BoJo’s Tories are arguably more vulnerable to the LDs at the next election than LAB – politicalbetti

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Gove and Vlad?

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

Gove is however electoral poison - especially for younger age groups.

What proportion of ABC1 Remainers voted Tory in 2019?

Is Johnson being rated at Minus 44% with them a swing from the last General Election, or is it already baked into the pre-existing figures?

eek said:

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.

StuartDickson said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

PM Gove. Ho ho. Those Scottish sub-samples will make for hilarious data inputs for FUDHY’s Baxter calculations.

Well the clueless wonders are in for a shock eh?

Philip_Thompson said:

What proportion of ABC1 Remainers voted Tory in 2019?

Is Johnson being rated at Minus 44% with them a swing from the last General Election, or is it already baked into the pre-existing figures?

Bonjour.

Far more likely they will end up in a telephone box. Pro remain =curtains...
..

Nigelb said:

StuartDickson said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

4. England loses its weapons of mass destruction.

5. Rest of planet breathes a sigh of relief that the infants have had their toy drum removed.

That's just bile.
On the list of things that keep the RotW awake at night, the UK's possession of nuclear weapons figures very low indeed.

Haters gotta hate.

But "joyous & civic" (sic) Scottish Nationalism is so much better than anyone else's nationalism...

HYUFD said:

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.

The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.

Got to say in the light of TSE's post https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/07/20/michael-gove-has-extraordinary-gift-politicians-can-look-awe/ makes interesting reading.

Long answers for everything except about Boris which went

Baroness Suttie (Lib Dem) asked him how important it was for the PM to “play a full and active role” in dealing with the first ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Very, followed by Yes and Very when pushed further.

Interesting fusion technology, which generates electricity directly from the fusion process:
https://www.eetimes.com/helion-energy-achieves-key-fusion-milestone/

At first glance, it looks considerably more practicable than others approaches.

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

I was going to make a comment about the "revelation" but won't. Its already out there.

eek said:

Dura_Ace said:

eek said:

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.

How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?

It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.

The same way that any country enters the EU / Eurozone. The EU adopts the rules as a future target rather than an absolute.

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

FPT if you didn't see it:

Gnud said:

I've now watched the Dominic Cummings interview.

1. His hand was near his mouth for most of the time he was speaking. You don't have to know much about body language to know what that means.

2. The most important bit, the bit that gets to the core of what he is all about, was when he said that when "you’re trying to do very hard things", like dealing with "war and terrorism and things like that", "we should be very very aggressively trying to get into position these very rare people who are times 100 or times 1000 smarter, more able than the norm into those crucial positions".

3. If you just want some amusement, try the part where he says that MPs should take matters into their own hands. Yeah, right.

Laura Kuenssberg asks him who the "we" are and he replies "a few dozen".
The interview wouldn't have been much different had he written the questions himself.
The transcript is here.

The key ideas of the "we" are twofold:

*******************
* there's a genetic super-elite
* the genetic super-elite are super-needed, because humanity is at high risk of super-trouble.
*******************

On the risk of super-trouble, see the Global Challenges Foundation, the Future of Humanity Institute (Oxford, connected to the Centre for Effective Altruism), the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (Cambridge), etc.

Mostly the "EA" scene is composed of young male turds who believe that many previously unsolved problems can be solved in the blink of an eye by brilliant geniuses such as themselves, and who are so busy at their keyboards they rarely even see daylight, let alone attract any female interest, plus a small number of older men who manage to arrange lucrative pop-sci book contracts having crafted some buzzphrases and then spread them around at dinner parties. Closer to the core are a few billionaires who love hearing that "some people alive now" will live forever or at least for another 500 or 1000 years. See people like Laszlo Szombatfalvy and Peter Thiel.

I shall read Toby Ord's book "Precipice" in which he says there's a 1 in 6 chance that human society will fall off a cliff before 2100, mainly because I'm intrigued as to what preparations might be being made by certain insane billionaires for "if it happens". The concept of "existential risk" has been crafted to allow for the possible survival of a few. Their plans for "bugging out" will be very different from those of most "preppers".

This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.

The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.

What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.

eek said:

Dura_Ace said:

eek said:

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.

How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?

It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.

Probably similar to the UK one?

eek said:

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

It only takes one English Nationalist PM and that would go for Ireland as well as Scotland, even more likely for Scotland as after a very bitter divorce and led by the SNP it would not be somewhere an English PM would be desperate to send RAF pilots to potentially risk their lives to defend if it was not obliged to as a fellow NATO member

Stuartinromford said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

Have to wonder what Rishi has done that's so terrible.

As for PM Gove, as Jim Hacker's Chief Whip put it- who is suitable for the job? The only way to find out is to suck it and see.

Whats Sunak done thats terrible? From Gove's perspective simply be ahead of him in the next leadership betting.

Among adults

English antibody prevalence estimates from the ONS

Week beginning May 3: 75.9%
Week beginning May 17: 80.3%
Week beginning June 7: 86.6%
Week beginning June 14: 89.8%
Week beginning June 28: 91.9%

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1417785998222692354?s=20

Oh Goody "Two Brains" Burgon is on first:

https://twitter.com/PARLYapp/status/1417787390438092802?s=20

RochdalePioneers said:

HYUFD said:

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.

The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.

The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:

Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government.
This will shore up the centre right vote.
No other configuration of possible government is stable.

Consequences for LDs:

They need to clarify three areas of policy
1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.

2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.

3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.

algarkirk said:

RochdalePioneers said:

HYUFD said:

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.

The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.

The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:

Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government.
This will shore up the centre right vote.
No other configuration of possible government is stable.

Consequences for LDs:

They need to clarify three areas of policy
1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.

2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.

3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.

Davey has ruled out LD backing for indyref2 even with the SNP Holyood majority, so for Starmer to not only agree to but be able to allow indyref2 it would need a Labour, SNP, PC and SDLP and Green combined majority without the need for the LDs
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-54325592

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

Gove is however electoral poison - especially for younger age groups.

I'm first in line to be impervious to the charms of the Gover but I'm mildly intrigued by the voters of Surrey Heath; do they back him in spite of his Govieness 'cos he's a Con, or does he have some personal following? He increased his majority every GE from 2005 except interestingly the last one which I suppose was the great efflorescence of English nationalism.

StuartDickson said:

MattW said:

IshmaelZ said:

good, but could the LDs define themselves a bit more so I know what I'd be voting for?

They need to know who you are, first...

Lib Dem manifesto: We have a bridge to sell you!

Now that would be shameless theft of BJ's policies.

eek said:

HYUFD said:

eek said:

HYUFD said:

Dura_Ace said:

FPT...

1. Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
   
2. Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
   
3. Russia would not invade Scotland.
   

Iceland is in NATO

Ireland however isn't but this is why we do it https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/why-do-british-jets-protect-irish-airspace/

I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.

It only takes one English Nationalist PM and that would go for Ireland as well as Scotland, even more likely for Scotland after a very bitter divorce and led by the SNP would not be somewhere an English PM would be desperate to send RAF pilots to potentially risk their lives to defend if it was not obliged to as a fellow NATO member

So you haven't read the article to see why we do it.... Not that I'm surprised...

Allegedly to protect the FIR shared by both nations. It could still do that without flying over the rest of Ireland (or potentially Scotland) which does not share the FIR with rUK

algarkirk said:

RochdalePioneers said:

HYUFD said:

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.

The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.

The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:

Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government.
This will shore up the centre right vote.
No other configuration of possible government is stable.

Consequences for LDs:

They need to clarify three areas of policy
1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.

2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.

3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.

How about:

1) Brownfield sites need to be fully exploited, and including allowing the building of homes in former retail areas which are now just charity shop jungles

2) All suppoirt for other parties must only extend to S+C, (i think it's called), until a proper PR system is introduced

3) Brexit has happened, so there doesn't need to be a policy on that. What we now need is a renegotiated Customs/Trade/ freedom of movement system.

FeersumEnjineeya said:

Nigelb said:

Interesting fusion technology, which generates electricity directly from the fusion process:
https://www.eetimes.com/helion-energy-achieves-key-fusion-milestone/

At first glance, it looks considerably more practicable than others approaches.

Using the movement of the plasma to generate electricity through induction is certainly a novel approach. The idea does seem plausible unlike, as you say, most other approaches. However, you're still going to have the problems of irradiation of the containment vessel and the need to remove large amounts of heat.

They must have fixed the heat issue if they are able to keep it running for 16 months

ClippP said:

This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.

The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.

What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.

The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.

Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?

Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.

It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.

It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.

algarkirk said:

ClippP said:

This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.

The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.

What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.

The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.

Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?

Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.

It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.

It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.

Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.

Glad to see we’re still going round in circles on Scottish independence here.

noneoftheabove said:

algarkirk said:

ClippP said:

This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.

The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.

What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.

The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.

Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?

Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.

It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.

It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.

Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.

Too many counter examples for this to be a complete explanation. Try Saffron Walden. The sea of blue around the M25 is exactly where large numbers of educated workers live. And not one of them is inexpensive.

Daveyboy1961 said:

algarkirk said:

RochdalePioneers said:

HYUFD said:

Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP

There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.

The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.

The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:

Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government.
This will shore up the centre right vote.
No other configuration of possible government is stable.

Consequences for LDs:

They need to clarify three areas of policy
1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.

2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.

3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.

How about:

1) Brownfield sites need to be fully exploited, and including allowing the building of homes in former retail areas which are now just charity shop jungles

2) All support for other parties must only extend to S+C, (i think it's called), until a proper PR system is introduced

3) Brexit has happened, so there doesn't need to be a policy on that. What we now need is a renegotiated Customs/Trade/ freedom of movement system.

Taking up Mr Daveyboy's second point, a confidence and supply arrangement would leave the country with a government similar to Callaghan's government at the time of the Lib Lab pact. We had a stable government then - and Callaghan was able to pursue all the Labour policies in his party manifesto which the Liberals agreed with. He was not able to push through extreme Socialist policies, which is why the Labour extremists went in for the winter of discontent and undermined Callaghan.

Of course, the Scot Nats could bring down the government if they chose - as they did before - and put in a Tory government. But that did not work out well for the country last time, and I have no doubt it would be equally disastrous next time round, both for the country and the SNP. So I do not see that as being on the cards.

Voting Lib Dem next time is the best way of keeping out the extremists, at both extremes.

noneoftheabove said:

algarkirk said:

It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.

Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.

That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.

On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.

Daveyboy1961 said:

yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.

Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...

'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'

In more cutting off nose to spite face news..

algarkirk said:

noneoftheabove said:

algarkirk said:

ClippP said:

This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.

The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.

What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.

The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.

Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?

Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.

It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.

It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.

Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.

Too many counter examples for this to be a complete explanation. Try Saffron Walden. The sea of blue around the M25 is exactly where large numbers of educated workers live. And not one of them is inexpensive.

Its an hour and a half journey each way into London, its provincial not a commuter town or desirable for a London mid life emigre.

Theuniondivvie said:

eek said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....

Who is the we?

Michael Gove.

I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.

Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.

Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.

Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.

It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.

The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.

Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.

Gove is however electoral poison - especially for younger age groups.

I'm first in line to be impervious to the charms of the Gover but I'm mildly intrigued by the voters of Surrey Heath; do they back him in spite of his Govieness 'cos he's a Con, or does he have some personal following? He increased his majority every GE from 2005 except interestingly the last one which I suppose was the great efflorescence of English nationalism.

Gove does have his fans - I'm one on a non-political basis. He is a politician who is really interested in doing stuff, and I'm allergic to politicians who just want to BE something. I can well imagine that he'd be a great constituency MP - if I had some personal problem that an MP could help resolve, I would absolutely trust Gove to do the necessary.

Theuniondivvie said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.

Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...

'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'

In more cutting off nose to spite face news..

Well the only place they could supply is Ireland who are already supplied by England. Whether it's possible to justify building such a cable is an interesting question.

Alistair said:

Could we have just one thread where we don't confuse EU membership criteria with Euro membership criteria.

Just One. It's all in asking.

EU membership criteria requires making efforts to join the Euro...

Hence you can use the Euro criteria as part of the EU membership criteria.