Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review 2016

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited December 2016 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Local By-Election Review 2016

Votes cast, change on last time, seats won and change on last time for 2016 Labour 147,049 votes (29% +1% on last time) winning 85 seats (-5 on last time) Conservatives 146,074 votes (29% -2% on last time) winning 97 seats (-33 on last time) Liberal Democrats 76,877 votes (15% +4% on last time) winning 50 seats (+27 on last time) United Kingdom Independence Party 46,112 votes (9% -4% on last time) winning 10 seats (-3 on last time) Independent candidates 24,810 votes (5% unchanged on last time) winning 22 seats (+6 on last time) Green Party 23,604 votes (5% -1% on last time) winning 2 seats (+1 on last time) Scottish National Party 23,463 votes (5% +3% on last time) winning 8 seats (unchanged on last time) Plaid Cymru 4,133 votes (1% unchanged on last time) winning 5 seats (+3 on last time) Other Parties 11,268 votes (2% -1% on last time) winning 8 seats (+4 on last time) Labour lead of 975 votes (0%) on a swing of 1.5% from Conservative to Labour

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 113,981
    edited December 2016
    Many thanks Harry

    And first.
  • It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,548
    Second.

    And seconded thanks to Harry.
  • It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    As part of some research I'm undertaking, there's a strong correlation between the Lib Dem recovery being in seats they previously held but lost to the Tories in 2010 and 2015.

    A lot of these in the South West heavily voted UKIP and Tory in a lot of European elections and also voted Leave.

    Polarisation or something else, the non Scottish council seats next May should be fun to analyse when the results come in.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    UKIP fox shot?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    To me it says that if you're a Remainer surrounded by a majority of Leavers, you're likely to hold that conviction more strongly.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Is this significant? Or is this just a statement that the Lib Dems are dragging themselves slowly out of the abyss.

    More a consequence of the depth of the abyss rather than any sign of appeal to Leave voters.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    Thanks to Harry for this!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
  • Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    I've always wondered why the EU has to send two representatives, one for the countries, and one for the EU itself?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    As part of some research I'm undertaking, there's a strong correlation between the Lib Dem recovery being in seats they previously held but lost to the Tories in 2010 and 2015.

    A lot of these in the South West heavily voted UKIP and Tory in a lot of European elections and also voted Leave.

    Polarisation or something else, the non Scottish council seats next May should be fun to analyse when the results come in.
    It is my thought as well, there are still Liberals in ex-LD areas.
    Even though they are a weird flavour of euroskeptic Liberals-Libertarians.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
  • My thoughts.

    The Tories are doing on par/slightly sub par with governments that were re-elected 3/4 years later.

    Labour are doing worse than oppositions that lost general elections 3/4 years later.
  • It was this time last year that Rallings & Thrasher published what they think the next NESV should be.

    Hopefully we'll get something similar soon.
  • Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

    FPT: Mr. Dawning, there's nothing retrospective about referring to the significant impact of Obama's comment or Cameron's idiotic Little Englander line. Both were castigated at the time by many here (some Remain supporters did think they were either a killer blow or amusing).
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
  • Cheers for this, Mr. Hayfield.

    FPT: Mr. Dawning, there's nothing retrospective about referring to the significant impact of Obama's comment or Cameron's idiotic Little Englander line. Both were castigated at the time by many here (some Remain supporters did think they were either a killer blow or amusing).

    Certainly the Obama intervention was seen by the Remain side as the final nail in the Leave coffin.

    Oops.
  • FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
  • Looks like Mike and Michael Gove are about to have a twitter conversation, this could be epic.

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/814444159188733952
    https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/814522761217474560
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    Going through the first anecdotal report from Copeland:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/copeland-by-election-preview-jamie-reed-labour-party-2016-12

    A growing Corbynite local presence, which results in some tension between them and the old Jamie Reed allies (new people vs old guard stuff).

    Lot's of immigration talk and UKIP, lot's of local Hospital talk, plenty of disillusionment with politics.
    Not much mentioned about the Tories or LD in local talk.

    It's very early days but Labour might keep the seat.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
    Juncker and Tusk get invited as well to represent the EU.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
    In theory both Juncker and Tusk are invited, but the convention is that they take turns. So, the reality is that there are seven country leaders, plus one EU person.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780
    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
    Juncker and Tusk get invited as well to represent the EU.
    It's not even a country, by the same standards they should have the UN represented as well.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
    No, just that results should be taken with a pinch of salt.
  • Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/814469337176309760

    The trouble with council byelections is that a significant number of them either exclude one of the two main and two second-tier parties -- or at least one of those four didn't stand at the previous election. Throw in local factors, local independents and the unequal level of effort that the parties throw at them means that, with the tiny samples involved, the level of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them is effectively zero.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    Looks like Mike and Michael Gove are about to have a twitter conversation, this could be epic.

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/814444159188733952
    https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/814522761217474560

    The 4-11 looks big to me here.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    I can imagine 'Remainers' wanting to register their feelings on the referendum by voting Lib Dem but I can't imagine voters of any persuasion wanting to brave a winter's evening to register support for the cardboard cut-out that is Theresa May.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Speedy said:

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
    Juncker and Tusk get invited as well to represent the EU.
    It's not even a country, by the same standards they should have the UN represented as well.
    Does the UN have a currency, a central bank, a parliament? I'm not sure what standards you're using to see an analogy between the EU and the UN.
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
    The real risk:

    Having Trump and Obama on the same table might result in a bitter argument between them, which others on the table would not want to be involved but will be asked to.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,780
    Speedy said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
    The real risk:

    Having Trump and Obama on the same table might result in a bitter argument between them, which others on the table would not want to be involved but will be asked to.
    I think it's just a handover. Everyone says how much they enjoyed working with Obama and then there's a photoshoot, and then Trump stays for the actual discussions.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
    Local government is about more than winning seats national elections.

    But then I suppose some people have almost forgotten what the latter feels like. :smile:
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2016

    Speedy said:

    FPT:

    2017 and Article 50 is when the next wave of fun begins. Not long now. Tic toc...

    The G7 summit in May will be fascinating. You'll have 6 EU leaders (inc. Theresa May) + Trump, Abe and Trudeau.
    Serious question. If it is the G7 how come there will be 9 leaders? There are only 4 EU G7 members including the UK.
    Juncker and Tusk get invited as well to represent the EU.
    It's not even a country, by the same standards they should have the UN represented as well.
    Does the UN have a currency, a central bank, a parliament? I'm not sure what standards you're using to see an analogy between the EU and the UN.
    The UN has an assembly, and more than 100 currencies and central banks.
    It represents more than 7 billion people, 12 times more than the EU, and 6 times the GDP.

    And of course it includes EU members, just like the EU includes EU members (you can see how absurd it is to include the EU as a state entity).
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,964

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/814469337176309760

    The trouble with council byelections is that a significant number of them either exclude one of the two main and two second-tier parties -- or at least one of those four didn't stand at the previous election. Throw in local factors, local independents and the unequal level of effort that the parties throw at them means that, with the tiny samples involved, the level of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them is effectively zero.
    And the levle of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them about the LibDems is the square root of FA.

    I seem to recall the LibDems having some good results in by elections in the run up to the 2015 election.

    Where they ended up with 8 MPs. Local by-election form counted for nothing when it came to some bigger issues than pointing at pot-holes.
  • RobD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
    No, just that results should be taken with a pinch of salt.
    There's taking them with a pinch of salt and then there's ignoring them completely because they conflict with your hoped-for world view.

    The Lib Dems are plainly scraping themselves off the canvas, the Conservatives are proving oddly uninspiring for the most dedicated voters for all their good poll ratings. Why is it so hard for Conservatives to acknowledge those two pretty obvious conclusions from these aggregate results?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    As part of some research I'm undertaking, there's a strong correlation between the Lib Dem recovery being in seats they previously held but lost to the Tories in 2010 and 2015.

    A lot of these in the South West heavily voted UKIP and Tory in a lot of European elections and also voted Leave.

    Polarisation or something else, the non Scottish council seats next May should be fun to analyse when the results come in.
    I think the Scottish council elections will be fun I analyse too. STV will make clear any Unionism voting block that is available in various geographies for the Westminster elections to come.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    edited December 2016
    rcs1000 said:

    Speedy said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
    The real risk:

    Having Trump and Obama on the same table might result in a bitter argument between them, which others on the table would not want to be involved but will be asked to.
    I think it's just a handover. Everyone says how much they enjoyed working with Obama and then there's a photoshoot, and then Trump stays for the actual discussions.
    Unless I'm missing something Obama won't be invited at all. Why would he be?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/43rd_G7_summit
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    RobD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
    No, just that results should be taken with a pinch of salt.
    There's taking them with a pinch of salt and then there's ignoring them completely because they conflict with your hoped-for world view.

    The Lib Dems are plainly scraping themselves off the canvas, the Conservatives are proving oddly uninspiring for the most dedicated voters for all their good poll ratings. Why is it so hard for Conservatives to acknowledge those two pretty obvious conclusions from these aggregate results?
    I think that's a reasonable assessment. But I don't think it necessarily points to a Conservative loss at the next election.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    That's a very comprehensive work of record. Thanks Harry for all you do for this site.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    Pulpstar said:

    Looks like Mike and Michael Gove are about to have a twitter conversation, this could be epic.

    https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/814444159188733952
    https://twitter.com/michaelgove/status/814522761217474560

    The 4-11 looks big to me here.
    A possible example of a bet where only one side is offered being bad value?
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    edited December 2016

    rcs1000 said:

    Speedy said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
    The real risk:

    Having Trump and Obama on the same table might result in a bitter argument between them, which others on the table would not want to be involved but will be asked to.
    I think it's just a handover. Everyone says how much they enjoyed working with Obama and then there's a photoshoot, and then Trump stays for the actual discussions.
    Unless I'm missing something Obama won't be invited at all. Why would he be?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/43rd_G7_summit

    Obama will be an ex-president by then, so I agree I don't see why he would be there.

  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/814469337176309760

    The trouble with council byelections is that a significant number of them either exclude one of the two main and two second-tier parties -- or at least one of those four didn't stand at the previous election. Throw in local factors, local independents and the unequal level of effort that the parties throw at them means that, with the tiny samples involved, the level of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them is effectively zero.
    And the levle of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them about the LibDems is the square root of FA.

    I seem to recall the LibDems having some good results in by elections in the run up to the 2015 election.

    Where they ended up with 8 MPs. Local by-election form counted for nothing when it came to some bigger issues than pointing at pot-holes.
    There was a big decline of the local LD base though not to the same level as the Westminster polls said at the time, the local decline masked the national collapse.

    Local LD do not have the same notorious reputation than the national LD have, hence the direction is the same but on a different magnitude.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731

    RobD said:

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    On the basis that margin of error movements in tiny sub samples of the electorate mean whatever you want them to?
    The Conservatives have lost a net 13 seats in that period (a sixth of those they previously held) and the Lib Dems have won a net 23 seats in that period (more than doubling the number they previously held). Among those that can actually be bothered to go out and vote, the Conservatives are going backwards and the Lib Dems are going smartly forwards.
    Yet 'parish council' elections seem to bear no real relation to public sentiment expressed in polls or actual general elections.

    They're vehicles for expressing one's own grand theories, because they're generally tremendously influenced by local issues and time of year/correlation with more important elections.
    No doubt then the Conservatives will therefore on that basis be withdrawing from local elections in future.
    No, just that results should be taken with a pinch of salt.
    There's taking them with a pinch of salt and then there's ignoring them completely because they conflict with your hoped-for world view.

    The Lib Dems are plainly scraping themselves off the canvas, the Conservatives are proving oddly uninspiring for the most dedicated voters for all their good poll ratings. Why is it so hard for Conservatives to acknowledge those two pretty obvious conclusions from these aggregate results?
    Nomnom 9-5 what you sayin?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    rcs1000 said:

    Speedy said:

    RobD said:

    rcs1000 said:

    (Actually, I'm wrong, there will be nine people there, as President Elect Trump is also invited.)

    The seating plan will be awkward! Why not just have it when Obama is out just to save all the trouble? Or is it a goodbye sort of thing?
    The real risk:

    Having Trump and Obama on the same table might result in a bitter argument between them, which others on the table would not want to be involved but will be asked to.
    I think it's just a handover. Everyone says how much they enjoyed working with Obama and then there's a photoshoot, and then Trump stays for the actual discussions.
    The words and body language of Obama and Trump are going to be fascinating to watch at the G7.

    Obama clearly hates Trump with an absolute passion, but is also aware of the need for a smooth transition - as he was given himself by Dubya eight years ago.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,956
    Conservative support is a mile wide and an inch deep, ergo their supporters can't be bothered to turn out in the same numbers for locals as they would for a GE. Lib Dems shouldn't get too excited.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,921
    edited December 2016
    Hear, hear! re: thanks to Harry!
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    LDs have something relevant to say now. It suits a left of centre party better to be complaining about a perceived injustice than being the bad guys who empower Tories and fleece students, so hardly unexpected.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408
    edited December 2016
    Many thanks to Harry. How much it all means, who can say, but it makes me feel better just having the info.

    I still feel sorry for the Inverurie and District on Aberdeenshire chap/chapette - the only LD losing at the moment.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Copeland will be held by Labour in the BE, but if there was a GE tommorow I think the Tories would get it. The odds at the moment look to me like GE odds for the constituency whereas it is a BE.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408


    The trouble with council byelections is that a significant number of them either exclude one of the two main and two second-tier parties -- or at least one of those four didn't stand at the previous election. Throw in local factors, local independents and the unequal level of effort that the parties throw at them means that, with the tiny samples involved, the level of meaningful lessons that can be drawn from them is effectively zero.

    From individual ones I imagine that is the case. Cumulatively, while still not in any way definitive, can be potentially useful perhaps.
    Speedy said:

    It is curious that the Lib Dems had previously tallied 11% in both Remain and Leave seats, but the rise in Lib Dem fortunes in Leave seats is sharply higher than in Remain seats (now 20% to 14%). It perhaps says something about the essential nihilism of Leave seats' voters.

    As part of some research I'm undertaking, there's a strong correlation between the Lib Dem recovery being in seats they previously held but lost to the Tories in 2010 and 2015.

    A lot of these in the South West heavily voted UKIP and Tory in a lot of European elections and also voted Leave.

    Polarisation or something else, the non Scottish council seats next May should be fun to analyse when the results come in.
    It is my thought as well, there are still Liberals in ex-LD areas.
    Even though they are a weird flavour of euroskeptic Liberals-Libertarians.
    I think that fits quite well. May will be very interesting (the month that is)
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.
  • isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Ha, ha. Good one. Presumably the minion who penned it had a Christmas bet as to how many cliches he could fit into each paragraph.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Ha, ha. Good one. Presumably the minion who penned it had a Christmas bet as to how many cliches he could fit into each paragraph.
    It was written Tranmere Rovers club Doctor I think
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    edited December 2016
    Mr. Dawning, lessons must be learnt. This is no time for business as usual, but, at the same time, Rome wasn't built in a day.

    We have 24 hours to save the NHS.

    Edited extra bit: Anyway, time for me to be off.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,408

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    People may need to worry about being counter productive with some of these challenges.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-poll-idUKKBN14I002?il=0


    The poll showed 89 percent of voters in Greece thought their country was heading in the wrong direction. In France the figure was 82 percent, Italy 79 percent and Germany 62 percent.

    While EU voters are clearly discontented, there was only a small rise in the number of people who would vote for an exit: 36 percent from 33 percent across the 15 European countries including Britain that were surveyed.

    The percentage of people in Germany, France and Belgium who would vote to leave fell from a year ago. Finland and Greece saw an increase in support for leaving, up to 40 percent from 29 percent and to 46 percent from 38 percent respectfully.

    "2016 saw the EU foundations severely shaken," said Johnny Heald, managing director of ORB International, who did the UK polling.

    "What stands out is the overwhelming view from EU citizens that their countries are heading in the wrong direction - most noticeable in France and Greece - which makes fertile ground for right-wing populist parties."

    Across Europe, 60 percent said they would like to have fewer migrants and refugees. In Greece, 86 percent wanted fewer while in Italy the figure was 75 percent and in Germany 64 percent.


  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    The G7 is largely a relic anyway it is the G20 which takes all the key economic decisions now
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    HYUFD said:

    The G7 is largely a relic anyway it is the G20 which takes all the key economic decisions now

    That's the 19 countries & the EU ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    The one parliamentary by election in a Leave area since the referendum saw the LDs come third
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    kle4 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    People may need to worry about being counter productive with some of these challenges.
    Desperation... :p
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Speedy Given Labour held Copeland even in 1983 they really ought to hold it but it is a measure of the size of the Tory poll lead that the Tories could win it at the by election
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    One thing is clear from the Stats. The much vaunted "Labour" WWC vote had already flown the nest before June 23rd and possibly already had by May 2015.

    The bulk of the Remain vote comes from Labour.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy Given Labour held Copeland even in 1983 they really ought to hold it but it is a measure of the size of the Tory poll lead that the Tories could win it at the by election

    The Tory lead nationally in 1983 was much bigger than it is now.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy Given Labour held Copeland even in 1983 they really ought to hold it but it is a measure of the size of the Tory poll lead that the Tories could win it at the by election

    There have been no local and westminster by-elections that corroborate with the opinion polls, not even in their direction.

    That is why I'm skeptical of opinion polls.

    When all the other indicators including local anecdotal evidence say something different than opinion polls, the opinion polls always lose.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    kle4 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    People may need to worry about being counter productive with some of these challenges.
    I agree to an extent. But at the same time, it is interesting to see our parliamentary democracy tested (I hope not to destruction). The level of scrutiny is probably something most people could do without but IMO there's no harm in asking if it's all kosher, just as a check and balance concerning the system we all live within and I'm sure have mostly taken for granted.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    People may need to worry about being counter productive with some of these challenges.
    I agree to an extent. But at the same time, it is interesting to see our parliamentary democracy tested (I hope not to destruction). The level of scrutiny is probably something most people could do without but IMO there's no harm in asking if it's all kosher, just as a check and balance concerning the system we all live within and I'm sure have mostly taken for granted.
    A shame no preparation was done before the vote ;)
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    The government view that if we leave the EU, we automatically leave the EEA is a lazy one, since there is a separate EEA Act. At the very least, an amendment is needed.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    People may need to worry about being counter productive with some of these challenges.
    I agree to an extent. But at the same time, it is interesting to see our parliamentary democracy tested (I hope not to destruction). The level of scrutiny is probably something most people could do without but IMO there's no harm in asking if it's all kosher, just as a check and balance concerning the system we all live within and I'm sure have mostly taken for granted.
    A shame no preparation was done before the vote ;)
    Yes you'd think that the government's lawyers went through the wording and the premise with a fine-toothed comb. Perhaps they did. We shall see.
  • isamisam Posts: 40,731
    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2016
    This is definitely a new historical era that we have entered, I'm calling it the Silly Era:

    https://twitter.com/CNN/status/814467384547409920

    "Boxing legend Don King stood beside President-elect Donald Trump Wednesday to discuss the relationship between Israel and the United States."
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Roger said:

    I can imagine 'Remainers' wanting to register their feelings on the referendum by voting Lib Dem but I can't imagine voters of any persuasion wanting to brave a winter's evening to register support for the cardboard cut-out that is Theresa May.

    She is truly devoid of any emotion.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    Almost as significant IMO is the fact that in our enlightened, rule-of-law-bound, free, liberal, peaceful, not at all like those nasty jihadis society, the claimants found it necessary to remain anonymous.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Speedy said:

    This is definitely a new historical era that we have entered, I'm calling it the Silly Era:

    https://twitter.com/CNN/status/814467384547409920

    The Don thinks the Donald will cut his taxes - assuming he pays any.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
    Disturbing the thoughts of those who need the Guardian to tell them what to think.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    TOPPING said:

    Almost as significant IMO is the fact that in our enlightened, rule-of-law-bound, free, liberal, peaceful, not at all like those nasty jihadis society, the claimants found it necessary to remain anonymous.

    Which I think is a tad silly.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
    Scouring irrelevant quotes from the internet.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
    Scouring irrelevant quotes from the internet.
    Whatever happened to our dearly missed 619?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 40,950
    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    Almost as significant IMO is the fact that in our enlightened, rule-of-law-bound, free, liberal, peaceful, not at all like those nasty jihadis society, the claimants found it necessary to remain anonymous.

    Which I think is a tad silly.
    You did notice the heavies flanking Gina on her court forays?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    TOPPING said:

    RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    Almost as significant IMO is the fact that in our enlightened, rule-of-law-bound, free, liberal, peaceful, not at all like those nasty jihadis society, the claimants found it necessary to remain anonymous.

    Which I think is a tad silly.
    You did notice the heavies flanking Gina on her court forays?
    Yeah, and fair enough to her for facing the criticism she got.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614
    edited December 2016
    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
    Scouring irrelevant quotes from the internet.
    Whatever happened to our dearly missed 619?
    DNC contract expired at midnight on 8th November. Quite literally from posting history.

    Edit: although apparently lurking a few weeks ago, but maybe that's just a browser cache somewhere.
    http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/profile/619
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    RobD said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    surbiton said:

    isam said:

    A sensible FT article ☺️

    "With Labour tearing itself apart, and the Lib Dems pigeonholing themselves as a one-issue party for those who refuse to accept the referendum result, the country needs an opposition that is on the side of ordinary people."

    https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b36b68bc-cce8-11e6-b8ce-b9c03770f8b1

    Have you taken over Plato's role during the holidays or is Plato now only interested in Trump matters ?
    Not that I know of, what was her role?
    Scouring irrelevant quotes from the internet.
    Whatever happened to our dearly missed 619?
    No idea.

    He appeared from and vanished into thin air, during the presidential campaign.

    I wish that he stayed on PB so that he could dispel the notion that he was simply a paid agent of the Hillary campaign.
    Some campaigns usually flood internet forums with paid commentators to try to shift perceived opinions, and the Hillary campaign was no exception as we now know.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    Oh Mr HYUFD!!!

    "The one parliamentary by election in a Leave area since the referendum saw the LDs come third"

    In fact, it saw the Lib Dems rise from fourth to third, and very nearly come second.

    You Tory spin doctors must work a bit harder than that!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Surbiton In 1983 the Tories got 43% and Labour 27% and the latest yougov has the Tories on 42% and Labour on 25%
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    It's going to be terribly disappointing for cut and pasters if the Guardian is effectively paywalled. They may have to indulge in independent thought. It really will be open kimono time with respect to brains.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941
    matt said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/29/fresh-brexit-challenge-high-court-leaving-single-market-eea

    A fresh set of legal challenges asserting that the UK will remain within the single market and the European Economic Area after Brexit have been lodged at the high court.

    A group of four anonymous claimants have joined a judicial review of government plans to leave the EU, alleging that separate parliamentary approval is needed to quit the EEA.

    It's going to be terribly disappointing for cut and pasters if the Guardian is effectively paywalled. They may have to indulge in independent thought. It really will be open kimono time with respect to brains.
    Not too bothered.. the links are usually interesting!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    Speedy In the Sleaford by election the Tories got one of the lowest swings against an incumbent party in years
  • SpeedySpeedy Posts: 12,100
    edited December 2016
    HYUFD said:

    Speedy In the Sleaford by election the Tories got one of the lowest swings against an incumbent party in years

    Rural Lincolnshire is not supposed to have any swing against the Tories if the opinion polls are correct, and they still fell a bit.

    That is why I believe that the LD and Labour are a bit higher and the Tories and UKIP a bit lower than the opinion polls say.
  • RobD said:

    TOPPING said:

    Almost as significant IMO is the fact that in our enlightened, rule-of-law-bound, free, liberal, peaceful, not at all like those nasty jihadis society, the claimants found it necessary to remain anonymous.

    Which I think is a tad silly.
    Not as silly as them being allowed to remain anonymous.
  • @Speedy I think that's a good flavour of it from a grassroots Labour perspective. The immigration issue is hilarious. Copeland is literally depopulating. It's a huge pressure on local services as a proportion of funding is per capita and certain services need economy of scale. A huge issue in the local NHS ' cuts ' is the inability of WCH is to recruit. Reed himself had a bizzare public spat with the ONS because they published population projections not including the ( still unsigned ) Reactors deal.

    In fairness to Reed his real target would have been the local health trust who'll have been living their lips at the population projections. The brutal truth is few communities in the UK would benefit more from a wave of immigration. The problem is they've not had an immigration and so not had the recent benefits. It's depopulating because young talent people leave to move to areas of high immigration.

    Yet there they are muttering in a news paper article about Immigration. If you were a health professional reading that would you relocate to work at WCH ? No, you'd think it was Royston Vasey.

    There was a fascinating piece in the local press a few weeks ago with a ' Hostage Video ' style photo of a dozen new polish paramedics for the area. Think about that for a moment. Somewhere in the UK in 2016 where polish Immigration is genuinely novel and news worthy enough to justify press coverage. But also the angle the trust's media handlers were pushing. " Things are so bad we pulled off the rare feat of actually attracting some immgrants. Look they are white, speak English and aren't muslamics. "

    But apparently immigration is a " concern." It's black comedy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,719
    PClipp Given the Liberals had their worst result in 2015 since 1970 it would be surprising if they did not see at least some increase in voteshare
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    HYUFD said:

    Surbiton In 1983 the Tories got 43% and Labour 27% and the latest yougov has the Tories on 42% and Labour on 25%

    Opinium , the latest: 13-16 Dec. Con 38%, Lab 31%
This discussion has been closed.