Probably worth repeating that in Hartlepool the Tory candidate was a bigger carpet bagger than the Labour candidate. At least Dr Paul Williams had worked in Pools, the Tory now MP had no connection with the place at all.
That may be true. But impression is everything.
"carpetbagging" isn't why Paul lost. His record on Brexit and a desire of voters to vote ant-Labour is why he lost.
I think Batley is a Labour hold at the General Election, the most volatile voting block (Galloway) surely collapses mostly back to Labour ? Only Chesham to switch hands of the recent by-elections at the next GE back to the Tories...
All this talk about the Tories keeping quiet. This was the plan in the event of the Tory win, wasn’t it? Smear them with the racist votes for Galloway.
I think it was good politics from the Tories. A variation on the Napoleonic 'never interrupt you opponent when he is making a mistake' thing; let your opponents kick lumps out of each other, stay quiet and sneak through, whilst retaining a claim to the moral high ground 'cos you avoided the gutter. Which very nearly worked.
The Tories' stealth (or non-) campaign probably owed more to Boris's success in 2019 where he also avoided interviews and debates. Boris did raid the dressing-up box for photo-ops at Nissan and Fox's Biscuits, and it damn nearly did the trick. What we do not know is what social media campaigning was done.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch.
His second bloody nose in 2 weeks
B&S is not a bloody nose. There was a considerable swing to the Government party and Labour held on the skin of its teeth. If the Tories had fought long and hard, that accusation would hold more weight.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
Yes, like Derek Hatton before him, the appeal is personal.
He's not the Jezziah, he's a very naughty boy....
EDIT : with one caveat. He might try and start a sectarian "Muslim" Party
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
That's clearly nonsense as more people voted for Gentleman John in 1992 than for any PM before or since.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
B&S is not a bloody nose. There was a considerable swing to the Government party and Labour held on the skin of its teeth. If the Tories had fought long and hard, that accusation would hold more weight.
Now C&A, that was a bloody nose.
BoZo was in the constituency, convinced they were going to win.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
4 I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
That's clearly nonsense as more people voted for Gentleman John in 1992 than for any PM before or since.
In voteshare terms however Major only got 41.9% in 1992, not only below the 43.6% Boris got in 2019 but even less than the 42.4% May got in 2017
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
Respect failed because Corbyn was very supportive of Islamists and turned a blind eye to anti-Semitism. Now he has gone, Respect could come back. Also, as the Muslim population gets bigger, they will be less happy as a junior place in alliance with socialists and start demanding their own representation, which will cater to homophobic and misogynist views.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
The impression (from a distance) was that the Tories were furiously back-pedalling in B&S to keep Starmer in place and they threw Hancock overboard in a final desperate attempt to lose.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
Yes, I like Rishi but he would not have the same appeal to the Red Wall white working class Boris does though he might do a little better in Remainier in the Home Counties and posh London. The same applies to Javid.
Priti and Raab would do worse than Boris and Rishi and Javid across the board
I think it's a risky strategy for the Tories to blame Hancock for the defeat last night, because it draws attention to the PM's role in the 'scandal'. Hancock went a week ago, but the PM who refused to sack him and declared that the matter was closed is still there. Blaming Hancock could shift the narrative to blaming BJ for his lack of decisive action, a narrative that I think has had traction. Hancock's gross hypocrisy in breaking his own rules was exacerbated by the PM's indecision in dealing with it.
“ PM's indecision in dealing with it.”
Not how I heard it. Boris realised he had to go as soon as he found out about it same as we did reading the papers, and sacked him on the spot, which is the right haste to move in pandemic, putting country before party.
I guess he had stern word with his whips, why do I have to find out first from the front pages not you.
We know that is not true but nor is it true that Boris was indecisive. The Prime Minister did decide to support Hancock in the belief that the row would blow over (and to be fair, most rows do).
The stern words Boris might have been about why ministers were under surveillance by private contractors; why the camera was moved; which other ministers were also under surveillance, and was he?
Shades of Harold Wilson's conviction MI5 was out to get him, which turned out to be not a million miles from the truth.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
B&S is not a bloody nose. There was a considerable swing to the Government party and Labour held on the skin of its teeth. If the Tories had fought long and hard, that accusation would hold more weight.
Now C&A, that was a bloody nose.
BoZo was in the constituency, convinced they were going to win.
You forgot to mention he was travelling in the clown car.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
The impression (from a distance) was that the Tories were furiously back-pedalling in B&S to keep Starmer in place and they threw Hancock overboard in a final desperate attempt to lose.
Nah. Always better to win than lose. Sure, people have turned a situation around thanks to a loss sometimes, but you can never be sure of that happening, so focus on the win. The above is a plan too clever by half.
It was a disappointment for them given what could have been. Without Chesham itd not mean much, but looks worse as a result.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
Your point is that he will be a vote loser in the next election - a collapse in the majority. So why not replace him with someone your wobbly voters are more likely to vote for?
My opinion on his style of government is not relevant to the point. It is the opinion of Tory voters that matter and you have just told us that you are worried that enough of them will not vote for you next time.
I think it's a risky strategy for the Tories to blame Hancock for the defeat last night, because it draws attention to the PM's role in the 'scandal'. Hancock went a week ago, but the PM who refused to sack him and declared that the matter was closed is still there. Blaming Hancock could shift the narrative to blaming BJ for his lack of decisive action, a narrative that I think has had traction. Hancock's gross hypocrisy in breaking his own rules was exacerbated by the PM's indecision in dealing with it.
Also risky for the Tories to be stressing that it's a good result for them given they've "been in power for 11 years."
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
Your point is that he will be a vote loser in the next election - a collapse in the majority. So why not replace him with someone your wobbly voters are more likely to vote for?
My opinion on his style of government is not relevant to the point. It is the opinion of Tory voters that matter and you have just told us that you are worried that enough of them will not vote for you next time.
There is no one the white working class would vote for more than Boris amongst the Tories, that is the point
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
Common assault is pretty minor isnt it? Given circumstances I doubt hed get much time.
I'm in two minds about the public interest - it would seem harsh on the guy who has lost his job and apologised for his actions , but on the other hand the authorities may think it necessary to be harsh to demonstrate how it will protect public officials from harassment, lest the next time someone goes much further.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
I haven't seen the footage, did he commit a crime?
If he did assault him then why shouldn't he be prosecuted? If he didn't, then how can he be?
I think what I would say is from the footage, is the police are going to prosecute every similar incident, the justice system is going to need to work 24/7 to handle the level of cases.
Its seems more, like pissy man, because it was a big story in media, rather than severity of the case. And there does seem to be some really nasty stuff against Witty, that is far more insidious than this.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
Normally the matter would have been dropped, probably not even a caution. Bellend guy is unlucky the video went viral. In other times, he'd be lucky he was not Black where prosecutorial discretion is less likely to be used. As it is, he faces a fine (first offence) and a criminal record. Perhaps afterwards he can retrain as a lorry driver.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I'm always unhappy with exemplary justice. It's unfair on the person punished, does little or nothing for the victim and there's not much evidence that it deters anyone anyway.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2021/the-long-arm-of-the-chekists/ ...You must understand that I am not giving this book a good review, or a lukewarm review or any kind of review. I am reviewing a book that cannot be reviewed. Libel lawyers tell me that, if I recommend that you read it, I could open this magazine and myself to court action. Not in Russia where the judiciary has been the loyal servant of the Kremlin since the early 2000s, but here in England, a land we once assumed possessed a modicum of freedom...
..in 40 years in journalism, I have never seen a serious work — an “allegedly serious work”, I should say — subject to such a sustained attack. Belton and her publishers HarperCollins are facing libel and breach of data protection actions from Rosneft, the Russian oil giant controlling much of the Kremlin’s most important strategic asset, along with Roman Abramovich, the Putin ally and Chelsea FC owner, Mikhail Fridman, the banking, retail and telecoms billionaire, and his partner Petr Aven, and the Russian real estate tycoon Shalva Chigirinsky.
I should make it clear before I go any further — in fact I find I must make it clear — it is possible that Belton has traduced Rosneft and the billionaires, and every word she has written about them is a lie. We must wait on an English judge to settle the matter. I should add that a spokesperson for Fridman and Aven denied that they were part of a coordinated assault with other litigants on a critical book. “They have had no contact with, and did not co-ordinate a legal strategy with, the other plaintiffs or their lawyers,” the spokesperson said...
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I'm always unhappy with exemplary justice. It's unfair on the person punished, does little or nothing for the victim and there's not much evidence that it deters anyone anyway.
But I'm probably just old fashioned.
Yes and no. There’s video evidence of the assault, and not prosecuting him suggests to all the scumbags in the country that assaulting public officials in the street is fair game. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
If you'd told me in April 2015 that by 2021 the Tories would still be in office and Labour supporters would be saying that its "all to play for" at the next election then I would have taken that unequivocally.
Is it too late for Israel to offer them to the Palestians *without* demanding a quid pro quo? The previous deal which fell through, as with Britain, was to swap Israeli vaccines which are about to expire with long-dated vaccines due to Palestine or Britain.
Because of the narrow margin in a defence, it would be easy to underestimate and dismiss how good a win this is for Labour.
Not every Galloway campaign has caught light like this one - he got little traction on the left flank of Corbyn, but where they have he has sunk both Blair and Milliband in far more Labour dominated seats than this one.
That Labour successfully defended despite a 20% Galloway share is pretty damn good. In truth, I think the damage to Labour was no more than if Galloway had got 7-8%, a good deal of the extra was from the anti-social WWC ex-Heavy Woollen / BNP vote - not every Muslim voted GG by a long chalk, so it is the only logical conclusion.
In other words GG was a true horseshoe candidate, outflanking the Tories on the right as well as Labour on the left. I didn't think that possible for him in 2021. It shows the Tories still vulnerable on their right flank in the red wall - no doubt Farage and his ilk will be studying this. It remains a lowish chance, but the right message from the right party could yet peel off Red Wall socially conservative votes in the next GE, and they would almost exclusively come from the Tories.
Also, the extent to which there was Tory -> Leadbeater switching compensated the losses to GG by enough. In this respect B&S, in its wealthier parts, mirrored C&A. Simply getting the right candidate out and campaigning hard may bring rewards.
The calls for clarity on the policy platform are valid, Labour needs to project an identity, but the Starmer loser narrative has been stopped in its tracks, campaign wise it is onwards and upwards and who is to say that Delyn and Wakefield won't come around and provide decent opportunities for gains.
On the narrative of Starmer bolstered = good night for the Tories. Will Boris get unpopular enough / quick enough to ditch? Could one cheekily summarise, Tories got too close = good night for Labour?
The PB Tories have written off Starmer as hopeless but I don't think that that is necessarily true of the wider electorate.
Have you looked at polling?
Only a fool would think that the polling can't change - as I said, PB Tory complacency.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
They like him when he (a) delivers Brexit and (b) hoses cash about to make them (supposedly) better off. Furlough has just ended, and as we move into the autumn the economy will start the painful process of rebalancing itself.
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I agree. Screaming abuse in the faces of those we disagree with, filming it, then uploading it to social media in the name of free speech or bantz is a worrying trend. Crack down on it now.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
They like him when he (a) delivers Brexit and (b) hoses cash about to make them (supposedly) better off. Furlough has just ended, and as we move into the autumn the economy will start the painful process of rebalancing itself.
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
Well the Biden administration have decided the alternative is big spending, just like post war....they don't believe inflation is going to be a problem, and so are going to borrow big and spend big, and worry about it all in 10-15 years.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
Common assault is pretty minor isnt it? Given circumstances I doubt hed get much time.
I'm in two minds about the public interest - it would seem harsh on the guy who has lost his job and apologised for his actions , but on the other hand the authorities may think it necessary to be harsh to demonstrate how it will protect public officials from harassment, lest the next time someone goes much further.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
He didn't dither. The matter was closed. Couldn't have been clearer or firmer.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I agree. Screaming abuse in the faces of those we disagree with, filming it, then uploading it to social media in the name of free speech or bantz is a worrying trend. Crack down on it now.
Do you remember the 'Happy Slap' phenomenon of the early 2000s? Very much contemporaneous with the 'Chav' culture. Strange how these things go in cycles.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
They like him when he (a) delivers Brexit and (b) hoses cash about to make them (supposedly) better off. Furlough has just ended, and as we move into the autumn the economy will start the painful process of rebalancing itself.
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
He didn't dither. The matter was closed. Couldn't have been clearer or firmer.
It’s his judgement not his dithering that’s the issue here.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2021/the-long-arm-of-the-chekists/ ...You must understand that I am not giving this book a good review, or a lukewarm review or any kind of review. I am reviewing a book that cannot be reviewed. Libel lawyers tell me that, if I recommend that you read it, I could open this magazine and myself to court action. Not in Russia where the judiciary has been the loyal servant of the Kremlin since the early 2000s, but here in England, a land we once assumed possessed a modicum of freedom...
..in 40 years in journalism, I have never seen a serious work — an “allegedly serious work”, I should say — subject to such a sustained attack. Belton and her publishers HarperCollins are facing libel and breach of data protection actions from Rosneft, the Russian oil giant controlling much of the Kremlin’s most important strategic asset, along with Roman Abramovich, the Putin ally and Chelsea FC owner, Mikhail Fridman, the banking, retail and telecoms billionaire, and his partner Petr Aven, and the Russian real estate tycoon Shalva Chigirinsky.
I should make it clear before I go any further — in fact I find I must make it clear — it is possible that Belton has traduced Rosneft and the billionaires, and every word she has written about them is a lie. We must wait on an English judge to settle the matter. I should add that a spokesperson for Fridman and Aven denied that they were part of a coordinated assault with other litigants on a critical book. “They have had no contact with, and did not co-ordinate a legal strategy with, the other plaintiffs or their lawyers,” the spokesperson said...
It's a bit of a slog that book, but it does go into a lot more of the detail of how Putin came to power and who his allies are than most of the other recent popular books about Putin and the Russian government.
George Galloway says he will go to court to get the Batley and Spen by-election result set aside. It strongly seems that the statement that he stood nearby, laughing, when the Labour candidate was physically attacked in the street was, as he says, completely false. He references the 2010 Phil Woolas case in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Woolas was found to have breached ROPA and was disqualified as an MP but his Labour replacement won the by-election with an increase of more than 10% in voteshare.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
They like him when he (a) delivers Brexit and (b) hoses cash about to make them (supposedly) better off. Furlough has just ended, and as we move into the autumn the economy will start the painful process of rebalancing itself.
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
Meanwhile there’s been a series of announcements of big private and public investments in the North, companies are finding that they need to offer more than the minimum wage to attract people, and many other sectors are seeing wage inflation. All good news from the government, even before the temporary bounce of the ending of the pandemic restrictions.
Yes, Boris will run out of steam eventually, and I’m not one of his cheerleaders - but the Conservatives have managed to re-invent themselves in power twice in a decade, and it’s quite probable they’ll do it once more if required.
Labour need to work out what they stand for, and present a positive vision of the future, whether that’s under Starmer or someone else, just as Blair did in 1997. Right now, they have three incompatible groups of support - the old unionised working classes, the elite metropolitan woke, and the socially conservative ethnic minorities. In an age of close to perfect information, they can’t hold all three groups together.
George Galloway says he will go to court to get the Batley and Spen by-election result set aside. It strongly seems that the statement that he stood nearby, laughing, when the Labour candidate was physically attacked in the street was, as he says, completely false. He references the 2010 Phil Woolas case in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Woolas was found to have breached ROPA and was disqualified as an MP but his Labour replacement won the by-election with an increase of more than 10% in voteshare.
If every time George Galloway said he was going to go to court actually ended up in court, they would have to have a dedicated court just for Galloway cases. Next to the one for the kimono wearing fox basher.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I'm always unhappy with exemplary justice. It's unfair on the person punished, does little or nothing for the victim and there's not much evidence that it deters anyone anyway.
But I'm probably just old fashioned.
Yes and no. There’s video evidence of the assault, and not prosecuting him suggests to all the scumbags in the country that assaulting public officials in the street is fair game. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
There's video evidence of two pissed-up blokes putting their arms round Professor Whitty and asking for a selfie. Is that really assault worthy of prosecution? I've been on the receiving end myself which is why I try to avoid crowds of drunks, especially around Christmas, but this smacks of breaking a butterfly on a wheel, as JRM's dad's Times once condemned the prosecution of Mick Jagger. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-breaks-a-butterfly-on-a-wheel-williamreesmoggs-original-leader-in-full-l5zhdcm7g
To be fair, there have been previous incidents of harrassment of Chris Whitty which are probably worse, and it may be this was the last straw. But still.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
He didn't dither. The matter was closed. Couldn't have been clearer or firmer.
It’s his judgement not his dithering that’s the issue here.
It's one rule for them and one rule for us - and it's extremely concerning Johnson did/could not understand that.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2021/the-long-arm-of-the-chekists/ ...You must understand that I am not giving this book a good review, or a lukewarm review or any kind of review. I am reviewing a book that cannot be reviewed. Libel lawyers tell me that, if I recommend that you read it, I could open this magazine and myself to court action. Not in Russia where the judiciary has been the loyal servant of the Kremlin since the early 2000s, but here in England, a land we once assumed possessed a modicum of freedom...
..in 40 years in journalism, I have never seen a serious work — an “allegedly serious work”, I should say — subject to such a sustained attack. Belton and her publishers HarperCollins are facing libel and breach of data protection actions from Rosneft, the Russian oil giant controlling much of the Kremlin’s most important strategic asset, along with Roman Abramovich, the Putin ally and Chelsea FC owner, Mikhail Fridman, the banking, retail and telecoms billionaire, and his partner Petr Aven, and the Russian real estate tycoon Shalva Chigirinsky.
I should make it clear before I go any further — in fact I find I must make it clear — it is possible that Belton has traduced Rosneft and the billionaires, and every word she has written about them is a lie. We must wait on an English judge to settle the matter. I should add that a spokesperson for Fridman and Aven denied that they were part of a coordinated assault with other litigants on a critical book. “They have had no contact with, and did not co-ordinate a legal strategy with, the other plaintiffs or their lawyers,” the spokesperson said...
It's a bit of a slog that book, but it does go into a lot more of the detail of how Putin came to power and who his allies are than most of the other recent popular books about Putin and the Russian government.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
Common assault is pretty minor isnt it? Given circumstances I doubt hed get much time.
I'm in two minds about the public interest - it would seem harsh on the guy who has lost his job and apologised for his actions , but on the other hand the authorities may think it necessary to be harsh to demonstrate how it will protect public officials from harassment, lest the next time someone goes much further.
On balance I'd say go easy on this occasion.
What if Ms Dick has Ms Priti Patel in her ear?
Well, it would be the first time I've ever felt sorry for Cressida Dick!
George Galloway says he will go to court to get the Batley and Spen by-election result set aside. It strongly seems that the statement that he stood nearby, laughing, when the Labour candidate was physically attacked in the street was, as he says, completely false. He references the 2010 Phil Woolas case in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Woolas was found to have breached ROPA and was disqualified as an MP but his Labour replacement won the by-election with an increase of more than 10% in voteshare.
The Woolas bar seems high, a report not seen by many of him laughing nearby for that incident doesnt seem sufficient for overturn (not that I know the legalities) whereas false leaflets for instance are harder to counter and correct during the campaign.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
To be fair, there were stronger reasons for getting shot of Matt Hancock than a hypocritical grope, and that's the trouble. It's the aura of low-level corruption that starts to surround this government. Not just that it's one rule for them and another for us, but also that who you know matters more than what you can do, with occasional hints of brown envelopes.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
Not so sure you are correct here.
There is a point where Johnson's sometimes outrageous behaviour becomes tiresome to more voters than find it endearing. We are not there yet but that day is approaching and it could be sooner than expected.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
I posted this on another thread so apologies first to all those who have read this already.
First of all, congratulations to Mike and TSE for another stunning tip, some very tasty rewards for those who followed them. Also, as Mike said, thanks to @NickPalmer for his regular and very informative comments.
Having said that, I think the result is a long-term disaster for Labour for 3 reasons:
1. Galloway got 22pc of the vote. Not the 6pc Survation said nor the 5-6pc Nick said (sorry Nick...) B&S has an electorate of 75K. Assuming 16-17% of that is Muslim (a discount to the 20% mentioned because that is population, not electorate), and giving Galloway 2k+ non-Muslim votes which is generous, that still means Galloway got c 6K Muslim votes out of an electorate of c. 12K+ - that is a huge inroad into what is one of Labour's most effective voting blocs.
What he has shown there is appetite for a left wing, anti-woke / LGBTQ+ party. I know the feedback from the Labour camp was that Palestine or LGBTQ+ or anti-Seimitism was not coming up for these voters but then what explains why so many voted for Galloway? Something motivated them. Either option is scary for Labour - either it genuinely can't explain it in which it is going to be difficult to combat or (more likely) they know what did but realise that. going less woke puts their middle-class urban base at threat to the Greens (eg the 16% swing we saw in Islington last night);
2. Labour threw everything at this campaign, and I mean everything. They also had a candidate that was unique in several ways and probably would have had a significant sympathy vote. They also faced an invisible campaign from the Tory side, which was almost lethargic in its approach and where there seemed a noticeable lack of urgency. Plus Labour is in opposition and there has been recent news flow against the Govt. Yet it still only won by 323 votes. The only reason this is seen as a triumph is because of the very low expectations.
3. If you are BoJo, I think you will be pleased as punch. The result keeps SKS in place (who it is becoming more and more obvious will never revitalise Labour) but Galloway’s performance means it is very likely an anti-woke, left wing party will now emerge targeting one of Labour's last remaining loyal blocs. As a bonus, Labour’s poster with Modi will be used to the nth degree by Tories in seats with large Indian populations so you can kiss goodbye to those votes. In fact, I’m half tempted to say BJ deliberately didn’t campaign to win that seat.
One other point re Survation. My view is there are some longer term polling implications for the Labour share, namely it risks being overstated especially if Galloway fields a bank of candidates at the next GE. My gut feel is the error with Survation will lie with the Muslim vote due to language difficulties and / or reluctance to say they would vote for Galloway. If that is the case, Labour's possible vote share may be overstated
Interesting and largely agreed. On (1), the saving grace for Labour is that there's only one George Galloway (thank goodness), and he can only bugger up one seat out of 650 in a General Election.
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
Yes, like Derek Hatton before him, the appeal is personal.
He's not the Jezziah, he's a very naughty boy....
EDIT : with one caveat. He might try and start a sectarian "Muslim" Party
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
Yes, I like Rishi but he would not have the same appeal to the Red Wall white working class Boris does though he might do a little better in Remainier in the Home Counties and posh London. The same applies to Javid.
Priti and Raab would do worse than Boris and Rishi and Javid across the board
Things I am looking forward to later this decade: Lefty Labour ultrawoke types trying to hide their secret hope that all their ex-voters in the Red Wall are too racist to turn out for Rishi.
I'm not sure yet how I'll feel about the ones who say they actively don't want them to vote Labour if that's the reason why they switched back. Mockery with a tint of admiration, let's say.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I'm always unhappy with exemplary justice. It's unfair on the person punished, does little or nothing for the victim and there's not much evidence that it deters anyone anyway.
But I'm probably just old fashioned.
Yes and no. There’s video evidence of the assault, and not prosecuting him suggests to all the scumbags in the country that assaulting public officials in the street is fair game. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
There's video evidence of two pissed-up blokes putting their arms round Professor Whitty and asking for a selfie. Is that really assault worthy of prosecution? I've been on the receiving end myself which is why I try to avoid crowds of drunks, especially around Christmas, but this smacks of breaking a butterfly on a wheel, as JRM's dad's Times once condemned the prosecution of Mick Jagger. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-breaks-a-butterfly-on-a-wheel-williamreesmoggs-original-leader-in-full-l5zhdcm7g
To be fair, there have been previous incidents of harrassment of Chris Whitty which are probably worse, and it may be this was the last straw. But still.
Some are losing perspective: "thugs", "scumbags", "throw the book at them". I wonder whether they have ever seen real malicious street violence. What word is needed to describe a real thug or scumbag if that's what this drunken rowdy gets called? Give him a caution or bind him over to keep the peace. End of.
This seems massively over the top. The guy acted like total bellend and losing his job seems a very severe consequence of his actions....but this seems OTT, a bit like pissy man getting banged up for going for a whizz.
If he were your employee, you’d want to keep him on?
No...that was my point, he has effectively always been punished for his actions. Criminal charges...that seems massively OTT.
No, he assaulted a public official who was going about his business. Throw the book at him, and it will deter other idiots.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
I'm always unhappy with exemplary justice. It's unfair on the person punished, does little or nothing for the victim and there's not much evidence that it deters anyone anyway.
But I'm probably just old fashioned.
Yes and no. There’s video evidence of the assault, and not prosecuting him suggests to all the scumbags in the country that assaulting public officials in the street is fair game. The line has to be drawn somewhere.
There's video evidence of two pissed-up blokes putting their arms round Professor Whitty and asking for a selfie. Is that really assault worthy of prosecution? I've been on the receiving end myself which is why I try to avoid crowds of drunks, especially around Christmas, but this smacks of breaking a butterfly on a wheel, as JRM's dad's Times once condemned the prosecution of Mick Jagger. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-breaks-a-butterfly-on-a-wheel-williamreesmoggs-original-leader-in-full-l5zhdcm7g
To be fair, there have been previous incidents of harrassment of Chris Whitty which are probably worse, and it may be this was the last straw. But still.
I'd be inclined to be generous but describing it merely as them asking for a selfie when he us clearly trying to get away and they grab him seems over generous.
He was accosted, perhaps it was assault, but if prosecuted and if convicted a low sentence would seem reasonable.
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
And your best chance of making the margin of victory as good as it can be is to remove the clown and the rest of the idiots and install a serious PM. There are going to be some serious financial decisions to be made and unpopular policies to push through. Liar is not remotely suited to the task.
It is only thanks to Boris the Tories have a majority of 80.
You may not like his style of government but there is no doubt Boris is the biggest Tory votewinner since Thatcher, especially amongst the white working class.
Removing Boris would be as counterproductive for the Tories as it was when they toppled Thatcher and it was for Labour when Blair went.
Post Thatcher the Tories only won 1 of the next 4 general elections and post Blair Labour still have not won 4 general elections later
Your point is that he will be a vote loser in the next election - a collapse in the majority. So why not replace him with someone your wobbly voters are more likely to vote for?
My opinion on his style of government is not relevant to the point. It is the opinion of Tory voters that matter and you have just told us that you are worried that enough of them will not vote for you next time.
There is no one the white working class would vote for more than Boris amongst the Tories, that is the point
I'm mildly pleased by Labour's win as whilst I'm not convinced by Starmer he ought to be given some more time once restrictions are removed and if he went now the chances are Labour would end up with a worse leader. It's also nice to see predictions being defied.
I assume the polling for B&S was conducted before freedom day was delayed by four weeks? Recently we have seen:
1) Cummings revelations 2) Freedom day put back by four weeks 3) Hancock affair exposed
It wouldn't surprise me if the government's vaccine bounce has dissipated since we don't appear to be heading back to normal any quicker than our continental neighbours at the moment. Don't know if there is polling on the government's handling of covid well/badly measure?
HYUFD posting sensible analysis as usual, he is indicative of deep worries and concerns inside the Tory camp.
I wouldn't say it is deep worries but it confirms my view that if the Tories do win again in 2023/24 it will be more a 1992 style narrow majority than a 1983 style landslide, hopes of the latter were just hubris
Red Wall leavers love Boris. Maybe they won’t take to Rishi? Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better. Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
They like him when he (a) delivers Brexit and (b) hoses cash about to make them (supposedly) better off. Furlough has just ended, and as we move into the autumn the economy will start the painful process of rebalancing itself.
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
Meanwhile there’s been a series of announcements of big private and public investments in the North, companies are finding that they need to offer more than the minimum wage to attract people, and many other sectors are seeing wage inflation. All good news from the government, even before the temporary bounce of the ending of the pandemic restrictions.
Yes, Boris will run out of steam eventually, and I’m not one of his cheerleaders - but the Conservatives have managed to re-invent themselves in power twice in a decade, and it’s quite probable they’ll do it once more if required.
Labour need to work out what they stand for, and present a positive vision of the future, whether that’s under Starmer or someone else, just as Blair did in 1997. Right now, they have three incompatible groups of support - the old unionised working classes, the elite metropolitan woke, and the socially conservative ethnic minorities. In an age of close to perfect information, they can’t hold all three groups together.
Oh I agree that Labour will struggle to get a look-in. This is how the Tories maintain as much of their 2019 vote as possible. Times are going to get tough, and announcements so far haven't actually even made up for lost ground never mind moved people forward. There's still a net loss of jobs at Nissan as an example. The longer we go on where its all jam tomorrow the more the Tories will need to fall back on a solid offer and managing bad news to be less bad than the alternative.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2021/the-long-arm-of-the-chekists/ ...You must understand that I am not giving this book a good review, or a lukewarm review or any kind of review. I am reviewing a book that cannot be reviewed. Libel lawyers tell me that, if I recommend that you read it, I could open this magazine and myself to court action. Not in Russia where the judiciary has been the loyal servant of the Kremlin since the early 2000s, but here in England, a land we once assumed possessed a modicum of freedom...
..in 40 years in journalism, I have never seen a serious work — an “allegedly serious work”, I should say — subject to such a sustained attack. Belton and her publishers HarperCollins are facing libel and breach of data protection actions from Rosneft, the Russian oil giant controlling much of the Kremlin’s most important strategic asset, along with Roman Abramovich, the Putin ally and Chelsea FC owner, Mikhail Fridman, the banking, retail and telecoms billionaire, and his partner Petr Aven, and the Russian real estate tycoon Shalva Chigirinsky.
I should make it clear before I go any further — in fact I find I must make it clear — it is possible that Belton has traduced Rosneft and the billionaires, and every word she has written about them is a lie. We must wait on an English judge to settle the matter. I should add that a spokesperson for Fridman and Aven denied that they were part of a coordinated assault with other litigants on a critical book. “They have had no contact with, and did not co-ordinate a legal strategy with, the other plaintiffs or their lawyers,” the spokesperson said...
It's a bit of a slog that book, but it does go into a lot more of the detail of how Putin came to power and who his allies are than most of the other recent popular books about Putin and the Russian government.
Allegedly.
It's a bit of a slog, allegedly, that book, but it allegedly does go into a lot more of the alleged detail of how, allegedly, Putin came to power, allegedly, and who his alleged allies are than most of the other allegedly recent, allegedly popular books about Putin and the alleged Russian government.
"All the predictions here are that the Conservatives have won"
The truth is Galloway only needed to take a couple of thousand of votes from Labour to make it almost impossible for them to win this election.
The truth is he took an awful lot more than that.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
Remarkably their share is lower than in 1997. Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Obviously seats change both in name and geography, but here are the 60 seats that I can find where the Tories had a lower share of the vote in 2019 than in EDIT 1997:
The Labour hold and the LD gain in Chesham means the Tories will be playing defence not offence next time to stay in power
I think it's a mistake to assume that all BXP votes from 2019 go Tory at the next election, and even if they do, the Tories may lose other votes.
But to ignore the BXP vote altogether when analysing the relative difficulty of various seats, is in my opinion very foolish.
Yes but that was why Hartlepool was an outlier as the BXP got 25% there in 2019, few other Tory targets have that big a BXP vote to squeeze. The combined Tory and BXP vote in Hartlepool was over 50% even in 2019, in Batley and Spen the combined Tory and BXP vote in 2019 was only 39%
There are a few more Hartlepools for Labour to worry about. There are 10 seats where Con/BXP > Lab/LD/Green:
Dagenham and Rainham Stockton North Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford Hemsworth Kingston upon Hull East Wentworth and Dearne Doncaster Central Doncaster North Rotherham Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside Wansbeck Chesterfield Sunderland Central Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
LOL. Truth is we have passed peak Boris! Come next election Boris has a Remania problem whilst trying to deliver Brexit dividend to the Red Wall. All to play for.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
I think we will look back on the dithering over Matt Hancock as the moment when Boris passed his noon. Nevertheless, years in office may still await him as it did for Thatcher (Westland) and Blair (Iraq).
To be fair, there were stronger reasons for getting shot of Matt Hancock than a hypocritical grope, and that's the trouble. It's the aura of low-level corruption that starts to surround this government. Not just that it's one rule for them and another for us, but also that who you know matters more than what you can do, with occasional hints of brown envelopes.
Matt H might have got away with it had he said they were trying out ideas for a new pro-vaccination campaign. Trust the French to do it better though;
I think May would be a perfectly good leader of NATO tbh.
Why?
On the plus side: It gets her out of the Commons.
Why don't you want her in the Commons? Presumably because her devotion to Boris falls a little short of your own.
Because she is a nasty, horrid individual who think it is appropriate to send vans to areas of minorities telling people to "GO HOME", was an atrocious Home Secretary that led to the Windrush scandal, was a disastrous Prime Minister, and as a backbencher is a leading NIMBY wanting to prevent new housing being built. She represents the very worst characteristics of the Tory Party. If she never becomes a Minister again it will be too soon and if she's never going to be a Minister again then she is 'bed blocking' the seat from fresh talent that could be good in the future unlike her.
Boris lost my support with his extension of lockdown last month and I've been supporting since last year Tory rebels like Steve Baker who have been challenging the party on lockdown restrictions.
One could argue that sending a few silly vans around was small fry compared to the actual expulsion of EU citizens that Brexit brought about, but let that pass. I hadn't realized you'd turned against Boris though (only a few days ago you were saying he was the second greatest PM in the last half century). Apologies and wow!
How has he turned away from Liar? If Charlotte Nichols unexpectly got the NATO job and there was a by-election he'll be voting Tory. They all do, the supposed "moral high ground" PB Tories.
You don't get the Tories to stop doing all the Bad Things by voting Tory.
I think Phil voted UKIP rather than give his vote to the diabolical Theresa.
Phil voted for Farage and the Brexit Party in Spring 2019 yes as he opposed Theresa, he switched back to the Tories when Boris took over
So a bit of a floating voter.
First Blair, later Farage and for the moment, at least, Johnson.
What this does do is provide momentum if Starmer wants to start running, the summer is really the time to start putting in some policies but crucially really showing he is leading a new party with an entirely new organisation and structure
George Galloway says he will go to court to get the Batley and Spen by-election result set aside. It strongly seems that the statement that he stood nearby, laughing, when the Labour candidate was physically attacked in the street was, as he says, completely false. He references the 2010 Phil Woolas case in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Woolas was found to have breached ROPA and was disqualified as an MP but his Labour replacement won the by-election with an increase of more than 10% in voteshare.
George Galloway says he will go to court to get the Batley and Spen by-election result set aside. It strongly seems that the statement that he stood nearby, laughing, when the Labour candidate was physically attacked in the street was, as he says, completely false. He references the 2010 Phil Woolas case in Oldham East and Saddleworth. Woolas was found to have breached ROPA and was disqualified as an MP but his Labour replacement won the by-election with an increase of more than 10% in voteshare.
I'm mildly pleased by Labour's win as whilst I'm not convinced by Starmer he ought to be given some more time once restrictions are removed and if he went now the chances are Labour would end up with a worse leader. It's also nice to see predictions being defied.
I assume the polling for B&S was conducted before freedom day was delayed by four weeks? Recently we have seen:
1) Cummings revelations 2) Freedom day put back by four weeks 3) Hancock affair exposed
It wouldn't surprise me if the government's vaccine bounce has dissipated since we don't appear to be heading back to normal any quicker than our continental neighbours at the moment. Don't know if there is polling on the government's handling of covid well/badly measure?
I believe - might be wrong - Johnson's ratings and the Government's are both on the slide again. Which is what predicted the narrowing of the polls previously.
What this does do is provide momentum if Starmer wants to start running, the summer is really the time to start putting in some policies but crucially really showing he is leading a new party with an entirely new organisation and structure
Momentum? Not a good word selection in this context!
What this does do is provide momentum if Starmer wants to start running, the summer is really the time to start putting in some policies but crucially really showing he is leading a new party with an entirely new organisation and structure
Momentum? Not a good word selection in this context!
What this does do is provide momentum if Starmer wants to start running, the summer is really the time to start putting in some policies but crucially really showing he is leading a new party with an entirely new organisation and structure
Momentum? Not a good word selection in this context!
He has momentum, to remove Momentum for good
Is it me, or are the Boris fanbois eerily quiet today?
What this does do is provide momentum if Starmer wants to start running, the summer is really the time to start putting in some policies but crucially really showing he is leading a new party with an entirely new organisation and structure
Momentum? Not a good word selection in this context!
He has momentum, to remove Momentum for good
Is it me, or are the Boris fanbois eerily quiet today?
We've reached peak Johnson, actually it's evident we reached peak Johnson months ago, he's never polled at that high point of 20+ points ahead ever again. But the polls slipping into the seven point range is the start of something, I feel.
Decent Tour De France shaping up, Roglic and Thomas' crashes mean that UAE (Pogacar) are going to have to do all the work chasing breakaways. And Ineos to the front of the peloton as I say that...
🇪🇺 EU to ban 5,000,000 Brits who've had Astrazenca jab. I think the government needs to make major efforts to green zone destinations outside Europe and just ban travel to and from the EU.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
Increasing pay can help you short term as you can draw in workers from elsewhere. Unless the increased pay actually brings more people into the pool wanting those jobs then the shortage is just moved around.
This is the issues with truck drivers. Pay is not the issue - there aren't enough drivers. Until more people join the pool of qualified drivers there is no pay solution to stop the nationwide problem.
Ultimately this has one of a number of possible effects. 1) Increased automation/efficiency - this is a win for us, increasing productivity is a good thing. 2) Attracting more labour into the market - also mostly a win for our economy. 3) Reduction in demand from increased cost - less desirable.
Consider getting ones car washed. Thanks to oddles of cheap Eastern European labour, the UK has loads of cheap hand car washes.
If those Eastern Europeans decide instead to drive lorries because they get higher wages, what happens. First order effect - the cost of having your car washed increases. Second order effects: This makes automatic car washes more viable, so more are built (productivity increases). It means that students are tempted to take jobs at car washes, or people will pay their kids to wash their car (increased labour participation) It means that some people may go longer between car washes (demand reduction).
This sort of thing will be repeated across various low paid sectors. The essential stuff which really needs humans will still be done by humans and those humans will be paid more. The other stuff will go or get automated. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing.
Comments
Labour really needs more of these candidates
Only Chesham to switch hands of the recent by-elections at the next GE back to the Tories...
The danger for Labour is that he might manage to convert his personal appeal into a party fielding lots of candidates who can have a similar effect in dozens of their seats. Then again he tried and failed to do that with Respect.
Now C&A, that was a bloody nose.
He's not the Jezziah, he's a very naughty boy....
EDIT : with one caveat. He might try and start a sectarian "Muslim" Party
Red Wall expecting delivery, it likely take more than 1 election to unwind waiting for that change for the better.
Whoever is leader, do Tories have a remainia issue.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/02/million-pfizer-covid-jabs-face-being-dumped-israel-uk-swap-deal-fails
Priti and Raab would do worse than Boris and Rishi and Javid across the board
The stern words Boris might have been about why ministers were under surveillance by private contractors; why the camera was moved; which other ministers were also under surveillance, and was he?
Shades of Harold Wilson's conviction MI5 was out to get him, which turned out to be not a million miles from the truth.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/02/man-charged-with-assault-after-chris-whitty-was-accosted
George Eustice formally ends the automatic accreditation of Evian, Volvic, Perrier, etc. as recognised mineral waters for export into Great Britain. https://twitter.com/DPMcBride/status/1410880677453643776/photo/1
That is how the Tories will keep Home Counties voters onside.
Ban Perrier...
FFS
It was a disappointment for them given what could have been. Without Chesham itd not mean much, but looks worse as a result.
My opinion on his style of government is not relevant to the point. It is the opinion of Tory voters that matter and you have just told us that you are worried that enough of them will not vote for you next time.
Because - yep - they have indeed.
If he did assault him then why shouldn't he be prosecuted?
If he didn't, then how can he be?
Dagenham and Rainham
Stockton North
Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford
Hemsworth
Kingston upon Hull East
Wentworth and Dearne
Doncaster Central
Doncaster North
Rotherham
Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle
Plus the two seats where BXP came second:
Barnsley East
Barnsley Central
And another five seats where Lab/LD/Green > Con/BXP with BXP more than 5 points above Labour's majority:
Alyn and Deeside
Wansbeck
Chesterfield
Sunderland Central
Houghton and Sunderland South
Would the Tories gain all of these with similar vote shares to 2019? Probably not, but they are a worry for Labour and they'll need to consider them when deciding where to focus their efforts at the next election.
I'm in two minds about the public interest - it would seem harsh on the guy who has lost his job and apologised for his actions , but on the other hand the authorities may think it necessary to be harsh to demonstrate how it will protect public officials from harassment, lest the next time someone goes much further.
On balance I'd say go easy on this occasion.
Its seems more, like pissy man, because it was a big story in media, rather than severity of the case. And there does seem to be some really nasty stuff against Witty, that is far more insidious than this.
The Express will lead on next weeks heatwave. (Everyone else forecasting wall to wall rain)
The star has an alien from Planet Tharg tipping England to win.
The offence is minor, and he’ll likely get community service.
But I'm probably just old fashioned.
Wake up tlg, Boris has over promised. He’s taking the Conservatives down with him.
https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/july-2021/the-long-arm-of-the-chekists/
...You must understand that I am not giving this book a good review, or a lukewarm review or any kind of review. I am reviewing a book that cannot be reviewed. Libel lawyers tell me that, if I recommend that you read it, I could open this magazine and myself to court action. Not in Russia where the judiciary has been the loyal servant of the Kremlin since the early 2000s, but here in England, a land we once assumed possessed a modicum of freedom...
..in 40 years in journalism, I have never seen a serious work — an “allegedly serious work”, I should say — subject to such a sustained attack. Belton and her publishers HarperCollins are facing libel and breach of data protection actions from Rosneft, the Russian oil giant controlling much of the Kremlin’s most important strategic asset, along with Roman Abramovich, the Putin ally and Chelsea FC owner, Mikhail Fridman, the banking, retail and telecoms billionaire, and his partner Petr Aven, and the Russian real estate tycoon Shalva Chigirinsky.
I should make it clear before I go any further — in fact I find I must make it clear — it is possible that Belton has traduced Rosneft and the billionaires, and every word she has written about them is a lie. We must wait on an English judge to settle the matter. I should add that a spokesperson for Fridman and Aven denied that they were part of a coordinated assault with other litigants on a critical book. “They have had no contact with, and did not co-ordinate a legal strategy with, the other plaintiffs or their lawyers,” the spokesperson said...
There is no alternative to cuts and we know how popular they are. The easiest things to cut are monies promised but not yet spent. So there goes your towns fund projects and your HS3 and your remaining services.
The only way to possibly keep people onside through this is punchy messaging ("yes it hurt, yes it worked") and being seen as honest and trustworthy. That isn't the PM on any day of the week. But it could be Sunak.
Crack down on it now.
The matter was closed.
Couldn't have been clearer or firmer.
Yes, Boris will run out of steam eventually, and I’m not one of his cheerleaders - but the Conservatives have managed to re-invent themselves in power twice in a decade, and it’s quite probable they’ll do it once more if required.
Labour need to work out what they stand for, and present a positive vision of the future, whether that’s under Starmer or someone else, just as Blair did in 1997. Right now, they have three incompatible groups of support - the old unionised working classes, the elite metropolitan woke, and the socially conservative ethnic minorities. In an age of close to perfect information, they can’t hold all three groups together.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/who-breaks-a-butterfly-on-a-wheel-williamreesmoggs-original-leader-in-full-l5zhdcm7g
To be fair, there have been previous incidents of harrassment of Chris Whitty which are probably worse, and it may be this was the last straw. But still.
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1410914828147953664?s=20
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1410646610741170180?s=20
There is a point where Johnson's sometimes outrageous behaviour becomes tiresome to more voters than find it endearing. We are not there yet but that day is approaching and it could be sooner than expected. With Russia Today financial backing?
Lefty Labour ultrawoke types trying to hide their secret hope that all their ex-voters in the Red Wall are too racist to turn out for Rishi.
I'm not sure yet how I'll feel about the ones who say they actively don't want them to vote Labour if that's the reason why they switched back. Mockery with a tint of admiration, let's say.
He was accosted, perhaps it was assault, but if prosecuted and if convicted a low sentence would seem reasonable.
I assume the polling for B&S was conducted before freedom day was delayed by four weeks? Recently we have seen:
1) Cummings revelations
2) Freedom day put back by four weeks
3) Hancock affair exposed
It wouldn't surprise me if the government's vaccine bounce has dissipated since we don't appear to be heading back to normal any quicker than our continental neighbours at the moment. Don't know if there is polling on the government's handling of covid well/badly measure?
Is that right, allegedly?
https://order-order.com/2021/07/02/r-rate-falls-in-england/
The R-rate in England has fallen from 1.2-1.4 to 1.1-1.3.
https://order-order.com/2021/07/02/labour-slough-council-declare-bankruptcy/
Slough council has issued a section 114 notice, declaring itself bankrupt.
For anyone hoping to blame the pandemic, the council’s coffers had already fallen by £7.5 million to just £500,000 by 2018/19…
Trust the French to do it better though;
https://twitter.com/jeromegodefroy/status/1410918236498104320?s=19
First Blair, later Farage and for the moment, at least, Johnson.
There's hope yet for Richard Burgon after all.
Starmer is better at being humble than bombastic. I don’t think anyone is buying his words judging by the BBC comments.
Starmer just needs to do something. Anything.
And Ineos to the front of the peloton as I say that...
1) Increased automation/efficiency - this is a win for us, increasing productivity is a good thing.
2) Attracting more labour into the market - also mostly a win for our economy.
3) Reduction in demand from increased cost - less desirable.
Consider getting ones car washed. Thanks to oddles of cheap Eastern European labour, the UK has loads of cheap hand car washes.
If those Eastern Europeans decide instead to drive lorries because they get higher wages, what happens.
First order effect - the cost of having your car washed increases.
Second order effects:
This makes automatic car washes more viable, so more are built (productivity increases).
It means that students are tempted to take jobs at car washes, or people will pay their kids to wash their car (increased labour participation)
It means that some people may go longer between car washes (demand reduction).
This sort of thing will be repeated across various low paid sectors. The essential stuff which really needs humans will still be done by humans and those humans will be paid more. The other stuff will go or get automated. I'm not sure that this is such a bad thing.