> @eek said: > > @_Anazina_ said: > > > @Sean_F said: > > > > > I'm surprised by how badly the Conservatives did in Essex. > > > > > > > > I think it makes sense, Leaver-y but with many people with much to lose if Brexit becomes an economic disaster, as opposed to Leaver strongholds in the E Mids and North where there are many people who feel they’ve nothing left to lose. I suspect Essex Man and his counterparts around the country are the bulk of those who’ve shifted from Leave to Remain in polling. > > > > > > Indeed. > > I'm confused why people are looking at this on a national / European level. Locally it's a lot of councils losing their majority because they haven't delivered / people want a change..
Id imagine most councils have not delivered as they have less funding and increasing demands, so you are right that whilst that lasts it should be tough for incumbent councils, hard to know much is local/national/European/protest, everyone is guessing.
> @AndyJS said: > The most astonishing results IMO were in Ashfield, where in a lot of the wards the result was something like Ind 87%, Lab 8%, Con 3%. A total meltdown of the two established parties.
De piero will get turfed at the next election. Remainer in the badlands
> @thecommissioner said: > Corbyn can't be seen to enable any kind of Brexit even if May did agree to the customs union. > > He is sitting on a pile of absolutely useless surplus votes in places like London. > > For Labour to win an election he needs to add votes in places that aren't remain obsessed.
> @Wulfrun_Phil said: > In terms of the media narrative, Labour has been hurt by the fact that it had the bulk of its net losses quite early on last night after which the figure largely held steady today, whereas the Conservative losses seem to have got much worse throughout the day. > > The BBC as a consequence took to reporting "heavy Conservative and Labour losses" from the outset as if there was some equivalence, and lazily failed to change tack as the nuances played out. > > Right now we have a net Labour loss of 83 compared to a net Conservative loss of 1180 - a ratio of something like 1:14. Even allowing for 2015 being a moderately good year for the Conservatives (enough to secure only a very narrow parliamentary majority) those results are nothing like equally bad for Labour and the Conservatives.
But for the Tories to lose 1200 seats - and for net, Labour to pick up NONE of them - that is a rare old event.....
> @justin124 said: > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament.
They had their script and weren’t going to deviate regardless . So in this bizarre scenario either way they have the script .
Tories and Labour up , get on with Brexit .
Tories and Labour down with huge gains for pro EU Lib Dems and the Greens , get on with Brexit.
The BBC and the risible Laura K are by some chalk the worst of the main networks in terms of political coverage and analysis. They are swimming in a pond with Channel 5 and TalkRadio.
The swing to independents will be interesting in terms of good council government. I can speak only for one I know, Herefordshire, but many of the independents are perhaps not best suited to active, considered, thoughtful and effective decision making (as opposed to professional level whinging). “None of the above” is great until people realise the above do have some merits.
> @thecommissioner said: > Corbyn can't be seen to enable any kind of Brexit even if May did agree to the customs union. > > He is sitting on a pile of absolutely useless surplus votes in places like London. > > For Labour to win an election he needs to add votes in places that aren't remain obsessed.
It seems his strategy is not to add Labour votes but split the Tory vote up into Tory/Brexit/other protest/stay at home. It may work.
That projected vote share is still a projection for support in _local_ elections, though. It's not surprising it's different from polls for Westminster elections.
In 2017 the Lib Dems had a projected national share of 18% (only one point lower than today's figure). A month later they polled 7.4% in a general election.
> @justin124 said: > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
I think that is fair - the Greens have done disproportionately well. The LibDem result is also excellent and they seem to have concentrated their efforts very effectively, with some particularly big gains in areas where they've previously done well but were clobbered badly in 2015.
> @HYUFD said: > > @Wulfrun_Phil said: > > In terms of the media narrative, Labour has been hurt by the fact that it had the bulk of its net losses quite early on last night after which the figure largely held steady today, whereas the Conservative losses seem to have got much worse throughout the day. > > > > The BBC as a consequence took to reporting "heavy Conservative and Labour losses" from the outset as if there was some equivalence, and lazily failed to change tack as the nuances played out. > > > > Right now we have a net Labour loss of 83 compared to a net Conservative loss of 1180 - a ratio of something like 1:14. Even allowing for 2015 being a moderately good year for the Conservatives (enough to secure only a very narrow parliamentary majority) those results are nothing like equally bad for Labour and the Conservatives. > > Yet still abysmal for any opposition party 9 years out of power
It is not brilliant but still represents a 3% swing from Con to Lab compared with 2015 - and a 1% swing compared with 2017. As I pointed out earlier, Labour lost seats in the Local Elections of 1959,1960 & 1961 despite having been out of office since 1951. In May 1970 the Tories lost several hundred seats to Labour - yet went on to win the General Election just five weeks later.
> > I'm surprised by how badly the Conservatives did in Essex.
>
>
>
> I think it makes sense, Leaver-y but with many people with much to lose if Brexit becomes an economic disaster, as opposed to Leaver strongholds in the E Mids and North where there are many people who feel they’ve nothing left to lose. I suspect Essex Man and his counterparts around the country are the bulk of those who’ve shifted from Leave to Remain in polling.
>
>
> Indeed.
I'm confused why people are looking at this on a national / European level. Locally it's a lot of councils losing their majority because they haven't delivered / people want a change..
I'd be surprised if there was anywhere in the country more likely to back the Brexit party than Essex.
> @justin124 said: > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
Yes, the Greens also picked up a seat in Waltham Abbey to add to their seats in Buckhurst Hill East in Epping Forest
> @thecommissioner said: > > @_Anazina_ said: > > > > @Sean_F said: > > > > > > > I'm surprised by how badly the Conservatives did in Essex. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it makes sense, Leaver-y but with many people with much to lose if Brexit becomes an economic disaster, as opposed to Leaver strongholds in the E Mids and North where there are many people who feel they’ve nothing left to lose. I suspect Essex Man and his counterparts around the country are the bulk of those who’ve shifted from Leave to Remain in polling. > > > > > > > > > Indeed. > > > > I'm confused why people are looking at this on a national / European level. Locally it's a lot of councils losing their majority because they haven't delivered / people want a change.. > > I'd be surprised if there was anywhere in the country more likely to back the Brexit party than Essex.
Lincolnshire.
There are some Remain patches in Essex including much of Chelmsford where the LDs made big gains last night
> @Barnesian said: > > @justin124 said: > > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years. > > The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament.
I think they are very different on (national) policies but agree they share some characteristics that would make them good partners. A non aggression pact would increase their share of MPs, which could be important if it was another hung parliament - it would also put pressure ChangeUK to join in - if Change had run yesterday as well, how many of the LibDem gains could have been lost? The narrative could have been very different.
> @Big_G_NorthWales said: > > @dyedwoolie said: > > Change will be delighted at the independent surge. > > Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
Consuming the lib dems maybe, why would anyone merge with them?
> @El_Capitano said: > Congratulations Nick. > > So for the PB party, I make that +2 (Nick, Andy), -1 (JohnO) at principal council level. #winninghere > > (Any I've missed? This is your chance to delurk, folks!)
is someone having a laugh? I'm sure Dyfodol must mean Daffodil, not future.
Yes. Because picking the word in English that sounds a bit like the word in another language is an entirely reliable method of translation and never ever goes wrong
Middle class Tory Remainers clearly deserting the party , the strong Lib Dem performance in those traditional marginals should really worry the Tories .
> @noneoftheabove said: > > @Barnesian said: > > > @justin124 said: > > > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years. > > > > The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament. > > I think they are very different on (national) policies but agree they share some characteristics that would make them good partners. A non aggression pact would increase their share of MPs, which could be important if it was another hung parliament - it would also put pressure ChangeUK to join in - if Change had run yesterday as well, how many of the LibDem gains could have been lost? The narrative could have been very different.
I think ChangeUK is likely split the Tory vote at the Remainer end, while the Brexit party splits it at the Leaver end. This helps LibDems in LibDem/Tory marginals.
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > On Topic > > > > Yeah right. > > > > The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors. > > > > The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story > > How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections? > > This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
Today is kinda like the Tories facing 120 Westminster by-elections.
So not having been following the debate through the day, judging by the end results it looks like the Tories are looking to be doing even worse than the worst predictions, Labour actually losing seats, and the LDs better than anticipated?
The Tory losses being over a thousand looks dreadful, that seems more than the worst predictions I saw so the header title looks strange.
> @bigjohnowls said: > On Topic > > Yeah right. > > The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors. > > The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
The problem is the conservatives are expected to get a going over but it is labour who need to capture their seats and today the lib dems have caused the mayhem while labour go backwards. Time for labour to decide for leave or remain but also rid themselves of Corbyn and his cabal
> @Stereotomy said: > > @dyedwoolie said: > > > Change will be delighted at the independent surge. > > > > Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems > > Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals. > > And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
Tbf with the likes of Fat nonce and Freud in their past the dems are rather too liberal sometimes
> @Jonathan said: > > @JohnO said: > > FPT - Many thanks for the commiserations on my sub optimal result in deepest ex blue Surrey. Majority against was 300 at the upper end of expectations, though I knew I’d lose. But for one elector, it was obviously personal for he/she scrawled in big black pencil TRAITOR against my name, which I thought a mite harsh. Must have known my Fenian background...... > > Hope they wrote it neatly in the box and it counted as a vote. > > Sorry you lost, you’re one of the better blue peril. >
Sadly, he put a small but perfectly formed X in my opponents’ box!
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > Beaconsfield Tories have seen the light, the ERG lot are more likely to be deselected now.
Why would Grieve listen to his association to try to help deliver Brexit? He's on a practically religious mission, the erudite version of Baker and Francois.
> @kle4 said: > So not having been following the debate through the day, judging by the end results it looks like the Tories are looking to be doing even worse than the worst predictions, Labour actually losing seats, and the LDs better than anticipated? > > The Tory losses being over a thousand looks dreadful, that seems more than the worst predictions I saw so the header title looks strange.
Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
Tories need to ram a deal through and deselect the ERG en masse, let them fuck off to Farages party which will be a chocolate teapot after Brexit happens
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > On Topic > > > > Yeah right. > > > > The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors. > > > > The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story > > How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections? > > This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
It happened in 1982, 1983, 1987 & 1992. As I have already pointed out, it also occurred under Gaitskell inthe late 1950s/early 1960s and Heath in 1970. Edit - And ,of course, to Corbyn in 2017!
> @nico67 said: > Middle class Tory Remainers clearly deserting the party , the strong Lib Dem performance in those traditional marginals should really worry the Tories . > >
It does. They are still in the denial stage at present...These are all protest votes* etc.
*If so, why are these protests happening in Remain favouring wards rather than Brexity ones?
> @justin124 said: > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
Of course, UKIP broke through years ago and despite Brexit are no longer a force, so the momentum may not be maintained. But a very good result for them and well done indeed.
> @Richard_Nabavi said: > > @El_Capitano said: > > Congratulations Nick. > > > > So for the PB party, I make that +2 (Nick, Andy), -1 (JohnO) at principal council level. #winninghere > > > > (Any I've missed? This is your chance to delurk, folks!) > > -1 @Icarus
My congrats too to Nick and Andy on their successes. I’ll keep a wary eye (once removed) on the former from my lair at County Hall!
> @Stereotomy said: > > @dyedwoolie said: > > > Change will be delighted at the independent surge. > > > > Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems > > Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals. > > And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
How many LibDems are actually liberal though? Was Tim Farron for example? Like most of our parties, it is a broad church, with a mix of liberals, social democrats, pragmatists, centre lefts, centre rights, environmentalists.
> @kle4 said: > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
But that is not the way it is coming over in the media
Both parties are losers and my loss is smaller than your loss is not hacking it when labour have to be winning hundreds of seats
> The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
>
>
>
> The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
>
> How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections?
>
> This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
It happened in 1982, 1983, 1987 & 1992. As I have already pointed out, it also occurred under Gaitskell inthe late 1950s/early 1960s and Heath in 1970.
I should have been clearer, if you excluded GE years then you've only got one instance in the last 40 years, which can be considered a unique set of circumstances.
> @kle4 said: > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
> @kle4 said: > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
> @kle4 said: > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
The Tories were always going to lose seats.
Labour should have been making gains. Instead they are further away than they were in 2015.
The Tory loses are bad for them, but Labour losing ground is more newsworthy.
> @Jonathan said: > > @kle4 said: > > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story. > > > @kle4 said: > > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story. > > > @kle4 said: > > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story. > > The Tories were always going to lose seats. > > Labour should have been making gains. Instead they are further away than they were in 2015. > > The Tory loses are bad for them, but Labour losing ground is more newsworthy. > >
I'd have agreed before the Tories smashed past 1000 losses. It's almost 50% more than the worst prediction I saw, I am genuinely surprised at how bad they have done even knowing the relatively good performance in the northern areas that declared last night would not be maintained.
It is not to diminish that yes, you are right, Labour should be making gains, but 1200+?!
> @noneoftheabove said: > > @Stereotomy said: > > > @dyedwoolie said: > > > > > Change will be delighted at the independent surge. > > > > > > > > Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems > > > > Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals. > > > > And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place? > > How many LibDems are actually liberal though? Was Tim Farron for example? Like most of our parties, it is a broad church, with a mix of liberals, social democrats, pragmatists, centre lefts, centre rights, environmentalists.
Yes, while he had curious views on some matters, he did not attempt to force them on others. That is a very liberal position.
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > > @kle4 said: > > > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story. > > > > But that is not the way it is coming over in the media > > > > Both parties are losers and my loss is smaller than your loss is not hacking it when labour have to be winning hundreds of seats > > I'm sure PM Raab will ennoble you and we can have lunch in the Lords. > > (Don't forget my GCMG)
Work has finished for the day and I am now on a train (again) wending my weary way home. I have a diet coke and my tablet and my coat is off, so I can regale you with my wit and wisdom. Please restrain your gratitude if you can...
Thank you to all those who responded to my post about FOBTs. Suffice to say I disagreed with all those who expressed the contrary opinion, and in some cases my disagreement was vehement. However I did appreciate the anecdotage, which matches my (albeit limited) experience. So thank you for that.
How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights.
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > We must rearrange our postponed (mea culpa) lunch: we can surely reach a quick consensus on the price of your richly deserved and long overdue honour. > > I'll email you some dates, it is likely to be August, I start my new job a week on Monday.
Ooh, well done you and best of luck. Yep, August will assuredly be a quiet month........
> @kle4 said: > How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights.
> @TheScreamingEagles said: > > @TheScreamingEagles said: > > > On Topic > > > > > > > > > > > > Yeah right. > > > > > > > > > > > > The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors. > > > > > > > > > > > > The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story > > > > > > How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections? > > > > > > This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory. > > > > It happened in 1982, 1983, 1987 & 1992. As I have already pointed out, it also occurred under Gaitskell inthe late 1950s/early 1960s and Heath in 1970. > > I should have been clearer, if you excluded GE years then you've only got one instance in the last 40 years, which can be considered a unique set of circumstances.
But in both 1983 and 1987 the General Election had yet to be announced. In 1983 there was no great expectation of an immediate Dissolution - most commentators thought it would occur in the Autumn. It is true to say that in May 1987 Thatcher was widely expected to go to the country after analysing the Local Election results - which proved to be better for the Tories than in 1983.
> @TGOHF said: > > @_Anazina_ said: > > > I like craft beer but find most craft porters undrinkable. Guinness I only drink occasionally, but a good pint of it remains a nice drop. > > I think it needs to move with the times - it's very light on ingredients and hence tastes very bland in the modern era. > > I'd be amazed if the average age of Guinness drinkers isn't rising quite steadily. >
Think you're right - the over 80s are flocking to it. Reason not altogether clear.
> @dyedwoolie said: > > @Charles said: > > Actor Tony Robinson quitting Labour after 45 years over antisemitism and Brexit. > > > > Wasn’t he in the NEC for many years? > > Yes he was. Sensible labour are fleeing the lunatics in charge
Which is a part of why they made losses last night. Anti-semitism isn't a great vote magnet....
FPT - Many thanks for the commiserations on my sub optimal result in deepest ex blue Surrey. Majority against was 300 at the upper end of expectations, though I knew I’d lose. But for one elector, it was obviously personal for he/she scrawled in big black pencil TRAITOR against my name, which I thought a mite harsh. Must have known my Fenian background......
> @twistedfirestopper3 said: > > @rcs1000 said: > > @AmpfieldAndy > > > > Yesterday you posted that 70% of law taught at law school in the UK was EU law. You also said common law was no longer being taught. ("Not so common " were your words.) > > > > Now I like the fact that this site is a free for all. It's good when people have genuine disagreements and passion. But I hate it when people make shit up. > > > > So I offered you one of three alternatives: > > > > 1. Win £1,000 for a charity of your choice by backing up your claim with some evidence. > > > > 2. Apologise and promise not to make shit up. > > > > or > > > > 3. Get banned. > > > > Your call. > > 76.3% of stats are made up on the spot. Or is it 88.7%? I dunno, but it's a lot. Probably.
LOL!
You know, there are differences of opinion. And that's cool and all.
And there are times when in the heat of argument we all start quoting things we kind of remember as fact.
But if you're going to be on this site, and you start quoting facts, and you're called out on them, then either:
- present the evidence to support your assertion or - apologise
Pretending you didn't say it doesn't cut it. So I'm afraid, for I think perhaps the first time ever, I'm swinging the ban hammer. (I'm give @AmpfieldAndy another 20 minutes to respond. We'll see.)
> @dyedwoolie said: > > @kle4 said: > > How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights. > > Great yarmouth > Boston
I never believed in the predictable death of the liberal democrats. Always thought they would return at some point and current politics has made it near inevitable - Brexit/May/Corbyn.
Not sure if their voters have entirely forgiven them for 2010-15 but perhaps it's time to move on?
George Osborne has announced a round of job cuts at the Evening Standard, as the London newspaper prepares to merge its print and online teams to reduce costs.
The former Conservative chancellor became the newspaper’s editor in 2017 and stepped down from parliament soon after. In an email to staff he said the outlet was “facing a tough economic market with rising costs” and that the separate online and print teams would be merged to “ensure the Standard evolves to be profitable and keeps pace with our fast-changing society”.
> @Pulpstar said: > > @dyedwoolie said: > > > @kle4 said: > > > How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights. > > > > Great yarmouth > > Boston > > Coventry held steady lol
'Congratulations to all Conservative councillors elected today, and heartfelt commiserations to those who have lost their seats. Politics is a tough business sometimes, but you are dedicated public servants who can be proud to have represented your local community.'
I know @NickPalmer was the Nick who won, but which Andy was the Andy that won? And I know @HYFUD lost, and @JohnO lost, but who was the other pber who lost?
Comments
> > @_Anazina_ said:
> > > @Sean_F said:
> >
> > > I'm surprised by how badly the Conservatives did in Essex.
> >
> >
> >
> > I think it makes sense, Leaver-y but with many people with much to lose if Brexit becomes an economic disaster, as opposed to Leaver strongholds in the E Mids and North where there are many people who feel they’ve nothing left to lose. I suspect Essex Man and his counterparts around the country are the bulk of those who’ve shifted from Leave to Remain in polling.
> >
> >
> > Indeed.
>
> I'm confused why people are looking at this on a national / European level. Locally it's a lot of councils losing their majority because they haven't delivered / people want a change..
Id imagine most councils have not delivered as they have less funding and increasing demands, so you are right that whilst that lasts it should be tough for incumbent councils, hard to know much is local/national/European/protest, everyone is guessing.
> The most astonishing results IMO were in Ashfield, where in a lot of the wards the result was something like Ind 87%, Lab 8%, Con 3%. A total meltdown of the two established parties.
De piero will get turfed at the next election. Remainer in the badlands
> Corbyn can't be seen to enable any kind of Brexit even if May did agree to the customs union.
>
> He is sitting on a pile of absolutely useless surplus votes in places like London.
>
> For Labour to win an election he needs to add votes in places that aren't remain obsessed.
Like Godalming?
Could 1300 be breached ?
Still 16 councils left..
> In terms of the media narrative, Labour has been hurt by the fact that it had the bulk of its net losses quite early on last night after which the figure largely held steady today, whereas the Conservative losses seem to have got much worse throughout the day.
>
> The BBC as a consequence took to reporting "heavy Conservative and Labour losses" from the outset as if there was some equivalence, and lazily failed to change tack as the nuances played out.
>
> Right now we have a net Labour loss of 83 compared to a net Conservative loss of 1180 - a ratio of something like 1:14. Even allowing for 2015 being a moderately good year for the Conservatives (enough to secure only a very narrow parliamentary majority) those results are nothing like equally bad for Labour and the Conservatives.
But for the Tories to lose 1200 seats - and for net, Labour to pick up NONE of them - that is a rare old event.....
> Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament.
> -1208 for Cons
>
> Could 1300 be breached ?
>
> Still 16 councils left..
Hardly matters now, theyve breached meltdown levels
And in the south and SW and EA mainly
> Corbyn can't be seen to enable any kind of Brexit even if May did agree to the customs union.
>
> He is sitting on a pile of absolutely useless surplus votes in places like London.
>
> For Labour to win an election he needs to add votes in places that aren't remain obsessed.
It seems his strategy is not to add Labour votes but split the Tory vote up into Tory/Brexit/other protest/stay at home. It may work.
In 2017 the Lib Dems had a projected national share of 18% (only one point lower than today's figure). A month later they polled 7.4% in a general election.
> Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
I think that is fair - the Greens have done disproportionately well. The LibDem result is also excellent and they seem to have concentrated their efforts very effectively, with some particularly big gains in areas where they've previously done well but were clobbered badly in 2015.
> > @Wulfrun_Phil said:
> > In terms of the media narrative, Labour has been hurt by the fact that it had the bulk of its net losses quite early on last night after which the figure largely held steady today, whereas the Conservative losses seem to have got much worse throughout the day.
> >
> > The BBC as a consequence took to reporting "heavy Conservative and Labour losses" from the outset as if there was some equivalence, and lazily failed to change tack as the nuances played out.
> >
> > Right now we have a net Labour loss of 83 compared to a net Conservative loss of 1180 - a ratio of something like 1:14. Even allowing for 2015 being a moderately good year for the Conservatives (enough to secure only a very narrow parliamentary majority) those results are nothing like equally bad for Labour and the Conservatives.
>
> Yet still abysmal for any opposition party 9 years out of power
It is not brilliant but still represents a 3% swing from Con to Lab compared with 2015 - and a 1% swing compared with 2017. As I pointed out earlier, Labour lost seats in the Local Elections of 1959,1960 & 1961 despite having been out of office since 1951. In May 1970 the Tories lost several hundred seats to Labour - yet went on to win the General Election just five weeks later.
> Change will be delighted at the independent surge.
Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
> Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
Yes, the Greens also picked up a seat in Waltham Abbey to add to their seats in Buckhurst Hill East in Epping Forest
> > @_Anazina_ said:
>
> > > @Sean_F said:
>
> >
>
> > > I'm surprised by how badly the Conservatives did in Essex.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I think it makes sense, Leaver-y but with many people with much to lose if Brexit becomes an economic disaster, as opposed to Leaver strongholds in the E Mids and North where there are many people who feel they’ve nothing left to lose. I suspect Essex Man and his counterparts around the country are the bulk of those who’ve shifted from Leave to Remain in polling.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Indeed.
>
>
>
> I'm confused why people are looking at this on a national / European level. Locally it's a lot of councils losing their majority because they haven't delivered / people want a change..
>
> I'd be surprised if there was anywhere in the country more likely to back the Brexit party than Essex.
Lincolnshire.
There are some Remain patches in Essex including much of Chelmsford where the LDs made big gains last night
So for the PB party, I make that +2 (Nick, Andy), -1 (JohnO) at principal council level. #winninghere
(Any I've missed? This is your chance to delurk, folks!)
> > @justin124 said:
> > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
>
> The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament.
I think they are very different on (national) policies but agree they share some characteristics that would make them good partners. A non aggression pact would increase their share of MPs, which could be important if it was another hung parliament - it would also put pressure ChangeUK to join in - if Change had run yesterday as well, how many of the LibDem gains could have been lost? The narrative could have been very different.
> > @dyedwoolie said:
> > Change will be delighted at the independent surge.
>
> Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
Consuming the lib dems maybe, why would anyone merge with them?
> Congratulations Nick.
>
> So for the PB party, I make that +2 (Nick, Andy), -1 (JohnO) at principal council level. #winninghere
>
> (Any I've missed? This is your chance to delurk, folks!)
-1 @Icarus
> https://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1124356009860960256
Common sense and time for the brexiteers to row back and seek consensus
Lab 20
Greens 19
Con 9
2 wards (6 seats) left....both Tories last time
> Brighton and Hove
>
>
> Lab 20
> Greens 19
> Con 9
>
> 2 wards (6 seats) left....both Tories last time
Come on greens!
> Congratulations to Nick.
And my congratulations to Nick
> > @Barnesian said:
> > > @justin124 said:
> > > Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
> >
> > The Greens and LibDems make good partners in policies and temperament.
>
> I think they are very different on (national) policies but agree they share some characteristics that would make them good partners. A non aggression pact would increase their share of MPs, which could be important if it was another hung parliament - it would also put pressure ChangeUK to join in - if Change had run yesterday as well, how many of the LibDem gains could have been lost? The narrative could have been very different.
I think ChangeUK is likely split the Tory vote at the Remainer end, while the Brexit party splits it at the Leaver end. This helps LibDems in LibDem/Tory marginals.
> https://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1124356009860960256
I wonder how many members in Beaconsfield are thinking otherwise after today's results......
Will they listen? Of course not. The bubble will protect them
Yeah right.
The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
> > @Richard_Nabavi said:
> > https://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1124356009860960256
>
> I wonder how many members in Beaconsfield are thinking otherwise after today's results......
It was written today
And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
> > @MarqueeMark said:
> > > @Richard_Nabavi said:
> > > https://twitter.com/DanielHewittITV/status/1124356009860960256
> >
> > I wonder how many members in Beaconsfield are thinking otherwise after today's results......
>
> It was written today
Following the Executive Meeting on the 29th.....
This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
> On Topic
>
>
>
> Yeah right.
>
>
>
> The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
>
>
>
> The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
>
> How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections?
>
> This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
Today is kinda like the Tories facing 120 Westminster by-elections.
Losing them all.
And Labour winning none.
Sure, that would be a fine result for Labour.
The Tory losses being over a thousand looks dreadful, that seems more than the worst predictions I saw so the header title looks strange.
> On Topic
>
> Yeah right.
>
> The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
>
> The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
The problem is the conservatives are expected to get a going over but it is labour who need to capture their seats and today the lib dems have caused the mayhem while labour go backwards. Time for labour to decide for leave or remain but also rid themselves of Corbyn and his cabal
> > @dyedwoolie said:
>
> > Change will be delighted at the independent surge.
>
>
>
> Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
>
> Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals.
>
> And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
Tbf with the likes of Fat nonce and Freud in their past the dems are rather too liberal sometimes
> > @JohnO said:
> > FPT - Many thanks for the commiserations on my sub optimal result in deepest ex blue Surrey. Majority against was 300 at the upper end of expectations, though I knew I’d lose. But for one elector, it was obviously personal for he/she scrawled in big black pencil TRAITOR against my name, which I thought a mite harsh. Must have known my Fenian background......
>
> Hope they wrote it neatly in the box and it counted as a vote.
>
> Sorry you lost, you’re one of the better blue peril.
>
Sadly, he put a small but perfectly formed X in my opponents’ box!
> Beaconsfield Tories have seen the light, the ERG lot are more likely to be deselected now.
Now that would be good news
> Beaconsfield Tories have seen the light, the ERG lot are more likely to be deselected now.
Why would Grieve listen to his association to try to help deliver Brexit? He's on a practically religious mission, the erudite version of Baker and Francois.
> So not having been following the debate through the day, judging by the end results it looks like the Tories are looking to be doing even worse than the worst predictions, Labour actually losing seats, and the LDs better than anticipated?
>
> The Tory losses being over a thousand looks dreadful, that seems more than the worst predictions I saw so the header title looks strange.
Shh
> On Topic
>
>
>
> Yeah right.
>
>
>
> The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
>
>
>
> The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
>
> How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections?
>
> This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
It happened in 1982, 1983, 1987 & 1992. As I have already pointed out, it also occurred under Gaitskell inthe late 1950s/early 1960s and Heath in 1970.
Edit - And ,of course, to Corbyn in 2017!
Commiserations to @JohnO and @HYUFD.
> Middle class Tory Remainers clearly deserting the party , the strong Lib Dem performance in those traditional marginals should really worry the Tories .
>
>
It does. They are still in the denial stage at present...These are all protest votes* etc.
*If so, why are these protests happening in Remain favouring wards rather than Brexity ones?
> Of all the parties , I sense it is the Greens who have most to be pleased about from these results. Whilst the LibDems have numerically made bigger gains, effectively they are partly recouping earlier very heavy losses. The Greens,though, appear to have succeeded this time in breaking through in many places where they have no earlier record of electoral success. Their progress has not been restricted to areas - such as here in Norwich - where they have been on the map for some years.
Of course, UKIP broke through years ago and despite Brexit are no longer a force, so the momentum may not be maintained. But a very good result for them and well done indeed.
> > @El_Capitano said:
> > Congratulations Nick.
> >
> > So for the PB party, I make that +2 (Nick, Andy), -1 (JohnO) at principal council level. #winninghere
> >
> > (Any I've missed? This is your chance to delurk, folks!)
>
> -1 @Icarus
My congrats too to Nick and Andy on their successes. I’ll keep a wary eye (once removed) on the former from my lair at County Hall!
> > @dyedwoolie said:
>
> > Change will be delighted at the independent surge.
>
>
>
> Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
>
> Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals.
>
> And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
How many LibDems are actually liberal though? Was Tim Farron for example? Like most of our parties, it is a broad church, with a mix of liberals, social democrats, pragmatists, centre lefts, centre rights, environmentalists.
> Actor Tony Robinson quitting Labour after 45 years over antisemitism and Brexit.
>
> Wasn’t he in the NEC for many years?
Yes he was. Sensible labour are fleeing the lunatics in charge
> Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
But that is not the way it is coming over in the media
Both parties are losers and my loss is smaller than your loss is not hacking it when labour have to be winning hundreds of seats
> Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
> @kle4 said:
> Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
> @kle4 said:
> Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
The Tories were always going to lose seats.
Labour should have been making gains. Instead they are further away than they were in 2015.
The Tory loses are bad for them, but Labour losing ground is more newsworthy.
> Congratulations to @NickPalmer!
>
> Commiserations to @JohnO and @HYUFD.
Thanks though was only a town council rather than district seat in my case
> > @kle4 said:
> > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
>
> > @kle4 said:
> > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
>
> > @kle4 said:
> > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
>
> The Tories were always going to lose seats.
>
> Labour should have been making gains. Instead they are further away than they were in 2015.
>
> The Tory loses are bad for them, but Labour losing ground is more newsworthy.
>
>
I'd have agreed before the Tories smashed past 1000 losses. It's almost 50% more than the worst prediction I saw, I am genuinely surprised at how bad they have done even knowing the relatively good performance in the northern areas that declared last night would not be maintained.
It is not to diminish that yes, you are right, Labour should be making gains, but 1200+?!
> > @Stereotomy said:
> > > @dyedwoolie said:
> >
> > > Change will be delighted at the independent surge.
> >
> >
> >
> > Change future lies with merging with the Lib Dems
> >
> > Why would the Lib Dems have them? They're not liberals.
> >
> > And if they wanted to join the Lib Dems why wouldn't they have done that in the first place?
>
> How many LibDems are actually liberal though? Was Tim Farron for example? Like most of our parties, it is a broad church, with a mix of liberals, social democrats, pragmatists, centre lefts, centre rights, environmentalists.
Yes, while he had curious views on some matters, he did not attempt to force them on others. That is a very liberal position.
> > @kle4 said:
>
> > Labour's night is clearly a story, but I'm sorry, even though governments are expected to lose a lot of seats 9 years into office, losing over 1200 is just too big to not be the larger story.
>
>
>
> But that is not the way it is coming over in the media
>
>
>
> Both parties are losers and my loss is smaller than your loss is not hacking it when labour have to be winning hundreds of seats
>
> I'm sure PM Raab will ennoble you and we can have lunch in the Lords.
>
> (Don't forget my GCMG)
Now that would be a result !!!
Thank you to all those who responded to my post about FOBTs. Suffice to say I disagreed with all those who expressed the contrary opinion, and in some cases my disagreement was vehement. However I did appreciate the anecdotage, which matches my (albeit limited) experience. So thank you for that.
> We must rearrange our postponed (mea culpa) lunch: we can surely reach a quick consensus on the price of your richly deserved and long overdue honour.
>
> I'll email you some dates, it is likely to be August, I start my new job a week on Monday.
Ooh, well done you and best of luck. Yep, August will assuredly be a quiet month........
> How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights.
Great yarmouth
Boston
> > @TheScreamingEagles said:
>
> > On Topic
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Yeah right.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The stories definitely the party that lost 81 Councillors.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The one that lost over 1200 is a complete non story
>
> >
>
> > How many times in the last 40 years has the principal opposition party made a net loss in council elections?
>
> >
>
> > This is new, governments losing council seats is dog bites man territory.
>
>
>
> It happened in 1982, 1983, 1987 & 1992. As I have already pointed out, it also occurred under Gaitskell inthe late 1950s/early 1960s and Heath in 1970.
>
> I should have been clearer, if you excluded GE years then you've only got one instance in the last 40 years, which can be considered a unique set of circumstances.
But in both 1983 and 1987 the General Election had yet to be announced. In 1983 there was no great expectation of an immediate Dissolution - most commentators thought it would occur in the Autumn. It is true to say that in May 1987 Thatcher was widely expected to go to the country after analysing the Local Election results - which proved to be better for the Tories than in 1983.
> > @_Anazina_ said:
>
> > I like craft beer but find most craft porters undrinkable. Guinness I only drink occasionally, but a good pint of it remains a nice drop.
>
> I think it needs to move with the times - it's very light on ingredients and hence tastes very bland in the modern era.
>
> I'd be amazed if the average age of Guinness drinkers isn't rising quite steadily.
>
Think you're right - the over 80s are flocking to it. Reason not altogether clear.
> https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1124079418979356673?s=20
Mr Williamson, you’re no Geoffrey Howe..
What’s he supposed to say anyway “sir, sir, she says I did something bad and I didn’t. She’s mean.”
> > @Charles said:
> > Actor Tony Robinson quitting Labour after 45 years over antisemitism and Brexit.
> >
> > Wasn’t he in the NEC for many years?
>
> Yes he was. Sensible labour are fleeing the lunatics in charge
Which is a part of why they made losses last night. Anti-semitism isn't a great vote magnet....
Off to the Lords with you
> > @rcs1000 said:
> > @AmpfieldAndy
> >
> > Yesterday you posted that 70% of law taught at law school in the UK was EU law. You also said common law was no longer being taught. ("Not so common " were your words.)
> >
> > Now I like the fact that this site is a free for all. It's good when people have genuine disagreements and passion. But I hate it when people make shit up.
> >
> > So I offered you one of three alternatives:
> >
> > 1. Win £1,000 for a charity of your choice by backing up your claim with some evidence.
> >
> > 2. Apologise and promise not to make shit up.
> >
> > or
> >
> > 3. Get banned.
> >
> > Your call.
>
> 76.3% of stats are made up on the spot. Or is it 88.7%? I dunno, but it's a lot. Probably.
LOL!
You know, there are differences of opinion. And that's cool and all.
And there are times when in the heat of argument we all start quoting things we kind of remember as fact.
But if you're going to be on this site, and you start quoting facts, and you're called out on them, then either:
- present the evidence to support your assertion
or
- apologise
Pretending you didn't say it doesn't cut it. So I'm afraid, for I think perhaps the first time ever, I'm swinging the ban hammer. (I'm give @AmpfieldAndy another 20 minutes to respond. We'll see.)
> https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1124079418979356673?s=20
I did wonder whether he might choose to do that.
> Congratulations to @NickPalmer!
>
> Commiserations to @JohnO and @HYUFD.
Excellent news on @NickPalmer!
> > @kle4 said:
> > How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights.
>
> Great yarmouth
> Boston
Coventry held steady lol
> https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1124079418979356673?s=20
The incredibly well respected former Chancellor and Deputy PM Geoffrey Howe?
That Geoffrey Howe?
Rather than the overpromoted Gavin Williamson who's signature achievement is... is... is...
Not sure if their voters have entirely forgiven them for 2010-15 but perhaps it's time to move on?
https://tinyurl.com/y4cwcsyo
George Osborne has announced a round of job cuts at the Evening Standard, as the London newspaper prepares to merge its print and online teams to reduce costs.
The former Conservative chancellor became the newspaper’s editor in 2017 and stepped down from parliament soon after. In an email to staff he said the outlet was “facing a tough economic market with rising costs” and that the separate online and print teams would be merged to “ensure the Standard evolves to be profitable and keeps pace with our fast-changing society”.
> > @dyedwoolie said:
> > > @kle4 said:
> > > How many Tory areas up for election in the south actually saw them hold firm or make gains? Swindon and anywhere else? Those councils will have bragging rights.
> >
> > Great yarmouth
> > Boston
>
> Coventry held steady lol
Dover saw a gain against labour
3/
'Congratulations to all Conservative councillors elected today, and heartfelt commiserations to those who have lost their seats. Politics is a tough business sometimes, but you are dedicated public servants who can be proud to have represented your local community.'
David Cameron
> > @HYUFD said:
> > https://twitter.com/BBCNewsnight/status/1124079418979356673?s=20
>
> Mr Williamson, you’re no Geoffrey Howe..
>
> What’s he supposed to say anyway “sir, sir, she says I did something bad and I didn’t. She’s mean.”
As a former whip he knows where the bodies are buried.