Labour MP Tracy Brabin has won the metro mayor election for West Yorkshire on vote that was more or less 60/40 over the Tories.
The effect however is to trigger a by-election in her Batley and Spen seat, a Lab/Con marginal.
Watch this space.
|
I went to school in Spenborough, which is no more - it was the local council area for Cleckheaton, Gomersal and Liversedge. I suppose they dropped the 'borough' because Spenborough became part of Kirklees in the 1974 reorganisation.
'Spen' is no more a place than Raith of Rovers fame. I look forward to the BBC reporting that the Conservatives (or Labour supporters) "will be dancing in the streets of Spen tonight".
As constituencies are geographic, I think they should stick to place names.
As you were.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 10 May 21 at 08:29
|
|
Wouldn't say it doesn't exist, people still talk about 'Spen' in reference to an area.
|
Are you from Cleck, Sooty?
I don't think people used to say they lived in Spen - maybe they do now! Google maps won't navigate you to "Spen".
|
>> I don't think people used to say they lived in Spen - maybe they do
>> now! Google maps won't navigate you to "Spen".
Wiki suggests that the term references the Spen Valley and that the Spen is a tributary of the Calder.
|
|
Even if google is deficient, I suspect the taxman and DVLA know exactly where it is!
|
|
I used to live nearby yes.
|
I was only musing, when I went to Whitcliffe Mount School in 1964 they thought it was worth mentioning how unusual it was that "Spenborough" could not be found on any normal map. That changed of course in 1974 when all sorts of made up names appeared for the new 'counties' and authorities.
People did refer to Spen Valley and of course Spen Bank /Spen Lane went up to Gomersal from Cleck, past Spen Victoria Cricket Club so "Spen" was all over the place - can't think why I mentioned it:)
|
|
I was thinking of Spen baths, bit of a local landmark. Been pulled down now though.
|
>> I was thinking of Spen baths, bit of a local landmark. Been pulled down now
>> though.
Lordy I remember that being "the new baths", I think it was called Spenborough Pool or similar? The 33m pool seemed enormous. The replacement they are building now will only be 25m. By Princess Mary playing fields We had our swimming lessons at the old baths up where they built the new-fangled Tesco.
|
I remember that Airevalley and Spen Athletic Club. Back in the day I was a wiry kid and ran cross country for a different athletic club, whose name escapes me, but I remember competing against them at several events.
I never won anything.
|
By Princess Mary playing fields
We had one school sports day there for some reason or other, I remember thinking how enormous it looked, like something out of the Olympic games.
|
Labour, bending their rules slightly as her membership lapsed for a while, have selected Jo Cox's sister, Kim Leadbeater, as their candidate. Local lady with a good reputation and history in the constituency should make it an interesting contest.
There's also an by-election in Chesham following the death of Cheryl Gillan.
I doubt the Tories could lose it but Lib Dems made some inroads at Amersham in the locals. A number of issues including HS2 and planning reform/'NIMBY' stuff might make it interesting.
|
>>I doubt the Tories could lose it
I don't know so much. I think at least they will make significant inroads.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 25 May 21 at 23:09
|
|
I'd read that there was a couple of MPs suggesting SKS should resign if Labour lose this by election, I don't think he should or would but it'll certainly pile the pressure on and make the divisions in labour come back to the front. I think if it were to lose they'll be more time spent looking inward to the labour party.
|
>> I'd read that there was a couple of MPs suggesting SKS should resign if Labour
>> lose this by election, I don't think he should or would but it'll certainly pile
>> the pressure on and make the divisions in labour come back to the front. I
>> think if it were to lose they'll be more time spent looking inward to the
>> labour party.
>>
I agree; the divisions in the Labour Party have existed for at least 30 years so changing the leader again isn’t really going to make much difference I don’t think. And anyway, who is there to replace him? Though of course for the party, finding a scapegoat means avoiding tackling the issue of division...which delays further their chances of winning another election. And if there’s one thing the Labour Party is good at it’s blaming anyone but themselves for the mess they’re in ;)
I’m not a left wing trade union supporting brexiteer. The opposite in fact. But unlike your average guardian
-reading metropolitan elite champagne socialist I like reading other points of view, and I think this chap has neatly summarised, albeit somewhat simplified, some of the problems the Labour Party has created for itself. I think he’s wrong about the opportunity to win back the old working class in mainly manual, low paid jobs - they have all but disappeared. What’s left of manufacturing is well paid and skilled on the whole. But there’s a huge tranche of voters in retail, distribution, hospitality etc that have effectively replaced them, but that Labour treat with disdain.
unherd.com/2021/05/labour-isnt-working/
And given the leadership is now so far away from the parties roots perhaps they should read it too...
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-57472032
Looks like a pretty incredible result. To go from a majority of 16k+ then to come second by 8k in just 2 years is some collapse, can't be many bigger falls in any parties vote.
The article touches on local issues but doesn't really get into it, anyone live nearby able to expand on that?
Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 18 Jun 21 at 05:52
|
>> The article touches on local issues but doesn't really get into it, anyone live nearby
>> able to expand on that?
Manatee is nearer than I am but from here it looks like a classic Liberal/Lib-Dem gain on a continuum going back to Orpington in the sixties. The LDs threw everything at it in terms of leafleting and, in so far as is possible currently, solid street/stump campaigning.
Local issues included opposition to HS2 and HMG's proposals to ease planning for housing etc. It's also a remain area.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 18 Jun 21 at 07:05
|
I'm not sure flooding the area with leaflets will do much on their own, but maybe your right. I think must be underlying issues to start with.
Looks like Labour stood aside, as their vote fell to pretty much nothing. I guess a deal was done?
|
>> I'm not sure flooding the area with leaflets will do much on their own, but
>> maybe your right. I think must be underlying issues to start with.
>> Looks like Labour stood aside, as their vote fell to pretty much nothing. I guess
>> a deal was done?
I've never seen it on the ground but there's a well used Liberal campaign manual for winnable by-elections. They've had Ed Davey and other senior MPs in the seat throughout the campaign. A bit of Googling suggests it's an MO going back to Jo Grimond's leadership in the sixties.
Ripon, Ely and Rochdale were examples from the seventies and they continued under Thorpe, Steel and Ashdown.
It was never a Labour area and they've got Batley and Spen to defend so I doubt Kier Starmer had much time in the area.
|
> It was never a Labour area and they've got Batley and Spen to defend so
>> I doubt Kier Starmer had much time in the area.
>>
Well no but a fall from 11k to 600 is still a fair fall. I'm sure he can walk and chew gum at the same time.
|
>> I'm not sure flooding the area with leaflets will do much on their own, but maybe your right.
>>
We get lots of LD leaflets aimed at getting D Raab replaced.
|
>> >> I'm not sure flooding the area with leaflets will do much on their own,
>> but maybe your right.
>> >>
>> We get lots of LD leaflets aimed at getting D Raab replaced.
>>
Is he increasingly unpopular? Any local issues similar to Chesham?
|
>> Is he increasingly unpopular? Any local issues similar to Chesham?
There's a swathe of seats in the London commuter belt where planning, remainer sentiment etc make sitting Tories potentially vulnerable to the Lib-Dems. In the nineties/noughties there was a bit of a Lib Dem enclave to South and West of London.
Until the size of the landslide became apparent there were a number of seats in Surrey etc held by high profile Tories that were thought vulnerable in 2019. Raab may have been one of them.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 18 Jun 21 at 07:49
|
>> >> Is he increasingly unpopular? Any local issues similar to Chesham?
>>
>> There's a swathe of seats in the London commuter belt where planning, remainer sentiment etc
>> make sitting Tories potentially vulnerable to the Lib-Dems. In the nineties/noughties there was a bit
>> of a Lib Dem enclave to South and West of London.
>>
I get the remain part but planning? I assume that's really about house building, are the LD the party of house building reform?
I take what people want is a stop on house building in that particular area of the SE, are the LDs in favour of a halt to house building?
|
>>I get the remain part but planning? I assume that's really about house building, are
>> the LD the party of house building reform?
One might use the NIMBY acronym but building on open land is dead unpopular in these places yet there's an ongoing demand for new houses. Developers find a clutch of 'executive villas' on fields at the edge of towns/villages far more profitable than brownfield sites or (at least before Covid killed the office) inner city re-development.
The current government are advancing plans to ease development restrictions making it more difficult, or even nigh on impossible, for local councils to stop unpopular development. There a a fair number of back bench MP's on the government side with nightmares about how that plays with their electorate.
Today's result is grist to their mill in a campaign to stop, or at least rebalance, the proposals.
|
I can't see how voting LD or anyone else is going to solve this problem. You can't talk about home ownership and at the same time become the party of nimbys.
None of the main parties can wave a magic wand and square this particular circle.
I think you've got to pick a side for this one.
|
>> I can't see how voting LD or anyone else is going to solve this problem.
>> You can't talk about home ownership and at the same time become the party of
>> nimbys.
>> None of the main parties can wave a magic wand and square this particular circle.
I agree that "it's complicated". I wouldn't want to be the man charged with writing a coherent and workable policy on planning new housing although I wouldn't be trying to deliver it solely by private developers and home ownership model.
What I'll characterise, for simplicity, as NIMBY plays well with the voters.
QV Brexit.
|
It is complicated, however on the three issues that Duncan raised the first two (housing and hs2) are all supported by the main three parties. They all want (minus some backbenchers) more housing to be built and hs2 to be built, they disagree on detail of course.
But no one party is talking of stopping either policy (that I'm aware of)
And the third issue remain, is something from the past anyway. Like/dislike/don't care we've left the EU.
Strange issues to vote on, but each to their own. Especially so given the result 2 years ago.
|
|
The losing Tory seems to be complaining that the LD 'tried too hard' to win... which he thought was unfair!
|
>> The losing Tory seems to be complaining that the LD 'tried too hard' to win...
>> which he thought was unfair!
I heard that too. He said they threw not just the kitchen sink but the microwave and various other things including the dog.
Classic old fashioned Liberal campaigning in other words.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 18 Jun 21 at 07:55
|
>> Local issues included opposition to HS2 and HMG's proposals to ease planning for housing etc.
>> It's also a remain area.
>>
I have just spoken to a friend who lives locally.
It's what he ^^ said. HS2, planning and a strong remain area.
I think it is even more worrying for Labour. They are not seen as an alternaive government.
|
>> I think it is even more worrying for Labour. They are not seen as an
>> alternative government.
As a supporter and party member I'd agree with that in broad terms.
Another key pitch in the Liberal's 60 year old by-election plan is to encourage tactical voting and, in a seat that Labour couldn't get near even in 97 that was going to be massive this time.
The big challenge for Kier Starmer is to create a platform that makes Labour look electable. Having made the mistake of allowing Corbyn, albeit I regard him as a decent honourable man, to be nominated for, and subsequently win, the leadership that's a big mountain.
He should have set course on that track as soon as he was elected but Covid, the biggest challenge since WW2, put the brakes on that.
I'm now getting loads of stuff about a policy forum, on which Anniliese Dodds is leading.
Starmer can now get out on the stump and make an image for himself as a real alternative PM.
My hope is that Boris's teflon coating will wear off and that his repeat offending will catch up with him. Talk of him as a three term PM in the model of Thatcher, or even MacMillan is (IMHO) widely misplaced. His clay feet WILL show.
|
|
I don't think anyone seriously is talking about him being in that long, least of all the PM.
|
Who will be the PM after the next election?
Starmer - intelligent, decent, balanced. But thus far completely uninspiring. Covid may be the reason for his current poll deficit - proof of this will emerge in the next few months post return to normality and depend on bye-election performance.
Johnson - intelligent, politically astute, communication skills, amoral, lacks integrity. Puts personal ambition above party and electorate. His party will support him unless the polls say otherwise. Then he will be unceremoniously dumped.
None of the above - a lot depends on the post-covid climate. Trying to be unswervingly objective rather than modify the narrative to fit preconceived personal political bias.
Quick recovery in economic growth, no major unemployment, overall neutral covid enquiries (balance of good and bad) - Boris will thrive and Tories will want him as an electoral asset.
Negative covid public enquiries, higher unemployment, economic woes (Brexit or Covid related) and Boris replacement in late 2022. Keir then has a chance if he can hang on in there until 2023.
|
>> Starmer - intelligent, decent, balanced. But thus far completely uninspiring. Covid may be the reason
>> for his current poll deficit - proof of this will emerge in the next few
>> months post return to normality and depend on bye-election performance
COVID and a couple of hundred Conservative party political broadcasts purporting to be COVID updates.
Starmer also has the nutters in his own party to cope with.
|
>> Starmer also has the nutters in his own party to cope with.
And he doesn't seem to be showing that he is able to deal with them.
|
Starmer has 1 foot in the grave and the other on a bar of Batley soap - he has not established himself as a leader - PMQs he often fails even when the government bench is vulnerable.
Reasons for possible loss
1) Remainer Labour candidate
2) She campaigns for LGBT rights and this does not go down with many South Asian minority Labour voters
3) used to be solid labour seat 16K majority in recent past, 2019 3,000 IIRC
4) Starmer - who? London/ M25 Labour view, not working class Northern view. Labour lost recent by-election
|
|
I expect that some voters are also be a little annoyed by the way that Leadbeater was chosen by the Party in preference to the other candidates when she wasn't even a member of the Party until a few weeks ago.
|
>> I expect that some voters are also be a little annoyed by the way that
>> Leadbeater was chosen by the Party in preference to the other candidates when she wasn't
>> even a member of the Party until a few weeks ago.
I understand there's a fair bit of that locally, some councillors who had done the hard yards felt it was a prepacked decision with someone dropped in at the last minute.
Probably not a deal breaker but not great in terms of relations between the local party and the central one.
|
>> I understand there's a fair bit of that locally, some councillors who had done the
>> hard yards felt it was a prepacked decision with someone dropped in at the last
>> minute.
>> Probably not a deal breaker but not great in terms of relations between the local
>> party and the central one.
I suspect, given Kim Leadbeater's background, very few electors would see her candidacy as a problem. It's not like they've parachuted in a southerner from a central list who's background is solely at Labour HQ or 'SPAD' to a Shadow Minister.
There will though be resentments in the local party branches.
|
>I suspect, given Kim Leadbeater's background, very few electors would see her candidacy as a problem.
No Bromp. I think that's part of the problem. Some might see it as a cynical attempt to exploit Jo Cox's murder by waiving membership rules to allow her to stand.
|
>> No Bromp. I think that's part of the problem. Some might see it as a
>> cynical attempt to exploit Jo Cox's murder by waiving membership rules to allow her to
>> stand.
Was there an obvious local candidate with huge local appeal and who is running round claiming they were robbed?
I understand the importance of rules to eliminate carpet baggers. AIUI Kim Ledbetter had been a member but had allowed her card to lapse due other pressures. Not like she'd defected to The Greens and come back again. Provided the party's rules allow exceptions then decision is reasonable and explicable.
I think the persons most likely to take the "cynical attempt to exploit Jo Cox's murder" line would be voting Tory anyway :-).
|
>> I think the persons most likely to take the "cynical attempt to exploit Jo Cox's
>> murder" line would be voting Tory anyway :-).
I don't know any of the players or the constituency so I don't know how I would have voted, but the "cynical attempt" was the first thought that crossed my mind.
Not that I have any particular objection to it, one needs to do all one can do to win of course, but may as well recognise it for what it is.
|
>Was there an obvious local candidate with huge local appeal and who is running round claiming
>they were robbed?
AIUI there were two longstanding and well respected local councillors who stood down after the announcement that she had been chosen.
It's interesting that you think people won't notice unless someone is running around claiming they were robbed.
>I think the persons most likely to take the "cynical attempt to exploit Jo Cox's murder" line
>would be voting Tory anyway..
Why?
|
>> It's interesting that you think people won't notice unless someone is running around claiming they
>> were robbed.
Obviously some people will notice and may variously vote elsewhere, stay at home or hold their noses and vote for her anyway. The cynical attempt narrative would gain much more traction if there were a well known local figure deposed, the more so if they were crying foul.
.
>>
>> Why?
Just a gut feeling.
|
I suspect, given Kim Leadbeater's background, very few electors would see her candidacy as a
>> problem.
I think it'll be an issue for some, how much and enough to tip the balance. Maybe.
>> There will though be resentments in the local party branches.
>>
Yes, I don't think that's a bright idea but I suppose it was thought to be worth it. I guess we'll find out in a few days.
Polling for what it's worth Labour are 6/7 points behind.
|
The fact that he was a Remainer should simply be irrelevant. He's accepted that we've left but recognises that current Trade Agreement is utterly unsatisfactory and needs to be sorted. Brexit, as expressed by Johnson, has toxified all public debate and nobody dares say Boo to it for fear of being treated as an 'Enemy of the People.
It was almost certainly a factor at Hartlepool. Batley & Spen is a different socio economic group and doesn't have the big vote for the Brexit Party that Hartlepool had. A candidate for the Heavy Woollen District Independents did very well though.
I can't find a record of the majority being anywhere near 16k except in the wholly exceptional circumstances of the 2016 by-election when Jo Cox had been murdered. In it's current iteration it's been held by both parties with a run in Tory hands until 1997.
The presence of the poisonous snake George Galloway who has, at best, failed to discourage hotheads and may well be elevating the LGBT issue to his own ends is another factor.
Starmer though needs to get out and about so that people know who he is and that his background, whilst in Surrey, is neither public school nor posh. Somebody in Batley was quoted as saying he's not Harold Wilson. Wilson was Grammar School, University, Civil Service Economist, politics. Starmer's career pattern was similar except he was a lawyer not an economist.
|
And the answer is...Starmer needs to take up pipe smoking. (Harold smoked cigars in private).
Smoking being a bit out of date now, maybe a whippet or some racing pigeons would do it.
|
>..maybe a whippet or some racing pigeons would do it.
Real men have ferrets down their trousers.
|
>>
>>
>> Wilson was Grammar School, University, Civil Service Economist, politics. Starmer's career pattern was similar except he was a lawyer not an economist.
>>
But Wilson was clever enough to make himself appear working class. I doubt if many Labour voters of that time were aware of his upper middle class roots, I certainly wasn't. Starmer reinforces the growing view that Labour is now the party of the middle class left and the London elite.
|
>> But Wilson was clever enough to make himself appear working class. I doubt if many
>> Labour voters of that time were aware of his upper middle class roots,
Upper middle class is stretching it too far in the other direction.
www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/power-house-50-years-ago-7951770
|
>> Upper middle class is stretching it too far in the other direction.
>>
>> www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/power-house-50-years-ago-7951770
I'm not sure what constitutes Upper Middle Class but assume it would be Board Level Managerial or maybe professional - Solicitor or Dentist for example. According to Wiki Wilson's father was a chemist and mother a teacher though it seems she stopped working after marriage.
Father was later unemployed and 'got on his bike' to find work in the Badlands west of the Pennines.
|
Did I hear that Angela Rayner is going to challenge Starmer for the leadership?
Seems premature.
|
>> Did I hear that Angela Rayner is going to challenge Starmer for the leadership?
Last I heard she was firmly denying it.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/01/angela-rayner-forced-to-deny-plans-for-labour-leadership-bid
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 1 Jul 21 at 17:39
|
It's kind of carefully phrased, isn't it.
However, another question if you don't mind;
"They fear that could allow a change to the leadership rules, diminishing the influence of grassroots members"
What [who] do they mean by "grassroots members"?
|
>> What [who] do they mean by "grassroots members"?
People like me and Mrs B who pay our annual subs.
The change in voting after Miliband let Corbyn in on the votes of 'grassroots members', many of whom joined on discounted rates just ahead of the leadership election. It is alleged that people with no commitment to the party and indeed a loyalty to other principles joined to get him elected.
|
So "grassroots" as in 'committed to the party' rather than just trying to engineer a particular result?
A strange term though.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 1 Jul 21 at 19:01
|
Seems a fairly common term especially when talking about political party members.
But I'd say grassroots means members at the lowest level but still with some influence.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Thu 1 Jul 21 at 19:03
|
>>But I'd say grassroots means members at the lowest level but still with some influence.
That's kind of what I was thinking it meant. I'm not sure I'd want to be known as a grassroots member.
Doesn't this go back to an article I posted a couple of months ago about how Labour is the biggest bar to left-leaning Government?
Is one's target to be elected or to please one's grassroots members? And which takes precedence?
|
Is one's target to be elected or to please one's grassroots members? And which takes
>> precedence?
>>
I think all parties are a bit like that, but Labour's is perhaps a little harder/different in that their membership has a bigger say in who is to be leader?
|
|
I think Labour's is harder as much because of the overbearing presence of the gobby Unions as anything else.
|
>> So "grassroots" as in 'committed to the party' rather than just trying to engineer a
>> particular result?
>>
>> A strange term though.
I think it's a fairly widespread term referencing card carrying members of whatever party. I think I heard the term Republican grassroots bandied by UK correspondents covering the Trump/Biden contest. It's also used to refer to supporters.
My experience of the one constituency meeting I got to before Covid was that grassroots members covered a gamut of opinions from Corbynites to folks like myself of a strand closer to term one Blair.
|
>> >> So "grassroots" as in 'committed to the party' rather than just trying to engineer
>> a
>> >> particular result?
>> >>
>> >> A strange term though.
>>
>> I think it's a fairly widespread term referencing card carrying members of whatever party.
Still not quite grasping it, I tried Google....
"ordinary people regarded as the main body of an organization's membership."
Which I guess is exactly what you were saying, but somehow made more sense to me.
So it's all about the leadership of a party and the "grassroots" staying in step with each other. If one changes, then the other needs to follow if they are to stay in touch with each other.
That's got to be close to impossible over time. Less so for the Conservatives I guess, since who the hell knows what their overarching belief is. But for the Labour Party that ongoing and gradual change presumably is exactly their challenge.
|
>> So it's all about the leadership of a party and the "grassroots" staying in step
>> with each other. If one changes, then the other needs to follow if they are
>> to stay in touch with each other.
I guess in an ideal world yes.
>> That's got to be close to impossible over time. Less so for the Conservatives I
>> guess, since who the hell knows what their overarching belief is. But for the Labour
>> Party that ongoing and gradual change presumably is exactly their challenge.
The reality is that the party belongs to the Membership. In Labour, where reforms have greatly eased the power of the unions - the block vote at conference is gone and leaders are one man one vote, that's baked in.
It's happened to the Tories as well though. Brexit, the selection of Brexity candidates and attempts to oust MP's like Dominic Grieve who opposed it is but one case.
|
The Labour party has ~0.5m members. They need ~13-15m votes to win a majority of seats in a general election. The views of members are likely to be more polarised than the electorate as a whole - although other parties are in a similar position.
The Tories place more reliance on existing MPs rather than party members. This may have the advantage that those who have to work with/for the PM are instrumental in his/her election.
Labour reliance on membership votes means they may elect someone who does not have the confidence of the parliamentary party they need to lead to do the job.
|
BBC News - Batley and Spen: Labour hold seat in by-election
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57691543
|
|
It was always going to be tight so no massive surprise that the majority was very small. Surprised at the turnout being so low, perhaps all the media coverage turned alot off people away.
|
Like Sooty I found the turnout surprising in a high profile contest. Did people stay away as wilfull abstention? Covid a factor?
It will be interesting to see if there is any analysis of the numbers and how the turnout was distributed across the constituency.
Given that Galloway took 8,000 votes, the vast majority of them from Labour, it's a remarkable event. I'd expected Labour to lose by 2-3,000.
There will be an inquest in the Tory party who seemed, so the reports said, to be keeping a low profile and letting Galloway tear lumps off Labour. The total vote for candidates on the right was considerably in excess of Leadbeater's majority.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 2 Jul 21 at 08:21
|
Apathy rules in Batley and Spen by-elections!! Only 25.6% turned out for the last one, in 2016. Mind you, the other main parties didn't field a candidate as a mark of respect to Jo Cox so Labour swept the field with 85.8% of the vote.
|
Don’t know much about this by election but if anyone, anywhere, votes for George Galloway, they really should have their head examined and their motives questioned.
I often wonder who funds him? I guess it may be different across all elections he stands in, depending on who he is claiming to represent in that particular election.
|
>> Don’t know much about this by election but if anyone, anywhere, votes for George Galloway, they really should have their head examined and their motives questioned.
>>
>> I often wonder who funds him? I guess it may be different across all elections he stands in, depending on who he is claiming to represent in that particular election.
Galloway is a racist who declares himself against anyone who he thinks the local electorate don't like.
In this case he was mainly supported by the ill-educated Islamic community who don't like the Indians or the Jews. A few whites will vote for him also.
Mind you - that's his main area of support generally. The better educated Islamic community know him for what he is. They have the decency to vote elsewhere and it is no real surprise that Labour won. The Tories were less likely to do a Hartlepool but came close.
|
Seems an odd thing to say especially with your third para.
What other right wing parties were you thing of?
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Jul 21 at 21:22
|
>> Seems an odd thing to say especially with your third para.
>>
>> What other right wing parties were you thing of?
The low key Tory campaign has received a reasonable amount of comment. One paper is reporting the candidate was absent from the count until the actual declaration.
The right wing bit was about the also rans, including Jayda Fransen and Anne Marie Waters who have links with the extreme right, as well as a candidate for the English Nationalists.
|
The right wing bit was about the also rans, including Jayda Fransen and Anne Marie
>> Waters who have links with the extreme right, as well as a candidate for the
>> English Nationalists.
>>
If you're doing that you may as well lump all of GG votes in with Labour as most of them would have been from traditional labours voters, in which case Left wing parties won comfortably and was no real surprise.
|
>> If you're doing that you may as well lump all of GG votes in with
>> Labour as most of them would have been from traditional labours voters, in which case
>> Left wing parties won comfortably and was no real surprise.
I'm not intending to lump them in but the plethora of minority candidates, several of whom had overtly right of English National tendencies may actually have changed the outcome, that's MAY not did.
|
>>Galloway
Is it just me or does he make anyone else's skin crawl?
|
No, it's not just you.
What kind of person votes for him, and what are they voting for?
He's always been a nasty little man and I am constantly surprised that some awful sleaze hasn't slipped out of the cupboard.
|
I heard that his campaign leaflets had been made to look exactly the same as the Labor party ones implying that some voters might have been fooled into thinking he was an official Labor candidate...
Surely it can't be as simple as that??
|
>> Surely it can't be as simple as that??
Unfortunately, some of the electorate are.
|
|
It can be. I was at a Count for local elections in SW London. The candidates were listed on the ballot, as normal, alphabetically. It worked out that two conservatives had initials starting at the beginning of the alphabet (one was a certain Chope at the start of his political career) and the third had a name beginning with W. It was a landslide to the Conservatives overall. Much to everyone’s surprise, including the candidate, the Communist candidate polled an unusually high number of votes. He was listed in the first half of the list, the third Conservative candidate didn’t get in by some 20 votes.
|
>> It can be. I was at a Count for local elections in SW London. The
>> candidates were listed on the ballot, as normal, alphabetically. It worked out that two conservatives
>> had initials starting at the beginning of the alphabet (one was a certain Chope at
>> the start of his political career) and the third had a name beginning with W.
>> It was a landslide to the Conservatives overall. Much to everyone’s surprise, including the candidate,
>> the Communist candidate polled an unusually high number of votes. He was listed in the
>> first half of the list, the third Conservative candidate didn’t get in by some 20
>> votes.
That sort of thing was probably why ballot slips have latterly included party logos.
|
|
Galloway, aka "the king of the libel courts." He does have a remarkable record.
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59435987
Seems the government aren't taking many chances with lots of door knocking.
|
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59435987
>>
>> Seems the government aren't taking many chances with lots of door knocking.
It's Ted Heath's old seat and not one Labour could easily capture although they're consistently placed second. Even in 97 Heath held the seat albeit with majority down to 3,500. In recent elections the late James Brokenshire had majorities in the order of 15,000.
I'd imagine both Labour and the Tories are throwing the kitchen sink at it, the LD's less so.
The by election on Owen Paterson's seat is a fortnight later on 16 December.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 27 Nov 21 at 13:28
|
>> The by election on Owen Paterson's seat is a fortnight later on 16 December.
>>
Looks like they'll be quite a few this year then.
|
>> Looks like they'll be quite a few this year then.
Unless Claudia Webbe's appeal succeeds there'll be a recall petition in Leicester East. Labour are going to get all hands to the pumps to get that petition over the line; I've seen several appeals for volunteers to do the footslogging.
|
A majority of 23,000 for Owen Paterson is probably unassailable but the Lib Dems are running their classic byelection campaign with all hands to the pumps, carpet leafleting etc:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/06/people-are-fed-up-tories-anxious-about-losing-owen-patersons-seat
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Mon 6 Dec 21 at 13:53
|
Well looks like the government got a real shoeing here, been Conservative for the last 200 years. Not any more. Another low turnout though. Must be piling the pressure on to Number10.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-shropshire-59693102
Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 05:52
|
Should embolden the back benches to show Boris the door, but who is there that can actually run this crapshow?
|
And this morning we'll have to listen to endless Tories coming on the radio giving apparently the 'real' reason they lost... should be fun.
|
>> And this morning we'll have to listen to endless Tories coming on the radio giving
>> apparently the 'real' reason they lost... should be fun.
>>
Its not, they are all doing it in an aggressive annoyed manner.
|
Not studied this, but it wasn't Labour that were voted in. Should Sarmer be worried?
Labour don't seem to be able to make prgress.
|
>> Not studied this, but it wasn't Labour that were voted in. Should Sarmer be worried?
>>
>> Labour don't seem to be able to make prgress.
It was tactical voting to give the Tories a kicking. No-one expected labour to take a 100% safe tory seat, but the liberals had a chance. SoftTory voters switched to LD, Labour voters switched to LD and floaters switched to LD.
|
>> It was tactical voting to give the Tories a kicking. No-one expected labour to take
>> a 100% safe tory seat, but the liberals had a chance. SoftTory voters switched to
>> LD, Labour voters switched to LD and floaters switched to LD.
>>
When you consider that a person of average intelligence is not very bright and 50% of the population are of below average intelligence, then I don't think the average voter has the wit to indulge in tactical voting.
|
|
By the by, for a party that has been in power for more than eleven years, the Tories are doing remarkably well.
|
>> By the by, for a party that has been in power for more than eleven
>> years, the Tories are doing remarkably well.
Really?
The loss of this seat was an unforced error. If Owen Paterson and done his porage like a man he'd be back by now (unless felled by a recall petition).
Similarly 'partygate' could have been knocked on the head by a decent statement of regret instead of weeks of lying and obfuscation.
The briefing against Chris Witty, a dedicated public servant in a role that has always spoken advice direct to the public, is an utter disgrace. The spokesman on the Today programme (Party Chair) was tying himself in knots over the issue.
|
Bromptonaut said
>> Really?
And then more of his now quite predictable Tory bashing - blind to Labour failings stuff.
However I really believe that this by-election tells us as much about the Labour parties weaknesses as it does about the Tories.
Labour were second in the previous general election result, this time they are third. Do we draw a conclusion from that?
I do.
|
>> However I really believe that this by-election tells us as much about the Labour parties
>> weaknesses as it does about the Tories.
>>
>> Labour were second in the previous general election result, this time they are third. Do
>> we draw a conclusion from that?
>>
>> I do.
Your conclusion is very poor indeed. The conclusion should be. "The LD were the easiest and most digestible path for the Tory voters of Shropshire to give BoJo a kicking.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 09:36
|
>> Bromptonaut said
>>
>> >> Really?
>>
>> And then more of his now quite predictable Tory bashing - blind to Labour failings
>> stuff.
The three propositions I put were based on commentary in the news (BBC and Times Radio) this morning.
Are you saying they're wrong?
|
Put it like this, Do you think that the LD candidate was elected because a: they have the best policies, b: the public think they are a creditable party to form a government, c:the LD candidate had charisma and a groundswell of local popular support*
or d: People wanted to give BoJo a kicking.
Answer on a ballot paper please.
(* of course the elected candidate will try and tell you (and may even believe) it is indeed a, b, & c)
|
>> Put it like this, Do you think that the LD candidate was elected because a:
>> they have the best policies, b: the public think they are a creditable party to
>> form a government, c:the LD candidate had charisma and a groundswell of local popular support*
>>
>> or d: People wanted to give BoJo a kicking.
She's local so there may be an element of the second limb of (c).
It's being reported that the Conservative, a Brummie, didn't know the area, confused its various towns and at one point spoke of being in Staffordshire.
Neither of the major parties seem to understand the problem of candidates selected in haste.
|
>> She's local so there may be an element of the second limb of (c).
>>
>> It's being reported that the Conservative, a Brummie, didn't know the area, confused its various
>> towns and at one point spoke of being in Staffordshire.
>>
>> Neither of the major parties seem to understand the problem of candidates selected in haste.
Absolutely, local roots should be a legal requirement of candidacy*, the tories still have an element of rotten borough candidacy about them - nowdays disguised as a "safe seat"
*When I become the benign dictator, my sham parliament will certainly be selected this way.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 11:38
|
>> By the by, for a party that has been in power for more than eleven
>> years, the Tories are doing remarkably well.
They were. Public satisfaction in them has collapsed. However, as you say maybe it is inevitable, but its a sudden collapse even by UK political standards.
|
>> When you consider that a person of average intelligence is not very bright and 50%
>> of the population are of below average intelligence, then I don't think the average voter
>> has the wit to indulge in tactical voting.
It's hardly a new idea; I voted tactically for the Liberal in Pudsey in 1979.
It can be a difficult call in a 3 way contest but here the choice was spelled out in bold capitals several feet high. Labour, who were second albeit by a truckload, last time effectively conceded they'd no chance an put minimal effort in their campaign. They're preserving resources for the forthcoming defenestration of Claudia Webbe and the subsequent by election in Leicester East.
|
Labour,... minimal effort in their
>> campaign. They're preserving resources for the forthcoming defenestration of Claudia Webbe and the subsequent by
>> election in Leicester East.
That is a seriously weedy excuse. If Labour can't pour effective fire into a single by-election then they couldn't organise a bring and buy sale. I hope the reason was simply a deliberate, albeit passive, cooperation with the Lib Dems to ensure a Conservative defeat. That would at least show some intelligence.
|
>> That is a seriously weedy excuse. If Labour can't pour effective fire into a single
>> by-election then they couldn't organise a bring and buy sale. I hope the reason was
>> simply a deliberate, albeit passive, cooperation with the Lib Dems to ensure a Conservative defeat.
>> That would at least show some intelligence.
That is the case, there was serious talk of Labour standing down to give the LDs a chance.. It was obvious that it was never going to be a Labour seat and never will, its just the wrong demographic.
|
Labour worried about the LD getting in in Leicester east?
Although i don't think her appeal is until mid march, so they've still a while to wait. Labour hard up for cash?
|
Turn out very low, so clearly most people simply didn't care or at least couldn't be bothered. Which kind of puts the media reported "voter outrage" into perspective - there clearly isn't much.
Conservatives lost ground (because they're rubbish), Labour failed to make ground (because they're rubbish) LD did make ground (because they're mostly an inoffensive unimportant alternative)
Only those who were really bothered voted, and that is usually those who are not in power. Those in power rarely worry as much.
Rather than just the Conservatives worrying, because their time is limited anyway, I suggest that *all* politicians should worry about the turn out and the decreasing interest from the voters.
That lack of interest in the current rabble is exactly why awful people like Farage can bounce up and have significant impact simply by causing interest.
Pretty much what Trump did as well, and Bolsonaro and Kast/Boric. etc. etc.
If the politicians want the voters to show interest, then they'll need to grow up and take an interest themselves.
Useless shower. All of them.
|
>> Turn out very low, so clearly most people simply didn't care or at least couldn't
>> be bothered. Which kind of puts the media reported "voter outrage" into perspective - there
>> clearly isn't much.
A quick look at byelections since 2010 suggests sub 50% turnouts to be pretty much the norm. Sure there are exceptions like Bradford West where Galloway was elected for Respect but they're exactly that; exceptions.
The figure may catch some Tories who sat on their hands at home but that's speculation.
LAbour put little effort in recognising, as they did at Amersham, that it wasn't their territory and they'd a tacit understanding with the LD's and hoping their supporters voted tactically.
Tory majority here is similar to North Shropshire. If Chris Heaton-Harris fell under a bus I'd happily vote LD in the byelection if that were likely to send Downing Street a message.
|
>>but that's speculation
Since I haven't spoken to each and every one, then of course it's speculation.
>>LAbour put little effort in recognising, as they did at Amersham, that it wasn't their territory and they'd a tacit understanding with the LD's and hoping their supporters voted tactically.
You know what that is? That's speculation that is.
|
> LAbour put little effort in recognising, as they did at Amersham, that it wasn't their
>> territory and they'd a tacit understanding with the LD's and hoping their supporters voted tactically.
Labour chap on the news categorically denied that happened, said it was near impossible to engineer 'your' voters to go across to another party.
|
>> Labour chap on the news categorically denied that happened, said it was near impossible to
>> engineer 'your' voters to go across to another party.
This is the time to quote Mandy Rice-Davies...
|
>> >> Labour chap on the news categorically denied that happened, said it was near impossible
>> to
>> >> engineer 'your' voters to go across to another party.
>>
>> This is the time to quote Mandy Rice-Davies...
>>
Perhaps it was too much to expect him to be honest.
|
>> Turn out very low, so clearly most people simply didn't care or at least couldn't
>> be bothered. Which kind of puts the media reported "voter outrage" into perspective - there
>> clearly isn't much.
Of course the turnout was low, Omnicron has put the fear of god into people, Shops are empty, Pubs are empty, restaurants have had over 50% of their bookings cancelled.
The result is what matters and is proportionate with the omnicron fear.
but they are all a useless shower anyway, large turnout or small.
|
>> When you consider that a person of average intelligence is not very bright and 50%
>> of the population are of below average intelligence, then I don't think the average voter
>> has the wit to indulge in tactical voting.
Well this event proves you to be wrong. You dont need to thank me, its a pleasure to be able to teach our elderly population.
|
"If the Liberal Democrats did as well in general elections as they did in by-elections they would have been in power for most of the past 50 years," he adds.
Whether he meant it to be funny or not, it did make me smile.
|
>>
>> Well this event proves you to be wrong. You dont need to thank me, its
>> a pleasure to be able to teach our elderly population.
>>
I am, of course grateful to my young friend.
However, if I were filming steam locos, I wouldn't need to be told to film on the other side of the tracks so that my shot wasn't spoilt by a local train pulling into the station.
|
>> However, if I were filming steam locos, I wouldn't need to be told to film
>> on the other side of the tracks so that my shot wasn't spoilt by a
>> local train pulling into the station.
Allow me to retort. The percentage of his videos being spoilt by local trains is about 3%. The angle of view of a train on the "safe side" is always compromised compared to a wider view. Given the right spin F.Ud videos always earn more money, but I understand he is not prepared to compromise the quality of his art for filthy lucre
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 10:58
|
>> Allow me to retort. The percentage of his videos being spoilt by local trains is
>> about 3%. The angle of view of a train on the "safe side" is always
>> compromised compared to a wider view. Given the right spin F.Ud videos always earn more
>> money, but I understand he is not prepared to compromise the quality of his art
>> for filthy lucre
Another train getting in the way is an occupational hazard for those filming the railway. I dare see Mr Nowun's memory is long enough to remember pictures a return of steam to Paddington in the eighties being obstructed by the departure of a routine IC125.
No doubt you can check the timetable to ascertain obvious conflicts but the reality is that on an intensively used line things only need to be a minute or two adrift for trains to cross unexpectedly.
|
With steam excursions the rostered timetable is useless. The intermediate times on the journey are of no consequence, merely the departure and destination times are of any importance.
However with the aid of live tracking, and live signal block diagrams on the mobile phone, its easy to tell what is likely to happen
My father was called in once for a "cup of tea" with the regional deputy inspector. "Driver, you can have any number of perfectly valid and excusable reasons for being late, but there is absolutely no excuse for departing early"
|
The LibDems have done well, with all contenders rolling out predictable excuses and rationale.
Mid term elecions are an opportunity for voters to give the current government a kicking. The surprise is not just that the Tories lost - they were always going to lose votes with a low turnout - but that Labour also tanked.
Will it make Boris more insecure as PM - possibly. Will it bring forward a general election - unlikely. Will the Libdems hold the seat at the next election - probably not. Does it give Labour hope for future electoral success - no.
|
>> Allow me to retort. The percentage of his videos being spoilt by local trains is
>> about 3%. The angle of view of a train on the "safe side" is always
>> compromised compared to a wider view. Given the right spin F.Ud videos always earn more
>> money, but I understand he is not prepared to compromise the quality of his art
>> for filthy lucre
>>
Dave, what did he say that had to be edited? Was he nasty to me?
"When I am the benign dictator", my posterior.
|
>> Dave, what did he say that had to be edited? Was he nasty to me?
>>
>> "When I am the benign dictator", my posterior.
You have no fears, Duncan, when I become the benign dictator you will be treated like royalty.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. As soon as I have had Fotheringhay castle rebuilt.
|
>> Dave, what did he say that had to be edited? Was he nasty to me?
Nothing sinister, just unnecessary quoting, which he and a couple of others have a habit of doing.
|
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
If you've lost them, I can repost them if you like. Including your threats.
|
And I'll just disable your account.
Still want to play?
|
>> And I'll just disable your account.
>>
>> Still want to play?
>>
DGAF.
I enjoy it here but stopping me coming isn't much of a threat.
You want to do it, crack on. Hell will freeze over before I walk around one of your silly threats, all because you don't like the way Zero formatted one of his posts.
"Still want to play?" What a man.
Pathetic.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 21:11
|
|
But if you do, make sure you delete everything so you can write history your way. You wouldn't want anybody seeing the truth with this, any more than you did with previous instances.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 17 Dec 21 at 21:12
|
Now who’s making threats?
I answered a question by Duncan. It had nothing to do with you, but you still stuck your big nose in to wind me up.
Like I said, there is a pop up asking to only partially quote. And in your usual childish manor you then started quoting everything once I mentioned it. How old are you again? 13?
I can remember a certain someone else who used to edit peoples posts, but there was no trace of an “edited by” message back then.
|
>> Now who’s making threats?
>>
>> I answered a question by Duncan. It had nothing to do with you, but you
>> still stuck your big nose in to wind me up.
>>
>> Like I said, there is a pop up asking to only partially quote. And in
>> your usual childish manor you then started quoting everything once I mentioned it. How old
>> are you again? 13?
>>
>> I can remember a certain someone else who used to edit peoples posts, but there
>> was no trace of an “edited by” message back then.
>>
Someone making threats? Dunno, not me though.
I didn't respond to your comment to Duncan until you deleted my reply. You remember the one, it was a reply to Duncan that had nothing to do with you, but you still stuck your big nose in.
And I care little for your 'memories' from 20 years ago, whether true, relevant or most likely entirely made up. So you can shove your innuendos the same place you keep your threats.
your turn.....
|
Actually, I'm off out to the pub. If you wouldn't mind holding on until I am back that would be helpful.
4 or 5 hours should about do it.
|
>> your turn.....
Ok.
House Rules
The following posts or content are not allowed:
Harassing content
Such content represents a "minimum standard" of discussion. However, posts or content which is thought by the mods to detract from the respectful and courteous tone may also be a breach of house rules.
Violations of house rules may result in:
Posts or other content being “snipped” (partially edited).
Posts or other content being hidden or removed.
Members being suspended or banned.
You’ve been sailing close to the wind for a very very long time, and we have previously been asked why we let you get away with things that others don’t. I can’t recall anyone on here that you’ve not had an argument with, and the bullying manner in which you shout them down to get the final say. People have even left because of it.
Time for you to leave. Bye.
|
>> Time for you to leave. Bye.
I appreciate this is not a democracy. If it were I would ask my vote be registered for a reversal of that intemperate decision.
|
>> I appreciate this is not a democracy. If it were I would ask my vote
>> be registered for a reversal of that intemperate decision.
This post won't last long on here.
|
>This post won't last long on here.
Depends on how long it takes to look up "intemperate".
|
>> I appreciate this is not a democracy. If it were I would ask my vote
>> be registered for a reversal of that intemperate decision.
Can I respectfully second that and ask that the Mods take a measured and collective view on Mark's membership. Maybe a suspension or final warning?
For all the (justified) criticism his bark is far worse than his bite and he's been very helpful to a lot of us over the years.
|
His bark is actually very nasty and full of venom and as there's no way of distinguishing between that and his bite on an internet forum that's all we have to judge his failings with.
That's the downside. The upside, as Bromp says, is his helpfulness.
I would not question the judgment of the mods - they have a thankless job. Maybe it is really is time for "Mark" to go. (As for warnings, I believe that has already been tried.)
I can't get a vision of the ghost of Pat out of my mind.
|
>> I can't get a vision of the ghost of Pat out of my mind.
I have that too.
Deja vu.
|
>Deja vu.
All over again?
© Yogi Berra
|
|
...I think you've used that line before....
|
>> >> I can't get a vision of the ghost of Pat out of my mind.
>>
>> I have that too.
>>
>> Deja vu.
Lets hope Mark does not suffer the same fate as her in exile.
|
|
Agreed. Time out on both sides. Decisions taken and things said in haste on refection are seldom the right ones.
|
|
Mark is a significant contributor and should be allowed to continue to be so.
|
To clarify,
As it stands, Mark's account is currently disabled. This decision has been made unanimously by all C4P admin.
It has been noted that some of you feel that it shouldn't be.
This was not a decision that was made lightly, as some of you have said, Mark was a regular contributor to the forum, but where do we draw the line? The forum rules are there for everyone to adhere to and not a select few.
Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
This post has been self moderated following reading through again what I originally wrote
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 19 Dec 21 at 04:32
|
Hopefully he reads this just so he knows I had a fantastic kebab earlier this evening - mixed lamb and chicken, with chilli sauce and salad.
It was awesome.
|
The MP for Wakefield, Imran Ahmad Khan, has resigned after being convicted of sexually assaulting a 15yo boy:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/apr/14/imran-ahmad-khan-resigns-after-child-sexual-assault-conviction
Looks like another rum selection at the last minute before the 2019 GE. Original candidate withdrew after historic social media posts came to light.
Wakefield looks like a classic 'Red Wall' seat taken from Labour in a Brexit area with a Remain incumbent. Majority about 3,500.
Ripe for the taking by Labour with the right candidate and the usual agreement for the LDs to keep a low profile?
|
Well. The Pr0n Perusing MP for Tiverton & Honiton has resigned but his friend says that he can see how an internet search for tractors could lead to adult content.
Must try it sometime.
|
I would prefer the porn.......I'm an ex tractor fan !
I'll get me coat.
Ted
|
|
Dominator, as in Krause Dominator.
|
|
Someone .suggested that he Googled ' rough ploughing'........
|
|
Was it the full porn film he watched, or just the trailer?
|
|
Did he have to write a Deere John???
|
|
...he was only interested in sowing his seed....
|
|
I'm not sure he was tilling the truth.
|
|
Fifty shades of little grey Fergie
|
The party in power should not be surprised or down hearted if they lose a by-election. We have had 12 good years of Tory government, it would be more surprising if they did not lose the occasional by-election.
Don't forget in 2019 the Tories were up against Jeremy Corbyn, a fearsome opponent. At the next general election things will be back to what used to pass for normality.
Last edited by: Duncan on Sun 5 Jun 22 at 13:14
|
That the party in power lose a few by-elections is no surprise - although the size of the losses may be much larger than the norm.
The question the Tory party need to ask is whether Boris, previously an electoral asset, will still be a drag on support in the (expected) 2024 election.
The longer he is in post, the greater the blame he will inevitably have to take for any/all Covid and Brexit failings. If no longer PM I doubt Boris will be concerned (he is too egotistical) - the media will simply find someone else still in the leadership team to blame.
The Tories will need a replacement in position by middle to end of 2023 so that any new PM will have time to settle in. So Boris may last another year - although I somehow doubt it. His copy book is well and truly blotted!
|
>>
>>
>> The longer he is in post, the greater the blame he will inevitably have to
>> take for any/all Covid and Brexit failings.
>>
Assuming no resurgence of Covid, I doubt it will be any more than a distant memory by the next election and we did no worse than most other countries in handling it anyway.
|
>>12 good years of Tory government,
Based on what measures?
|
>> >>12 good years of Tory government,
>>
>> Based on what measures?
>>
...the number of years since the party was formed... ;-)
|
>> >>12 good years of Tory government,
>>
>> Based on what measures?
>>
Were I a politian, I would say:-
12 years of stability
Delivered Brexit for which you (the great British electorate) voted.
Handled the biggest epidemic in the country since - choose 1665, or 1918.
Peace in Northern Ireland.
And our lovely Queen has been on the throne for 70 years and the nation celebrated.
|
Blair/Brown - arguably 11 good years until 2008.
Banking crisis on their watch. Unemployment increases from 5% to 8%. Recession. Liam Byrne leaves letter to incoming Chief Secretary - "sorry, no money left, we've spent it all".
The public have short memories. The outcome of the 2024 election will depend on inflation, unemployment, cost of living etc over the next two years. Brexit and Covid will probably be history of little consequence.
|
>> 12 years of stability
Hardly, the list you added below is testament to that
>> Delivered Brexit for which you (the great British electorate) voted.
Screwed that up
>> Handled the biggest epidemic in the country since - choose 1665, or 1918.
didnt handle it, just let it happen - ignored it completely in no 10 according to the Gray report.
>> Peace in Northern Ireland.
Under labours watch, now taking it apart under Tory watch.
>> And our lovely Queen has been on the throne for 70 years and the nation
>> celebrated.
For a (sacked) pedant you are remarkably slapdash with the facts.
And you missed the really, and only good thing the Tories have done. Saw off Jeremy Corbyn.
|
Any road. We saved the world from Jeremy Corbyn.
There is a vote of confidence on Boris today.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-60289386
Any bets? I have a shilling and I am prepared to wager most of it that BoJo will win. Come on! Any takers?
|
Likely to win the vote tonight? Yes of course. That’s’ not the though question is it? The real question is whether he is so damaged he will not be able to win the next General Election. If not he will shortly be out on his ear.
I would remind you Theresa May won her vote of confidence and resigned seven months later.
|
Truss is being touted as a candidate for leader. All the accessories who have propped Johnson up and excused his lies should be ineligible. Javid's effort this morning was laughable as are all the other "the country wants us to get on with the job" blusters.
I had no time at all for Jeremy Hunt but he is positively statesmanlike in comparison. He very cleverly (or perhaps honourably, to put the best shine on it) turned down the defence job when he lost to Johnson and distanced himself, and has rehabilitated himself somewhat in regard to his mismanagement of the NHS, admitting it was not funded properly when he was in charge.
I hope the last 3 years been a lesson to the parliamentary party, and they will think twice before picking another demagogue.
|
Johnson is toast. He will probably survive the no confidence motion, but even when they do, they never survive much longer afterwards. Either by the oarty or the electorate.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 6 Jun 22 at 10:20
|
|
I think the party will pick whoever they think will win the election. My guess would be javid
|
>> I think the party will pick whoever they think will win the election...
I fear you're right with that bit.
|
>> >> I think the party will pick whoever they think will win the election...
>>
>> I fear you're right with that bit.
>>
Well they are hardly likely to choose someone who is going to lose an election.
|
>> Well they are hardly likely to choose someone who is going to lose an election.
They are going to lose it, regardless of who they chose.
Unless the Labour party cock it up badly, which they could of course.
|
>> >> >> I think the party will pick whoever they think will win the election...
>> >>
>> >> I fear you're right with that bit.
>> >>
>>
>> Well they are hardly likely to choose someone who is going to lose an election.
No, but if it's the sole criterion you can end up with a Johnson. Or a Trump.
|
>> No, but if it's the sole criterion you can end up with a Johnson. Or
>> a Trump.
>>
I think it is yes, as they say you can't do much sat on the oppostion bench.
|
"My guess would be javid"
I always thought the Sontarans would be ruling the country sooner or later.
|
|
Not being a Dr Who fan, I had to check whether I needed to moderate that!! :-)
|
|
Hunt or Gove would be my choice, def not Truss. I'm not sure I know much about many of the others. Gove won't get it cos of (possibly unfair) popular dislike. He speaks very well I think.
|
|
Gove appears to me one of those bright but clueless types.
|
>> Gove appears to me one of those bright but clueless types.
Kinda.
I think well meaning but useless sums him up better. I think he wants to do the right thing, I think he even knows what the right thing is, but has no idea how to articulate it or sell it to others to enable the machinery of power or government to achieve it*
*The last part could. be summed up as "everyone thinks he is a dick"
|
|
Far too many rumours about Gove and his nasal habits to be unfounded.
|
I really doubt that Gove would have the cajones, liberalism or independence of thinking to indulge in any form of illegal stimulation.
He night say "Oh yes I have done it". buts that only a lie to prevent being left sitting on the school wall when it comes to picking the teams.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 6 Jun 22 at 13:44
|
Not rumours, he volunteered it.
I'm with Ian Birrell on this one.
"I am not remotely fussed by their use of drugs. They were simply having fun during younger days. But I am incensed by their arrogance, their lack of self-awareness and, above all, their sickening display of double-standards."
inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/michael-goves-breathtaking-drugs-hypocrisy-brings-contempt-as-pure-as-the-cocaine-300329
|
Batley and Spen by-election - Manatee
