Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

The widespread notion that LAB can automatically assume 2nd prefs of LDs is not supported by real li

SystemSystem Posts: 11,689
edited June 2021 in General
imageThe widespread notion that LAB can automatically assume 2nd prefs of LDs is not supported by real life elections – politicalbetting.com

Inevitably after outcomes like yesterday’s by-election there are calls for a progressive alliance of some sort to be created whereby there is an arrangement so that the two of Lib Dem, Green or Labour parties in a specific seat stand aside so that the vote of the “progressive” can be maximised. This is the way it is argued that the FPTP system does not always work best for the Tories.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    Interesting,
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,598
    edited June 2021
    2nd

    Nearly beat the SE...
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,828
    edited June 2021
    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,987
    edited June 2021
    3rd. Like the Green.
    Edit. 4th like Labour just.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    The interesting thing about this notion is that nothing seems to shake it. I've even seen party members convinced it is true, possibly because they assume their feelings are shared by all those who vote for them (though not all members think that, as plenty will also not be fans of Labour). The progressive alliance just won't work so blatantly.
  • Options
    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    Would not surprise me. Especially if an Islamic party gains some ground.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    Fewer votes than Count Binface.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,205
    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,987
    edited June 2021
    On topic. Has anyone ever assumed LD voters would automatically choose Labour over the Tories? I certainly haven't.
    The point about an electoral pact is to oust a Conservative government. If that results in a net gain of only 1 vote in a Lab/Con marginal, then it is serving its purpose.

    Edit:: From recent comments some folk obviously do. I don't. It is only 6 years ago the LDs were propping up a Tory government.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    Taz said:

    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.

    PCC votes are pretty good. So many Lab/Con or Con/Lab, or Green/Con and so on.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    I don't think so, but it does feel sometimes like our politics struggles the idea of alliances or realistic prospects for new parties, even compared to other places with FPTP. I don't know if that is the case, but it feels like it.
  • Options
    Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,790
    kle4 said:

    The interesting thing about this notion is that nothing seems to shake it. I've even seen party members convinced it is true, possibly because they assume their feelings are shared by all those who vote for them (though not all members think that, as plenty will also not be fans of Labour). The progressive alliance just won't work so blatantly.

    I am naturally inclined centrist/centre right and have voted on occasion LD and long ago SDP.. If the Tories ditch the Clown for a moderate leader (unlikely but possible) and there were an alternative vote I could see myself voting LD/Tory or vice versa. I actually voted LD/Labour in one of the elections mentioned above. First time I have ever voted Labour. I felt dirty and deflowered, but amused!
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.

    PCC votes are pretty good. So many Lab/Con or Con/Lab, or Green/Con and so on.
    I would think in those circumstances the greens would garner rather more votes from other parties. There are many many people who would support an environmental issues party rather than one with an otherwise opposing agenda.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    dixiedean said:

    On topic. Has anyone ever assumed LD voters would automatically choose Labour over the Tories? I certainly haven't.
    The point about an electoral pact is to oust a Conservative government. If that results in a net gain of only 1 vote in a Lab/Con marginal, then it is serving its purpose.

    Edit:: From recent comments some folk obviously do. I don't. It is only 6 years ago the LDs were propping up a Tory government.

    Yes, and a lot of people were furious immediately (prior to seeing if it would be worth it) at the idea they even contemplated it, as though they were automatic Labour allies (rather than, perhaps, more likely allies). I recall some commentators talking of betrayal at the idea, and presumably some voters had the same thought.
  • Options
    Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,790

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.

    PCC votes are pretty good. So many Lab/Con or Con/Lab, or Green/Con and so on.
    I would think in those circumstances the greens would garner rather more votes from other parties. There are many many people who would support an environmental issues party rather than one with an otherwise opposing agenda.
    Except that they are more extreme socialists than Jeremy Corbyn. i am pretty woke on environmental matters but I would never vote for the Green sack cloth and ashes nutters
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820
    edited June 2021
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    ClippP said:

    Sean_F said:

    Just an FYI if any of you ever meet John Bercow tell him that you're a huge fan of his and his political judgment, tell him you really liked his Monday Club days, when they supported apartheid and repatriation of darkies from the UK.

    Very oddly shaped man. Large head, average sized body and little legs as I recall. Like a puppet on a string
    I remember one friend calling him "the Gollum of British politics. Small, stinking, and misshapen, yet strong, with a demonic inner drive."
    So your lot made him a Conservative MP..... The rot didn't really start with Johnson, did it?
    There have always been some horrible Conservative MP's.
    Nailed it, Sean.
    Far be it for me to defend the Conservative Party, but I name Elliot Morley, Chris Huhne, Jim Devine, Denis MacShane, Fiona Onasanya who are all non-Tory MPs who have done jail time, and don't seem paragons of repentance. Add to those some of the really obnoxious MPs from the Labour Party, who are not provenly criminal but just, well, painfully obnoxious: (Prescott, Skinner, Corbyn, Keith Vaz). Equally for all these arseholes there are also some very nice ones, as there are in the Conservative Party. Oh, and I almost forgot the guy that was described by his own QC as a bully and sex pest, oh what's his name...looks like a toad and only has one fan on here.
    Yes there are some nice Tory MPs.
    The retired kind or the ex kind?

    Just kidding.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,458
    On topic - plenty of people I knew voted LibDem as SpareLabour, over Iraq.

    They were appalled to discover that the LibDems thought that they weren't SpareLabour (The Coalition), and were quite angry about it.

    The student fees things was simply the excuse - they were looking for an opportunity to go back home to Labour.

    From the last thread - the one to watch is the age differentiated hospital admissions

    image
  • Options
    Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 13,790
    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    ClippP said:

    Sean_F said:

    Just an FYI if any of you ever meet John Bercow tell him that you're a huge fan of his and his political judgment, tell him you really liked his Monday Club days, when they supported apartheid and repatriation of darkies from the UK.

    Very oddly shaped man. Large head, average sized body and little legs as I recall. Like a puppet on a string
    I remember one friend calling him "the Gollum of British politics. Small, stinking, and misshapen, yet strong, with a demonic inner drive."
    So your lot made him a Conservative MP..... The rot didn't really start with Johnson, did it?
    There have always been some horrible Conservative MP's.
    Nailed it, Sean.
    Far be it for me to defend the Conservative Party, but I name Elliot Morley, Chris Huhne, Jim Devine, Denis MacShane, Fiona Onasanya who are all non-Tory MPs who have done jail time, and don't seem paragons of repentance. Add to those some of the really obnoxious MPs from the Labour Party, who are not provenly criminal but just, well, painfully obnoxious: (Prescott, Skinner, Corbyn, Keith Vaz). Equally for all these arseholes there are also some very nice ones, as there are in the Conservative Party. Oh, and I almost forgot the guy that was described by his own QC as a bully and sex pest, oh what's his name...looks like a toad and only has one fan on here.
    Yes there are some nice Tory MPs.
    The retired kind or the ex kind?

    Just kidding.
    The Clown and Dom got rid of the best ones.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,820

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.

    PCC votes are pretty good. So many Lab/Con or Con/Lab, or Green/Con and so on.
    I would think in those circumstances the greens would garner rather more votes from other parties. There are many many people who would support an environmental issues party rather than one with an otherwise opposing agenda.
    Except that they are more extreme socialists than Jeremy Corbyn. i am pretty woke on environmental matters but I would never vote for the Green sack cloth and ashes nutters
    Lots do not see that though. I think a lot of people see them as a safe, harmless option.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    Absolutely shocking decision there.
  • Options

    kle4 said:

    Taz said:

    Not really a shock, the assumption of many who propose a so called progressive alliance automatically assume every voters who does not vote Tory is anti Tory. You just cannot take people’s votes for granted or assume they will do as certain blue ticks on Twitter expect.

    PCC votes are pretty good. So many Lab/Con or Con/Lab, or Green/Con and so on.
    I would think in those circumstances the greens would garner rather more votes from other parties. There are many many people who would support an environmental issues party rather than one with an otherwise opposing agenda.
    Except that they are more extreme socialists than Jeremy Corbyn. i am pretty woke on environmental matters but I would never vote for the Green sack cloth and ashes nutters
    Yep but many people are otherwise unaware of those tendencies, probably most of the electorate.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    Absolutely shocking decision there.

    It's a dreadful decision.
  • Options

    Absolutely shocking decision there.

    Quite pleased. I have Czech friends and it may do England a favour for the next game
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    Pulpstar said:

    Absolutely shocking decision there.

    It's a dreadful decision.
    It's one of the reasons I'm betting less on football, VAR and poor referees are making betting a bit more risky.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,500

    kle4 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sean_F said:

    ClippP said:

    Sean_F said:

    Just an FYI if any of you ever meet John Bercow tell him that you're a huge fan of his and his political judgment, tell him you really liked his Monday Club days, when they supported apartheid and repatriation of darkies from the UK.

    Very oddly shaped man. Large head, average sized body and little legs as I recall. Like a puppet on a string
    I remember one friend calling him "the Gollum of British politics. Small, stinking, and misshapen, yet strong, with a demonic inner drive."
    So your lot made him a Conservative MP..... The rot didn't really start with Johnson, did it?
    There have always been some horrible Conservative MP's.
    Nailed it, Sean.
    Far be it for me to defend the Conservative Party, but I name Elliot Morley, Chris Huhne, Jim Devine, Denis MacShane, Fiona Onasanya who are all non-Tory MPs who have done jail time, and don't seem paragons of repentance. Add to those some of the really obnoxious MPs from the Labour Party, who are not provenly criminal but just, well, painfully obnoxious: (Prescott, Skinner, Corbyn, Keith Vaz). Equally for all these arseholes there are also some very nice ones, as there are in the Conservative Party. Oh, and I almost forgot the guy that was described by his own QC as a bully and sex pest, oh what's his name...looks like a toad and only has one fan on here.
    Yes there are some nice Tory MPs.
    The retired kind or the ex kind?

    Just kidding.
    The Clown and Dom got rid of the best ones.
    And that's going to be a little bit of a problem when the time comes. As Labour are finding with their post-Corbyn flounderings, it's really hard to build a quality team after the sort of bushfire both parties have experienced over the last decade or so.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    Even if hey did, has anyone come up with a list of seats where the Liberal Democrat vote is significantly larger than the Tory majority over Labour?

    Because that’s what I was asking for this morning and AFAICS one was not forthcoming.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,987

    On topic - plenty of people I knew voted LibDem as SpareLabour, over Iraq.

    They were appalled to discover that the LibDems thought that they weren't SpareLabour (The Coalition), and were quite angry about it.

    The student fees things was simply the excuse - they were looking for an opportunity to go back home to Labour.

    From the last thread - the one to watch is the age differentiated hospital admissions

    image

    From arguably before Iraq, Charlie Kennedy was making hay attacking New Labour from the Left. This continued for 10 years. It's no surprise some folk were angry to find them backing a Tory government.
    However, that hasn't applied for over a decade. Not sure why anyone would be at all surprised by the header's charts.
    I am only in the sense that I'm surprised they all saw more transfers to Lab than the Cons.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,731
    That Czech player looked like he was having a seizure
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,779
    When polling the options should include anti-Tory and anti-Labour.

    Depending on their leaderships I am generally far more anti-one (or last election both!) of those than I am pro anyone else. I don't think that is unusual, at least not more unusual than being a Lib Dem or Green.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,458
    dixiedean said:

    On topic - plenty of people I knew voted LibDem as SpareLabour, over Iraq.

    They were appalled to discover that the LibDems thought that they weren't SpareLabour (The Coalition), and were quite angry about it.

    The student fees things was simply the excuse - they were looking for an opportunity to go back home to Labour.

    From the last thread - the one to watch is the age differentiated hospital admissions

    image

    From arguably before Iraq, Charlie Kennedy was making hay attacking New Labour from the Left. This continued for 10 years. It's no surprise some folk were angry to find them backing a Tory government.
    However, that hasn't applied for over a decade. Not sure why anyone would be at all surprised by the header's charts.
    I am only in the sense that I'm surprised they all saw more transfers to Lab than the Cons.
    {Orange Book Lib Dems have entered the chat}

    The Lib Dem opposition to New Labour wasn't so much from the Left as the Liberal position.

    As issue is people who assume that anyone objecting to anything done by the Labour party must be attacking from the Right, since the Labour party owns the left....
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344
    edited June 2021
    kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:

    On topic. Has anyone ever assumed LD voters would automatically choose Labour over the Tories? I certainly haven't.
    The point about an electoral pact is to oust a Conservative government. If that results in a net gain of only 1 vote in a Lab/Con marginal, then it is serving its purpose.

    Edit:: From recent comments some folk obviously do. I don't. It is only 6 years ago the LDs were propping up a Tory government.

    Yes, and a lot of people were furious immediately (prior to seeing if it would be worth it) at the idea they even contemplated it, as though they were automatic Labour allies (rather than, perhaps, more likely allies). I recall some commentators talking of betrayal at the idea, and presumably some voters had the same thought.
    A subtle point is how it changes things if there's (a) an official pact (b) a failure of one party to contest the seat, with no overt explanation or (c) a "paper candidate" non-campaign.

    (a) will maximise crossover far more than sponantaneous 2nd preferences, but at the cost of some rejecting a party they'd have voted for without it ("What! You're in the pocket of X? Not voting for that!"). (b) occasionally happens at Parl'y level now and often at lower levels. My impression is that about half the supporters of the other party take the hint, and the others mostly stay at home. (c) is pretty much what happened in A+C though Labour did make a token effort. We'll see if the Batley and Spen LD candidate conversely refrains from the "Winning here" stuff - if so, it suggests that an element of mutual common sense is creeping in.

    A propos of nothing, I was contemplating the Wakefield result in 2019.

    https://www.wakefield.gov.uk/elections/previous-election-results-electorate-statistics/general-election-results/general-election-results-2019
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,082
    Change of tone from Ireland and the EU:

    @simoncoveney
    @MarosSefcovic tells College of Europe in Bruges that EU welcomes UKs recognition of the importance of trust, by asking for agreement on extension to the chilled meats grace period rather than acting unilaterally on NI Protocol.
    - I’ll be urging the EU to respond with generosity.


    https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1405909246647099394
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,360
    A Tory MP is facing trial for a sex related matter dating back to 2008.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,709
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57531904.amp

    Tory MP on trial for sexual assault on 15 year old.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,266
    Pulpstar said:

    Absolutely shocking decision there.

    It's a dreadful decision.
    Ridiculous decision.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760

    Change of tone from Ireland and the EU:

    @simoncoveney
    @MarosSefcovic tells College of Europe in Bruges that EU welcomes UKs recognition of the importance of trust, by asking for agreement on extension to the chilled meats grace period rather than acting unilaterally on NI Protocol.
    - I’ll be urging the EU to respond with generosity.


    https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1405909246647099394

    Do you think they're rethinking using NI to "coax" the UK into dynamic alignment rule taking on SPS in the wake of the announcement of the Australia deal?
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,134

    When polling the options should include anti-Tory and anti-Labour.

    Depending on their leaderships I am generally far more anti-one (or last election both!) of those than I am pro anyone else. I don't think that is unusual, at least not more unusual than being a Lib Dem or Green.

    Of course, the one great lasting achievement of Nick Clegg is that for many people the Lib Dems have now moved permanently into the "one of the above" column.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,333

    Pulpstar said:

    Absolutely shocking decision there.

    It's a dreadful decision.
    Ridiculous decision.
    Did that Croatia bloke just drop to the ground for no reason and then a few minutes later the blond haired Czech bloke did the same thing.

    Where's their sense of fair play god damnit?
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Ftpt
    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
  • Options
    All those five contests in the graph are, broadly speaking, located from the Midlands northwards; I strongly suspect that a similar analysis for elections in the south east and south west would give a very different picture.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,333
    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,858
    edited June 2021
    ydoethur said:

    Even if hey did, has anyone come up with a list of seats where the Liberal Democrat vote is significantly larger than the Tory majority over Labour?

    Because that’s what I was asking for this morning and AFAICS one was not forthcoming.

    I don’t know what you mean by “significantly larger” but the first 23 seats on Labour’s target list are all those where the LD vote is larger than the majority over Labour.

    Combine those with perhaps 20 odd seats that could fall to LD given a reasonable Tory > LD shift in the SE and you have a path to victory for Lab w/ LD.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303

    ydoethur said:

    Even if hey did, has anyone come up with a list of seats where the Liberal Democrat vote is significantly larger than the Tory majority over Labour?

    Because that’s what I was asking for this morning and AFAICS one was not forthcoming.

    I don’t know what you mean by “significantly larger” but the first 23 seats on Labour’s target list are all those where the LD vote is larger than the majority over Labour.

    Combine those with perhaps 20 odd seats that could fall to LD given a reasonable Tory > LD shift in the SE and you have a path to victory for Lab w/ LD.
    Thank you, that is a start. By significantly larger I didn’t have a figure in mind, I was just thinking of the point in OGH’s graph above - that not all Lib Dem voters would break Lab even if there were tactical voting. So a cushion would be comfortable.

    Although we might then have to add any Brexit party vote to the permutation. Obviously in some seats it wouldn’t apply, like Kensington.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,793

    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
    I'd not mind a LD government so much in principal. In practice though.. Is there a LD with any credibility beyond one who supplies great political betting tips and I'm sorely regretting opposing today?

    The LD peers are clearly worse than everyone else's peers and that's a low bar.

    I guess it's me getting old but I see almost no wisdom exhibited by any politicians, and the LDs really are for my money the bottom of the pile. Just empty.

    Their leader doesn't help.
  • Options

    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
    The Liberals were in favour of PR when they _were_ winning huge outright majorities. So, unlikely they'd change their position in such circumstances.
  • Options
    maaarshmaaarsh Posts: 3,391

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    They do seem to have apportioned more costs to AZN than the EU. But it's a Belgian court so looking to it for fair dealing when one of the parties is the EU seems quite cute.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,333

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    Does it matter? I thought agreements were structured to be broken?
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 20,858
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Even if hey did, has anyone come up with a list of seats where the Liberal Democrat vote is significantly larger than the Tory majority over Labour?

    Because that’s what I was asking for this morning and AFAICS one was not forthcoming.

    I don’t know what you mean by “significantly larger” but the first 23 seats on Labour’s target list are all those where the LD vote is larger than the majority over Labour.

    Combine those with perhaps 20 odd seats that could fall to LD given a reasonable Tory > LD shift in the SE and you have a path to victory for Lab w/ LD.
    Thank you, that is a start. By significantly larger I didn’t have a figure in mind, I was just thinking of the point in OGH’s graph above - that not all Lib Dem voters would break Lab even if there were tactical voting. So a cushion would be comfortable.

    Although we might then have to add any Brexit party vote to the permutation. Obviously in some seats it wouldn’t apply, like Kensington.
    I think OGH’s charts are interesting but don’t preclude significant anti-government tactical voting in a GE.

    The necessity is for “Tory Remainers” to go Lib Dem. While in other contests, Tory Remainer types might second pref Tory; it’s totally feasible for them to vote tactically against *this* government.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    All those five contests in the graph are, broadly speaking, located from the Midlands northwards; I strongly suspect that a similar analysis for elections in the south east and south west would give a very different picture.

    Yes. These are all areas where the Liberal Democrats are relatively weak, especially at Parliamentary level - *except* for Cambridgeshire, where they have some past and present form. The preference for switching to Labour is strongest there, possibly lending credence to your observation.

    It's a shame that there aren't more results tabulated from parts further South.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,556
    edited June 2021
    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244
    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    I know loads of Lib Dem’s who would set their nads on fire before voting labour.
  • Options
    jonny83jonny83 Posts: 1,261
    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    I expect this will lead to some prolonged and epic bishop bashing.

    US Catholic bishops approve drafting of Communion document that could lead to rebuke of President Joe Biden.

    https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1405938606426972166
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    jonny83 said:

    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.

    Scary to think Jeremy Corbyn is the more intelligent brother.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,793
    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    maaarsh said:

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    They do seem to have apportioned more costs to AZN than the EU. But it's a Belgian court so looking to it for fair dealing when one of the parties is the EU seems quite cute.
    Although they have apportioned 70/30 on costs, it’s striking that they didn’t give the EU a single thing they asked for. Only a penalty clause that looks pretty well meaningless if the facts are as stated. They did not find AZ in breach of contract, deferring that decision. They have not ordered AZ to provide 120 million doses by the end of the month, as requested. They did not impose a daily fine for failure to comply, but a sum per vaccine in a timeframe that will make it totally meaningless.

    That’s ultimately a fairly major defeat for the EU. It has got some nice words, but it’s not getting the vaccines it demanded, or the money. Not, of course, that it was in a court’s power to increase the number of doses available, that depending on the pace of production.

    Von der Leyen is spinning this as a major win for the EU because she is a fluent and shameless liar, not for any other reason.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,709

    All those five contests in the graph are, broadly speaking, located from the Midlands northwards; I strongly suspect that a similar analysis for elections in the south east and south west would give a very different picture.

    Yes. These are all areas where the Liberal Democrats are relatively weak, especially at Parliamentary level - *except* for Cambridgeshire, where they have some past and present form. The preference for switching to Labour is strongest there, possibly lending credence to your observation.

    It's a shame that there aren't more results tabulated from parts further South.
    In Leics the LDs have strong presence on Hinckley, Harborough and Oadby and Wigston councils.

    I think though it is hard to interpret too much from PCC elections as turnout is so low.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,803

    I expect this will lead to some prolonged and epic bishop bashing.

    US Catholic bishops approve drafting of Communion document that could lead to rebuke of President Joe Biden.

    https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1405938606426972166

    But they are not the approved Henrician Catholic but not Roman Catholic variety, so they don't count on PB.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    edited June 2021
    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    Am I right in thinking that the only Liberal Democrat seat in England north of a line from Oxford to St Albans is Westmoreland and Lonsdale? No seats in the Midlands, in Yorkshire, in East Anglia or in the North East left at all?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,714
    edited June 2021
    First time on PB for 36 hours, and it seems my prediction of a LD win in Chesham was right, although my forecast margin of 0.1% wasn't so good. :)
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,598

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    Claims I have seen are quite technical - that the ruling is that not using UK factories means that Best Reasonable Efforts have not been fulfilled, and that that therefore opens the way for a damages claim based on BREs not being used resulting in delays in vaccine supplies.

    That "may" in the Reuters' quote is interesting - would totally change the sense if in the judgement.

    There'ss plenty of spin going on eg that AZ are 70% responsible for legal costs, without mentioning the very low ceiling on it. And I have seen that reported the other way, too.

    These are the kind of snippets being quoted, including your extract, pretending that "this was never about the doses" (not what EuCo said...). Until I get a translation of the whole thing, it is just spin.

    We saw all this with the contract, too.



  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,234
    edited June 2021
    Omnium said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
    I'd not mind a LD government so much in principal. In practice though.. Is there a LD with any credibility beyond one who supplies great political betting tips and I'm sorely regretting opposing today?

    The LD peers are clearly worse than everyone else's peers and that's a low bar.

    I guess it's me getting old but I see almost no wisdom exhibited by any politicians, and the LDs really are for my money the bottom of the pile. Just empty.

    Their leader doesn't help.
    Whereas the Tory peers are the epitome of decency -cough cough Lord Hanningfield cough cough- and led by a clean living master of probity and truth who is definitely not the most dishonest political chancer to be PM since Lord Bute... Get back in your box, troll!
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303

    jonny83 said:

    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.

    Scary to think Jeremy Corbyn is the more intelligent brother.
    A classic example of how intelligence need not be hereditary, given both their parents were pretty smart.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,013
    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    The LDs used to have four stronghold areas:

    1. The Celtic fringe - Orkney & Shetland, Cornwall, etc
    2. South West London
    3. The market towns of South East England
    4. Scottish seats where they were the perceived challengers to the Conservatives

    Re 1, while Orkney & Shetland remains, the LDs have been hammered in the Southwest - probably at least partly due to their Europhilia. I don't see a quick way back for them there.

    2. South West London remains a strong area, and one where they have the opportunity to make further gains in the future. It wouldn't be a surprise if they won both Carshalton and Wimbledon in 2024.

    3. The LibDems used to have a swathe of seats - Lewes, Eastleigh, Eastbourne, Winchester, etc. They have been almost eliminated. But C&A, plus successes in the locals should give them optimism here.

    4. Well, it's not anti-Tory tactical voting any more, it's anti-SNP. The LDs could gain - at most - two more seats in Scotland. And realistically, one is more likely.

    Put those together, and you can see... ohh... the opportunity for the LDs to get back to about 20 seats. But getting much beyond there requires them to start nationally polling a lot higher than current levels.
  • Options
    AnExileinD4AnExileinD4 Posts: 337

    Change of tone from Ireland and the EU:

    @simoncoveney
    @MarosSefcovic tells College of Europe in Bruges that EU welcomes UKs recognition of the importance of trust, by asking for agreement on extension to the chilled meats grace period rather than acting unilaterally on NI Protocol.
    - I’ll be urging the EU to respond with generosity.


    https://twitter.com/simoncoveney/status/1405909246647099394

    In non-related news, Irish Ferries is opening on the Dover - Calais route.
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,234
    moonshine said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    I know loads of Lib Dem’s who would set their nads on fire before voting labour.
    I have the burns to prove it.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,501
    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Bloody Geordies :wink:
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    ydoethur said:

    maaarsh said:

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    They do seem to have apportioned more costs to AZN than the EU. But it's a Belgian court so looking to it for fair dealing when one of the parties is the EU seems quite cute.
    Although they have apportioned 70/30 on costs, it’s striking that they didn’t give the EU a single thing they asked for. Only a penalty clause that looks pretty well meaningless if the facts are as stated. They did not find AZ in breach of contract, deferring that decision. They have not ordered AZ to provide 120 million doses by the end of the month, as requested. They did not impose a daily fine for failure to comply, but a sum per vaccine in a timeframe that will make it totally meaningless.

    That’s ultimately a fairly major defeat for the EU. It has got some nice words, but it’s not getting the vaccines it demanded, or the money. Not, of course, that it was in a court’s power to increase the number of doses available, that depending on the pace of production.

    Von der Leyen is spinning this as a major win for the EU because she is a fluent and shameless liar, not for any other reason.
    Any apologists for the EU spinning this as a victory are simply shameless charlatans.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303

    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Bloody Geordies :wink:
    If you fall ill with Covid in Durham, are you at risk of a Chester-le infection?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,709
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    Am I right in thinking that the only Liberal Democrat seat in England north of a line from Oxford to St Albans is Westmoreland and Lonsdale? No seats in the Midlands, in Yorkshire, in East Anglia or in the North East left at all?
    At the moment...but things change.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    Cicero said:

    moonshine said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    I know loads of Lib Dem’s who would set their nads on fire before voting labour.
    I have the burns to prove it.
    We will take your word for it, despite your being a banker. Please don’t feel the need to show them.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Bloody Geordies :wink:
    If you fall ill with Covid in Durham, are you at risk of a Chester-le infection?
    A low bar - but that has to be your worst effort ever :smiley:
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,333
    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Blimey.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    edited June 2021
    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    The LibDems are generally the fringiest of fringe players in the Midlands. It is a straight Tory-Labour fight there. LibDems reappearing in Yardley or Solihull for example are pipe dreams.

    And wanting to can HS2 is not exactly going to play well for them.

    Except, of course, they don't want to can HS2. Just not have it go from London to the Midlands.....
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    Floater said:

    ydoethur said:

    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Bloody Geordies :wink:
    If you fall ill with Covid in Durham, are you at risk of a Chester-le infection?
    A low bar - but that has to be your worst effort ever :smiley:
    Really? I would have though it was right up your Street.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,611

    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
    Attachment of Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party of Canada hardly sudden, as Grits have been contesting elections - provincial as well as federal - on that basis since before 1867. And while they've endured several severe defeats under FPTP (just 34 of 308 seats in 2011 GE) for most of confederation the Liberals have been THE Party of Government in the Great White North.

    Of course the British Liberal Party had zero problem with FPTP in the age of Gladstone v Disraeli, and for decades thereafter. Wonder why?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,013
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    Am I right in thinking that the only Liberal Democrat seat in England north of a line from Oxford to St Albans is Westmoreland and Lonsdale? No seats in the Midlands, in Yorkshire, in East Anglia or in the North East left at all?
    Well, up until yesterday, there were only seven LD seats in England.

    Four were in London and its suburbs. Two were in towns west of London. And one was in Cumbria.

    Today, five will be in London and its suburbs...
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,172
    I laffed


  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,793
    Amazing frothiness from our LD Host!

    (Well done LDs, and well done Mike for tipping it)

    The LDs will never be taken seriously in a 'progressive alliance'. It's just a ridiculous idea.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    Am I right in thinking that the only Liberal Democrat seat in England north of a line from Oxford to St Albans is Westmoreland and Lonsdale? No seats in the Midlands, in Yorkshire, in East Anglia or in the North East left at all?
    At the moment...but things change.
    C'mon - don't be vacuous. Where will they change?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    The LibDems are generally the fringiest off fringe players in the Midlands. It is a straight Tory-Labour fight there. LibDems reappearing in Yardley or Solihull for example are pipe dreams.

    And wanting to can HS2 is not exactly going to play well for them.

    Except, of course, they don't want to can HS2. Just not have it go from London to the Midlands.....
    It might in Lichfield. It isn’t very popular there, for I have to say (even as a supporter of HS2) the legitimate reason that they will have vast disruption and inconvenience from building it and then lose the current hourly 125mph expresses to London.

    Just because Fabricant is as mad as a box of frogs and pig ignorant on all matters to do with railways doesn’t mean he doesn’t occasionally say something right.

    But equally, given how strongly he’s opposed, why would you vote for a Lib Dem?

    Meanwhile, in Tamworth, Burton, Stone and Cannock, the other seats similarly adversely affected, they are nowhere. Heck, they didn’t even bother to stand in Cannock.
  • Options
    Omnium said:

    Amazing frothiness from our LD Host!

    (Well done LDs, and well done Mike for tipping it)

    The LDs will never be taken seriously in a 'progressive alliance'. It's just a ridiculous idea.

    If everyone wants PR enough it might not be.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,709

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    The LibDems are generally the fringiest of fringe players in the Midlands. It is a straight Tory-Labour fight there. LibDems reappearing in Yardley or Solihull for example are pipe dreams.

    And wanting to can HS2 is not exactly going to play well for them.

    Except, of course, they don't want to can HS2. Just not have it go from London to the Midlands.....
    I think the new seat of Oadby, Wigston and Blaby is winnable for the LDs.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,205
    Foxy said:

    All those five contests in the graph are, broadly speaking, located from the Midlands northwards; I strongly suspect that a similar analysis for elections in the south east and south west would give a very different picture.

    Yes. These are all areas where the Liberal Democrats are relatively weak, especially at Parliamentary level - *except* for Cambridgeshire, where they have some past and present form. The preference for switching to Labour is strongest there, possibly lending credence to your observation.

    It's a shame that there aren't more results tabulated from parts further South.
    In Leics the LDs have strong presence on Hinckley, Harborough and Oadby and Wigston councils.

    I think though it is hard to interpret too much from PCC elections as turnout is so low.
    Also the Lib Dem party has a strong presence on the Durham council which is now a several party coalition and it is led by a Lib Dem. I’m always surprised how poorly they do in the Durham city seat given their strength in many of the wards at a council level it should be far more competitive.
  • Options

    All those five contests in the graph are, broadly speaking, located from the Midlands northwards; I strongly suspect that a similar analysis for elections in the south east and south west would give a very different picture.

    Yes. These are all areas where the Liberal Democrats are relatively weak, especially at Parliamentary level - *except* for Cambridgeshire, where they have some past and present form. The preference for switching to Labour is strongest there, possibly lending credence to your observation.

    It's a shame that there aren't more results tabulated from parts further South.
    I was more thinking along the lines that in the south, LibDems see the clear enemy as being the Tories, while in the north it's often Labour they are opposing. When I was in the LibDems, at party conferences I was often taken aback by how different the attitudes of party colleagues from northern parts were.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,205

    Alistair said:

    TOPPING said:

    Alistair said:

    Ftpt

    TOPPING said:

    Someone said upthread about the pox at unis. As I said yesterday, niece and nephew both confirm it is rampant at Durham.

    Would explain the MASSIVE rise in cases in the North East
    Of course we are all interested to know about how this translates into hospitalisations and death.

    But I would have thought that if these increase the press will be all over it. Given the demographic in sure there will be plenty of high powered interest in the stats.
    Just checked, over a quarter of all Covid cases in the North East are in Country Durham.
    Bloody Geordies :wink:

    At least you didn’t say Mackems
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,430
    ydoethur said:

    jonny83 said:

    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.

    Scary to think Jeremy Corbyn is the more intelligent brother.
    A classic example of how intelligence need not be hereditary, given both their parents were pretty smart.
    Piers Corbyn used to have quite a PB following because of his theory that global warming was due to solar activity.
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,793
    Cicero said:

    Omnium said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Maybe this Century will see a reversion back to Conservative/Liberal and Labour will decline... Nothing more than a 20th century fad that only won with four leaders (McDonald, Atlee, Wilson and Blair) in 100 years?

    It would be amusing if the Liberals in one form or another were to win an outright majority how long it would take them, like Trudeau, to suddenly understand the wonders of FPTP.
    I'd not mind a LD government so much in principal. In practice though.. Is there a LD with any credibility beyond one who supplies great political betting tips and I'm sorely regretting opposing today?

    The LD peers are clearly worse than everyone else's peers and that's a low bar.

    I guess it's me getting old but I see almost no wisdom exhibited by any politicians, and the LDs really are for my money the bottom of the pile. Just empty.

    Their leader doesn't help.
    Whereas the Tory peers are the epitome of decency -cough cough Lord Hanningfield cough cough- and led by a clean living master of probity and truth who is definitely not the most dishonest political chancer to be PM since Lord Bute... Get back in your box, troll!
    Do try to catch up with the idea of civilisation.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,303
    edited June 2021

    ydoethur said:

    jonny83 said:

    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.

    Scary to think Jeremy Corbyn is the more intelligent brother.
    A classic example of how intelligence need not be hereditary, given both their parents were pretty smart.
    Piers Corbyn used to have quite a PB following because of his theory that global warming was due to solar activity.
    Are you saying he hit a hot spot there?
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,611
    edited June 2021

    I expect this will lead to some prolonged and epic bishop bashing.

    US Catholic bishops approve drafting of Communion document that could lead to rebuke of President Joe Biden.

    https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/1405938606426972166

    The Southern Baptist Convention has just turned back a highly-organized right-wing effort to take over control of one of America's largest religious denominations.

    So naturally the crazed Catholic wing of the US Catholic Bishops's Conference is wanting to fill that space. EDIT - In spite of Pope Francis calling for delay in making the decision.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,803
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    jonny83 said:

    Piers Corbyn trending on twitter for Piers Corbyn things... What a disgrace he is.

    Scary to think Jeremy Corbyn is the more intelligent brother.
    A classic example of how intelligence need not be hereditary, given both their parents were pretty smart.
    Piers Corbyn used to have quite a PB following because of his theory that global warming was due to solar activity.
    Are you saying he hit a hit spot there?
    The row just flared up.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Omnium said:

    Amazing frothiness from our LD Host!

    (Well done LDs, and well done Mike for tipping it)

    The LDs will never be taken seriously in a 'progressive alliance'. It's just a ridiculous idea.

    If everyone wants PR enough it might not be.
    True.

    And if you have enough faith, trust, happy thoughts and pixie dust then you too can fly.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,611
    Foxy said:

    Omnium said:

    algarkirk said:

    There are two decent reasons for thinking that overall as of today LDs have more in common with Labour than the Tories.

    One is the coalition experience which tested the theory that LDs are just moderate Tories to destruction. They got demolished for going in with them instead.

    Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place. In almost every case it is either Labour or LD up against a Tory. If they were genuine adversaries there would be lots of seats where Lab and LD would be fighting it out for first place, especially in those places where Tories are naturally weak. Just as there are lots of seats where Con and Lab do so, and Con and LD do so.

    "Secondly there are very few constituencies where LD and Labour fight it out for first place"

    Not a great LD selling point. Interesting though.

    The LDs really should have great unassailable heartlands in the midlands etc. They just have outliers and leafy deodorists.
    The LibDems are generally the fringiest of fringe players in the Midlands. It is a straight Tory-Labour fight there. LibDems reappearing in Yardley or Solihull for example are pipe dreams.

    And wanting to can HS2 is not exactly going to play well for them.

    Except, of course, they don't want to can HS2. Just not have it go from London to the Midlands.....
    I think the new seat of Oadby, Wigston and Blaby is winnable for the LDs.
    This is a VERY humorous name. Is it perchance in the Soke of Woke?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,980
    MattW said:

    A question for the PB legal community. The EU and their fans are heavily trying to spin today's court ruling in Belgium as a victory for the EU showing that AstraZeneca seriously broke the contract. In particular putting emphasis on the words "faute lorde" https://twitter.com/NaomiOhReally/status/1405896125132029952?s=19

    But Reuters is saying the ruling means that the AZN "may" have committed a breach and that wasn't settled. https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

    What's your take on it? Has the court ruled AZN is in breach or not?

    Claims I have seen are quite technical - that the ruling is that not using UK factories means that Best Reasonable Efforts have not been fulfilled, and that that therefore opens the way for a damages claim based on BREs not being used resulting in delays in vaccine supplies.

    That "may" in the Reuters' quote is interesting - would totally change the sense if in the judgement.

    There'ss plenty of spin going on eg that AZ are 70% responsible for legal costs, without mentioning the very low ceiling on it. And I have seen that reported the other way, too.

    These are the kind of snippets being quoted, including your extract, pretending that "this was never about the doses" (not what EuCo said...). Until I get a translation of the whole thing, it is just spin.

    We saw all this with the contract, too.



    Costs of 4k EUR? An emphatic win for the EU.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,714
    edited June 2021
    Don't want to boast but I'd bet £20 on the LDs at 17/1 a couple of days ago.
  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Andy_JS said:

    Don't want to boast but I'd bet £20 on the LDs at 17/1 a couple of days ago.

    Sounds like a boast to me.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,760
    Here's Comedy Dave's take on AZ:

    We've had six months of hagiographies for Hancock and his manoeuvring to keep doses in the UK and block exports.

    Now a UK-based company's reputation is in tatters and it's unclear what benefit that early vaccine-hoarding gave in the end.

    Time for a reevaluation?

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1405936861357486084?s=20

    Since it's the Swedish company that was sued, not sure what he's going on about....

    They asked for 300 million, the court said 80, 70 of which have already been delivered.....
This discussion has been closed.