The SNP doesn't actually want a referendum right now. Because a referendum would probably be lost, and after two defeats in a decade, the voters would probably want a break from being asked the same question a third time.
But the SNP also knows that the best way to bolster support for independence is for the Westminster government (either through the Courts or directly) to deny Scotland a referendum.
They therefore, are almost obliged to pass a referendum bill in Hollyrood.
The Conservative & Unionist Party has to then deny Scotland that referendum, even though doing so almost certainly increases the chance of independence. Failure to veto the referendum would be disastrous for the Scottish Conservative Party because they would appear insufficiently Unionist.
So, the Conservative Party will act against the long term interests of the Union by denying a vote in Scotland. But by doing so, they will shore up their position as the most Unionist of the Scottish parties.
It is extraordinary that a purported law passed that is explicitly against the terms of the legislation underpinning the Scottish parliament is deemed to have any power.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Why are CNN obsessed with Brexit Britain?
Exactly
Because it's a massive foreign policy change that explains a lot of the PM's electoral success?
BREAKING: The Conservative likely to be Wiltshire’s Police & Crime Commissioner has been told by Tory HQ that he can't take the job if he wins Monday's election count. Jonathon Seed is "disbarred" over an old conviction for drink driving. More soon. #BBCElections @BBCPoliticshttps://twitter.com/DanOB1986/status/1391428545797398531/photo/1
Oxfordshire Tory collapse continues. LibDems have gained a few more and could even become the largest party at a pinch.
There are some very surprising gains in Oxfordshire.
The Labour and Green voteshare jump in Witney North and East is huge, which of course was David Cameron's seat.
Given the fashion for Labour types saying northern leave voters are a bunch of rubes who don't understand their own interests, it's amusing to see the same can now be said, with far more justice, for lots of the smug southern voters too.
I think it's instructive that it's Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire where the Conservatives have suffered the most in these elections, losing control in both.
If you were to devise a policy prescription calculated to offend academics and ultra-progressive internationalist upper-middle classes, who are heavily concentrated in those areas, this Government would be it.
BREAKING: The Conservative likely to be Wiltshire’s Police & Crime Commissioner has been told by Tory HQ that he can't take the job if he wins Monday's election count. Jonathon Seed is "disbarred" over an old conviction for drink driving. More soon. #BBCElections @BBCPoliticshttps://twitter.com/DanOB1986/status/1391428545797398531/photo/1
On topic, I really enjoy GE nights and usually stay up or catch up when wakeful (as most nights). However if they decided it would be best to count next day, that seems fair enough.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
This, however, does not necessarily mean that, as the first minister claims, holding another referendum is now clearly the "will of the people" in Scotland.
Rather, the outcome of the election confirms that Scotland is evenly divided on the constitutional question.
The three main pro-union parties won 50.4 per cent of the constituency vote, but the three main list parties secured 50.1 per cent of the list vote. The pro-independence majority is a consequence of the limitations of Holyrood’s supposedly proportional electoral system (devised over twenty years ago by Labour and the Liberal Democrats) rather than evidence of a clear majority in favour of another referendum.
It's not the Will of the People, but there's a clear democratic mandate for it. Both these things are true at the same time.
The number of MSPs is irrelevant - you don’t elect a representative to represent you in something that is outwith their powers
But they just did
No, they didn’t. The SNP candidates promised* to hold a referendum on independence. But it is not in their power to grant a legal referendum. They can only try to put pressure on the Westminster parliament to grant one.** It would like a Mayor of London promising to declare war on France - it might win votes but doesn’t change the scope of their power
* I haven’t read their manifesto so don’t know precisely what they promised
** the share of the vote is a better argument - although only for putting pressure on Westminster - but I understand (saw some debate between @DavidL & @RochdalePioneers this afternoon) that was pretty close up 50/50 so not an overwhelming demand
DAvidL and RP were both in agreement that it was over the 50% mark. It's HYUFD who was using the psephological equivalent of creative bistromathics.
Yes - I don’t recall the details but think it was around 50.1/50.4? Hence my comment that it wasn’t “overwhelming demand”.
BREAKING: The Conservative likely to be Wiltshire’s Police & Crime Commissioner has been told by Tory HQ that he can't take the job if he wins Monday's election count. Jonathon Seed is "disbarred" over an old conviction for drink driving. More soon. #BBCElections @BBCPoliticshttps://twitter.com/DanOB1986/status/1391428545797398531/photo/1
It looks like Witney is reverting to the same politics it had before 2005, where the LD and Labour voteshares combined more or less equalled the Tory share - with some Tory Remain erosion/defection it should be possible for the LDs to take that seat next time.
Kind of explains why Cameron took the approach to modernisation that he did.
My conclusion from this election is that tactical voting, which last happened in 2010, is beginning to happen again. That benefits the Conservatives in the North, the Labour Party and the Greens in major metropolitan areas, and the LibDems in the market towns of the South East.
I doubt it will have a major impact on the 2024 GE, but it may well do by the time of the next.
Yes, I think that's right - and there was unionist tactical voting in Scotland too.
It's starting to happen now because it's only now that people are starting to understand how and where the new voting coalitions lie.
It looks like Witney is reverting to the same politics it had before 2005, where the LD and Labour voteshares combined more or less equalled the Tory share - with some Tory Remain erosion/defection it should be possible for the LDs to take that seat next time.
Kind of explains why Cameron took the approach to modernisation that he did.
My conclusion from this election is that tactical voting, which last happened in 2010, is beginning to happen again. That benefits the Conservatives in the North, the Labour Party and the Greens in major metropolitan areas, and the LibDems in the market towns of the South East.
I doubt it will have a major impact on the 2024 GE, but it may well do by the time of the next.
Yes, though the nature of the Conservative TV is a bit different to the others. The Conservatives have feasted on the corpse of UKIP/BXP. Good, especially in certain places, but finite.
The other parties seem to have forgiven each other; Lib Dems have been forgiven for their part in the coalition and Labour for putting forward a loony antisemite as potential PM. That process has started later, is smaller, but has more room to grow.
Ed Davey was positioning himself as anti-Tory on Sophy this morning
The Guardian was told that on one occasion Jim McMahon, the Oldham MP who ran the Hartlepool byelection campaign, told a meeting with the leader’s office that Rayner had been “dressed inappropriately” on a visit to the town on 21 March.
McMahon’s allies strongly denied he had been disparaging about Rayner, whose constituency borders his own in Greater Manchester, and said he was simply expressing displeasure about pictures that had been selected for a leaflet.
The photographs showed Rayner wearing leopard-print trousers, heavy-duty stomper boots and a hoodie during a visit to Hartlepool on a Sunday, when she had travelled there from her home in Tameside.
Rayner’s team “hit the roof” when they heard about the remark, sources said, but chose not to tell the deputy leader for fear of worsening relations in the middle of a difficult byelection campaign.
The Guardian is already collecting material for those fantastic 10,000 words pieces in line by line microdetail on How Labour Had A Million Rows Over Headstones, Trousers And Biscuits Before Losing Again. They are now a regular feature of our cultural life and always compellingly written. Labour provides the script for free, and it is doing it again.
I have to say again what an outstanding newspaper the Guardian is. And of course I disagree fundamentally with most of its political positioning. But that doesn't matter. They have writers and reporters of such consistently great quality that it is no hardship to overlook the political slant and enjoy the articles and stories. To be honest no other paper seems to come close these days in the UK.
Hmmm. Seamus Milne was on their books,.
The man credited with turning the Comments Section of the Guardian into the "most thought-provoking opinion section in Britain" - by Dan Hannan who is also diametrically opposed to him politically.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Why are CNN obsessed with Brexit Britain?
Exactly
Because it's a massive foreign policy change that explains a lot of the PM's electoral success?
Because, like the NYT, they equate it - wrongly in my view - with Trump, and think that to discredit one is to hurt the other by implication.
In my experience, Americans usually comment on foreign affairs to make points on American politics.
The SNP doesn't actually want a referendum right now. Because a referendum would probably be lost, and after two defeats in a decade, the voters would probably want a break from being asked the same question a third time.
But the SNP also knows that the best way to bolster support for independence is for the Westminster government (either through the Courts or directly) to deny Scotland a referendum.
They therefore, are almost obliged to pass a referendum bill in Hollyrood.
The Conservative & Unionist Party has to then deny Scotland that referendum, even though doing so almost certainly increases the chance of independence. Failure to veto the referendum would be disastrous for the Scottish Conservative Party because they would appear insufficiently Unionist.
So, the Conservative Party will act against the long term interests of the Union by denying a vote in Scotland. But by doing so, they will shore up their position as the most Unionist of the Scottish parties.
It is extraordinary that a purported law passed that is explicitly against the terms of the legislation underpinning the Scottish parliament is deemed to have any power.
You just have a sock puppet challenge it
Exactly.
I'm sure there's a Unionist Gina Miller out there!
On topic, I really enjoy GE nights and usually stay up or catch up when wakeful (as most nights). However if they decided it would be best to count next day, that seems fair enough.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
Good evening, everyone.
Edited to change autocorrected word.
On topic, not bothering to count till the next day would just give us 15 hours of an exit poll being treated as the result, which doesn't feel that heallthy given the lack of discipline to do otherwise in the media
I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the Labour Party is actually trying to self immolate.
It's quite logical, really.
Back in the days of Attlee et al - they *lived* the Labour culture. They had no problem reconciling love of country and Socialism (with a great big S). They BELIEVED. Not through conscious effort, or study. They just did.
Now they are a an ancient church, going through the motions of worshipping Om. While angrily accusing everyone of being a heretic.
Watch out for falling tortoises.
It's not just that, it's just the nature of "labour" has changed. The "middle classes" working 60+ hour weeks in London and other major cities, spending half their salary on rent, see themselves as working class. A plumber living in a Durham pit village is likely to be earning near enough the same as them but with a higher standard of living, also sees themselves as working class.
They can both validly see themselves as working class but obviously they have very different perspectives on life and different needs and priorities.
So what unites them?
They're paying taxes, so they don't want to see that money wasted. They want to feel safe. They're probably using state schools and hospitals for their families, so they want them to be decent and accessible. They want the streets to be clean, maybe some nice flower beds.
Until those needs are met, they're probably not impressed with politicians dicking about with flags, whether British, European or Palestinian. They don't want the sense that their rulers are taking the mickey.
This stuff is not difficult.
To be fair, I don't think even Labour's existing base gives that much of a toss about Palestine.
That's an obsession of the hard-left activist base, who are small in number but have foghorns on the streets and motormouths on Twitter.
On topic, I really enjoy GE nights and usually stay up or catch up when wakeful (as most nights). However if they decided it would be best to count next day, that seems fair enough.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
Good evening, everyone.
Edited to change autocorrected word.
On topic, not bothering to count till the next day would just give us 15 hours of an exit poll being treated as the result, which doesn't feel that heallthy given the lack of discipline to do otherwise in the media
Thinking outside the box, you could alternatively extend voting until 10am the next day, and then start counting.
This, however, does not necessarily mean that, as the first minister claims, holding another referendum is now clearly the "will of the people" in Scotland.
Rather, the outcome of the election confirms that Scotland is evenly divided on the constitutional question.
The three main pro-union parties won 50.4 per cent of the constituency vote, but the three main list parties secured 50.1 per cent of the list vote. The pro-independence majority is a consequence of the limitations of Holyrood’s supposedly proportional electoral system (devised over twenty years ago by Labour and the Liberal Democrats) rather than evidence of a clear majority in favour of another referendum.
It's not the Will of the People, but there's a clear democratic mandate for it. Both these things are true at the same time.
The number of MSPs is irrelevant - you don’t elect a representative to represent you in something that is outwith their powers
But they just did
No, they didn’t. The SNP candidates promised* to hold a referendum on independence. But it is not in their power to grant a legal referendum. They can only try to put pressure on the Westminster parliament to grant one.** It would like a Mayor of London promising to declare war on France - it might win votes but doesn’t change the scope of their power
* I haven’t read their manifesto so don’t know precisely what they promised
** the share of the vote is a better argument - although only for putting pressure on Westminster - but I understand (saw some debate between @DavidL & @RochdalePioneers this afternoon) that was pretty close up 50/50 so not an overwhelming demand
The trick will be to deny a referendum without looking like they are doing so, and shift the dial in favour of the Union at the same time.
Look out for a UK/EU deal on NI and Scotland in the next few months..
Sunday’s belated Rawnsley. All problem and no solution this week, so very on topic:
[The Tories] can massively screw up and still win elections for so long as Labour hasn’t changed itself enough to convince the country that it would be a superior government.
The party still hasn’t worked out how to respond to the realignment of Britain’s political geography that was in train before Brexit and then greatly accelerated by it. Labour has still not identified how to assemble an electoral coalition that could get it back into power. Those who claim to have a magic solution to the party’s plight are not credible and those who are thinking about it seriously have yet to crack it.
If there is a common theme to the critiques coming from both the left of the party and the right, it is that Sir Keir has yet to make Labour relevant to many voters and articulate to the public compelling reasons why they should want to support his party. Some of his critics put it down to an excess of caution or an absence of panache. Others are beginning to wonder whether he actually possesses any big ideas.
One former Labour cabinet minister, who was incredibly pleased when Sir Keir won the leadership, now confesses to some disappointment: “There is no sense yet of a coherent political project. You need a leader who is a storyteller as well as having role authority. Keir has role authority, but he hasn’t got emotional engagement with the country.”
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Why are CNN obsessed with Brexit Britain?
When they want to run a story about Britain they will ring up their friends on the Guardian and Channel4 news for the comment, and only them.
I am slowly coming to the conclusion that the Labour Party is actually trying to self immolate.
No.
I simply don't understand the faux outrage about this on here. First, @Casino_Royale has somewhat overstated what was actually said to make a cheap political point.
I've no problem with what the former Labour Councillor said - I've heard a lot worse. For some councillors, defeat is a blessed relief - a chance to return to a more normal life but for others it's a serious business, it's their contribution to public life and their attempt to better the lives of their residents (perhaps in a small way).
Politics has no gratitude - Churchill was thanked for leading us through the war with a landslide defeat, Margaret Thatcher was thanked for three GE victories by being turfed out by her own MPs. If there's no gratitude, there's no requirement for magnanimity.
We all react to rejection (for that's what it is) differently. As to whether their voters of Amber Valley will come to regret their decision, it's one of those councils which often changes political control. In a couple of years, perhaps, the Conservatives will be out and Labour will be back.
That's politics - it's a rough trade as someone once said, oddly enough after he'd been on the end of a bad result.
I wonder if you would have said the same if it had been a tory
Yes I would and if I had been a Lib Dem or Green or whoever.
Politicians are human beings too irrespective of the colour of the rosette.
The Conservative likely to be Wiltshire’s Police & Crime Commissioner has been told by Tory HQ that he can't take the job if he wins Monday's election count. Jonathon Seed is "disbarred" over an old conviction for drink driving. More soon
Can't the PCC-elect tell CCHQ where to get off? Surely he was elected in a personal capacity, even if he did have party backing. It's not a party list position.
I mean the rules are quite clear. Any conviction for an offence where the maximum sentence is imprisonment disqualifies you from standing.
IIRC this was insisted upon by the Police when PCC were brought in - PCCs had to be held to the same bar as police.
Some wags suggested that in the East Midlands, the minimum qualification for candidacy would be organising at least two armed robberies....
Oi !!!
Such wags will get locked up in a small room with Vera Baird speeches on a loop for 15 minutes.
You are being *watched* .
Codnor used to have an excellent eato-pub, but it .. er .. burnt down.
On topic, I really enjoy GE nights and usually stay up or catch up when wakeful (as most nights). However if they decided it would be best to count next day, that seems fair enough.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
Good evening, everyone.
Edited to change autocorrected word.
On topic, not bothering to count till the next day would just give us 15 hours of an exit poll being treated as the result, which doesn't feel that heallthy given the lack of discipline to do otherwise in the media
Thinking outside the box, you could alternatively extend voting until 10am the next day, and then start counting.
Could bring it in at the same time as requiring voter ID so the whiners about that could chill out knowing that ballot stuffing has been facilitated to replace personation.
Which relies on the huge oversimplification that people vote the same way in local and general elections.
Spoiler - they don't.
On that point none of my family voted in the Senedd election on Thursday, and chatting to neighbours not one did either and a couple said they had no idea there was an election taking place
What's happening in Bristol could be the start of something existential for Labour.
Don’t count on it. Bristol is an unusual case because the local Labour Party are so corrupt.
In fact, I would say that their ability to hang on to so much of their vote despite their abject performance shows the potential for resurgence if they get their act together.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Why are CNN obsessed with Brexit Britain?
Exactly
Because it's a massive foreign policy change that explains a lot of the PM's electoral success?
Because, like the NYT, they equate it - wrongly in my view - with Trump, and think that to discredit one is to hurt the other by implication.
In my experience, Americans usually comment on foreign affairs to make points on American politics.
Labour need to find a candidate from Yorkshire, from outside politics, without a Twitter feed to pick through for pro-remain Tweets, amongst other things.
A local business leader like Andy Street would be good.
Geoff Boycott?
A great choice if we're pivoting to "so unwoke we're comatose".
Lives in S Africa
I walked past Boycott in Leeds a couple of years ago. Caught his eye, smiled and nodded to him as I passed and the miserable old git stared right through me and blanked me totally. Definitely a Tory. (I jest, I jest, sorry Tories, only messing. Some of my best friends are Tories. Boycott’s definitely a Tory supporter though, I know that for sure.)
When I was a little kid, 1960s, I used to collect players' autographs at Headingley. Boycott always refused and was foul and dismissive, quite unpleasant to us little ones. The other foul one I remember was Derek Underwood - another Tory, I reckon. By contrast, Gary Sobers was lovely and always found to give us an autograph - a class act.
I woz there, Headingley 77, Ashes Test, his home ground, hot sun, bloke running on to give him a pint of John Smiths after he'd just knocked up his career 100th 100.
You just could not script it. Pure Yorkshire bliss.
Just for the (pedantic) record - surely Tetley's, not John Smith's, in Leeds?
It looks like Witney is reverting to the same politics it had before 2005, where the LD and Labour voteshares combined more or less equalled the Tory share - with some Tory Remain erosion/defection it should be possible for the LDs to take that seat next time.
Kind of explains why Cameron took the approach to modernisation that he did.
My conclusion from this election is that tactical voting, which last happened in 2010, is beginning to happen again. That benefits the Conservatives in the North, the Labour Party and the Greens in major metropolitan areas, and the LibDems in the market towns of the South East.
I doubt it will have a major impact on the 2024 GE, but it may well do by the time of the next.
Yes, though the nature of the Conservative TV is a bit different to the others. The Conservatives have feasted on the corpse of UKIP/BXP. Good, especially in certain places, but finite.
The other parties seem to have forgiven each other; Lib Dems have been forgiven for their part in the coalition and Labour for putting forward a loony antisemite as potential PM. That process has started later, is smaller, but has more room to grow.
Ed Davey was positioning himself as anti-Tory on Sophy this morning
Very sensible of him. One of the things that has got forgotten is the degree of anti-Labour tactical voting in 2019. JC really was that awful. And remember, the difference between 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992 wasn't so much the Conservative share of the vote as the way the other votes were distributed.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
This, however, does not necessarily mean that, as the first minister claims, holding another referendum is now clearly the "will of the people" in Scotland.
Rather, the outcome of the election confirms that Scotland is evenly divided on the constitutional question.
The three main pro-union parties won 50.4 per cent of the constituency vote, but the three main list parties secured 50.1 per cent of the list vote. The pro-independence majority is a consequence of the limitations of Holyrood’s supposedly proportional electoral system (devised over twenty years ago by Labour and the Liberal Democrats) rather than evidence of a clear majority in favour of another referendum.
It's not the Will of the People, but there's a clear democratic mandate for it. Both these things are true at the same time.
The number of MSPs is irrelevant - you don’t elect a representative to represent you in something that is outwith their powers
The number of MSPs is relevant to the mandate. Whether the mandate should be denied by Westminster on arcane legal grounds is a separate question. My opinion is it could be but shouldn't be. For 2 reasons, one of principle, one pragmatic. The principle is the right of the Scottish people to decide whether they wish to stay a part of the union. The pragmatism is that to deny and delay would make an acrimonious split more likely. Remain would be favourite if the vote were held soon. Respect democracy, win the vote, secure the union. That's the right way, the honest way, the best way. So I suppose Johnson won't do it. Or might he? In truth I'm not so sure.
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
I see that 20-25% of Conservative votes for London Mayor gave Lib Dem or Green for second preference (or it might have been the other way round, I forget) suggesting that quite a few Remainers in London voted Bailey.
There's clearly more to a Conservative vote than just Brexit and I suspect that extends into the home counties too.
Conservatives seem to be better at holding onto Remain voters than Labour are at holding onto Leave voters.
The coalition that won in 2019 was made up of 75% of the then-LEAVE vote (48%) and 20% of the then-REMAIN vote (52%) - roughly.
The latter, while not supportive of leaving the EU in 2016, either considered the requirement to settle the issue the paramount consideration or were so terrified of Jeremy Corbyn they were always to vote for any party capable of stopping him.
The question for the opposition is how you break apart that coalition. Time will help - as the distance between our membership of the EU and the present increases, so the salience of 2016 should diminish. The second part will depend on whether the latter group is fiscally conservative (in which case there's an opening) or would be willing to support a "centrist" Labour party or whether they are Conservative no matter what (I suspect elements of all three).
I always think of @TOPPING in situations like this.
He clearly hates Brexit, but he dislikes Labour even more. He thinks Brexit is a major policy mistake but it hasn't changed the fundamentals of the Conservative v Labour paradigm.
Unless and until the Labour party offers a centrist, fiscally responsible and efficient tax & spend option I suspect that will remain the case.
Well ... I am a lifelong Tory voter. They have lost me over a combination of Brexit, Johnson (the NZR fiasco when he was FS being the last straw) and dropped opposition to the Hunting Act. I don't see myself voting tory ever again, but not lab either. Lib dem or abstain from here on in.
It now seems that Rayner is not just refusing to be sacked by trying to reshuffle Starmer’s office in response. Hugely costly to his authority (as May found out). Quote Tweet Sienna Rodgers @siennamarla · 10m I'm told separately that she wants senior LOTO figures gone. Easy to see why negotiations aren't getting anywhere fast...
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
This, however, does not necessarily mean that, as the first minister claims, holding another referendum is now clearly the "will of the people" in Scotland.
Rather, the outcome of the election confirms that Scotland is evenly divided on the constitutional question.
The three main pro-union parties won 50.4 per cent of the constituency vote, but the three main list parties secured 50.1 per cent of the list vote. The pro-independence majority is a consequence of the limitations of Holyrood’s supposedly proportional electoral system (devised over twenty years ago by Labour and the Liberal Democrats) rather than evidence of a clear majority in favour of another referendum.
It's not the Will of the People, but there's a clear democratic mandate for it. Both these things are true at the same time.
The number of MSPs is irrelevant - you don’t elect a representative to represent you in something that is outwith their powers
But they just did
No, they didn’t. The SNP candidates promised* to hold a referendum on independence. But it is not in their power to grant a legal referendum. They can only try to put pressure on the Westminster parliament to grant one.** It would like a Mayor of London promising to declare war on France - it might win votes but doesn’t change the scope of their power
* I haven’t read their manifesto so don’t know precisely what they promised
** the share of the vote is a better argument - although only for putting pressure on Westminster - but I understand (saw some debate between @DavidL & @RochdalePioneers this afternoon) that was pretty close up 50/50 so not an overwhelming demand
More than a shade of Sadiq there.
"Rent controls! rent controls! rent controls!"
Ooops I don't have the power !
Safer strategy than claiming all the promises on his campaign website don't count.
It now seems that Rayner is not just refusing to be sacked by trying to reshuffle Starmer’s office in response. Hugely costly to his authority (as May found out). Quote Tweet Sienna Rodgers @siennamarla · 10m I'm told separately that she wants senior LOTO figures gone. Easy to see why negotiations aren't getting anywhere fast...
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
You can't double job that.
Yorkshire Post used the word 'obliged' today in relation to Brabin giving up her seat, so I don't n know if something is formally written. In to the devolution deal?
This reply to the tweet is amusing but quite succinct about todays labour party
'Probably got to be BAME-balanced, gender-balanced, and have a % of LGBetc representation. They learn nothing'
Actually, it should be demographically and politically balanced. And – as even some pb Tories have noted – it should be geographically balanced as well.
Somewhere there is a William Hague piece on this but I cannot find it just now.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Was this drivel put forward as news or an opinion piece? Trump really did drive them insane.
One can sometimes get a clearer view from a distance. I wouldn't reject it completely if I were you.
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
You can't double job that.
Yorkshire Post used the word 'obliged' today in relation to Brabin giving up her seat, so I don't n know if something is formally written. In to the devolution deal?
It is in the original legislation that set up the Police & Crime Commissioners.
Disqualifications that apply on election
1.5 Members of the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly or the European Parliament may stand for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner. However, if they are elected they must resign their seat before taking up the post of Police and Crime Commissioner.
What's happening in Bristol could be the start of something existential for Labour.
The risk is that they drop down to 20-25% of the vote and only 120-130 seats.
The Democrats have the advantage in the USA that they hoover up all the Left, just as the Republicans do the Right. Here, under FPTP, the British Left is segmented, whilst the Tories have feasted on all their rivals.
If you merged the LDs, Labour and Greens together (and SNP, for that matter) you could probably get up to 40% of the vote here most of the time. But, it won't happen because our political landscape and history is different.
I would suggest we are seeing the fall of labour into a party under electoral attack from the conservatives, the lib dems (unequivocally pro EU) and the rise of the greens
I do not see how they address what could be a be an existential crisis for their future
Those on here who are celebrating the death of the Labour Party have short memories or are young - or both. We've been here before.
In 1983, Thatcher destroyed the Labour Party, eating deep into its heartlands in the north, the midlands and London. It was absolutely rife for commentators to report that the Party had been taken over by "Hampstead intellectuals", as personified by its hapless leader, Michael Foot, and had lost, or abandoned, its working class roots. The Labour Party was dead and would never govern again, they said. 27.6% of the votes - a complete disaster, an existential crisis. And it was.
But the rest is history. Yes, it took a long time for the Party to reinvigorate itself. But I suspect overcoming Boris's undoubted political skills will be somewhat easier than it was to break through against Thatcherism, if only because the current PM and his cabal could implode quite quickly.
I see that 20-25% of Conservative votes for London Mayor gave Lib Dem or Green for second preference (or it might have been the other way round, I forget) suggesting that quite a few Remainers in London voted Bailey.
There's clearly more to a Conservative vote than just Brexit and I suspect that extends into the home counties too.
Conservatives seem to be better at holding onto Remain voters than Labour are at holding onto Leave voters.
The coalition that won in 2019 was made up of 75% of the then-LEAVE vote (48%) and 20% of the then-REMAIN vote (52%) - roughly.
The latter, while not supportive of leaving the EU in 2016, either considered the requirement to settle the issue the paramount consideration or were so terrified of Jeremy Corbyn they were always to vote for any party capable of stopping him.
The question for the opposition is how you break apart that coalition. Time will help - as the distance between our membership of the EU and the present increases, so the salience of 2016 should diminish. The second part will depend on whether the latter group is fiscally conservative (in which case there's an opening) or would be willing to support a "centrist" Labour party or whether they are Conservative no matter what (I suspect elements of all three).
I always think of @TOPPING in situations like this.
He clearly hates Brexit, but he dislikes Labour even more. He thinks Brexit is a major policy mistake but it hasn't changed the fundamentals of the Conservative v Labour paradigm.
Unless and until the Labour party offers a centrist, fiscally responsible and efficient tax & spend option I suspect that will remain the case.
Well ... I am a lifelong Tory voter. They have lost me over a combination of Brexit, Johnson (the NZR fiasco when he was FS being the last straw) and dropped opposition to the Hunting Act. I don't see myself voting tory ever again, but not lab either. Lib dem or abstain from here on in.
I find your position a hard one to work out. You have a mixture of views that are hard to categorise.
It's reflected in your posting style. You sometimes make sensible points and at other times - mysteriously, out of the blue - become aggressive and look to label other posters as bigots.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Was this drivel put forward as news or an opinion piece? Trump really did drive them insane.
One can sometimes get a clearer view from a distance. I wouldn't reject it completely if I were you.
Apart from the final paragraph it reads fairly neutrally to me.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
I once persuaded a chap who'd forgotten it was election day to run down the road in his pyjamas to vote at 955 - to be honest he didn't need much persuasion and thought it was funny. The polling officer was heroically straight-faced.
What's happening in Bristol could be the start of something existential for Labour.
The risk is that they drop down to 20-25% of the vote and only 120-130 seats.
The Democrats have the advantage in the USA that they hoover up all the Left, just as the Republicans do the Right. Here, under FPTP, the British Left is segmented, whilst the Tories have feasted on all their rivals.
If you merged the LDs, Labour and Greens together (and SNP, for that matter) you could probably get up to 40% of the vote here most of the time. But, it won't happen because our political landscape and history is different.
Conservative rule in perpetuity?
Occasional "re-inventions" to mark a change of direction but it's the same party always in power?
I'm not sure politics works that way - at some point the Conservatives will lose power and when that happens they will be the ones facing the existential crisis as they try to figure out how to do opposition to a new genuinely popular Government.
I'm reminded of how "effective" the Conservatives were in opposition from 1997-2005.
Those on here who are celebrating the death of the Labour Party have short memories or are young - or both. We've been here before.
In 1983, Thatcher destroyed the Labour Party, eating deep into its heartlands in the north, the midlands and London. It was absolutely rife for commentators to report that the Party had been taken over by "Hampstead intellectuals", as personified by its hapless leader, Michael Foot, and had lost, or abandoned, its working class roots. The Labour Party was dead and would never govern again, they said. 27.6% of the votes - a complete disaster, an existential crisis. And it was.
But the rest is history. Yes, it took a long time for the Party to reinvigorate itself. But I suspect overcoming Boris's undoubted political skills will be somewhat easier than it was to break through against Thatcherism, if only because the current PM and his cabal could implode quite quickly.
Can I just say that I do not celebrate the possible demise of labour
HMG needs a proper opposition and so does the country
Those on here who are celebrating the death of the Labour Party have short memories or are young - or both. We've been here before.
In 1983, Thatcher destroyed the Labour Party, eating deep into its heartlands in the north, the midlands and London. It was absolutely rife for commentators to report that the Party had been taken over by "Hampstead intellectuals", as personified by its hapless leader, Michael Foot, and had lost, or abandoned, its working class roots. The Labour Party was dead and would never govern again, they said. 27.6% of the votes - a complete disaster, an existential crisis. And it was.
But the rest is history. Yes, it took a long time for the Party to reinvigorate itself. But I suspect overcoming Boris's undoubted political skills will be somewhat easier than it was to break through against Thatcherism, if only because the current PM and his cabal could implode quite quickly.
Can I just say that I do not celebrate the possible demise of labour
HMG needs a proper opposition and so does the country
Why does the Opposition have to come from Labour? If we can have a realignment amongst the electorate, then why not amongst their representatives as well? I know it hasn't happened for a long time - in England. But it can happen. Scotland demonstrates this.
I'd be delighted to see the back of the Labour Party. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
I once persuaded a chap who'd forgotten it was election day to run down the road in his pyjamas to vote at 955 - to be honest he didn't need much persuasion and thought it was funny. The polling officer was heroically straight-faced.
On topic, I really enjoy GE nights and usually stay up or catch up when wakeful (as most nights). However if they decided it would be best to count next day, that seems fair enough.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
Good evening, everyone.
Edited to change autocorrected word.
On topic, not bothering to count till the next day would just give us 15 hours of an exit poll being treated as the result, which doesn't feel that heallthy given the lack of discipline to do otherwise in the media
Thinking outside the box, you could alternatively extend voting until 10am the next day, and then start counting.
Spread the voting over 2 days, finishing at 1800 on the second at a civilised time such as 1700, to allow an evening count. It could all be wrapped up before midnight on Friday.
What's happening in Bristol could be the start of something existential for Labour.
The risk is that they drop down to 20-25% of the vote and only 120-130 seats.
The Democrats have the advantage in the USA that they hoover up all the Left, just as the Republicans do the Right. Here, under FPTP, the British Left is segmented, whilst the Tories have feasted on all their rivals.
If you merged the LDs, Labour and Greens together (and SNP, for that matter) you could probably get up to 40% of the vote here most of the time. But, it won't happen because our political landscape and history is different.
Conservative rule in perpetuity?
Occasional "re-inventions" to mark a change of direction but it's the same party always in power?
I'm not sure politics works that way
Excuse the snip. It does in Japan.
EDIT: Scotland has gone the same way as well, and Welsh Labour still seems to be immovable.
This, however, does not necessarily mean that, as the first minister claims, holding another referendum is now clearly the "will of the people" in Scotland.
Rather, the outcome of the election confirms that Scotland is evenly divided on the constitutional question.
The three main pro-union parties won 50.4 per cent of the constituency vote, but the three main list parties secured 50.1 per cent of the list vote. The pro-independence majority is a consequence of the limitations of Holyrood’s supposedly proportional electoral system (devised over twenty years ago by Labour and the Liberal Democrats) rather than evidence of a clear majority in favour of another referendum.
It's not the Will of the People, but there's a clear democratic mandate for it. Both these things are true at the same time.
The number of MSPs is irrelevant - you don’t elect a representative to represent you in something that is outwith their powers
The number of MSPs is relevant to the mandate. Whether the mandate should be denied by Westminster on arcane legal grounds is a separate question. My opinion is it could be but shouldn't be. For 2 reasons, one of principle, one pragmatic. The principle is the right of the Scottish people to decide whether they wish to stay a part of the union. The pragmatism is that to deny and delay would make an acrimonious split more likely. Remain would be favourite if the vote were held soon. Respect democracy, win the vote, secure the union. That's the right way, the honest way, the best way. So I suppose Johnson won't do it. Or might he? In truth I'm not so sure.
And that’s exactly the point:
The MSP mandate explicitly doesn’t include a referendum under the terms of the law that established the Scottish Parliament
The right of the Scottish people to determine their future is more strongly demonstrated by the share of the vote which was about 50/50. If it had been 60/40 then I would have happily argued that Westminster should listen to that demand. But 50/50 doesn’t demonstrate a desire to go through the trauma of a further referendum
I see that 20-25% of Conservative votes for London Mayor gave Lib Dem or Green for second preference (or it might have been the other way round, I forget) suggesting that quite a few Remainers in London voted Bailey.
There's clearly more to a Conservative vote than just Brexit and I suspect that extends into the home counties too.
Conservatives seem to be better at holding onto Remain voters than Labour are at holding onto Leave voters.
The coalition that won in 2019 was made up of 75% of the then-LEAVE vote (48%) and 20% of the then-REMAIN vote (52%) - roughly.
The latter, while not supportive of leaving the EU in 2016, either considered the requirement to settle the issue the paramount consideration or were so terrified of Jeremy Corbyn they were always to vote for any party capable of stopping him.
The question for the opposition is how you break apart that coalition. Time will help - as the distance between our membership of the EU and the present increases, so the salience of 2016 should diminish. The second part will depend on whether the latter group is fiscally conservative (in which case there's an opening) or would be willing to support a "centrist" Labour party or whether they are Conservative no matter what (I suspect elements of all three).
I always think of @TOPPING in situations like this.
He clearly hates Brexit, but he dislikes Labour even more. He thinks Brexit is a major policy mistake but it hasn't changed the fundamentals of the Conservative v Labour paradigm.
Unless and until the Labour party offers a centrist, fiscally responsible and efficient tax & spend option I suspect that will remain the case.
Well ... I am a lifelong Tory voter. They have lost me over a combination of Brexit, Johnson (the NZR fiasco when he was FS being the last straw) and dropped opposition to the Hunting Act. I don't see myself voting tory ever again, but not lab either. Lib dem or abstain from here on in.
I find your position a hard one to work out. You have a mixture of views that are hard to categorise.
It's reflected in your posting style. You sometimes make sensible points and at other times - mysteriously, out of the blue - become aggressive and look to label other posters as bigots.
It is a "plague on both (all) your houses" position. I am aware that it can be construed as disappointingly negative, but I console myself with the thought that George Orwell was pretty much the same - impossible to know what he was actually *for* because he had a pessimistic view of the paucity of things to be for.
Those on here who are celebrating the death of the Labour Party have short memories or are young - or both. We've been here before.
In 1983, Thatcher destroyed the Labour Party, eating deep into its heartlands in the north, the midlands and London. It was absolutely rife for commentators to report that the Party had been taken over by "Hampstead intellectuals", as personified by its hapless leader, Michael Foot, and had lost, or abandoned, its working class roots. The Labour Party was dead and would never govern again, they said. 27.6% of the votes - a complete disaster, an existential crisis. And it was.
But the rest is history. Yes, it took a long time for the Party to reinvigorate itself. But I suspect overcoming Boris's undoubted political skills will be somewhat easier than it was to break through against Thatcherism, if only because the current PM and his cabal could implode quite quickly.
Can I just say that I do not celebrate the possible demise of labour
HMG needs a proper opposition and so does the country
Why does the Opposition have to come from Labour? If we can have a realignment amongst the electorate, then why not amongst their representatives as well? I know it hasn't happened for a long time - in England. But it can happen. Scotland demonstrates this.
I'd be delighted to see the back of the Labour Party. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
That is a fair point but labour will still exist in some form and I believe we will see the rise of the greens and the lib dems, so the opposition will be divided and not coherent
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
You can't double job that.
Yorkshire Post used the word 'obliged' today in relation to Brabin giving up her seat, so I don't n know if something is formally written. In to the devolution deal?
It is in the original legislation that set up the Police & Crime Commissioners.
Disqualifications that apply on election
1.5 Members of the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly or the European Parliament may stand for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner. However, if they are elected they must resign their seat before taking up the post of Police and Crime Commissioner.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Was this drivel put forward as news or an opinion piece? Trump really did drive them insane.
One can sometimes get a clearer view from a distance. I wouldn't reject it completely if I were you.
I genuinely don't see what Boris is doing which the Scots and Welsh can take such umbrage at. How is he 'driving a wedge between the nations'? (The Northern Irish aside, who do have a genuine grievance.) The wedge was driven between nations 20 years ago by the devolution settlement. As far as I can tell, the complaint t about Boris from the Scots appears to amount to him being English and a Conservative. If this is 'driving a wedge between nations' then the Scots essentially have a veto on any PM they don't like. This is tail-dogwaggery of the highest order. If this is the only way the union can function then the union is already dead.
The problem for Lab is that next year's local elections might not be much better either.
In the Met Boroughs, due to election by thirds, Lab will have to defend the seats they've just lost in places like Sandwell and Wolverhampton
And the major elections will be London locals where the Greens might fancy their chances in Boroughs like Lambeth and Haringey
It will be interesting to see if the LibDems and Greens can come to an arrangement, for Boroughs like those. I have heard rumours this is already a possibility. There are plenty of Tories in those places willing to vote tactically if they thought there was a real chance of finally getting rid of their Labour council.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
I once persuaded a chap who'd forgotten it was election day to run down the road in his pyjamas to vote at 955 - to be honest he didn't need much persuasion and thought it was funny. The polling officer was heroically straight-faced.
Did he vote for you? Or did your appearance remind him how important it was for him to run down to vote you out?
How the Electoral Commission may insist the question is put:
Both words irretrievably tainted by Brexit. Stay/go is better (as is cool it/blow).
If/when the UK Government caves then Remain/Leave would be the ideal formulation, assuming that it actually wants to keep Scotland. Surely if the "Leave vote" is tainted anywhere, it's there?
At the Oxfordshire count, the Returning Officer accidentally put the total number of votes for Labour to the Conservative candidate and the Conservative total to the Labour candidate. So they declared the Conservative elected while Labour actually won.
Now they need an election petition to correct the mistake.
The RO already got a job offer from Tower Hamlets to run the 2024 count
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
That you went to that effort may be an indication of why you won by a thousand.
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
You can't double job that.
Yorkshire Post used the word 'obliged' today in relation to Brabin giving up her seat, so I don't n know if something is formally written. In to the devolution deal?
It is in the original legislation that set up the Police & Crime Commissioners.
Disqualifications that apply on election
1.5 Members of the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly or the European Parliament may stand for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner. However, if they are elected they must resign their seat before taking up the post of Police and Crime Commissioner.
Nope, he's not Police and Crime Commissioner of South Yorkshire, whereas Tracey Babin is subsuming the role of the West Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner.
You can't double job that.
Yorkshire Post used the word 'obliged' today in relation to Brabin giving up her seat, so I don't n know if something is formally written. In to the devolution deal?
It is in the original legislation that set up the Police & Crime Commissioners.
Disqualifications that apply on election
1.5 Members of the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly or the European Parliament may stand for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner. However, if they are elected they must resign their seat before taking up the post of Police and Crime Commissioner.
At the Oxfordshire count, the Returning Officer accidentally put the total number of votes for Labour to the Conservative candidate and the Conservative total to the Labour candidate. So they declared the Conservative elected while Labour actually won.
Now they need an election petition to correct the mistake.
This clearly wouldn't have happened if they had counted overnight.
What's happening in Bristol could be the start of something existential for Labour.
The risk is that they drop down to 20-25% of the vote and only 120-130 seats.
The Democrats have the advantage in the USA that they hoover up all the Left, just as the Republicans do the Right. Here, under FPTP, the British Left is segmented, whilst the Tories have feasted on all their rivals.
If you merged the LDs, Labour and Greens together (and SNP, for that matter) you could probably get up to 40% of the vote here most of the time. But, it won't happen because our political landscape and history is different.
Conservative rule in perpetuity?
Occasional "re-inventions" to mark a change of direction but it's the same party always in power?
I'm not sure politics works that way - at some point the Conservatives will lose power and when that happens they will be the ones facing the existential crisis as they try to figure out how to do opposition to a new genuinely popular Government.
I'm reminded of how "effective" the Conservatives were in opposition from 1997-2005.
No, not least because the current Conservative coalition isn't static, tactical voting will develop, and, at some point, a new threat to the Tories right-flank will re-emerge.
Going too radical on climate change being the most obvious one.
Only 1-in-8 people in Scotland believe independence is one of the most important issues the new government should prioritise, a poll taken on the eve of the election has revealed. The Survation poll also found that only 37 per cent of Scots believe there should be a referendum before the end of 2023 – Nicola Sturgeon’s proposed timeline.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
That you went to that effort may be an indication of why you won by a thousand.
We certainly bust a gut, the whole campaign. But as someone said upthread, the result was surely in the bag before the campaign even started, and we’d have won if we’d taken the month off and gone on holiday. It’s the work before the election starts that really counts.
The list of Johnson's Covid-19 mishaps is long. Early in the crisis, he was criticized for going into lockdown too late, not taking the virus seriously enough (famously saying he was still shaking hands with people at the same time Covid-19 was ripping through the country) and dropping the ball on crucial matters like testing and providing PPE for medical workers.
His government has been accused of sleaze and cronyism, handing lucrative contracts to people with links to his party. Most recently, Johnson was accused of saying he'd rather "let the bodies pile high in their thousands" than impose another lockdown, a comment he denied making.
His Brexit deal has been criticized for being sloppy and poorly implemented, leaving exporters in serious trouble. He is also being formally investigated by the electoral commission for allegedly letting Conservative donors pay for a very expensive refurbishment of his flat in Downing Street. And his judgment has come under serious scrutiny following a huge fallout in his inner circle.
How, then, has Johnson so resoundingly won this referendum on his leadership?
The first point to note is that Johnson has been bailed out by his government's vaccine rollout. More importantly, Johnson has managed to shift the center ground in England, a difficult feat in modern politics. Finally, the UK is very divided, which works in the Prime Minister's favor, at least for now.
And while Johnson appears to have gamed British politics perfectly for now, he's done so by driving a wedge between the four nations and by reaping the benefits of grievance politics. One day, it's entirely possible Johnson may come to regret unleashing these demons for the sake of victory.
Was this drivel put forward as news or an opinion piece? Trump really did drive them insane.
One can sometimes get a clearer view from a distance. I wouldn't reject it completely if I were you.
I genuinely don't see what Boris is doing which the Scots and Welsh can take such umbrage at. How is he 'driving a wedge between the nations'? (The Northern Irish aside, who do have a genuine grievance.) The wedge was driven between nations 20 years ago by the devolution settlement. As far as I can tell, the complaint t about Boris from the Scots appears to amount to him being English and a Conservative. If this is 'driving a wedge between nations' then the Scots essentially have a veto on any PM they don't like. This is tail-dogwaggery of the highest order. If this is the only way the union can function then the union is already dead.
I agree in the sense that while the Scots in particular dislike Boris, driving a wedge as suggested seems to put a lot more of the divide on his shoulders that is the case, particularly as the Tories did Ok in Wales, albeit not as well as they hoped, and the problems in Scotland predated him even if many of us fear he will make them worse.
Yes, the people who would really benefit are the candidates and activists.
Polling day for me in London meant getting up at 5 am for an early morning delivery run which I’d start from 5.30, finish by 7.00 so I could leap in the car and make sure all the first tellers were in position (or alternatively do the first hour at one of them myself), then back to the committee room to set things up, make sure everything was under control and that people knew what they were doing. Time to snatch something for breakfast, then it was pretty much non stop rushing around, a mix of door knocking, delivery, organising and crisis management, through to close of poll at 10pm. The only bits of rest were spells of telling, when as the candidate you had to be smiling and chatting to those people who wanted to talk or ask questions on the way out.
Then a quick shower and change of clothes and it was off to the count. Usually the declarations wouldn’t come through until 3.00 or 4.00 am; by the time I got back from the count it was after a solid 24 hours of activity and exhaustion beckoned, although it was hard to get to sleep without checking the internet to see how friends and colleagues in other patches had done, and to catch the general news. It was incredibly tough.
The thing is, 99 times out of 100, without all that frantic ground game activity the result would be exactly the same.
Of course. I always said that election campaigning was remarkable for having such a huge ratio of effort to outcome. It did make a difference - I have enough anecdotes to prove that - but each person helping probably only shifted the result by a handful of votes. Trouble is, under our voting system, a handful of votes can be all the difference.
One of my favourite election day stories was of a Vet in St Andrews who worked a shift from 7 till just before 10pm. She was absolutely knackered but literally ran through the streets to get to her polling station at 10. She was an SNP supporter and they won by 1 vote.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
I remember in the election when we first captured my ward, we thought it could be close and I turned up at the door of a young couple who had said they would support us, 15 minutes before polls closed. They were having their dinner, and I had to plead with them that their votes could make the difference, offer them both a lift straight there and back, and promise that I could drive fast enough that their dinner wouldn’t be cold on return.
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
I remember on referendum day Southam Observer being touch and go to make it back from London to cast his vote due to the biblical weather. His updates on making it or not were genuinely the most exciting thing that happened before the polls closed. He was voting the opposite way to me, but I remember punching the air in triumph when he made it with ten minutes to spare. I remember someone rechristening him Southam Participant in celebration.
Comments
You just have a sock puppet challenge it
The Conservatives’ Commons majority would halve to just 36 if the PM “did a Theresa May” and held a snap general election says Martin Baxter from @ElectCalculus, based on super-Thursday’s results. https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1391428131068731402/photo/1
If you were to devise a policy prescription calculated to offend academics and ultra-progressive internationalist upper-middle classes, who are heavily concentrated in those areas, this Government would be it.
From yesterday evening, I'm puzzled about the BBC breaking that embargo. Why would they do that? (Sorry if that's already been debated, I haven't had time to read right through the threads.)
Good evening, everyone.
Edited to change autocorrected word.
This has been posted and debated for quite some time on here
https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1391455432317751296?s=20
It's starting to happen now because it's only now that people are starting to understand how and where the new voting coalitions lie.
Knight of the blunt knives
Novara also getting stuck into Stamer on Youtube
In my experience, Americans usually comment on foreign affairs to make points on American politics.
I'm sure there's a Unionist Gina Miller out there!
'Probably got to be BAME-balanced, gender-balanced, and have a % of LGBetc representation. They learn nothing'
That's an obsession of the hard-left activist base, who are small in number but have foghorns on the streets and motormouths on Twitter.
@PickardJE
working on the basis the reshuffle will come at the most annoying time possible, which is probably 10.45pm or so
Spoiler - they don't.
Look out for a UK/EU deal on NI and Scotland in the next few months..
[The Tories] can massively screw up and still win elections for so long as Labour hasn’t changed itself enough to convince the country that it would be a superior government.
The party still hasn’t worked out how to respond to the realignment of Britain’s political geography that was in train before Brexit and then greatly accelerated by it. Labour has still not identified how to assemble an electoral coalition that could get it back into power. Those who claim to have a magic solution to the party’s plight are not credible and those who are thinking about it seriously have yet to crack it.
If there is a common theme to the critiques coming from both the left of the party and the right, it is that Sir Keir has yet to make Labour relevant to many voters and articulate to the public compelling reasons why they should want to support his party. Some of his critics put it down to an excess of caution or an absence of panache. Others are beginning to wonder whether he actually possesses any big ideas.
One former Labour cabinet minister, who was incredibly pleased when Sir Keir won the leadership, now confesses to some disappointment: “There is no sense yet of a coherent political project. You need a leader who is a storyteller as well as having role authority. Keir has role authority, but he hasn’t got emotional engagement with the country.”
Politicians are human beings too irrespective of the colour of the rosette.
Such wags will get locked up in a small room with Vera Baird speeches on a loop for 15 minutes.
You are being *watched*
Codnor used to have an excellent eato-pub, but it .. er .. burnt down.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Stewards_of_the_Chiltern_Hundreds
Make of that of what you will
In fact, I would say that their ability to hang on to so much of their vote despite their abject performance shows the potential for resurgence if they get their act together.
Spoiler - there hasn't.
Not sure we're any better mind.
One of the things that has got forgotten is the degree of anti-Labour tactical voting in 2019. JC really was that awful.
And remember, the difference between 1979, 1983, 1987 and 1992 wasn't so much the Conservative share of the vote as the way the other votes were distributed.
Of course in some ways I wish she hadn't bothered but in other ways I think its just brilliant, what democracy is all about and a perfect answer to those who say why bother?
You can't double job that.
https://twitter.com/wallaceme/status/1391459112983179266
It now seems that Rayner is not just refusing to be sacked by trying to reshuffle Starmer’s office in response. Hugely costly to his authority (as May found out).
Quote Tweet
Sienna Rodgers
@siennamarla
· 10m
I'm told separately that she wants senior LOTO figures gone. Easy to see why negotiations aren't getting anywhere fast...
Sportingly, they agreed, and the deed was done. I went to the count confident that I had gone the extra mile and imagined us winning by two. To win the ward by over a thousand was embarrassing, so much so that I actually went back to their house at the weekend after to apologise in person. They were very decent about it and always voted for us thereafter.
"Rent controls! rent controls! rent controls!"
Ooops I don't have the power !
Safer strategy than claiming all the promises on his campaign website don't count.
Somewhere there is a William Hague piece on this but I cannot find it just now.
Big on the BBC this weekend.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/824b3fc4-b7b5-492c-b31e-1d37730c6770
Disqualifications that apply on election
1.5 Members of the House of Commons, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly or the European Parliament may stand for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner. However, if they are elected they must resign their seat before taking up the post of Police and Crime Commissioner.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/sites/default/files/2019-12/PCC Part 1 - Can you stand for election.pdf
The Democrats have the advantage in the USA that they hoover up all the Left, just as the Republicans do the Right. Here, under FPTP, the British Left is segmented, whilst the Tories have feasted on all their rivals.
If you merged the LDs, Labour and Greens together (and SNP, for that matter) you could probably get up to 40% of the vote here most of the time. But, it won't happen because our political landscape and history is different.
I do not see how they address what could be a be an existential crisis for their future
In 1983, Thatcher destroyed the Labour Party, eating deep into its heartlands in the north, the midlands and London. It was absolutely rife for commentators to report that the Party had been taken over by "Hampstead intellectuals", as personified by its hapless leader, Michael Foot, and had lost, or abandoned, its working class roots. The Labour Party was dead and would never govern again, they said. 27.6% of the votes - a complete disaster, an existential crisis. And it was.
But the rest is history. Yes, it took a long time for the Party to reinvigorate itself. But I suspect overcoming Boris's undoubted political skills will be somewhat easier than it was to break through against Thatcherism, if only because the current PM and his cabal could implode quite quickly.
It's reflected in your posting style. You sometimes make sensible points and at other times - mysteriously, out of the blue - become aggressive and look to label other posters as bigots.
Occasional "re-inventions" to mark a change of direction but it's the same party always in power?
I'm not sure politics works that way - at some point the Conservatives will lose power and when that happens they will be the ones facing the existential crisis as they try to figure out how to do opposition to a new genuinely popular Government.
I'm reminded of how "effective" the Conservatives were in opposition from 1997-2005.
HMG needs a proper opposition and so does the country
Don't forget - they already had watered down the SNP's preferred question "
Do you agree thatScotland should be an Independent Country?Subsequent testing found that "Yes/No" questions favour the "Yes" option.
I suppose they could ask "Should Scotland stay in the United Kingdom?" Yes/No.
It will be one of the sticking points in any referendum negotiations.
In the Met Boroughs, due to election by thirds, Lab will have to defend the seats they've just lost in places like Sandwell and Wolverhampton
And the major elections will be London locals where the Greens might fancy their chances in Boroughs like Lambeth and Haringey
I'd be delighted to see the back of the Labour Party. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
EDIT: Scotland has gone the same way as well, and Welsh Labour still seems to be immovable.
The MSP mandate explicitly doesn’t include a referendum under the terms of the law that established the Scottish Parliament
The right of the Scottish people to determine their future is more strongly demonstrated by the share of the vote which was about 50/50. If it had been 60/40 then I would have happily argued that Westminster should listen to that demand. But 50/50 doesn’t demonstrate a desire to go through the trauma of a further referendum
Now they need an election petition to correct the mistake.
The RO already got a job offer from Tower Hamlets to run the 2024 count
Going too radical on climate change being the most obvious one.
One imagines that there probably won't be another GE until after boundary reform has passed.
https://www.scotlandinunion.co.uk/post/new-poll-only-1-in-8-scots-say-independence-is-a-priority
In 1987 everyone said LAB wouldn't win again. No one had heard of Blair. 1997 super LAB!
Don't know who the new Blair is though! 👍