I make the starting points for the local elections:
Con 1321 Lab 2103 LD 427 Other 308
That is all flavours of councillors (London, Unitary, Metropolitan & District) {Obviously no county this year}
So Corbyn already has about 50% more seats than the Tories in May to defend
Yes.
However, it is worth remembering that this year the whole of London votes (32 Boroughs multiplied by a little more than 50 councillors on average, gives 1,700 odd in London.
Plus there are the whole of Birmingham (101), Leeds (99), Manchester (96) and Newcastle-upon-Tyne (78).
And then there are a third of 30 more Metropolitan Boroughs, including Barnsley, Bolton, Bradford, Coventry, Gateshead, Liverpool, Rochdale, North Tyneside, St Helens, Salford, Sheffield, Sunderland and Wigan.
Of course, some of these councils are already utterly dominated by Labour. (Manchester, for instance, has 95 Labour councillors, and one LibDem).
Yes, so the main battle will be Labour defending its London, urban and metropolitan strongholds and trying to strangle the Tories there while in the District elections in rural areas and market and spa towns the main battle will often be Tory v LD
I think zero votes are going to be moved by Labour's Customs Union shift. For all the delusions of some of the Brexit commentariat, Leave voters in the country were not voting for lots of trade deals - the reasons were immigration, more money for public services, and a generic protest vote. Just because keeping the Customs Union goes against the pet projects of a handful of Tory politicians, that doesn't mean it's "betraying the will of the people".
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
I think zero votes are going to be moved by Labour's Customs Union shift. For all the delusions of some of the Brexit commentariat, Leave voters in the country were not voting for lots of trade deals - the reasons were immigration, more money for public services, and a generic protest vote. Just because keeping the Customs Union goes against the pet projects of a handful of Tory politicians, that doesn't mean it's "betraying the will of the people".
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
Few really understand the pros and cons of CU. What Jezza has achieved is to be less dogmatic, meaning that the Tories have to bang on even more about the subject that Britons are bored of. It is a reasonably clever bit of politrix. CBI praising Jezza is the cherry on top.
I now know that Jeremy Corbyn is stupid as well as incompetent.
Listening to the speech he read out this morning, he said that Labour would support the UK being in a customs union, PROVIDING the EU allowed Britain an independent say in drawing up trade deals. When asked what would happen if the EU said NO -as it does to all countries in such customs unions -he replied that the UK would negotiate.
And what would happen if the EU still said NO Jeremy-as it does to all other countries in such customs unions.
No answer.
Stop treating us like the fools that you and your supporters are Jeremy.
Ummm:
Turkey is in *a* customs union with the EU, and his its own trade deals.
Turkey is in the wonderful position of having to give tariff free access to all those countries that have FTAs with the EU but is not allowed the same tariff free access in return. The deal is horrendously one sided and does not serve them well at all.
I think zero votes are going to be moved by Labour's Customs Union shift. For all the delusions of some of the Brexit commentariat, Leave voters in the country were not voting for lots of trade deals - the reasons were immigration, more money for public services, and a generic protest vote. Just because keeping the Customs Union goes against the pet projects of a handful of Tory politicians, that doesn't mean it's "betraying the will of the people".
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
This is about keeping remainer Labour voters on side. The fact is that the most ardent corbynites are also fanatically pro remain. A lot of leave voters in traditional Labour constituencies would rather spit in their mother's eye than vote Tory, so they have nowhere else to go. Does Labour's latest pivot win them new voters? Probably not. But Corbyn has clearly calculated he needs to keep his core vote on side - hence the soft Brexit pivot. This isn't a change of direction - its merely a smarter way of keeping as many on side as possible, by remaining on the fence.
I think zero votes are going to be moved by Labour's Customs Union shift. For all the delusions of some of the Brexit commentariat, Leave voters in the country were not voting for lots of trade deals - the reasons were immigration, more money for public services, and a generic protest vote. Just because keeping the Customs Union goes against the pet projects of a handful of Tory politicians, that doesn't mean it's "betraying the will of the people".
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
This is about keeping remainer Labour voters on side. The fact is that the most ardent corbynites are also fanatically pro remain. A lot of leave voters in traditional Labour constituencies would rather spit in their mother's eye than vote Tory, so they have nowhere else to go. Does Labour's latest pivot win them new voters? Probably not. But Corbyn has clearly calculated he needs to keep his core vote on side - hence the soft Brexit pivot. This isn't a change of direction - its merely a smarter way of keeping as many on side as possible, by remaining on the fence.
I believe that the next GE will see Mr Corbyn become PM, so I've reconciled myself to that.
I voted Leave because (a) I don't believe 'More Europe' is the answer to every problem and (b) I don't believe that the UK population will be submissive to ever-increasing rule-by-unelected-bureaucrat and (c) I'm afraid that at some future time (maybe 50 years off) the whole thing will end in war.
I hope I'm wrong and certainly wish the EU well.
As long as we actually do undock from the EU so that we are not part & parcel of their political project, that's fine by me. Divergence can happen in its own time & its own way.
IIRC Mr Cameron said he'd achieved that concession, but it wasn't in a Treaty and we've been gulled before like that.
He comes across a bit better but the difference isn't great. The crucial thing is his sense of purpose. He appears to want to do something. I don't share his political views but at least he has a vision.
I think zero votes are going to be moved by Labour's Customs Union shift. For all the delusions of some of the Brexit commentariat, Leave voters in the country were not voting for lots of trade deals - the reasons were immigration, more money for public services, and a generic protest vote. Just because keeping the Customs Union goes against the pet projects of a handful of Tory politicians, that doesn't mean it's "betraying the will of the people".
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
This is about keeping remainer Labour voters on side. The fact is that the most ardent corbynites are also fanatically pro remain. A lot of leave voters in traditional Labour constituencies would rather spit in their mother's eye than vote Tory, so they have nowhere else to go. Does Labour's latest pivot win them new voters? Probably not. But Corbyn has clearly calculated he needs to keep his core vote on side - hence the soft Brexit pivot. This isn't a change of direction - its merely a smarter way of keeping as many on side as possible, by remaining on the fence.
I note that at the tail of that article, Hague implies that we may be heading toward an “abyss”.
Another sceptic who got mugged by reality.
I think that's harsh - he was an effective advocate for Remain in the campaign. With his track record of campaigning against the Euro "24 hours to save the pound" his journey on the issue is quite a story, he could have been used more effectively by Remain in my view.
The ones being mugged by reality are those attacking Treasury forecasts because they don't like what they say, and those pretending there are no costs to Brexit in all scenarios.
Why is it a 'journey'? It's perfectly sensible to argue against membership of the Euro and for remaining in the EU (especially with Dave's deal). I know this, because it was exactly my position.
I agree he could have been used in the campaign more effectively.
Nick Herbert was on such a journey, or had completed it, and led the Remain Cons group, having done the same for Business for Sterling earlier.
But he had absolutely no response, on DP, to Kate Hoey asking him how, if we remained in the EU, the UK was going to restrict immigration. That for me was a defining moment.
And all the PB Leavers tell us it is nothing to do with foreigners.
Do they? Why would they say that, and which ones actually, specifically, have? More generally, either you personally believe that anyone in the world, by virtue of being a human being, can come to this country and live and work here, for ever, or you do not believe that, in which case you believe in immigration controls, in which case you believe in dividing foreigners into those who can come here, and those who cannot. Therefore you believe in DISCRIMINATING AGAINST FOREIGNERS, YOU XENOPHOBE.
Infantile strawmanning is really irritating, isnt it?.
You’re not at all irritating, perhaps sadly for you.
oh good, so you'll be happy to answer the question, then. Who ever said "it is nothing to do with foreigners"?
Every Leave proponent during the referendum campaign.
Comments
London:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nH2n7JYsbb0lSy8-iyzsvs6ze8g1ygSNPRsFIluvXjQ/edit#
Unitary:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Efdl47kD0SmFyG8z6ybldqiWfhsMrmmxom9iY4B305Y/edit#gid=0
District:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nHFLNYjKqKee3U3OOC3gNjh_OddAAGJ4tYFF6Adtu_Q/edit#gid=0
Metropolitan:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/11urmBUZhN4WwzQXTyAWUGa2GdJztpm89jsR2k01sSl0/edit#gid=0
Summary:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YbY7VeOahbUiqf31ZGjmnzvI3M_RfH4LJXwS1NexD9E/edit#gid=0
That said, I'm also sceptical whether (m)any Remain voters are going to switch their votes to Labour just on the basis of this. A great many of them don't have Brexit as their top priority, and even fewer actually understand the intricacies of the various aspects of the EU - on all the doors I knocked on during the election, only one person ever even used the terms "Single Market" or "Customs Union" (the terms "soft Brexit" and "hard Brexit" did come up a little more often, to be fair, but still not much at all).
Comes across better than May.
I voted Leave because
(a) I don't believe 'More Europe' is the answer to every problem and
(b) I don't believe that the UK population will be submissive to ever-increasing rule-by-unelected-bureaucrat and
(c) I'm afraid that at some future time (maybe 50 years off) the whole thing will end in war.
I hope I'm wrong and certainly wish the EU well.
As long as we actually do undock from the EU so that we are not part & parcel of their political project, that's fine by me. Divergence can happen in its own time & its own way.
IIRC Mr Cameron said he'd achieved that concession, but it wasn't in a Treaty and we've been gulled before like that.