Editor of Labour Uncut on Sky, predicting Labour face at least two more election defeats and a share in the low 20s in 2020....
I would have said that was possible but yesterday's results don't bear it out, do they?
I thought yesterday's council results were fascinatingly boring - Car Crash Labour vs Car Crash Tory. They balanced each other out, so it looks like everyone is quite happy. I think that's very misleading.
Car crashes for both, very true.
I doubt that Osborne sees Corbyn safe for another year as a car crash.
I'm not sure how much worse it can get for Labour. I know we keep saying this, then another PR horror springs on-stage - but what could that be?
A couple of dozen suspensions for anti-Semitism, another 50 before that by Labour's Compliance Unit, endless Hitler from Ken, don't shoot-to-kill a terrorist, won't push the button, give back the Falklands, my friendships with IRA and Hamas... and on and on and on.
And Jezza's own been Leader since September!!
It gets worse when we get a year out from GE and public finally start to focus on who will run the economy better.
If we are in the middle of a terrible recession then maybe Corbyn pulls it off.
If we are in the middle of a terrible recession, we could see a 1931-type result. Corbyn's best chance will be when there aren't major issues that need judgement and competence to address.
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I'm beginning to wonder if Zac will stand down early. He's being publicly cast adrift by unhappy Tories - it was reported that few were there to support him at the result and he looked desperate to get off stage.
I'd imagine he's pretty hurt and bruised right now.
I'll hopefully have the webscraper written today to produce spreadsheet of Scottish results both Constituency and list.
Don't know what a Webscraper is, but I would really appreasheat a Spreadsheet of the Scottish results. If you are going to make one, then many thanks in advance.
As usual David Herdson gives a very balanced assessment.
Things to watch in the future: what do Plaid Cymru do with their second place? Will the SNP be able to stop daydreaming about independence and use the extensive powers they possess, and if so will they seek to close the gap with the new main opposition or continue to suffocate Scottish Labour, and how will they ensure that the Greens don't prosper?
Delighted though I am with Ruth's triumph it does seem to me that a lot of the comments on here are seriously underrating Sturgeon's success. The result in 2011 was something of a freak, a combination of constituency and list wins that maximised the efficiency of the SNP vote in a way that was unlikely to be repeated. It was also achieved because there was a very strong desire to force through a referendum by (thankfully) just less than half of the Scottish people.
To retain the same level of dominance once that referendum has been lost is a remarkable achievement. The SNP constituency vote went up and they picked up more of the Labour fiefdoms destroying them in Glasgow. Winning the Council there next year looks like a formality now.
Under the list system majorities should be almost impossible and Nicola came very close. Like Ruth she has profited from Labour's collapse into irrelevance but like her she has also taken full advantage. As a political party the SNP remain sensationally successful and only those who regard everything other than independence itself as immaterial could say otherwise. The winners in the UK yesterday were Nicola, Ruth and Sadiq in roughly that order. Everyone else lost.
The only sane Tory in the village. PS: Compare and contrast with the opposite our site village idiot.
Aye, David usually speaks sense. The difference between actually living in Scotland and being a Yoon migrant, pontificating impotently from afar I guess.
I've just realised that the SCons are the new LCFC. Most of their long term fans too feart to make a prediction of success but then creeping out of the woodwork to shamelessly aftertime, plus a whole bunch of goonish newbies and gloryhunters 'celebrating' their achievement who've never seen them play, can only name one of their players and who agreed with the general consensus that they were pretty crap right until the very last moment.
Though of course the stark difference is Leicester won convincingly while the SCons came second, 23pts behind the winners.
Lol - need a quart of vinegar with your chips I think.
Delighted though I am with Ruth's triumph it does seem to me that a lot of the comments on here are seriously underrating Sturgeon's success. The result in 2011 was something of a freak, a combination of constituency and list wins that maximised the efficiency of the SNP vote in a way that was unlikely to be repeated. It was also achieved because there was a very strong desire to force through a referendum by (thankfully) just less than half of the Scottish people.
To retain the same level of dominance once that referendum has been lost is a remarkable achievement. The SNP constituency vote went up and they picked up more of the Labour fiefdoms destroying them in Glasgow. Winning the Council there next year looks like a formality now.
Under the list system majorities should be almost impossible and Nicola came very close. Like Ruth she has profited from Labour's collapse into irrelevance but like her she has also taken full advantage. As a political party the SNP remain sensationally successful and only those who regard everything other than independence itself as immaterial could say otherwise. The winners in the UK yesterday were Nicola, Ruth and Sadiq in roughly that order. Everyone else lost.
The only sane Tory in the village. PS: Compare and contrast with the opposite our site village idiot.
Aye, David usually speaks sense. The difference between actually living in Scotland and being a Yoon migrant, pontificating impotently from afar I guess.
I thought Sweden's Dickson was your pal.
Never met him, though since he's banned from posting here he doesn't enter into the comparison.
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3) Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7) Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1) Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3) Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12) Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
Delighted though I am with Ruth's triumph it does seem to me that a lot of the comments on here are seriously underrating Sturgeon's success. The result in 2011 was something of a freak, a combination of constituency and list wins that maximised the efficiency of the SNP vote in a way that was unlikely to be repeated. It was also achieved because there was a very strong desire to force through a referendum by (thankfully) just less than half of the Scottish people.
To retain the same level of dominance once that referendum has been lost is a remarkable achievement. The SNP constituency vote went up and they picked up more of the Labour fiefdoms destroying them in Glasgow. Winning the Council there next year looks like a formality now.
Under the list system majorities should be almost impossible and Nicola came very close. Like Ruth she has profited from Labour's collapse into irrelevance but like her she has also taken full advantage. As a political party the SNP remain sensationally successful and only those who regard everything other than independence itself as immaterial could say otherwise. The winners in the UK yesterday were Nicola, Ruth and Sadiq in roughly that order. Everyone else lost.
The only sane Tory in the village. PS: Compare and contrast with the opposite our site village idiot.
Aye, David usually speaks sense. The difference between actually living in Scotland and being a Yoon migrant, pontificating impotently from afar I guess.
I thought Sweden's Dickson was your pal.
Never met him, though since he's banned from posting here he doesn't enter into the comparison.
I don't think he's banned. Just chastened into silence.
Pic of candidates on stage for the London wide Assembly Members declaration. 2 of the 3 Conservatives elected didn't show up (including Shawn Bailey...for once he finally managed to get elected for something!)
They are standing in order of election: Green's Sian Barry on the far right of the screen, UKIP's Peter Whittle, LibDem Caroline Pidgeon, Conservative Andrew Boff, Labour's Fiona Twycross, Green Caroline Russell, Labour's Tom Copley, Labour's Nicky Gavron and UKIP's David Kurten
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I couldn't vote in the end, a plague on both their houses. But I was astonished by how many long-time Conservative voters told me they were choosing Khan.
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3) Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7) Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1) Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3) Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12) Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
Terrible night for Ind. Their leader needs to consider his position.
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I'm beginning to wonder if Zac will stand down early. He's being publicly cast adrift by unhappy Tories - it was reported that few were there to support him at the result and he looked desperate to get off stage.
I'd imagine he's pretty hurt and bruised right now.
And completely unfairly. He did no worse than the party in London last year. The questions about Khan were perfectly reasonable despite idiots like Yvette Cooper who still believe blindly that being an ethnicminoriy gives you an automatic scrutiny shield. He was not a great candidate and neither was Khan. The result given the disturbed state of British politics today was perfectly respectable.
Even though it's frowned upon to say it, there are tensions between members/leaders of some Muslim communities in the UK and the traditional British way of life. Khan will be faced with dealing with these issues at some point and I'm hopeful he can turn more Muslims away from the idiocy of Sharia Law, FGM, forced marriages, repression of women and, of course, extremism, and lead them towards the light.
The very fact that one of the world's great cities has elected a Muslim mayor demonstrates how open-armed this country is. I hope Khan can bring communities together and help convince more people that our Western way of life is far more tolerant and progressive than the evil, primitive cultures the religious lunatics active in some Mosques (and across the Middle East, sub continent and North Africa) espouse.
Good luck to him. If he succeeds he'll make Britain an even better, safer place.
But if he dissemble or backs away over any intolerant practices/extremism, I'll be the first in the queue to slam him over it.
Agreed. A pity then that he has spoken in the past in favour of an Islamic blasphemy law and against making forced marriages a crime.
I would agree if we didn't already have what amounts to a blasphemy law. You can't insult religions or what some call 'races' anymore in this country.
The thin blue line is stretched to breaking point following up minor insults to very over sensitive people. Might as well at least clarify so we know who and what we can and can't insult. I don't blame Khan wanting an even playing field.
As for 'forced marriage' that's very difficult to separate from 'arranged marrige' which is impossible to legislate against and goes way beyond Muslims
We need to get rid of the recently introduced constraints on free speech, not double down on them.
Forced marriage and arranged marriage are clearly distinct. The former involves coercion or duress, the latter doesnt. It might be hard to prove that a marriage was forced but then a lot of crimes are hard to prove.
Roger's always been rather keen on constraining free speech.
To my mind, the most interesting thing about the Scottish results was the rise of anti-SNP (or Unionist) tactical voting.
Nothing else explains the extraordinary swings to the LibDems in Orkney & Shetland, Edinburgh West, and North East Fife. Or from the LibDems to the Conservative Party in Southern Scotland and the Borders.
If this continues in 2020, we can reasonably expect a few of the SNP 2015 gains to be lost.
Yes, I would agree. The Tories and the Lib Dems have learned how to play this game effectively. Only SLAB still seems to struggle to understand. I think it is now very likely that Scotland will contribute more Tory MPs than Labour MPs in 2020. Remarkable.
It's staggering, given they are on perhaps 7% in Scotland, but the libdems could actually gain seats in Scotland in 2020 based on these results. (And assuming tactical voting continues at the General)
Ming Campbell's old seat now called Fife NE has to be a real possibility with a seat in Edinburgh more of an outside bet but their old base in the borders from David Steel days has gone completely blue as has most of their old redoubts in the North East.
Yes, Fife NE is probably odds on in 2020 (assuming that the LDs don't disappear before then), and Edinburgh West (where there's a big Conservative vote to squeeze) has to be a reasonable shot too.
Assuming Carmichael is not the candidate, Orkney & Shetland will be a comfortable LibDem hold.
To my mind, the most interesting thing about the Scottish results was the rise of anti-SNP (or Unionist) tactical voting.
Nothing else explains the extraordinary swings to the LibDems in Orkney & Shetland, Edinburgh West, and North East Fife. Or from the LibDems to the Conservative Party in Southern Scotland and the Borders.
If this continues in 2020, we can reasonably expect a few of the SNP 2015 gains to be lost.
Yes, I would agree. The Tories and the Lib Dems have learned how to play this game effectively. Only SLAB still seems to struggle to understand. I think it is now very likely that Scotland will contribute more Tory MPs than Labour MPs in 2020. Remarkable.
It's staggering, given they are on perhaps 7% in Scotland, but the libdems could actually gain seats in Scotland in 2020 based on these results. (And assuming tactical voting continues at the General)
Ming Campbell's old seat now called Fife NE has to be a real possibility with a seat in Edinburgh more of an outside bet but their old base in the borders from David Steel days has gone completely blue as has most of their old redoubts in the North East.
Yes, Fife NE is probably odds on in 2020 (assuming that the LDs don't disappear before then), and Edinburgh West (where there's a big Conservative vote to squeeze) has to be a reasonable shot too.
Assuming Carmichael is not the candidate, Orkney & Shetland will be a comfortable LibDem hold.
I think Carmichael would walk it although he will probably be at retirement age anyway. Thursday's results showed what the people of Orkney and Shetland thought of that nonsense.
Barnet and Camden – Andrew Dismore (LAB) Bexley and Bromley – Gareth Bacon (CON) Brent and Harrow – Navin Shah (LAB) City and East – Unmesh Desai (LAB) Croydon and Sutton – Steve O’Connell (CON) Ealing and Hillingdon – Onkar Sahota (LAB) Enfield and Haringey – Joanne McCartney (LAB) Greenwich and Lewisham – Len Duvall (LAB) Havering and Redbridge – Keith Prince (CON) Lambeth and Southwark – Florence Nosegbe (LAB) Merton and Wandsworth – Leonie Cooper (LAB) North East – Jennette Arnold (LAB) South West – Tony Arbour (CON) West Central – Tony Devenish (CON)
Overall 15 out of 25 were also sitting in the previous Assembly
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3) Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7) Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1) Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3) Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12) Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
Norfolk is an odd one. Bett's lost - he was the chair of the local Tories, was a big wheel on the Police Authority, then became PCC as an Indy, and now ousted by the improbably named - Lorne Green. His son got into a load of bother and ended up in jail
Look I know you are really stupid. I am not raging , I have a life , politics is way way down my list of priorities, I personally do not give a toss. I would like independence but given the amount of gutless wonders like yourself then I am unlikely to see it soon. It is not a big deal for me, I live a good life and can have a laugh at sad angry people like you who are one dimensional.
On that note I must be off to do a bit of painting as I am off to Madrid tomorrow so looking forward to some nice Tapas.
I encourage you to share your thoughts on Catalan independence with the regulars while you're propping up those Tapas bars in Madrid.
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3) Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7) Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1) Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3) Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12) Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
Norfolk is an odd one. Bett's lost - he was the chair of the local Tories, was a big wheel on the Police Authority, then became PCC as an Indy, and now ousted by the improbably named - Lorne Green. His son got into a load of bother and ended up in jail
To my mind, the most interesting thing about the Scottish results was the rise of anti-SNP (or Unionist) tactical voting.
Nothing else explains the extraordinary swings to the LibDems in Orkney & Shetland, Edinburgh West, and North East Fife. Or from the LibDems to the Conservative Party in Southern Scotland and the Borders.
If this continues in 2020, we can reasonably expect a few of the SNP 2015 gains to be lost.
Yes, I would agree. The Tories and the Lib Dems have learned how to play this game effectively. Only SLAB still seems to struggle to understand. I think it is now very likely that Scotland will contribute more Tory MPs than Labour MPs in 2020. Remarkable.
It's staggering, given they are on perhaps 7% in Scotland, but the libdems could actually gain seats in Scotland in 2020 based on these results. (And assuming tactical voting continues at the General)
Ming Campbell's old seat now called Fife NE has to be a real possibility with a seat in Edinburgh more of an outside bet but their old base in the borders from David Steel days has gone completely blue as has most of their old redoubts in the North East.
Yes, Fife NE is probably odds on in 2020 (assuming that the LDs don't disappear before then), and Edinburgh West (where there's a big Conservative vote to squeeze) has to be a reasonable shot too.
Assuming Carmichael is not the candidate, Orkney & Shetland will be a comfortable LibDem hold.
It's amazing that we can pick a handful of seats that the Tories and Lib Dems could win back in 2020 but Labour have few prospects of any kind of recovery in Scotland. It will be interesting to see if the Tories can capitalise on becoming the main opposition party since it will allow them a higher profile to campaign for Westminster from.
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
With I think 6 councils still to count and declare I think my forecast of councillor gains/losses will be pretty much spot on . Well done the Conservatives in Scotland a ( to me ) unexpectedly strong performance but do not get carried away . There is still 4 years left for the Conservative government at Westminster to re toxify the brand and set back the recovery in Scotland .
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3) Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7) Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1) Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3) Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12) Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
Norfolk is an odd one. Bett's lost - he was the chair of the local Tories, was a big wheel on the Police Authority, then became PCC as an Indy, and now ousted by the improbably named - Lorne Green. His son got into a load of bother and ended up in jail
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
Agreed - I have seen Tories wanting, quote, 'permanent revolution' in respect of organisational, er, reorganisation for local government and the like. Massive change I get, flexibility I get, but there seems a lot of tinkering always going on without the question of whether it will do any good.
SNP versus the Tories in Scotland for the foreseeable.
I wonder for how many decades the SNP will keep winning that battle :-)
Given they have total control of the central belt probably for a while - but the electoral system could be against them if the Cons move nearer to 30% and they slip further. I could see that happening and Edinburgh is an interesting city to watch for the future.
"south of the border the Conservatives NEV significantly underperformed recent Westminster polling, perhaps indicating the Corbyn effect. "
I would suggest that people see UKIP as a safe protest vote that's not Labour between general elections.
If you look at the NEV 2011 - 2015, UKIP seem to exist as a repository of that vote.
In the long term, if people get used to voting UKIP, that's another problem to deal with.
The implications for EU polling are clear . The online pollsters are over stating Conservative support and UKIP support even more so . This goes quite a long way to explaining their more favourable results for Leave compared to phone polls .
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
Unfortunately there remain serious performance and financial weaknesses in both education and health which the 'professionals' want to ignore while taking the tax handouts. Short of outright 'privatisation' it is difficult to avoid the need for constant reviews.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
I think part of the problem is that the permanent officials tend to be of a below average quality - Wormald springs to mind - but it also does seem to be a gig where too many ministers trying to make a mark for the sake of publicity or their careers end up causing total chaos because they don't get just how much of a strain the system is under, and how much more difficult constant mindless tinkering and budget cuts make things. Similar comments could be made for Health, of course.
It's a structural defect of both politics and most large businesses that it's thought to be essential in a good Minister/manager to change stuff around - if you say the system seems to be working reasonably well so you won't disrupt it, people think you're pathetic.
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
Nick endorses conservatism.
Nick is certainly doing all he can to ensure a big Tory win in 2020.
SNP versus the Tories in Scotland for the foreseeable.
I wonder for how many decades the SNP will keep winning that battle :-)
Given they have total control of the central belt probably for a while - but the electoral system could be against them if the Cons move nearer to 30% and they slip further. I could see that happening and Edinburgh is an interesting city to watch for the future.
Things change. The Tories and the SNP are going to spend a lot of the next five years agreeing on tax and other economic issues. That may get noticed st some stage. Tory voters will presumably be less concerned about that than at least some SNP voters.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
An unfortunate encounter with Cyril Smith perhaps?
Willie Rennie from his base of 5 per cent of the vote and the 5th party status tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what to do. Well that's them off the table.
Ruthie from her base of 21 per cent of the vote tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what their mandate is. Well that's them off the table.
That leaves the Greens and Labour and more than enough on any issue for the SNP to govern.
I have a tendency to feel that this week has largely been a re-run of last May.
London has elected Labour. The percentage of the vote on first call was virtually identical to that of the 2015 General Election. Whilst Khan is now Mayor, the real numbers have not moved since last May.
Scotland has seen an overwhelming SNP victory. Whilst there is no majority, it is only a whisker away from being one. There is a power slippage, that is more important symbolically than in reality. The Tories and Lib Dems have made a small comeback, but again the unionist vote is split. Labour go from bad to worse, and will no doubt be on the end of a thrashing at next year's council elections.
Wales meanwhile has continued with it's loosening of the Labour grip. It's tempting to imagine that it is Scotland in slo-mo with Plaid and UKIP playing the role of the SNP in 2007.
Constituency: Labour 34.7 Nationalists 33 Regional: Labour 31.5 Nationalists 33.8
Labour are only being protected in Wales by a split nationalist vote.
And non-London England?
What of Nuneaton, Thurrock and Tamworth? Still leaving Labour and switching to Tory and UKIP.
One change is the pockets of Lib Dem re-emergence in Manchester and Liverpool, Fife and Edinburgh.
I don't see anything to suggest that Labour are in anything other than decline to their urban core in England. University towns, areas of high ethnic concentration and London luvviedom and hipsters.
SNP versus the Tories in Scotland for the foreseeable.
I wonder for how many decades the SNP will keep winning that battle :-)
Given they have total control of the central belt probably for a while - but the electoral system could be against them if the Cons move nearer to 30% and they slip further. I could see that happening and Edinburgh is an interesting city to watch for the future.
Things change. The Tories and the SNP are going to spend a lot of the next five years agreeing on tax and other economic issues. That may get noticed st some stage. Tory voters will presumably be less concerned about that than at least some SNP voters.
Nicola may be seen as being in Ruth's pocket and then perhaps SLab will resuscitate.
Willie Rennie from his base of 5 per cent of the vote and the 5th party status tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what to do. Well that's them off the table.
Ruthie from her base of 21 per cent of the vote tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what their mandate is. Well that's them off the table.
That leaves the Greens and Labour and more than enough on any issue for the SNP to govern.
The Tories will back the SNP on tax cuts for the well off, public services squeezes, no redistributive policies and not raising top rate of income tax. Ruth and Nicola will spend plenty of time agreeing on economics.
Epping Forest results so far Cons lose 1 seat to Residents and 1 to Greens Amber Valley 1 Con hold and 1 Lab hold so far small swing Lab to Con compared to 2012
Ignoring Western Isles, Orkeny and Shetland for being tiny the parties got over 10,000 votes in the following number of constituencies
LD: 3 LAB: 10 CON: 16 SNP: 69
Subtracting the ones they won gives
LD: 1 LAB: 7 CON: 9 SNP: 10
For Constituencies where they got over 10000 votes but did not win. I feel that gives a decent scope for where parties could improve on the constituency vote, although I haven't looked for the blow out seats where the winner was massively ahead so that could cut the figures down further.
Outside the island seats Ruth Davidson won with the lowest absolute vote of any candidate. the next lowest was Glasgow Kelvin, where a Green Candidate also stood.
I always take the trouble to answer you because your contributions are thoughtful (in contrast Scot P I reckon is the all-night service of the Tory research department!).
Sturgeon does not have the same policies as the Tories. She is reversing the Osborne tax cut for top raters for example which was enough to provoke Cabinet resignations. She is not going to impose tuition fees. Good thing to as it was the policy which did for the Lib Dems.
Also since the Tory tax policy in Scotland was to do nothing at all it would be difficult to have the same policy!!!
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I'm beginning to wonder if Zac will stand down early. He's being publicly cast adrift by unhappy Tories - it was reported that few were there to support him at the result and he looked desperate to get off stage.
I'd imagine he's pretty hurt and bruised right now.
And completely unfairly. He did no worse than the party in London last year. The questions about Khan were perfectly reasonable despite idiots like Yvette Cooper who still believe blindly that being an ethnicminoriy gives you an automatic scrutiny shield. He was not a great candidate and neither was Khan. The result given the disturbed state of British politics today was perfectly respectable.
He also had his campaign disrupted and over shadowed by the tory splits in the referendum campaign.
Mr. kle4, that sounds like the mindless modernisation of a Bercow, where change is assumed to be inherently good.
My opinion of Bercow really dropped over the whole debacle over the appointment of a new Clerk for the Commons, where he tried to secure the appointment of someone who was wholly unsuitable for a major aspect of the job, and his defence was that he wanted to split the two roles of the job (having a chief exec for the administrative stuff) but having been stymied had to stick with one - because it was in no way a defence of trying to appoint someone unsuitable. If those against the reform of the position were wrong, fine, but having not reformed the position, the solution was not the appoint someone unsuitable to half the position in protext.
What of Nuneaton, Thurrock and Tamworth? Still leaving Labour and switching to Tory and UKIP.
Swindon was also seen as a bellweather seat, and Lab won 3 seats off the Tories there, although I do not know if the wards in question were generally favourable to them anyway.
Ignoring Western Isles, Orkeny and Shetland for being tiny the parties got over 10,000 votes in the following number of constituencies
LD: 3 LAB: 10 CON: 16 SNP: 69
Subtracting the ones they won gives
LD: 1 LAB: 7 CON: 9 SNP: 10
For Constituencies where they got over 10000 votes but did not win. I feel that gives a decent scope for where parties could improve on the constituency vote, although I haven't looked for the blow out seats where the winner was massively ahead so that could cut the figures down further.
Outside the island seats Ruth Davidson won with the lowest absolute vote of any candidate. the next lowest was Glasgow Kelvin, where a Green Candidate also stood.
LD recovery seems highly targeted, to say the least.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
An unfortunate encounter with Cyril Smith perhaps?
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
What do you think of sharing a party with David Ward?
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I couldn't vote in the end, a plague on both their houses. But I was astonished by how many long-time Conservative voters told me they were choosing Khan.
I have a tendency to feel that this week has largely been a re-run of last May.
London has elected Labour. The percentage of the vote on first call was virtually identical to that of the 2015 General Election. Whilst Khan is now Mayor, the real numbers have not moved since last May.
Scotland has seen an overwhelming SNP victory. Whilst there is no majority, it is only a whisker away from being one.
I believe the correct term is a Scottish Panda short of a majority.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
An unfortunate encounter with Cyril Smith perhaps?
Who can recall Mark Senior's posts which always attacked the Conservatives and never Labour? Pot calling the kettle black?
Mr. kle4, that sounds like the mindless modernisation of a Bercow, where change is assumed to be inherently good.
My opinion of Bercow really dropped over the whole debacle over the appointment of a new Clerk for the Commons, where he tried to secure the appointment of someone who was wholly unsuitable for a major aspect of the job, and his defence was that he wanted to split the two roles of the job (having a chief exec for the administrative stuff) but having been stymied had to stick with one - because it was in no way a defence of trying to appoint someone unsuitable. If those against the reform of the position were wrong, fine, but having not reformed the position, the solution was not the appoint someone unsuitable to half the position in protext.
That whole farce smacked of empire building/power grab by Bercow. I've never rated him. His negatives far outweigh any positives.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
An unfortunate encounter with Cyril Smith perhaps?
Who can recall Mark Senior's posts which always attacked the Conservatives and never Labour? Pot calling the kettle black?
It is his utter inability to ever criticise the Lib Dems I find so amusing. At least most other posters on here are willing om attack their chosen party when it does something they disagree with. We see a lot of Labour and UKIP supporters a decent number of Tories doing this - although there are some of the usual suspects for whom the party leadership can do no wrong. Mark is a classic example of utter party loyalty. It is very sad.
Mr. kle4, bellwether [very understandable typo, though. A wether is a castrated ram, the one with the bell leads the flock].
Edited extra bit: incidentally, is it 'toe the party line' or 'tow the party line'?
Damnit, I started spelling it the correct way as well, then changed it!
So I'm not guessing on toe/tow! I'd assume the former on the assumption you lose a toe if you do cross the line.
Wiki
"Toe the line" is an idiomatic expression meaning either to conform to a rule or standard, or to stand poised at the starting line in a footrace. Other phrases which were once used in the early 1800s and have the same meaning were toe the mark and toe the plank.
The LDs never did get to understand the meaning of hypocrisy.
"A reminder that the LibDems have an even worse record on dealing with anti-Semitism than Corbyn’s Labour…" Guido
Just the same problem with the hard left.
You still seem not to have had treatment for your pathological hatred of the Lib Dems , perhaps a psychologist can trace it back to something that happened in your childhood .
An unfortunate encounter with Cyril Smith perhaps?
Lol - tho he was big enough to be both Labour and LD!
I am glad Khan won in London. And I honestly never thought I would find myself saying that about a Labour politician. Goldsmith's campaign shown an horrendous lack of sense and decorum. His willingness to drag himself through the gutter to win shows a vast lack of both experience and of basic common sense as well as a questionable moral stand.
I may not like Khan's political views but if I had had to choose between the two even I would have been choosing him over Goldsmith.
I'm beginning to wonder if Zac will stand down early. He's being publicly cast adrift by unhappy Tories - it was reported that few were there to support him at the result and he looked desperate to get off stage.
I'd imagine he's pretty hurt and bruised right now.
And completely unfairly. He did no worse than the party in London last year. The questions about Khan were perfectly reasonable despite idiots like Yvette Cooper who still believe blindly that being an ethnicminoriy gives you an automatic scrutiny shield. He was not a great candidate and neither was Khan. The result given the disturbed state of British politics today was perfectly respectable.
He also had his campaign disrupted and over shadowed by the tory splits in the referendum campaign.
I was trying to be not controversial so will say no more
So no hanging chads after all in London. That would have been exciting.
Strange that the commentariat are almost universally saying that the reason why Sadiq won was because Zac ran a crap campaign. Hardly any attention is paid to Sadiq's own effort. We know for example that Zac tried to get the Indian vote by saying Sadiq would tax their jewellery, but what did Sadiq say to that demographic and was he successful?
Meanwhile, go Jemima! The Daily Mail don't like her at all. What's wrong with some people? Are they jealous or what? Do they just hate her because she's a Muslim?
One thing is for certain: Melanie Phillips and her racist ilk are going to have an absolute field day ranting on about "Londonistan", not just in the aftermath of Sadiq's election but inserting their attitude as a strong structural part of the political discourse over the next four years.
Ignoring Western Isles, Orkeny and Shetland for being tiny the parties got over 10,000 votes in the following number of constituencies
LD: 3 LAB: 10 CON: 16 SNP: 69
Subtracting the ones they won gives
LD: 1 LAB: 7 CON: 9 SNP: 10
For Constituencies where they got over 10000 votes but did not win. I feel that gives a decent scope for where parties could improve on the constituency vote, although I haven't looked for the blow out seats where the winner was massively ahead so that could cut the figures down further.
Outside the island seats Ruth Davidson won with the lowest absolute vote of any candidate. the next lowest was Glasgow Kelvin, where a Green Candidate also stood.
LD recovery seems highly targeted, to say the least.
Lib Dem win in Edinburgh West is by far the most impressive and important result of the night, being completely ignored for some reason.
Unfortunately there remain serious performance and financial weaknesses in both education and health which the 'professionals' want to ignore while taking the tax handouts. Short of outright 'privatisation' it is difficult to avoid the need for constant reviews.
I don't know your background, but my 16 years in pharma industry management did not lead me to think that private ownership was a proteciton against constant reorganisation. I really liked the company I worked for in many other ways, but they were incapable of settling for any model without wanting to fiddle with it.
Epping Forest results so far Cons lose 1 seat to Residents and 1 to Greens Amber Valley 1 Con hold and 1 Lab hold so far small swing Lab to Con compared to 2012
I voted in Epping on Thursday and not much UKIP presence in council elections though Bob Spink stood for PCC
Unfortunately there remain serious performance and financial weaknesses in both education and health which the 'professionals' want to ignore while taking the tax handouts. Short of outright 'privatisation' it is difficult to avoid the need for constant reviews.
I don't know your background, but my 16 years in pharma industry management did not lead me to think that private ownership was a proteciton against constant reorganisation. I really liked the company I worked for in many other ways, but they were incapable of settling for any model without wanting to fiddle with it.
Teaching 33 years - where the biggest problem throughout was Local authority incompetence and waste followed by the TUs. I don't favour privatisation but accept the nedd for governement to seek value for taxpayers,.
Yesterday some comparisons were made here between the BBC's NEV projection of Lab 31% and Con 30% and the 2012 NEV share of Lab 37% and Con 31%. That's quite a reasonable comparison, as almost all of the seats contested yesterday were last contested in 2012.
But in interpreting those figures, note that: - In terms of changes in English council seats on that 2012 base, Lab were last night 17 down (on 939) and Con 23 down (on 523), so in relative terms the Conservatives lost more. It's hard to reconcile that with the calculated shift in NEV, which would point to big Labour losses and some Con gains from Labour. Either there's been a big shift in the efficiency of the distribution of the Labour vote or there is cause to question whether the 2016 NEV calculation (made relatively early yesterday) is broadly correct. - In 2012, Labour's NEV share substantially underperformed its parliamentary polling, something that happened consistently across the last parliament. This time, the calculated Labour NEV share is consistent with Labour polling, while the Conservatives are underperforming theirs. Perhaps the post 2015 polling adjustments are working now.
Yes, I'm against change for the sake of change or (worse) for the sake of a manager being seen to do something.
It isn't obvious to me that the Conservative government agrees, though. You'd think that Perpetual Revolution was an election pledge, the "You shall have academies" nonsense being the latest example.
Delighted though I am with Ruth's triumph it does seem to me that a lot of the comments on here are seriously underrating Sturgeon's success. The result in 2011 was something of a freak, a combination of constituency and list wins that maximised the efficiency of the SNP vote in a way that was unlikely to be repeated. It was also achieved because there was a very strong desire to force through a referendum by (thankfully) just less than half of the Scottish people.
To retain the same level of dominance once that referendum has been lost is a remarkable achievement. The SNP constituency vote went up and they picked up more of the Labour fiefdoms destroying them in Glasgow. Winning the Council there next year looks like a formality now.
Under the list system majorities should be almost impossible and Nicola came very close. Like Ruth she has profited from Labour's collapse into irrelevance but like her she has also taken full advantage. As a political party the SNP remain sensationally successful and only those who regard everything other than independence itself as immaterial could say otherwise. The winners in the UK yesterday were Nicola, Ruth and Sadiq in roughly that order. Everyone else lost.
The only sane Tory in the village. PS: Compare and contrast with the opposite our site village idiot.
Aye, David usually speaks sense. The difference between actually living in Scotland and being a Yoon migrant, pontificating impotently from afar I guess.
I thought Sweden's Dickson was your pal.
Never met him, though since he's banned from posting here he doesn't enter into the comparison.
Hi could you explain this? Count after count in Holyrood in the fptp results we saw Labour down 10% and Tories up 10% like wtf why are labour switching to the tories it would seem? It can't be because they are THE "unionist party" because this was happening in seats where the tories had no hope of stopping the SNP, so why do you think this hapened? are the fptp seats and lists seats linked so more votes on fptp but without seats = more top up on lists?
Unfortunately there remain serious performance and financial weaknesses in both education and health which the 'professionals' want to ignore while taking the tax handouts. Short of outright 'privatisation' it is difficult to avoid the need for constant reviews.
I don't know your background, but my 16 years in pharma industry management did not lead me to think that private ownership was a proteciton against constant reorganisation. I really liked the company I worked for in many other ways, but they were incapable of settling for any model without wanting to fiddle with it.
A lot of professional services advisers gain from reorganisation; and constant structural change shields managements from concerted delivery. Plenty of people have plenty of reasons to advocate it in both public and private sectors. Where would PWC, BCG etc be without reorganisation and re-engineering?
Another comment: Sadiq Khan calls other people "Uncle Toms", when he wants to get non-white votes, but he's an Uncle Tom himself! He calls himself a Muslim and supports gay marriage. As all Muslims know (apart from Uncle Toms!), homosexuality is forbidden (haram) in Islam. Keeping to the traditional Muslim view doesn't imply that someone wants to blow stuff up.
In public relations terms we are witnessing "polarisation PR", not just the rainbow Coca-Cola advertisement PR that many people think.
Comments
I'd imagine he's pretty hurt and bruised right now.
Readers of this site are pocketing their winnings.
Readers of his site are crying in their porridge.
Things to watch in the future: what do Plaid Cymru do with their second place? Will the SNP be able to stop daydreaming about independence and use the extensive powers they possess, and if so will they seek to close the gap with the new main opposition or continue to suffocate Scottish Labour, and how will they ensure that the Greens don't prosper?
Ind holds: Dorset, Gloucestershire and Avon/Somerset (3)
Con gains from Ind: Kent, Lincolnshire, Warwickshire, West Mercia, Hampshire, Norfolk and Surrey (7)
Con gain from Lab: Bedfordshire (1)
Lab gain from Con: Leicestershire, Humberside, Cheshire (3)
Con hold: Hertfordshire, North Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Sussex, Suffolk, Thames Valley, Wiltshire, Cambridgeshire, Cumbria, Devon/Cornwall, Essex, Northamptonshire (12)
Lab hold: Cleveland, Durham, Lancashire, Merseyside, Northumbria, Nottinghamshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, West Midlands, Derbyshire (10)
Wales count today. In 2012 they were 1 Lab 1 Con 2 Ind
http://static.standard.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/story_large/public/thumbnails/image/2016/05/06/23/assembly.jpg
They are standing in order of election: Green's Sian Barry on the far right of the screen, UKIP's Peter Whittle, LibDem Caroline Pidgeon, Conservative Andrew Boff, Labour's Fiona Twycross, Green Caroline Russell, Labour's Tom Copley, Labour's Nicky Gavron and UKIP's David Kurten
Missing Kemi Badenoch and Shaun Bailey
Assuming Carmichael is not the candidate, Orkney & Shetland will be a comfortable LibDem hold.
Barnet and Camden – Andrew Dismore (LAB)
Bexley and Bromley – Gareth Bacon (CON)
Brent and Harrow – Navin Shah (LAB)
City and East – Unmesh Desai (LAB)
Croydon and Sutton – Steve O’Connell (CON)
Ealing and Hillingdon – Onkar Sahota (LAB)
Enfield and Haringey – Joanne McCartney (LAB)
Greenwich and Lewisham – Len Duvall (LAB)
Havering and Redbridge – Keith Prince (CON)
Lambeth and Southwark – Florence Nosegbe (LAB)
Merton and Wandsworth – Leonie Cooper (LAB)
North East – Jennette Arnold (LAB)
South West – Tony Arbour (CON)
West Central – Tony Devenish (CON)
Overall 15 out of 25 were also sitting in the previous Assembly
Basica salary is £55,161
@BigRich an others
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eArmDpMR_p5op62r6nW_mf7OgoXybDHmgQCiywbp4hs/edit?usp=sharing
Contains complete spreadsheet of Constituency Results. I will be improving this later today (adding Region and the like) but that is the raw numbers.
One limit is that the BBC lists all Independents as just IND so bear that in mind
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3204987/Police-Commissioner-s-son-jailed-killing-mother-crash.html
I'm sure she'll give him a job in one of her overseas pants factories (assuming they're still going).
http://order-order.com/2016/05/07/david-the-jews-ward-elected-in-bradford/
I wonder for how many decades the SNP will keep winning that battle :-)
I remember asking Patricia Hewitt when she was SoS for Health if we really needed another NHS reorganisation as she was proposing. She hesitated and said, "Well, this will really be the last one." I said "Yeah, right" and there was another one within two years.
Well done the Conservatives in Scotland a ( to me ) unexpectedly strong performance but do not get carried away . There is still 4 years left for the Conservative government at Westminster to re toxify the brand and set back the recovery in Scotland .
Does anyone know an average on numbers of rejected ballots? I was at a PCC count and there seemed a lot more than at other counts I've been at.
I would suggest that people see UKIP as a safe protest vote that's not Labour between general elections.
If you look at the NEV 2011 - 2015, UKIP seem to exist as a repository of that vote.
In the long term, if people get used to voting UKIP, that's another problem to deal with.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-36139073
Bloody traitors teaching Johnny foreigner to play football better than us ;-)
Just the same problem with the hard left.
Anyone who does not vote Conservative at all times and in all places should be put to death. By torture. Yesterday.
Willie Rennie from his base of 5 per cent of the vote and the 5th party status tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what to do. Well that's them off the table.
Ruthie from her base of 21 per cent of the vote tells the SNP (with 47 per cent) what their mandate is. Well that's them off the table.
That leaves the Greens and Labour and more than enough on any issue for the SNP to govern.
London has elected Labour. The percentage of the vote on first call was virtually identical to that of the 2015 General Election. Whilst Khan is now Mayor, the real numbers have not moved since last May.
Scotland has seen an overwhelming SNP victory. Whilst there is no majority, it is only a whisker away from being one. There is a power slippage, that is more important symbolically than in reality. The Tories and Lib Dems have made a small comeback, but again the unionist vote is split. Labour go from bad to worse, and will no doubt be on the end of a thrashing at next year's council elections.
Wales meanwhile has continued with it's loosening of the Labour grip. It's tempting to imagine that it is Scotland in slo-mo with Plaid and UKIP playing the role of the SNP in 2007.
Constituency: Labour 34.7 Nationalists 33
Regional: Labour 31.5 Nationalists 33.8
Labour are only being protected in Wales by a split nationalist vote.
And non-London England?
What of Nuneaton, Thurrock and Tamworth? Still leaving Labour and switching to Tory and UKIP.
One change is the pockets of Lib Dem re-emergence in Manchester and Liverpool, Fife and Edinburgh.
I don't see anything to suggest that Labour are in anything other than decline to their urban core in England. University towns, areas of high ethnic concentration and London luvviedom and hipsters.
Amber Valley 1 Con hold and 1 Lab hold so far small swing Lab to Con compared to 2012
Ignoring Western Isles, Orkeny and Shetland for being tiny the parties got over 10,000 votes in the following number of constituencies
LD: 3
LAB: 10
CON: 16
SNP: 69
Subtracting the ones they won gives
LD: 1
LAB: 7
CON: 9
SNP: 10
For Constituencies where they got over 10000 votes but did not win. I feel that gives a decent scope for where parties could improve on the constituency vote, although I haven't looked for the blow out seats where the winner was massively ahead so that could cut the figures down further.
Outside the island seats Ruth Davidson won with the lowest absolute vote of any candidate. the next lowest was Glasgow Kelvin, where a Green Candidate also stood.
I always take the trouble to answer you because your contributions are thoughtful (in contrast Scot P I reckon is the all-night service of the Tory research department!).
Sturgeon does not have the same policies as the Tories. She is reversing the Osborne tax cut for top raters for example which was enough to provoke Cabinet resignations. She is not going to impose tuition fees. Good thing to as it was the policy which did for the Lib Dems.
Also since the Tory tax policy in Scotland was to do nothing at all it would be difficult to have the same policy!!!
Edited extra bit: incidentally, is it 'toe the party line' or 'tow the party line'?
IIRC Lorne Green was the name of an American actor on TV i 1950/60's. He played in Westerns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZ6mrlbdZMk
So I'm not guessing on toe/tow! I'd assume the former on the assumption you lose a toe if you do cross the line.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZRuIhtC9Mo
"Toe the line" is an idiomatic expression meaning either to conform to a rule or standard, or to stand poised at the starting line in a footrace. Other phrases which were once used in the early 1800s and have the same meaning were toe the mark and toe the plank.
Anyway, time for a break from the computer.
Anyone who does not vote Conservative at all times and in all places should be put to death. By torture. Yesterday.
This may not be the last of dark campaigns by the Tories but it is a significant defeat for the Tory dark arts machine.
And such a shame to see Zac who seems such a decent man to be marred by racism.
Strange that the commentariat are almost universally saying that the reason why Sadiq won was because Zac ran a crap campaign. Hardly any attention is paid to Sadiq's own effort. We know for example that Zac tried to get the Indian vote by saying Sadiq would tax their jewellery, but what did Sadiq say to that demographic and was he successful?
Meanwhile, go Jemima! The Daily Mail don't like her at all. What's wrong with some people? Are they jealous or what? Do they just hate her because she's a Muslim?
One thing is for certain: Melanie Phillips and her racist ilk are going to have an absolute field day ranting on about "Londonistan", not just in the aftermath of Sadiq's election but inserting their attitude as a strong structural part of the political discourse over the next four years.
Con lose 1 to Res and 1 to Green
But in interpreting those figures, note that:
- In terms of changes in English council seats on that 2012 base, Lab were last night 17 down (on 939) and Con 23 down (on 523), so in relative terms the Conservatives lost more. It's hard to reconcile that with the calculated shift in NEV, which would point to big Labour losses and some Con gains from Labour. Either there's been a big shift in the efficiency of the distribution of the Labour vote or there is cause to question whether the 2016 NEV calculation (made relatively early yesterday) is broadly correct.
- In 2012, Labour's NEV share substantially underperformed its parliamentary polling, something that happened consistently across the last parliament. This time, the calculated Labour NEV share is consistent with Labour polling, while the Conservatives are underperforming theirs. Perhaps the post 2015 polling adjustments are working now.
It isn't obvious to me that the Conservative government agrees, though. You'd think that Perpetual Revolution was an election pledge, the "You shall have academies" nonsense being the latest example.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-06/showdown-leaked-letter-imf-tells-germany-“debt-relief-greece-or-imf-drops-out”
In public relations terms we are witnessing "polarisation PR", not just the rainbow Coca-Cola advertisement PR that many people think.
https://twitter.com/PlatoSays/status/728834419826565120