Howdy, Stranger!

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

Could Batley change Starmer’s fortunes? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited July 2021 in General
imageCould Batley change Starmer’s fortunes? – politicalbetting.com

Like all party leaders after a much publicised by-election victory Keir Starmer sped up to constituency for the now customary photo event with the winning candidate and assorted party workers.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    First
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    tlg86 said:

    Still confident about my laying Spain for the tournament strategy.

    Honest.

    Aren't you also laying England?
    I am.
    Well at least only one of them can win...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Sir Keir Starmer should give grateful thanks to Matt Hancock's gonads.

    Said gonads may well have save Sir Keir's career.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    EXCLUSIVE In The Daily Telegraph

    🛳 Private donors to be called on to put wind in the sails of royal yacht project

    🛳 Ex-Saga boss Lance Batchelor hired by HMG to lead national flagship project

    🛳 Flagship could be hired out to companies to cover costs
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/02/private-donors-called-put-wind-sails-royal-yacht-project/
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    tlg86 said:

    tlg86 said:

    Still confident about my laying Spain for the tournament strategy.

    Honest.

    Aren't you also laying England?
    I am.
    Well at least only one of them can win...
    Yup, I'll be utterly chuffed to buggery if England win the tournament, screw my betting position.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    tlg86 said:

    QTWTAIN.

    Disagree
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.
  • MundoMundo Posts: 30
    For what it’s worth, I’m not sure the Tories will be too upset here. An extra 2 majority is neither here nor there, whereas shoring up an opponent with known strengths and more importantly known weaknesses has a value in itself. Expecting a sense of relief in Tory planning circles that the plans to deploy “that picture” of taking the knee are still relevant come the next election.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.

    He has the support of the PM


  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    Sir Keir Starmer should give grateful thanks to Matt Hancock's gonads.

    Said gonads may well have save Sir Keir's career.

    Actually that might well be the basis of Sunday's piece, replete with headline.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    Two observations. First, if Keir Starmer had to speed up to Batley then he expected Labour to lose. He should already have been there.

    Second, he needs to resist the ultras who want him to declare war on the left of the party, and concentrate on attacking the government. PMQs was a good start.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Starmers fortunes have already changed. His enemies were gearing up for a challenge. That’s not happened.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,723
    I agree. This result could well put wind in Sir Keir's Labour Party's sails.

    I have said already I don't think it was an impressive result for Labour - their third record low vote share in a constituency in a row, that is pretty bad, and probably only saved by Hancocks faux pas revealed at the weekend... but so what?! The confidence gained from winning, even if it is misguided, is a tangible thing, especially when your confidence has been sapped of late
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    tlg86 said:

    QTWTAIN.

    Disagree
    I suspect Starmer would have been safe even if they'd lost B&S. I was thinking more in terms of his general performance as LotO, which so far has been worse than IDS.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920
    These are the two best sides in the Euros beyond doubt.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    Scott_xP said:

    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.

    He has the support of the PM


    People can have more than one national identity yadda yadda yadda.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,723

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    You could do the same for Hartlepool, and Chesham & Amersham
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052

    Two observations. First, if Keir Starmer had to speed up to Batley then he expected Labour to lose. He should already have been there.

    Second, he needs to resist the ultras who want him to declare war on the left of the party, and concentrate on attacking the government. PMQs was a good start.

    He had done sessions canvassing before the vote, hadn't he?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Galloway stole about 8,000 Labour votes.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,786
    Scott_xP said:

    EXCLUSIVE In The Daily Telegraph

    🛳 Private donors to be called on to put wind in the sails of royal yacht project

    🛳 Ex-Saga boss Lance Batchelor hired by HMG to lead national flagship project

    🛳 Flagship could be hired out to companies to cover costs
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/02/private-donors-called-put-wind-sails-royal-yacht-project/

    They need to fund a new series of Howard’s Way too. A return to 80s aspiration.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Corbyn 2017 looks pretty impressive in that list. Labour need to recapture that energy.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    What's the Belgian footy team's favourite Star Trek character?

    Romulan Lukaku!
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    Love the way the "injured" Italian writhing round in the box casually got up when they scored...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    edited July 2021
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.

    He has the support of the PM


    People can have more than one national identity yadda yadda yadda.
    Sounds a lot like citizens of nowhere talk.

    FWIW depending on my mood, I switch between being a Yorkshireman, Englishman, Brit, European (especially around Ryder Cup time), and rootless cosmopolitan/global metropolitan elite.

    Right now I'm simultaneously cheering for Yorkshire against Lancashire, Britain's Sir Andrew Murray, and getting psyched for England's match tomorrow.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    I'm not sure I want to know who else Michael Gove or Sarah Vine have been shagging.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    They need to fund a new series of Howard’s Way too. A return to 80s aspiration.

    Is it a Royal Yacht? no, they don't want it.

    Is it military? Of course, or we couldn't build it here.

    But anyone can hire it? Ummm, yes...
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910

    I'm not sure I want to know who else Michael Gove or Sarah Vine have been shagging.

    When I'm voting Blue
    All I have to do
    Is mark my 'X' by you
    And then I'm not so blue

    When you're close to me
    I can feel your conceit
    I can hear you briefing
    'gainst Sir Keir

    Wouldn't you agree
    Baby, you and me
    Got a groovy kind of Gove
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Galloway stole about 8,000 Labour votes.
    I think Galloway was a bit Schrödinger: he both generated and stole Labour votes.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    Italy 1-0 against Belgium
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957

    I'm not sure I want to know who else Michael Gove or Sarah Vine have been shagging.

    [Moderated] both separately and concurrently.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    Off-topic:

    Are Switzerland England in disguise?

    :lol:
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052

    I'm not sure I want to know who else Michael Gove or Sarah Vine have been shagging.

    Just good friends...


  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
  • Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    URL says it all.

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-husband-s-gay-affair-with-gove

    The husband in question is Dominic Cummings.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,723
    edited July 2021

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    tlg86 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.

    He has the support of the PM


    People can have more than one national identity yadda yadda yadda.
    I don't see the point of that photo. It will annoy Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. It is not particularly respectful: there must be countries where treading on the flag will significantly shorten your life expectancy. No-one believes Boris is a lifelong football fan but everyone takes it for granted that he supports England. So what's the point?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    I think SKS is a poor campaigner and speaker, but would be a good PM. In particular I think he would manage a coalition or C and S much better than the alternatives.
  • borisatsunborisatsun Posts: 188
    I think this by election result probably asks as many or more questions of Starmer and his leadership as it answers. How important was the unique back story of his candidate? Would he be more vulnerable to a Gallowslam (or maybe in future, Corbynite) broadside without the sympathy that must have been garnered for poor Kim? Can he hold a safe seat without a huge scandal for the most prominent senior cabinet member of the past year? Can one of his more anonymous candidates beat a tory who makes a visible effort?

    Off topic, and in my garden.. my wall of peas is going pretty well.. I hope I don't give anybody pea-ness envy :)


  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    tlg86 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Scotland's Sir Andrew Murray really is struggling today.

    He has the support of the PM


    People can have more than one national identity yadda yadda yadda.
    I don't see the point of that photo. It will annoy Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. It is not particularly respectful: there must be countries where treading on the flag will significantly shorten your life expectancy. No-one believes Boris is a lifelong football fan but everyone takes it for granted that he supports England. So what's the point?
    It won't happen, but he'd love for someone to say something they shouldn't. Then it's a masterstroke.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    I don't see the point of that photo. It will annoy Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish. It is not particularly respectful: there must be countries where treading on the flag will significantly shorten your life expectancy. No-one believes Boris is a lifelong football fan but everyone takes it for granted that he supports England. So what's the point?

    Brexiteers like it
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    No, Galloway, no slim margin.

    Labour would have trounced the Tories.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    Well that's just flat out wrong.

    Airdrie & Shotts saw Labour's share of the vote go up by 6.5%
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    It wasn't a particularly good by-election result for Labour, despite what their supporters are saying.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052
    Andy_JS said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    It wasn't a particularly good by-election result for Labour, despite what their supporters are saying.
    It was, because they won. It really is as simple as that.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    No, Galloway, no slim margin.

    Labour would have trounced the Tories.
    I wouldn't be surprised if some people voted for Labour to annoy Galloway. Hell, even I said I'd have considered it.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    2-0 to Italy!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052
    Wow 2 nil.

    Italy are not parking the bus, they are making a statement.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,723

    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    Well that's just flat out wrong.

    Airdrie & Shotts saw Labour's share of the vote go up by 6.5%
    Oh sorry, I thought there had only been the three recent ones in England.

    They are the three worst vote shares for Labour in their history aren't they? Can you check?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    What a hit!

    Belgium are bigger chokers than South Africa in the cricket.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    These Italian chappies might prove tricky against England in the final.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,085
    Foxy said:

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    I think SKS is a poor campaigner and speaker, but would be a good PM. In particular I think he would manage a coalition or C and S much better than the alternatives.
    So the polar opposite of the current incumbent of No 10, who has been brilliant at campaigning and a poor PM.

    The trick is going to be twofold;
    1 Let SKS do what he does well- be in charge and do the stuff in Parliament, where he's actually pretty good.
    2 Get those around him to do a lot more of the campaigning; the mental image I have is Starmer as Kenneth Horne surrounded by a swarm of Kenneth Williamses and Hugh Paddicks. It's the job of Rayner, Nandy, Burnham and the rest of them to make their boss look good, because then they get to be in government. That's not really happening yet.

    To continue the Round the Horne metaphor, if they do this, Labour should be able to look forward to an enormous Poll...

    ... unless the Home Office has had Vladimir deported for not sorting out his post-Brexit paperwork.
  • Bloody hell!
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Foxy said:

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    I think SKS is a poor campaigner and speaker, but would be a good PM. In particular I think he would manage a coalition or C and S much better than the alternatives.
    A very fair assessment of SKS, with which I agree.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,746

    I'm not sure I want to know who else Michael Gove or Sarah Vine have been shagging.

    Especially not if it's at the same time.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    Penalty to Belgium!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
    Did Galloway stand in any of the other elections pre-2021?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    Foxy said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Corbyn 2017 looks pretty impressive in that list. Labour need to recapture that energy.
    For all the bad things about the Corbyn leadership it did show, at least for a while, that Labour cared about unfairness in society.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926

    These Italian chappies might prove tricky against England in the final.

    The fightback begins!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    Well that's just flat out wrong.

    Airdrie & Shotts saw Labour's share of the vote go up by 6.5%
    Oh sorry, I thought there had only been the three recent ones in England.

    They are the three worst vote shares for Labour in their history aren't they? Can you check?
    Galloway stole about 20% of the vote!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    I've been thinking that if the Tory leader was performing as badly as SKS, they'd change leader.

    But I wonder if part of the equation is that whereas the Tories used to fear the Lib Dems replacing them when they were in opposition, Labour don't have quite the same worries. Okay, it happened in Scotland, but in England and Wales Labour look set in stone in their core areas.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052

    Foxy said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Corbyn 2017 looks pretty impressive in that list. Labour need to recapture that energy.
    For all the bad things about the Corbyn leadership it did show, at least for a while, that Labour cared about unfairness in society.
    Yes, and to young people in particular.

    For all his faults Corbyn knew how to campaign. It turned with his speech at Tranmere Rovers, where the chant began.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Sir Keir Starmer should give grateful thanks to Matt Hancock's gonads.

    Said gonads may well have save Sir Keir's career.

    Actually that might well be the basis of Sunday's piece, replete with headline.
    Hancock balls it up for BJ?

    /switchesoffTSE
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    Foxy said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Corbyn 2017 looks pretty impressive in that list. Labour need to recapture that energy.
    For all the bad things about the Corbyn leadership it did show, at least for a while, that Labour cared about unfairness in society.
    And they were brave. They set the agenda for a long time during the 2017 election. Now, it's obviously difficult for the opposition to do that in the current circumstances, but Labour need to try to get ahead rather than simply moaning about the government. Ed Miliband managed it for a bit too.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,052
    tlg86 said:

    I've been thinking that if the Tory leader was performing as badly as SKS, they'd change leader.

    But I wonder if part of the equation is that whereas the Tories used to fear the Lib Dems replacing them when they were in opposition, Labour don't have quite the same worries. Okay, it happened in Scotland, but in England and Wales Labour look set in stone in their core areas.

    It has to be remembered how hard it is for Labour to change leader.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    To turn that around the Conservatives will blow their poll lead by being incompetent and corrupt.

    Which is why not gaining B&S is good for them and more importantly the country.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    To turn that around the Conservatives will blow their poll lead by being incompetent and corrupt.

    Which is why not gaining B&S is good for them and more importantly the country.
    Yes, if you plan to govern by pork, then you don't want to win too many seats!
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
    Did Galloway stand in any of the other elections pre-2021?
    What of it ?

    Galloway feeds off dissatisfaction.

    If the dissatisfaction wasn't there then he wouldn't get votes.

    So why was there dissatisfaction among traditional Labour voters ?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    tlg86 said:

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    To turn that around the Conservatives will blow their poll lead by being incompetent and corrupt.

    Which is why not gaining B&S is good for them and more importantly the country.
    Yes, if you plan to govern by pork, then you don't want to win too many seats!
    Pork costs.

    Competence is cheaper but requires hard work and attention to detail.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    Scott_xP said:

    EXCLUSIVE In The Daily Telegraph

    🛳 Private donors to be called on to put wind in the sails of royal yacht project

    🛳 Ex-Saga boss Lance Batchelor hired by HMG to lead national flagship project

    🛳 Flagship could be hired out to companies to cover costs
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/02/private-donors-called-put-wind-sails-royal-yacht-project/

    Lance Batchelor chairs Action Against Gambling Harms.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,088

    Foxy said:

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    I think SKS is a poor campaigner and speaker, but would be a good PM. In particular I think he would manage a coalition or C and S much better than the alternatives.
    So the polar opposite of the current incumbent of No 10, who has been brilliant at campaigning and a poor PM.

    The trick is going to be twofold;
    1 Let SKS do what he does well- be in charge and do the stuff in Parliament, where he's actually pretty good.
    2 Get those around him to do a lot more of the campaigning; the mental image I have is Starmer as Kenneth Horne surrounded by a swarm of Kenneth Williamses and Hugh Paddicks. It's the job of Rayner, Nandy, Burnham and the rest of them to make their boss look good, because then they get to be in government. That's not really happening yet.

    To continue the Round the Horne metaphor, if they do this, Labour should be able to look forward to an enormous Poll...

    ... unless the Home Office has had Vladimir deported for not sorting out his post-Brexit paperwork.
    And plenty of Betty Marsdens.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 14,772
    isam said:

    I agree. This result could well put wind in Sir Keir's Labour Party's sails.

    I have said already I don't think it was an impressive result for Labour - their third record low vote share in a constituency in a row, that is pretty bad, and probably only saved by Hancocks faux pas revealed at the weekend... but so what?! The confidence gained from winning, even if it is misguided, is a tangible thing, especially when your confidence has been sapped of late

    I find it frustrating when people believe things to be true that I judge to be self-evidently false, but it's an important lesson that what people believe to be true is as important as what is actually true.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 11,182

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    Well that's just flat out wrong.

    Airdrie & Shotts saw Labour's share of the vote go up by 6.5%
    Oh sorry, I thought there had only been the three recent ones in England.

    They are the three worst vote shares for Labour in their history aren't they? Can you check?
    Galloway stole about 20% of the vote!
    I don't think that's reasonable. Would someone who voted for a party whose raison d'etre was anti-Labour have voted for the Labour party had he not stood? Most likely they'd have either just not voted or voted for some other fringe candidate.

    My view is that at least some of the Heavy Woollen vote went to Galloway.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,910

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
    Did Galloway stand in any of the other elections pre-2021?
    What of it ?

    Galloway feeds off dissatisfaction.

    If the dissatisfaction wasn't there then he wouldn't get votes.

    So why was there dissatisfaction among traditional Labour voters ?
    If there was so much dissatisfaction, why didn't the Tories win?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835

    Sir Keir Starmer should give grateful thanks to Matt Hancock's gonads.

    Said gonads may well have save Sir Keir's career.

    And some 10 year old social media posts by a then teenage Green candidate.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733
    Fuck, we didn't win B&S. Got any Brexit red meat?

    ** EXCLUSIVE in tomorrow’s Daily Telegraph **

    Ministers promise to consider carefully pardon for ‘metric martyrs’ who defied the European Union two decades ago


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/02/ministers-inch-closer-pardon-metric-martyrs-defied-eu/
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
    Did Galloway stand in any of the other elections pre-2021?
    What of it ?

    Galloway feeds off dissatisfaction.

    If the dissatisfaction wasn't there then he wouldn't get votes.

    So why was there dissatisfaction among traditional Labour voters ?
    If there was so much dissatisfaction, why didn't the Tories win?
    Because they've made plenty of mistakes themselves and government's don't tend to gain seats from the opposition especially seats which are trending away from them.

    But that doesn't hide the problems Labour has even if some people want to be in denial of them.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,458
    Starmer has been Labour leader for 15 months. Repeat, 15 months. During an extraordinary period dominated by Brexit as a starter and Covid as the main course. It's hilarious that so many (mainly Tories on here, but also some on the rabid left out there) have decided already that he's really boring, has no chance and should be replaced forthwith. Even the Tories would give a new leader longer than 15 months, especially under these circumstances.

    Starmer has 1-2 years to make headway. His priority will be to develop a coherent, reasonably radical policy platform - it will get a hearing once the pandemic's over. If he doesn't at least draw level in the polls by 2022/23, he'll probably go of his own accord. There won't be a challenge (certainly not a serious one) until then at the earliest.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    England aren't beating either of these teams.
  • maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391
    Foxy said:

    Keir Starmer could do very well indeed if the Tories keep blowing up their polling lead by being incompetent and corrupt

    I think SKS is a poor campaigner and speaker, but would be a good PM. In particular I think he would manage a coalition or C and S much better than the alternatives.
    There is this insideous myth that dull, weak campaigners must be good at the governing bit. In reality life isn't that fair and people who are crap at one part of the job are normally crap at the rest. Starmer would be more likely to be the next May or Brown than otherwise, given the chance.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,733

    England aren't beating either of these teams.

    England aren't playing...
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    England aren't beating either of these teams.

    With a bit of luck they won't have to play either.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 23,926
    Scott_xP said:

    Fuck, we didn't win B&S. Got any Brexit red meat?

    ** EXCLUSIVE in tomorrow’s Daily Telegraph **

    Ministers promise to consider carefully pardon for ‘metric martyrs’ who defied the European Union two decades ago


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/02/ministers-inch-closer-pardon-metric-martyrs-defied-eu/

    It doesn't count until we can buy champagne by the pint.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    tlg86 said:

    England aren't beating either of these teams.

    With a bit of luck they won't have to play either.
    Because England will go out weakly to the Ukraine on penalties? And we can then all talk about how we could have won it if not for stinking penalities again?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    Cookie said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    That every by Election Sir Keir's Labour has contested they have done worse in terms of vote share then Jezza's Labour did in his bad GE

    Or worse than Labour have ever done in their history in those seats, to put it another way
    Well that's just flat out wrong.

    Airdrie & Shotts saw Labour's share of the vote go up by 6.5%
    Oh sorry, I thought there had only been the three recent ones in England.

    They are the three worst vote shares for Labour in their history aren't they? Can you check?
    Galloway stole about 20% of the vote!
    I don't think that's reasonable. Would someone who voted for a party whose raison d'etre was anti-Labour have voted for the Labour party had he not stood? Most likely they'd have either just not voted or voted for some other fringe candidate.

    My view is that at least some of the Heavy Woollen vote went to Galloway.
    I reckon a lot of them didn't vote. But of those who did I'd be surprised if Galloway didn't win amongst them.
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,493

    These are the two best sides in the Euros beyond doubt.

    Italy will win this tournament.

    There, I’ve said it!
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274

    These are the two best sides in the Euros beyond doubt.

    Italy will win this tournament.

    There, I’ve said it!
    Nobody as good as Belgium stands in their way.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,957
    Always said Lukaku was rubbish.

    What do you expect from an ex Chelsea/Everton/Manchester United player?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    How did he miss that......
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    Not a good day for the Brits at Wimbledon.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    Galloway stole about 8,000 Labour votes.
    How did Galloway steal something Labour don't own ?

    Because no political party owns its voters.

    What they have is an opportunity and a responsibility to attract voters..

    And if they are unable to do so by not having the right policies or the right people they have nobody to blame but themselves.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    Andy Murray doesn't seem to have much energy left.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835

    Starmer has been Labour leader for 15 months. Repeat, 15 months. During an extraordinary period dominated by Brexit as a starter and Covid as the main course. It's hilarious that so many (mainly Tories on here, but also some on the rabid left out there) have decided already that he's really boring, has no chance and should be replaced forthwith. Even the Tories would give a new leader longer than 15 months, especially under these circumstances.

    Starmer has 1-2 years to make headway. His priority will be to develop a coherent, reasonably radical policy platform - it will get a hearing once the pandemic's over. If he doesn't at least draw level in the polls by 2022/23, he'll probably go of his own accord. There won't be a challenge (certainly not a serious one) until then at the earliest.

    Getting a proper campaign and ground game, starting with a decent candidate.
    That seems to have been begun.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279

    Labour vote in B&S

    1983 38.0%
    1987 41.1%
    1992 43.1%
    1997 49.4%
    2001 49.9%
    2005 45.8%
    2010 41.5%
    2015 43.2%
    2017 55.5%
    2019 42.7%
    2021 35.3%

    B&S may have kept Starmer in his job but it shouldn't hide the problems.

    And your point?
    The point was made in the comment.

    Your reaction suggests you are uneasy about it.
    Did Galloway stand in any of the other elections pre-2021?
    What of it ?

    Galloway feeds off dissatisfaction.

    If the dissatisfaction wasn't there then he wouldn't get votes.

    So why was there dissatisfaction among traditional Labour voters ?
    If there was so much dissatisfaction, why didn't the Tories win?
    They had a poor candidate.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920

    tlg86 said:

    England aren't beating either of these teams.

    With a bit of luck they won't have to play either.
    Because England will go out weakly to the Ukraine on penalties? And we can then all talk about how we could have won it if not for stinking penalities again?
    Fairly confident that England will beat Ukraine, but I think people are underestimating Denmark, their likely semi-final opponents.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164

    tlg86 said:

    England aren't beating either of these teams.

    With a bit of luck they won't have to play either.
    Because England will go out weakly to the Ukraine on penalties? And we can then all talk about how we could have won it if not for stinking penalities again?
    Fairly confident that England will beat Ukraine, but I think people are underestimating Denmark, their likely semi-final opponents.
    I think Denmark can win the whole thing.
This discussion has been closed.