, Scoop, Muck and Dizzy and Roly too.
    It wasn't like that when I was a kid. The sites my Dad worked on were a hive of folk.
    If you contrast the UK with France, UK sites are still very manual. Even a small site in France will have a crane, for example. In the UK, a procession of Polish blokes carrying stuff...
    And people wonder why the UK has less productivity ...
    because (imported) labour was cheaper than tech -
    For a while. One chap put it thus - "This machine will cost 2 Polish blokes wages a month to replace the work of 6 Polish blokes."
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang

    This is a country which for decades had a one child policy. If that's tolerated, then it makes it easier to move on to a no child policy.
    Read the article - they are relaxing the rules elsewhere.

    This is aimed at one demographic
    I know. But my point is that the notion of sexual freedom and right to choose is not one embedded within their society.

    For decades the state has sterilised people if they've already got one or two children and they've gotten away with that. So what's to stop them from using that now to sterilise unwanted minorities?

    Here the notion of forced-sterilisation is repugnant and evil. There it should be but its been accepted for decades, so switching to sterilising "them" while liberating the rules for "us" is accepted by the public.

    Horrible situation. Why we should never tolerate the state having such powers, once it does its easier to turn them against those the state dislikes.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 3,719
    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    Depends. In Hartlepool and elsewhere, the Conservatives were able to take those votes because there was effectively nobody to stop them.

    The Woolens have a local organisation and will presumably try to defend their votes. Obviously, the Conservatives start by finding an old Focus leaflet and cutting out the "Two Horse Race" artwork. But what else do they do? Reach out to the far right, or condemn it? It's not impossible, but it's not so trivially easy.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898
    eek said:

    Alistair said:

    FTPT

    Alistair said:

    sarissa said:

    One last story from the Scottish Parliament election.

    "Independent Green Voice was a tiny (list) party whose five candidates included two former British National Party activists and a man accused of Holocaust denial (he denies the allegation). But did all Scottish voters know this? There are plenty of signs that they didn’t.

    While far-Right candidates such as Britain First leader Jayda Fransen won just 46 votes in Glasgow, the anti-immigrant, anti-EU Independent Green Voice won thousands of votes. How come? How many of these voters thought they were voting for the Scottish Greens?

    These voters mattered. In Glasgow, for example, where Independent Green Voice took 2,210 votes, the Green Party fell 914 votes short of a second seat on the regional list. In South of Scotland, the Greens were just 115 votes short of taking a seat. Independent Green Voice won 1,690."

    I thought the Registration of Political Parties Act 1998 (following the 'Literal Democrats' case in 1994 was supposed to stop this tactic?

    The logog change was the key thing for me. Their new logo had the word Green in massively bigger font than Independent and Voice.

    It ended up being a larger Green text logo than the genuine Scottish Green party logo.

    Undoubtedly cost the Greens 1 seat and almost certainly 2.
    I just don't see why this isn't heading to a court challenge pronto.

    What would be the remedy? This was region wide votes, so votes across dozens of constituencies. And the end result is Conservatives and Labour losing seats to the Greens if you were to re-apportion votes.

    Someone at the Electoral Comission needs to have a talking too and their bollocks "We didn't see how it would cause confusion" defence should be treated with the contempt it deserves.

    But there is nothing that can be done now to change the outcome of the election.
    It also doesn't really impact the election - the Green party are down 2 seats compared to where they should be but still have enough seats to have a material impact on the day to day running of the Scottish Parliament.
    I mean, it's a 25% uplift in their number of seats. It's no a small change.

    I just can't see any possible way the change could happen though.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 21,504
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 20,898
    Ah, some of the kinder gentler welcome to politics I hear @CarlottaVance is so keen on

    https://twitter.com/AnnieWellsMSP/status/1392066482323009538?s=19
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    Seems a bit "motherhood and Apple Pie" as the Americans would say.

    Are you against the British identity?

    Are you against individual liberty?

    Are you against discussing sensitive issues?

    All meaningless phrases. Where's the beef?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 13,804
    This is one which isn't obvious unlike Hartlepool.
    2 vital factors.
    HWI intend to stand. How much of the vote do they keep from those who view the Tories as dangerous, woke lefties?
    Secondly. Turnout. Specifically can Labour GOTV in response?
    Could go either way. As said, candidates will be important, possibly crucial. Surely Labour won't cock that up again?
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 2,617
    On topic:

    I've put a few things out here from the council results in Batley & Spen. It is a place where council seats are contested by all parties each year, and council results do sorry in broadly the same range as GE results.

    So, again, by my count the 6 wards that make up B&S went as follows:

    LAB 11410 - 39.4%
    CON 11450 - 39.5%
    GRN 1939 - 6.7%
    LD 3548 - 12.3%
    OTHERS 622 - 2.1%

    This was a 5% swing Labour to Conservative compared to the 2019 locals, with the PNS national indicator being about a 4% swing in the same period.

    GE17 to GE19 was a 5% swing Lab to Con, again pretty close to national levels, but with a sizeable Brexity vote that could re-map Conservative this time out.

    At ward levels it is a good mix, again indicating that in general swings in this seat will tend to the national average - what b you'd expect in a mixed marginal.

    Again swings at ward leve (LE19 to 21)l are as follows:

    Liversedge: Con hold, 3% Con to Lab
    Birstall & Birkenshaw: Con hold, no swing
    Batley East: Lab hold, 3.5% Lab to Con
    Batley West: Lab hold: 5% Lab to Con
    Cleckheaton: LD hold, 8.5% Lab to Con
    (17% LD to Con)
    Heckmondwike: Lab hold: 12% Lab to Con

    So, a range of swings there. Nearer the M62, the towns are smaller and more green belt and motorway access plus greenery drives a degree of affluence. Batley and Heckmondwike have a sizeable Muslim community, from 15 to around 30% of the population in Batley East, Labour's safest ward, but on the other hand there is a Red Wall element, particularly strong in Heckmondwike, which has voted for a range of Brexiteers and, to be frank, outright racists over the years.

    So the key swing voter groups to me will be will be:

    - LD and Liberal minded voters in Cleckheaton and Liversedge and how they swing
    - How many red wall voters swing Tory in Heckmondwike and Batley West, and whether an independent candidate makes any inroads this time (I'm guessing not).

    One potential curve ball - if any local restrictions at all are needed after June 21st to control outbreaks, this is as likely a place as any.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 12,486
    Boro Mayorgate update - a council Executive meeting was booked for 1pm. Boycotted by the other exec members who have all now resigned in protest of the Mayor's alleged actions. Which are here: https://twitter.com/utb_smith/status/1392073778029596676
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    Hey Siri.

    Show me the Second Punic War in a polling format.


  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 13,804

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    Seems a bit "motherhood and Apple Pie" as the Americans would say.

    Are you against the British identity?

    Are you against individual liberty?

    Are you against discussing sensitive issues?

    All meaningless phrases. Where's the beef?
    As long as it is pre stunned they don't care.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    This reminds me of David Cameron's polling during the summer of 2007, can Starmer turn it around?

    This is why having a strong team helps, George Osborne CH helped him turn it around with that IHT policy.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 23,883
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Ok, rephrase. The Woollens are hardcore Ukip. Therefore much scope for Boris's Bluekip.

    Labour have their work cut out here imo. I'd need to see 4/1 to consider backing them.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 409
    So the army has a COVID secure wanking policy. British Army. Be the Best!💪🏻

    https://twitter.com/BenJT87/status/1392057421862998020
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Ok, rephrase. The Woollens are hardcore Ukip. Therefore much scope for Boris's Bluekip.

    Labour have their work cut out here imo. I'd need to see 4/1 to consider backing them.
    Which of those phrases you put in bold do you think Labour shouldn't be saying?

    Do you think Labour should be against provision of essential needs?

    Should Labour be against British identity? SNP fair enough, but Labour?

    Should Labour be against individual liberty. I get they are, but should they?
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 5,942

    B&S looks very, very close to this distant Welsh observer.

    One difference is that in 'Pool, the former Labour MP resigned in disgrace amidst a welter of sex allegations.

    In B&S, the former Labour MP resigned because she was popular enough to win the W Yorks Mayoralty.

    Still, by the time of B&S, SKS will have lost 3 by-elections. There must be a roughly evens chance that B&S makes four.

    Local knowledge needed. Can our Yorkshire posters emulate the cracking performance of our North-East posters who got 'Pool bang-on?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    Agree.

    Class has nothing to do with:
    -your accent
    -where you live
    -where you grew up
    -what your parents do
    -where you went to school

    These things remain important in supporting certain individuals to change their class position, but they don’t come into the definition of class.

    https://twitter.com/graceblakeley/status/1392045008560312320
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 28,980
    Fishing said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Yes, it could be written by Gordon "British jobs for British workers" Brown.
    No longer


  • El_SidEl_Sid Posts: 123


    They go where Farage doesn’t go, things like gypsies and some of their members talk of forced repatriations.

    I think if they stand they hold enough of their vote. They aren’t like Brexit party voters in Hartlepool.

    I believe they call the Brexit deal a surrender/appeasement.

    They may have been founded by the UKIP chairman but they look more like the "When I were a lad" nostalgia party, wrapped in some cuddly localism that means their appeal will go beyond hardcore Brexiteers. Looking at the message that was reaching the media at their 2019 campaign launch (at the Luddites Memorial...), you can imagine a lot of people thinking they'd like a bit of this if they wanted a protest at either how Brexit was going or just a "life's a bit crap" protest vote :

    "more school places for children and restoration of parental choice over preferred schools; a clean Brexit, restoring democracy and independence; taking back control of our borders, money and laws; a managed and controlled immigration system focusing on the specialist skills we need as a country.

    Other topics he will push are to end mass, unskilled migration as well as a review and reduction in foreign aid; a crackdown on crime and anti-social behaviour, particularly violent crime, drug-dealing and grooming gangs; an end to politically correct policing; and more support for our armed forces, including veterans, and increased investment in defence."

    I guess the question is the extent to which the people who were attracted to that as a protest, still feel the need to protest against Johnson's Tories.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang

    This is a country which for decades had a one child policy. If that's tolerated, then it makes it easier to move on to a no child policy.
    Read the article - they are relaxing the rules elsewhere.

    This is aimed at one demographic
    I know. But my point is that the notion of sexual freedom and right to choose is not one embedded within their society.

    For decades the state has sterilised people if they've already got one or two children and they've gotten away with that. So what's to stop them from using that now to sterilise unwanted minorities?

    Here the notion of forced-sterilisation is repugnant and evil. There it should be but its been accepted for decades, so switching to sterilising "them" while liberating the rules for "us" is accepted by the public.

    Horrible situation. Why we should never tolerate the state having such powers, once it does its easier to turn them against those the state dislikes.
    Anyone remember "Facts On The Ground" ? Yugoslavia and the civil war there.

    All the solemn foreign affairs experts angrily dismissing Thatcher's wanting to intervene - the "proper" response was more negotiation and accepting "The Facts On The Ground"

    Who said the Chinese didn't learn from foreigners? They are creating The Facts On the Ground. They did it before in Tibet - now the native Tibetans are a minority in their own land.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    We're only one percent ahead of the Germans, and behind the Italians. Must strive to do better!

    Good on the Greeks, they've got a great number! Knocking it out of the park there. 👍
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 56,664
    Mr. Eagles, Starmer is in danger of appearing more a Pharnaces II.

    Show me the fall of Saguntum, the Alpine march, the Trebia, the Arnus Marshes, the Trasimene, the Cannae, the decade of marauding undefeated in enemy territory that makes you think of the Second Punic war.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579

    Agree.

    Class has nothing to do with:
    -your accent
    -where you live
    -where you grew up
    -what your parents do
    -where you went to school

    These things remain important in supporting certain individuals to change their class position, but they don’t come into the definition of class.

    https://twitter.com/graceblakeley/status/1392045008560312320

    So a self employed plumber isn't working class?

    But a call centre manager is?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 28,980
    Alistair said:

    Ah, some of the kinder gentler welcome to politics I hear @CarlottaVance is so keen on

    https://twitter.com/AnnieWellsMSP/status/1392066482323009538?s=19

    I'm not Roof's biggest fan but she's by several orders of magnitude a better person and politician than that raging dimwit Wells.


  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 13,804

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    You're in with a good chance then.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266

    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    https://twitter.com/i/events/1391835363807801350

    China is targeting Muslim women in a push to suppress births in Xinjiang

    This is a country which for decades had a one child policy. If that's tolerated, then it makes it easier to move on to a no child policy.
    Read the article - they are relaxing the rules elsewhere.

    This is aimed at one demographic
    I know. But my point is that the notion of sexual freedom and right to choose is not one embedded within their society.

    For decades the state has sterilised people if they've already got one or two children and they've gotten away with that. So what's to stop them from using that now to sterilise unwanted minorities?

    Here the notion of forced-sterilisation is repugnant and evil. There it should be but its been accepted for decades, so switching to sterilising "them" while liberating the rules for "us" is accepted by the public.

    Horrible situation. Why we should never tolerate the state having such powers, once it does its easier to turn them against those the state dislikes.
    Anyone remember "Facts On The Ground" ? Yugoslavia and the civil war there.

    All the solemn foreign affairs experts angrily dismissing Thatcher's wanting to intervene - the "proper" response was more negotiation and accepting "The Facts On The Ground"

    Who said the Chinese didn't learn from foreigners? They are creating The Facts On the Ground. They did it before in Tibet - now the native Tibetans are a minority in their own land.
    Precisely!

    Its funny but Free Tibet used to be as popular a slogan as Free Palestine. Then everyone seemed to stop giving a damn about Tibet and the Chinese have uncompromisingly crushed Tibet - China really is a modern Evil Empire and very Orwellian. They'll ruthlessly do the same in Xinjiang and nobody is going to do anything about it.

    They won't stop with Xinjiang, just as they didn't stop with Tibet.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 3,221
    El_Sid said:


    They go where Farage doesn’t go, things like gypsies and some of their members talk of forced repatriations.

    I think if they stand they hold enough of their vote. They aren’t like Brexit party voters in Hartlepool.

    I believe they call the Brexit deal a surrender/appeasement.

    They may have been founded by the UKIP chairman but they look more like the "When I were a lad" nostalgia party, wrapped in some cuddly localism that means their appeal will go beyond hardcore Brexiteers. Looking at the message that was reaching the media at their 2019 campaign launch (at the Luddites Memorial...), you can imagine a lot of people thinking they'd like a bit of this if they wanted a protest at either how Brexit was going or just a "life's a bit crap" protest vote :

    "more school places for children and restoration of parental choice over preferred schools; a clean Brexit, restoring democracy and independence; taking back control of our borders, money and laws; a managed and controlled immigration system focusing on the specialist skills we need as a country.

    Other topics he will push are to end mass, unskilled migration as well as a review and reduction in foreign aid; a crackdown on crime and anti-social behaviour, particularly violent crime, drug-dealing and grooming gangs; an end to politically correct policing; and more support for our armed forces, including veterans, and increased investment in defence."

    I guess the question is the extent to which the people who were attracted to that as a protest, still feel the need to protest against Johnson's Tories.
    One issue that might also play a factor here is the recent Batley Grammar School incident. My feeling is that is an issue that makes it harder for Labour to retain the seat.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Anyway, @kinbalu, after your success in Hartlepool, what's your prognosis here?

    I was wrong last time about Hartlepool - the rules have changed. Not that the red wall is now a lot less Labour-friendly than before - we knew that. But that we no longer automatically see swings against the governing party. My prognosis was that those opposed to a mid-term government would always be more motivated to turn out than those who defend it - and that differential turn out would have probably seen Labour over the line. But as it happened it wasn't even close - we saw the sorts of turnout which imply that red wall voters are still motivated by punishing the Labour Party.
    So what's likely here? I still think the value is in Labour. In Hartlepool Con+BXP in 2019 would have beaten Labour; here Lab still wins that contest. We'd need to assume a HW-Con swing for the Cons to win it without a Lab-Con swing - a big stride, as who knows what they'll do - they probably won't vote Labour, but that's as much as we can say.
    We don't yet know what will happen with the candidate - will the candidate be as poor a choice for the local area as Paul Williams? Who will the Con candidate be? And presumably holding the by-election away from the local elections also benefits Labour (on my rule that opposition voters are more motivated).

    My assumption is that most BXP voters will transfer to Con, but only a relatively small proportion of the HWs. On the basis of this churn the Con vote is roughly level with Lab or perhaps slightly ahead - but differential turnout will help the opposition party. Therefore Labour are value at any odds better than Evens. As Ladbrokes are offering 9/4, Labour are value, and I have placed my £5 on that outcome.

    If Con win, but only win by a sliver, I can claim a moral victory, if not a financial one. If Con win relatively comfortably (2000 votes plus) then I am comfortably wrong, again.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 2,195
    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    AKA: "Are you thinking what we're thinking"? Sounds familiar.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 17,579

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    I know a few derivatives traders who live pay check to pay check.

    If we use the above definition - which is actually rather old - nearly everyone is working class.
  • noisywinternoisywinter Posts: 246

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    It seems so is Boris, according to Mr Lavery
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 23,883

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    Seems a bit "motherhood and Apple Pie" as the Americans would say.

    Are you against the British identity?

    Are you against individual liberty?

    Are you against discussing sensitive issues?

    All meaningless phrases. Where's the beef?
    I have little interest in them other than from the by-election betting angle. They have the air of hardcore Ukip to me (the guy who formed them certainly is) and I think they'll be breaking heavily Con. If you wish to make another bad call by thinking something else, by all means go for it.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818


    B&S looks very, very close to this distant Welsh observer.

    One difference is that in 'Pool, the former Labour MP resigned in disgrace amidst a welter of sex allegations.

    In B&S, the former Labour MP resigned because she was popular enough to win the W Yorks Mayoralty.

    Still, by the time of B&S, SKS will have lost 3 by-elections. There must be a roughly evens chance that B&S makes four.

    Local knowledge needed. Can our Yorkshire posters emulate the cracking performance of our North-East posters who got 'Pool bang-on?

    Well that is one way of seeing it.

    Tracy Brabin's majority shrank from 9000 to 3000 between 2017 and 2019 and the labour vote dropped from 29,000 to 22,000 in the same period.

    Perhaps Brabin saw the writing on the wall.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 95,999
    dixiedean said:

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    You're in with a good chance then.
    Apart from the fact I'm a fiscal conservative and unabashed free market Thatcherite.

    A little part of me died today when I read that a 'Conservative' government will introduce a state aid bill, not a bill to reduce/ban state aid but a bill to make it easier to dole out state aid.

    We've got a couple of decades of new British Leylands ahead of us.

    Mrs Thatcher must be turning in her grave today.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 28,980

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    AKA: "Are you thinking what we're thinking"? Sounds familiar.
    'Ye can't even not shy away from sensitive issues without bein' arrested nowadays'
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    That's a remarkably wide definition of working class. Must encompass 80% plus of the working age population.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 4,103
    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    What about the above is "Eng Nat"? The only nationality mentioned is British.
    Ok, rephrase. The Woollens are hardcore Ukip. Therefore much scope for Boris's Bluekip.

    Labour have their work cut out here imo. I'd need to see 4/1 to consider backing them.
    Ah, I see you've answered my question before I'd asked it :smile:
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 50,983
    Two/Three days data from Germany & Spain respectively, strong performance from Italy:

    https://www.politico.eu/coronavirus-in-europe/


  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 60,266
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Here's the Woollens -

    https://www.alekslukic.co.uk/hwdi.htm

    "We pride ourselves on not shying away from sensitive issues that other local politicians prefer not to discuss."

    "Promotion of a unifying shared British identity."

    Sufficient provision for the essential needs of the populace, otherwise preserving individual liberty."

    No Labour votes here. Plenty for the "Eng Nat" Cons.

    Seems a bit "motherhood and Apple Pie" as the Americans would say.

    Are you against the British identity?

    Are you against individual liberty?

    Are you against discussing sensitive issues?

    All meaningless phrases. Where's the beef?
    I have little interest in them other than from the by-election betting angle. They have the air of hardcore Ukip to me (the guy who formed them certainly is) and I think they'll be breaking heavily Con. If you wish to make another bad call by thinking something else, by all means go for it.
    I'm not making a call this time. I know nothing about them and if BXP were prepared to go Tory and not be neverTories then there seems to be little reason these won't do the same.

    UKIP is dead so hardcore UKIP is meaningless, just as those words in bold you highlighted are meaningless. You've not said what they mean to you that Labour should be against instead of being meaningless guff.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 2,739

    Anyhoo, it is official I am working class.

    Labour's Batley And Spen Candidate 'Must Be Working Class', Keir Starmer Told

    Ian Lavery, Jon Trickett and Laura Smith draw battle lines as fallout from Hartlepool defeat continue

    The joint statement from Lavery’s No Holding Back group, said Starmer must select someone with a working class background, and ideally a key worker, and “not repeat the errors that brought us such a humiliating defeat” in Hartlepool.

    While unable to categorically define what was meant by “working class”, the group said it welcomed a debate with the Labour leadership on the issue.

    One definition being looked at by the group was “people who have to work in order to provide sufficiently for themselves and their families”.


    https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/batley-spen-working-class-labour_uk_6098f8c3e4b05fb33f4ef5ca

    I know a few derivatives traders who live pay check to pay check.

    If we use the above definition - which is actually rather old - nearly everyone is working class.
    We should go back to calling the working class the lower class. You have an upper class, a middle class and a lower class - makes no sense. Upper, middle and lower on the other hand is much more consistent. Also less inaccurate, because most of the middle class work while plenty of the lower class don't.
  • kingbongokingbongo Posts: 377

    We're only one percent ahead of the Germans, and behind the Italians. Must strive to do better!

    Good on the Greeks, they've got a great number! Knocking it out of the park there. 👍
    the Danish number is a joke - 100% of Danes think their culture is better, but it causes huge problems because they are also trained to think they are nothing special - so actually 44% admitting what everyone in Denmark knows to be true is surprisingly high.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 87,889
    Chesham and Amersham local election voteshares last week

    Tories 43.6%
    LDs 22.9%
    Greens 17%
    Labour 10.5%
    https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1392093241844060165?s=20
This discussion has been closed.