There can be many explanations for Prigozhin's erratic behaviour and statements, but one thing that appears quite clear to me is that he is still Putin's* close associate, so most things he's doing must be sanctioned by the latter. I just don't think he's off the leash, even if his actions might suggest otherwise.
I think everyone has been paying attention to the local election results, as this Ukrainian MOD video thanking the UK for support on the eve of the King's coronation makes sure to include footage of politicians supporting them - Boris, Rishi...Keir.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
Whole idea of allowing non-residents to serve as local councillors is wrong, methinks.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
I recall a certain London mayor was also an MP at the same time for about a year.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
Whole idea of allowing non-residents to serve as local councillors is wrong, methinks.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election according to the story. So it's not as though a paper candidate can have no connections at all. So how much stricter is possible given the current criteria?
Of course, there are stories of people moving away after election and not resigning their seats as well, and I think that would render them eligible due to having 'worked' in the area as a councillor even if they no longer resided there.
Parishes you have to live within a parish or within three miles of it I believe. Which given the shape of some parishes can make people eligible to be on quite a few.
I suspect it's a case where MPs won't want to tighten rules too much, lest it blow back on their own potential to carpetbag.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
Whole idea of allowing non-residents to serve as local councillors is wrong, methinks.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election according to the story. So it's not as though a paper candidate can have no connections at all. So how much stricter is possible given the current criteria?
Of course, there are stories of people moving away after election and not resigning their seats as well, and I think that would render them eligible due to having 'worked' in the area as a councillor even if they no longer resided there.
Parishes you have to live within a parish or within three miles of it I believe. Which given the shape of some parishes can make people eligible to be on quite a few.
I suspect it's a case where MPs won't want to tighten rules too much, lest it blow back on their own potential to carpetbag.
"But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election"
So what? He is NOT a resident, lives a ways away. Elected government officials, should be required to be local residents and voters. And nobody ought to be allowed to be legally able to vote in TWO different places.
That's what I am arguing. Of course I do NOT have any vote anywhere in UK.
Unless I get paperwork approved re: approved ID for an unnamed location in an undisclosed marginal!
ADDENDUM - reckon you are correct re: parliament NOT taking up this particular question, in order NOT to highlight issue of carpetbaggery by MPs, long part of the unwritten British constitution.
I think everyone has been paying attention to the local election results, as this Ukrainian MOD video thanking the UK for support on the eve of the King's coronation makes sure to include footage of politicians supporting them - Boris, Rishi...Keir.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
Whole idea of allowing non-residents to serve as local councillors is wrong, methinks.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election according to the story. So it's not as though a paper candidate can have no connections at all. So how much stricter is possible given the current criteria?
Of course, there are stories of people moving away after election and not resigning their seats as well, and I think that would render them eligible due to having 'worked' in the area as a councillor even if they no longer resided there.
Parishes you have to live within a parish or within three miles of it I believe. Which given the shape of some parishes can make people eligible to be on quite a few.
I suspect it's a case where MPs won't want to tighten rules too much, lest it blow back on their own potential to carpetbag.
"But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election"
So what? He is NOT a resident, lives a ways away. Elected government officials, should be required to be local residents and voters. And nobody ought to be allowed to be legally able to vote in TWO different places.
That's what I am arguing. Of course I do NOT have any vote anywhere in UK.
Unless I get paperwork approved re: approved ID for an unnamed location in an undisclosed marginal!
So what? I was merely pointing out what the current rules were so as to enable a more complete discussion on where the line is drawn. They made it deliberately broad for a reason, its worth asking what that reason was so we can decide if it needs changing.
For example in my area like many there might be villages or towns right on a border of a county. Someone might live just on the wrong side despite the actual community going across it, even the urban area itself. Yet they work and own property there so they currently can stand. Is that unreasonable? What if it were five miles? Ten?
And also that being able to be a candidate despite not living in the area is clearly not a loophole, the broad eligibility is front and centre, this is just a bizarre example. So changing it would not be closing a loophole, it would be just tightening things up.
I'm not opposed to requiring someone be resident per se. But communities dont align exactly with administrative boundaries, despite best efforts, so it's worth investigating not just flipping out as one guy is from very far away.
Those who know me will be aware that I will be there, as Passmores have for generations, as deputy orb polisher and dredger of the majesterial spitoon.
I will do my ancient duty with an engorged heart and deep, deep sense of duty.
But Christ almighty those front pages. What a load of obsequious sh1te.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
Whole idea of allowing non-residents to serve as local councillors is wrong, methinks.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election according to the story. So it's not as though a paper candidate can have no connections at all. So how much stricter is possible given the current criteria?
Of course, there are stories of people moving away after election and not resigning their seats as well, and I think that would render them eligible due to having 'worked' in the area as a councillor even if they no longer resided there.
Parishes you have to live within a parish or within three miles of it I believe. Which given the shape of some parishes can make people eligible to be on quite a few.
I suspect it's a case where MPs won't want to tighten rules too much, lest it blow back on their own potential to carpetbag.
"But he must have been registered to vote in the area, or lived, worked, or owned property there for at least 12 months prior to the election"
So what? He is NOT a resident, lives a ways away. Elected government officials, should be required to be local residents and voters. And nobody ought to be allowed to be legally able to vote in TWO different places.
That's what I am arguing. Of course I do NOT have any vote anywhere in UK.
Unless I get paperwork approved re: approved ID for an unnamed location in an undisclosed marginal!
So what? I was merely pointing out what the current rules were so as to enable a more complete discussion on where the line is drawn. They made it deliberately broad for a reason, its worth asking what they reason was done can decide if it needs changing.
For example in my area like many there might be villages or towns right on a border of a county. Someone might live just on the wrong side despite the actual community going across it, even the urban area itself. Yet they work and own property there so they currently can stand. Is that unreasonable? What if it were five miles? Ten?
And also that being able to be a candidate despite not living in the area is clearly not a loophole, the broad eligibility is front and centre, this is just a bizarre example. So changing it would not be closing a loophole, it would be just tightening things up.
Sounds like a lengthy apologia for government by outsiders. And don't care if they live ten miles or ten feet from the jurisdiction in question. Or own half the damn place and live elsewhere. Let 'em represent where they live NOT where they don't.
Am not questioning the double-dipper's legal eligibility, rather the law that make him eligible where he does not have legal domicle.
I would say I am a very soft monarchist, largely because I don’t think the alternatives are any better, but I am looking forward to watching the event later for its place in history and the continuity it represents. I won’t be swearing any oath or anything of that nature (a misstep, albeit wilfully misinterpreted by the press) but there is something special about the crowning of our monarch, a moment etched in time.
I think everyone has been paying attention to the local election results, as this Ukrainian MOD video thanking the UK for support on the eve of the King's coronation makes sure to include footage of politicians supporting them - Boris, Rishi...Keir.
I would say I am a very soft monarchist, largely because I don’t think the alternatives are any better, but I am looking forward to watching the event later for its place in history and the continuity it represents. I won’t be swearing any oath or anything of that nature (a misstep, albeit wilfully misinterpreted by the press) but there is something special about the crowing of our monarch, a moment etched in time.
Feel same way about POTUS inaugurations.
And like my Daddy Dearest used to say, if you can't respect the man - respect the office.
Longbeck’s recount will take place Tuesday & we should have a result then. The returning officer has confirmed that 1st place is clear, but 2nd & 3rd are close."
Those who know me will be aware that I will be there, as Passmores have for generations, as deputy orb polisher and dredger of the majesterial spitoon.
I will do my ancient duty with an engorged heart and deep, deep sense of duty.
But Christ almighty those front pages. What a load of obsequious sh1te.
According to family legend, my own Irish great-great-granny was a washerwoman at Buckingham Palace during reign of King Edward VII.
One day she was working at her tub, when she went to deal with one of His Majesty's shirts, and found a note with the following pinned to the collar - "More starch here."
In reply, she sent the freshly-laundered garment back, with a note of her own pinned to the tail - "Less shit here".
With the failure of any UKIP councillors to be re-elected (they still had 31 in 2019), does that mean there are no elected UKIPpers at any level for the first time this century?
I held my seat in the expanded Binscombe and Charterhouse ward, which added the formerly very Conservative Charterhouse ward. Overall the fact that no non-Tory party had put up full slates led to a massive defeat for the Tories, who dropped 13 seats. The main beneficiaries were the LIbDems, who gained 8, though the Greens missed out by just 4 votes in one seat and Labour overtook the Tories in three Farnham wards to come close behind the Farnham Residents.
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
I held my seat in the expanded Binscombe and Charterhouse ward, which added the formerly very Conservative Charterhouse ward. Overall the fact that no non-Tory party had put up full slates led to a massive defeat for the Tories, who dropped 13 seats. The main beneficiaries were the LIbDems, who gained 8, though the Greens missed out by just 4 votes in one seat and Labour overtook the Tories in three Farnham wards to come close behind the Farnham Residents.
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
I held my seat in the expanded Binscombe and Charterhouse ward, which added the formerly very Conservative Charterhouse ward. Overall the fact that no non-Tory party had put up full slates led to a massive defeat for the Tories, who dropped 13 seats. The main beneficiaries were the LIbDems, who gained 8, though the Greens missed out by just 4 votes in one seat and Labour overtook the Tories in three Farnham wards to come close behind the Farnham Residents.
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
English salad with mixed Greens, hold the Blue cheese.
I held my seat in the expanded Binscombe and Charterhouse ward, which added the formerly very Conservative Charterhouse ward. Overall the fact that no non-Tory party had put up full slates led to a massive defeat for the Tories, who dropped 13 seats. The main beneficiaries were the LIbDems, who gained 8, though the Greens missed out by just 4 votes in one seat and Labour overtook the Tories in three Farnham wards to come close behind the Farnham Residents.
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
Incidentally, AndyJS asked how many people vote Con/Lab/LD in three-member wards. The answer in my ward was "not many but a few" - I spotted two. Quite a few Lab/Con votes though.
I held my seat in the expanded Binscombe and Charterhouse ward, which added the formerly very Conservative Charterhouse ward. Overall the fact that no non-Tory party had put up full slates led to a massive defeat for the Tories, who dropped 13 seats. The main beneficiaries were the LIbDems, who gained 8, though the Greens missed out by just 4 votes in one seat and Labour overtook the Tories in three Farnham wards to come close behind the Farnham Residents.
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
Incidentally, AndyJS asked how many people vote Con/Lab/LD in three-member wards. The answer in my ward was "not many but a few" - I spotted two. Quite a few Lab/Con votes though.
There are more ticket-spliters out there than most folks, including many politicos and pundits realize. Something you can observe at election counts where you can see actual voted ballots.
Quite a few people want to vote for the person, not the party, while others (there's lots of overlap) wish to demonstrate their independence of party (to themselves) by splitting their tickets if possible.
For example, in Seattle quite common to find voters who always vote voted Democratic EXCEPT they'd vote for Republican Kim Wyman for Secretary of State. Because she appeared to be focusing on her job of administering (really monitoring) elections across the state, and was the most-respectable, least-crazy GOP option on the ballot.
Good morning @MikeSmithson , @rcs1000 , @TheScreamingEagles I have sent you a proposed article for the Coronation, anonymous as usual. It is a bit free-form and "off the cuff" but should be easy to publish. I hope that you look kindly upon it.
If Team Smithson decline to publish as is their right, then anybody who wants a copy please let me know and I'll open a backstage discussion with a copy. It is a bit like an old-school sermon and may actually be very very silly, but I thought I'd have a go.
Good morning @MikeSmithson , @rcs1000 , @TheScreamingEagles I have sent you a proposed article for the Coronation, anonymous as usual. It is a bit free-form and "off the cuff" but should be easy to publish. I hope that you look kindly upon it.
If Team Smithson decline to publish as is their right, then anybody who wants a copy please let me know and I'll open a backstage discussion with a copy. It is a bit like an old-school sermon and may actually be very very silly, but I thought I'd have a go.
Thanks for giving us lots of notice. We really appreciate it.
Good morning @MikeSmithson , @rcs1000 , @TheScreamingEagles I have sent you a proposed article for the Coronation, anonymous as usual. It is a bit free-form and "off the cuff" but should be easy to publish. I hope that you look kindly upon it.
If Team Smithson decline to publish as is their right, then anybody who wants a copy please let me know and I'll open a backstage discussion with a copy. It is a bit like an old-school sermon and may actually be very very silly, but I thought I'd have a go.
Thanks for giving us lots of notice. We really appreciate it.
Incidentally, AndyJS asked how many people vote Con/Lab/LD in three-member wards. The answer in my ward was "not many but a few" - I spotted two. Quite a few Lab/Con votes though.
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
I see that we hear at last from that leadership rival:
"Cracks in Conservative unity already began on Friday with Rehman Chishti, a former leadership contender, criticising Suella Braverman’s rhetoric on immigration.
“The comments that we had from the home secretary, the rhetoric that she applies to certain faiths and diverse communities, is damaging to our communities and also it damages the community relations. It feeds into the far right,” he told Sky News."
I heard a Westminster rumour that a bad night for the Tories might trigger a reshuffle.
I can't find the next-Cabinet-Minister-out odds but if I could, I'd be looking at Gillian Keegan. She seems so far out of her depth I'm tempted to call the RNLI.
The Irish Wolfhound is going to steal the show. The Daily Star have some very good front pages.
The art really grew over covid, but they are consistently the best front page on the newsstands now. A decade or so ago they were flirting with the EDL; they’ve come a long way since.
I see that we hear at last from that leadership rival:
"Cracks in Conservative unity already began on Friday with Rehman Chishti, a former leadership contender, criticising Suella Braverman’s rhetoric on immigration.
“The comments that we had from the home secretary, the rhetoric that she applies to certain faiths and diverse communities, is damaging to our communities and also it damages the community relations. It feeds into the far right,” he told Sky News."
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
Not entirely untrue in the detail of the article. High taxes (that keep going up) were the reason I almost stayed at home and definitely the reason I didn't campaign or donate.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
Not entirely untrue in the detail of the article. High taxes (that keep going up) were the reason I almost stayed at home and definitely the reason I didn't campaign or donate.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
I’m not sure Woke and Boats are ‘it’ either. The former doesn’t really move the dial, and the latter is visibly failing.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
I heard a Westminster rumour that a bad night for the Tories might trigger a reshuffle.
I can't find the next-Cabinet-Minister-out odds but if I could, I'd be looking at Gillian Keegan. She seems so far out of her depth I'm tempted to call the RNLI.
Abolishing the DfE would be more useful.
It’s rather striking that no matter what their talents or indeed successes in other areas no minister since the 1940s has really been a success at education.
That’s not a problem of personnel, it’s a problem with the structure.
Of the seven coronations since 1760, one (1911) was held under a Liberal government, and two (1831 and 1838) under the Whigs. Every other one has been held under a Tory government of some form.
F1: surprised how fast the Mercedes were in practice yesterday. Especially given the short turn around from one race weekend to the next. We'll see if it lasts.
Qualifying's at 9pm and the race 8.30pm, I think, so no coronation clash.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
About 18 months ago I wrote that "Covid - in the developed world world at least - is over. We just haven't noticed yet."
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
In local government, whether a group or council is well run normally comes down to the management and leadership skills and judgement of a few key people within the group. If they have two or three people who know what they are doing and can give the rest, and the staff, direction and leadership, things will probably go well, and if they don’t, they won’t. Not much of this is to do with party politics.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
Not entirely untrue in the detail of the article. High taxes (that keep going up) were the reason I almost stayed at home and definitely the reason I didn't campaign or donate.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
I’m not sure Woke and Boats are ‘it’ either. The former doesn’t really move the dial, and the latter is visibly failing.
Anti-Woke only bothers those who are quite Woke - it's the one thing I think the Tories are doing quite well on, and pushing back on.
They've totally failed to get a grip on the Boats. It's possible that it's impossible - and they've calculated crowing about Rwanda incessantly will lose them less votes than admitting it - but I think the Albanian problem has largely gone away to be replaced by Indians (WTF?) so to the extent it can be solved maybe it's really a game of bilateral whack-a-mole.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
I don't think they were ever that out of favour. Remember 10 years ago we had a Conservative and LD coalition government with Cameron as PM and Clegg his deputy.
We had a brief period when Labour flirted with the hard left under Corbyn now ended under the more moderate Starmer and under Boris and Truss the Tories moved to the more populist right post Brexit but even Boris got SDP support to be Oxford Union President and Truss was once a LD and Rishi is on the more moderate wing of the Tories
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
Not entirely untrue in the detail of the article. High taxes (that keep going up) were the reason I almost stayed at home and definitely the reason I didn't campaign or donate.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
I’m not sure Woke and Boats are ‘it’ either. The former doesn’t really move the dial, and the latter is visibly failing.
Anti-Woke only bothers those who are quite Woke - it's the one thing I think the Tories are doing quite well on, and pushing back on.
They've totally failed to get a grip on the Boats. It's possible that it's impossible - and they've calculated crowing about Rwanda incessantly will lose them less votes than admitting it - but I think the Albanian problem has largely gone away to be replaced by Indians (WTF?) so to the extent it can be solved maybe it's really a game of bilateral whack-a-mole.
Think you’re wrong. It would be a mistake for the Tories to wage a culture war. The mood music is very much of the centre. The Tories need to remember their Cameron compassionate conservatism. The age of extremes is over, for now.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
There are too many "bastards" in the Tory Party. Unless they shut up, the Tories are screwed just like Major was.
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
Not entirely untrue in the detail of the article. High taxes (that keep going up) were the reason I almost stayed at home and definitely the reason I didn't campaign or donate.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
I’m not sure Woke and Boats are ‘it’ either. The former doesn’t really move the dial, and the latter is visibly failing.
Anti-Woke only bothers those who are quite Woke - it's the one thing I think the Tories are doing quite well on, and pushing back on. .
Of course you do. And you exemplify why your party took a hammering yesterday and why it is going to take a hammering at the GE.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
No it's really easy. You just go on any number of websites from electoral calculus to the bbc, type in your postcode, and see the results from last time.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
No it's really easy. You just go on any number of websites from electoral calculus to the bbc, type in your postcode, and see the results from last time.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
Honestly, I’m not sure it’s that easy. The LibDems have been down and out for a decade. I’m sympathetic to @Sean_F ’s view that the anti Tory tsunami was helped by a sizeable number of previous Tory voters registered a protest. I will be curious to see if they swing back immediately. What is clear to me is that the Tories need to swing away from the right to stand any chance.
He was half a second off Verstappen and off both Ferraris in second rpactice but also had to abort a fast lap, and last year was within half a tenth of Verstappen.
Obviously this follows my early 6.5 bet of the same nature. So I just added a little rather than a full stake.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
No it's really easy. You just go on any number of websites from electoral calculus to the bbc, type in your postcode, and see the results from last time.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
Honestly, I’m not sure it’s that easy.
It really is. The local election results in England have the anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote at 55%. That's identical to the last 3 national opinion polls, it's just that at national level Labour are polling c. high 40's and the LibDems single figures.
People like me who are naturally Labour voted LibDem at local level because they had more chance of winning, which they did. It really, really, isn't rocket science.
Even if you don't believe this, the other way of looking at it is the Cons vote share. Apart from the occasional scrape to 30%, they are polling in the high 20's (the last 3 national polls have been 29, 29, 27). That's the same as the locals which was 29% on the NEV.
Anyway, have a really nice day everyone whatever you are doing. It has been absolutely tipping it down here in Teignbridge and that radar blob is heading for London. It's going to be a wet one I fear.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
No it's really easy. You just go on any number of websites from electoral calculus to the bbc, type in your postcode, and see the results from last time.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
Honestly, I’m not sure it’s that easy. The LibDems have been down and out for a decade. I’m sympathetic to @Sean_F ’s view that the anti Tory tsunami was helped by a sizeable number of previous Tory voters registered a protest. I will be curious to see if they swing back immediately. What is clear to me is that the Tories need to swing away from the right to stand any chance.
The Bedford mayor result shows that the "anti tory vote" was sometimes very inefficient.
The fact is that the most efficient way to defeat Conservatives is for all the "anti tories" to just vote Labour!
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
I don't think they were ever that out of favour. Remember 10 years ago we had a Conservative and LD coalition government with Cameron as PM and Clegg his deputy.
We had a brief period when Labour flirted with the hard left under Corbyn now ended under the more moderate Starmer and under Boris and Truss the Tories moved to the more populist right post Brexit but even Boris got SDP support to be Oxford Union President and Truss was once a LD and Rishi is on the more moderate wing of the Tories
Your defence of Truss and Johnson's political history is spurious to say the least. Didn't Johnson mendaciously flirt with the SDP and Liberals solely for the purpose of his election to high office ( Oxford Union President)? That has a familiar ring to it. And as for Truss her political journey from Liberal Democrat to right wing hooligan was shorter than Moseley's from Labour to the Union of British Facists. And Sunak moderate? His back story is that of fiscal hawk.
Have to say that the R&T and Curtice modelling feel odd to me. While they’ve probably got the Tories right, the share to Lib Dems and others seems quite overstated.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
Quite obviously the LDs and Greens do well at Locals compared to nationally, and certainly the LDs are strongly back in England now.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
Politics is interesting again, but confusing from an ideological point of view. .
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
The Greens in Brighton was sub optimal I feel sure everyone breathed a sigh of relief when they were booted out.
Sussex as microcosm is especially interesting .
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
Either way we can be sure the results will confirm the pre-existing beliefs that people already had.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
Whilst I’m delighted at the outcome, I am curious about the mechanism. How did people know which direction to jump to unseat the Tory? Not everyone was voting the last time tactical anti Tory voting dominated. It can’t all be folk memory, but yet somehow the perfect pattern emerged. Was it tactical voting websites? It’s not obvious when you think about it.
No it's really easy. You just go on any number of websites from electoral calculus to the bbc, type in your postcode, and see the results from last time.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
Honestly, I’m not sure it’s that easy.
It really is. The local election results in England have the anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote at 55%. That's identical to the last 3 national opinion polls, it's just that at national level Labour are polling c. high 40's and the LibDems single figures.
People like me who are naturally Labour voted LibDem at local level because they had more chance of winning, which they did. It really, really, isn't rocket science.
Even if you don't believe this, the other way of looking at it is the Cons vote share. Apart from the occasional scrape to 30%, they are polling in the high 20's (the last 3 national polls have been 29, 29, 27). That's the same as the locals which was 29% on the NEV.
You misconstrue my point. I am curious about the mechanism about how an anti Tory voter decides who is the most likely candidate to win. I don’t think it’s completely obvious. There is an element of folk memory. Previous results as you suggested. Prediction websites. Social pressure. All play a part.
Since that movement dominated the outcome, I find it interesting to pause and reflect on how it works. The savvy political movement might try to influence it. A Tory might somehow promote ideas that muddy the waters.
Comments
Well done the FT and The Guardian for giving reasonable prominance to the elections.
Also, 84 page magazine in the Telegraph!
Oh, and there's a wedding too, header?
https://metro.co.uk/2022/09/19/who-is-king-charles-iiis-private-bodyguard-17403705/
I'm just not sure a guy with a personal army releasing daily videos calling the defence minister a bitch is a sustainable situation for a totalitarian fascist state.
https://twitter.com/OzKaterji/status/1654500442863181831?cxt=HHwWjoCxmeHY-_UtAAAA
There can be many explanations for Prigozhin's erratic behaviour and statements, but one thing that appears quite clear to me is that he is still Putin's* close associate, so most things he's doing must be sanctioned by the latter. I just don't think he's off the leash, even if his actions might suggest otherwise.
*accused of war crimes
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1654510622376185858?cxt=HHwWhMC-vaSpgPYtAAAA
Lib Dem Chris Twells’ shock win in Cotswolds prompts calls to close loophole in electoral law"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/05/salford-councillor-urged-to-quit-after-winning-second-seat-160-miles-away
https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1654479297128562691?cxt=HHwWhoCwmfWJ8vUtAAAA
One eye on the future, lads.
He told the Wilts and Gloucestershire Standard: “I will be taking some time off over the weekend and speaking to the chief executive of Salford city council after the bank holiday weekend to establish what action I need to take to resign as a councillor, to allow for a byelection to be held in my ward.
Easy - you send an email to the Chief Executive saying 'I resign'.
I'm not entirely sure what 'loophole' is being urged to be closed though. Not allowing someone to stand if they are a councillor elsewhere? He apparently met eligibility criteria otherwise.
It would be unusual but someone could be on two different councils, maybe they split their time between two places, though in his case being so far apart would not help (interestingly we have had married MPs representing seats in Scotland and Wiltshire respectively, so though representing only one seat themselves presumably split their time somewhat). Given the average time reported to be spent on council work if someone made it their full time job being on two councils would amount to about a full week's work.
THAT's the loophole. Seeing as how they are intended to serve local - not national - interest.
Nothing was said at the time.
Of course, there are stories of people moving away after election and not resigning their seats as well, and I think that would render them eligible due to having 'worked' in the area as a councillor even if they no longer resided there.
Parishes you have to live within a parish or within three miles of it I believe. Which given the shape of some parishes can make people eligible to be on quite a few.
I suspect it's a case where MPs won't want to tighten rules too much, lest it blow back on their own potential to carpetbag.
Congrats! Having a supportive boss is golden.
Mine just ignores me…
So what? He is NOT a resident, lives a ways away. Elected government officials, should be required to be local residents and voters. And nobody ought to be allowed to be legally able to vote in TWO different places.
That's what I am arguing. Of course I do NOT have any vote anywhere in UK.
Unless I get paperwork approved re: approved ID for an unnamed location in an undisclosed marginal!
ADDENDUM - reckon you are correct re: parliament NOT taking up this particular question, in order NOT to highlight issue of carpetbaggery by MPs, long part of the unwritten British constitution.
For example in my area like many there might be villages or towns right on a border of a county. Someone might live just on the wrong side despite the actual community going across it, even the urban area itself. Yet they work and own property there so they currently can stand. Is that unreasonable? What if it were five miles? Ten?
And also that being able to be a candidate despite not living in the area is clearly not a loophole, the broad eligibility is front and centre, this is just a bizarre example. So changing it would not be closing a loophole, it would be just tightening things up.
I'm not opposed to requiring someone be resident per se. But communities dont align exactly with administrative boundaries, despite best efforts, so it's worth investigating not just flipping out as one guy is from very far away.
Wishing my mom was still around and sending WhatsApp msgs - not that I'd know how to receive 'em!
He remarried 18 years ago
Give the guy a break
Con 15,747 [33.1%]
LD 15,602 [32.8%]
Lab 11,568 [24.3%]
Green 3,795 [8.0%]
Heritage 887 [1.9%]
The Tories almost certainly wouldn't have won under the old preference system.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2023/england/councils/E06000055#mayor-scoreboard
I will do my ancient duty with an engorged heart and deep, deep sense of duty.
But Christ almighty those front pages. What a load of obsequious sh1te.
Am not questioning the double-dipper's legal eligibility, rather the law that make him eligible where he does not have legal domicle.
I would say I am a very soft monarchist, largely because I don’t think the alternatives are any better, but I am looking forward to watching the event later for its place in history and the continuity it represents. I won’t be swearing any oath or anything of that nature (a misstep, albeit wilfully misinterpreted by the press) but there is something special about the crowning of our monarch, a moment etched in time.
And like my Daddy Dearest used to say, if you can't respect the man - respect the office.
"Luke Myer
@luke_myer
Longbeck’s recount will take place Tuesday & we should have a result then. The returning officer has confirmed that 1st place is clear, but 2nd & 3rd are close."
https://twitter.com/luke_myer/status/1654555335162568706
One day she was working at her tub, when she went to deal with one of His Majesty's shirts, and found a note with the following pinned to the collar - "More starch here."
In reply, she sent the freshly-laundered garment back, with a note of her own pinned to the tail - "Less shit here".
She emigrated to America soon afterwards.
https://www.farnhamherald.com/news/politics/local-elections-2023-tories-suffer-heavy-losses-as-lib-dems-increase-grip-on-waverley-borough-council-612365?fbclid=IwAR1izPpnA8eJlwSoL8vgACtG9s7UesAy-M0gZhCReFT-8rtwc2SaffK1yC4
Generally the Greens had a strange night, with the amazing gains in Hertfordshire and Suffolk but lossese elsewhere, notably Brighton and Hove to Labour; in my patch they are down to a single councillor despite several close races.
Quite a few people want to vote for the person, not the party, while others (there's lots of overlap) wish to demonstrate their independence of party (to themselves) by splitting their tickets if possible.
For example, in Seattle quite common to find voters who always vote voted Democratic EXCEPT they'd vote for Republican Kim Wyman for Secretary of State. Because she appeared to be focusing on her job of administering (really monitoring) elections across the state, and was the most-respectable, least-crazy GOP option on the ballot.
I have sent you a proposed article for the Coronation, anonymous as usual. It is a bit free-form and "off the cuff" but should be easy to publish. I hope that you look kindly upon it.
If Team Smithson decline to publish as is their right, then anybody who wants a copy please let me know and I'll open a backstage discussion with a copy. It is a bit like an old-school sermon and may actually be very very silly, but I thought I'd have a go.
Global cases and death rates are a fraction of what they were at the height of the pandemic
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/covid-world-health-organisation-downgrades-pandemic-b1079178.html
Boris Johnson backers hit back at claims partygate led to Conservative local election drubbing
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/05/05/boris-blame-game-triggers-backlash-over-sunak-election/ (£££)
It is not clear whether the Telegraph's headline-writer bothered to read the story which is more balanced and includes: Huw Merriman, a transport minister, said constituents were complaining to him about “older news about former prime ministers”.
The German goalkeeper moved to Craven Cottage for an initial £3m last summer but the deal included performance-related add-ons, including a survival fee.
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/arsenal-transfer-news-leno-clause-fee-b1079005.html
We were discussing the other day whether the government could include similar contingency fees in contracts.
"Cracks in Conservative unity already began on Friday with Rehman Chishti, a former leadership contender, criticising Suella Braverman’s rhetoric on immigration.
“The comments that we had from the home secretary, the rhetoric that she applies to certain faiths and diverse communities, is damaging to our communities and also it damages the community relations. It feeds into the far right,” he told Sky News."
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/05/rishi-sunak-under-pressure-dire-tory-losses-leadership-threats
I can't find the next-Cabinet-Minister-out odds but if I could, I'd be looking at Gillian Keegan. She seems so far out of her depth I'm tempted to call the RNLI.
Public service is to be admired however performed in any party.
It was only the prospect of crowing Lefties, which I knew I wouldn't be able to bear well if I hadn't voted, that got me out there and the fact that my existing Councillor is quite good.
That has nothing to do with the leadership. Boris would be even worse and even shitter in delivery. Essentially, Sunak has to give something to vote for and steady administration (whilst essential) isn't on its own going to be enough.
I get that they’re models - and actually the seat count for the LDs might be closer than the share prediction - but they just feel oddly dissonant to me. So many places - there are notable exceptions, but by far the rule - have seen the Tories get utterly smashed, and crucially the SNP are doing their level best to become as unappealing as possible.
In a GE though I think the LD and Green votes will be down by half, with Labour getting most of the benefit, Labour being unobjectional if uninspiring.
The LDs did very well, but beyond a bit of residual pro EU vibes I have absolutely no idea what they stand for. There is nothing there beyond being anti Tory.
Labour have been rowing back from the Corbyn years, but are yet to galvanise their new vision. Nevertheless they have won convincingly.
The Tories seem stuck between waging a vicious culture war and the last vestiges compassionate conservatism, whilst trying to gather some remnants of competence from the ashes of Truss/Johnson. Total failure.
Even the Greens seem halfway between the radical far left and cosy middle class feel good environmentalism.
Lab + 536
LibDem + 405
Green +241
Ind/RA - 104
It’s rather striking that no matter what their talents or indeed successes in other areas no minister since the 1940s has really been a success at education.
That’s not a problem of personnel, it’s a problem with the structure.
Completely pointlessfun fact for today:Of the seven coronations since 1760, one (1911) was held under a Liberal government, and two (1831 and 1838) under the Whigs. Every other one has been held under a Tory government of some form.
F1: surprised how fast the Mercedes were in practice yesterday. Especially given the short turn around from one race weekend to the next. We'll see if it lasts.
Qualifying's at 9pm and the race 8.30pm, I think, so no coronation clash.
The big towns swung to Labour, a few miles away the more rural bit swung heavily to the Lib Dems. Just a few miles apart you see very different patterns.
The folk memory of who is the challenger seems to be decisive, but that is such an ephemeral thing.
Either way it seems centrism, social democracy and liberalism are firmly back in fashion after an age of extremes. The Tories need to remember their more moderate wing.
They've totally failed to get a grip on the Boats. It's possible that it's impossible - and they've calculated crowing about Rwanda incessantly will lose them less votes than admitting it - but I think the Albanian problem has largely gone away to be replaced by Indians (WTF?) so to the extent it can be solved maybe it's really a game of bilateral whack-a-mole.
I suspect competence, exasperation and time for a change was a bigger factor than political ideology in almost all cases.
We had a brief period when Labour flirted with the hard left under Corbyn now ended under the more moderate Starmer and under Boris and Truss the Tories moved to the more populist right post Brexit but even Boris got SDP support to be Oxford Union President and Truss was once a LD and Rishi is on the more moderate wing of the Tories
These tories are utter shits and need a long, long, time in the wilderness.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-65484552
Omnisis which correctly called the local election Labour lead of 9%, has the national vote lead at 21%.
If you think the LibDems will poll 20% in the next GE, or that Labour will gain no seats in Scotland, then continue to believe.
Although I'm a newbie in Teignbridge it took me 5 seconds to work out that my Labour leanings wouldn't defeat the tories so I voted for 3 LibDems.
I will vote Labour at the GE because my Newton Abbot constituency is more Con-Lab marginal.
@Sean_F claimed yesterday that more LibDem voters will vote tory at the next GE than Labour. Of all the most fantastical posts on pb.com, that leads the way. Almost none of us who voted LibDem on Thursday will be placing our cross in a tory box thanks!
I don't know why people get so het up about animal testing. If I was a rabbit, I'd quite like an the free fags and make up.
Betting Post
F1: decided to tip Perez to 'win' qualifying, each way at 9.5.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2023/05/miami-pre-qualifying-2023.html
He was half a second off Verstappen and off both Ferraris in second rpactice but also had to abort a fast lap, and last year was within half a tenth of Verstappen.
Obviously this follows my early 6.5 bet of the same nature. So I just added a little rather than a full stake.
People like me who are naturally Labour voted LibDem at local level because they had more chance of winning, which they did. It really, really, isn't rocket science.
Even if you don't believe this, the other way of looking at it is the Cons vote share. Apart from the occasional scrape to 30%, they are polling in the high 20's (the last 3 national polls have been 29, 29, 27). That's the same as the locals which was 29% on the NEV.
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
The fact is that the most efficient way to defeat Conservatives is for all the "anti tories" to just vote Labour!
Since that movement dominated the outcome, I find it interesting to pause and reflect on how it works. The savvy political movement might try to influence it. A Tory might somehow promote ideas that muddy the waters.