Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Into the political void opened between Brexit Tories and Corby

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited April 7 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Into the political void opened between Brexit Tories and Corbynite Labour there came … no-one

“Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government!” David Steel’s rather premature exhortation to his activists at the 1981 Liberal Conference is remembered – to the extent that it’s remembered at all – as a classic example of over-optimism verging into hubris. It shouldn’t be. For a brief moment, there really was a genuine chance that the old Lab-Con dominance had been broken. At the last poll before the conference, the SDP-Liberal Alliance had pushed the Conservatives into third place; by the end of the year, they would record an astonishing 50.5% with Gallup.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,867
    First, and thanks David!
  • MTimT2MTimT2 Posts: 47
    Second, and second the motion
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108
    Vince Cable: The Quiet Man has gone quiet - and he's turning down the volume.....
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,608

    Vince Cable: The Quiet Man has gone quiet - and he's turning down the volume.....

    Who?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008
    "As in the 1980s, the drift of the two larger parties to their respective outer wings should be an opportunity for them,

    The 1983 result, when the Alliance was brand new and Labour had actually physically split (not just nationally but locally) fuels the expectation, reflected by the above quote from the lead, that the centre party should do better when the main parties are politically far apart, and worse when they are close together.

    But the broader picture of electoral evidence points to the opposite.

    The centre party high water mark in much of the country (mostly the south) remains February 1974 Heath v Wilson, when in comparison with other elections the political differences between the parties weren't wide. They got squeezed a little in the second election of the same year, which focused voters on the choice of Tory/Labour. In 1979 Thatcher v Callahan, the Tories were swinging right and Labour beginning to be pulled left (allowing the Liberals to pitch "the real fight is for Britain") yet the centre party vote fell back considerably. In 2010 the policy differences Brown v Cameron weren't yawning; the LibDems did well, in 2017 May v Corbyn they were, and they didn't.

    1983 was genuinely exceptional. Generally, a clear choice between main party prospectuses squeezes the centre party(ies), rather than "opening up space". Similarly UKIP did well when all the parties were officially 'remain' and sank back now that the Tories are clearly on the Brexit side.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,601
    edited April 7
    IanB2 said:

    "As in the 1980s, the drift of the two larger parties to their respective outer wings should be an opportunity for them,

    The 1983 result, when the Alliance was brand new and Labour had actually physically split (not just nationally but locally) fuels the expectation, reflected by the above quote from the lead, that the centre party should do better when the main parties are politically far apart, and worse when they are close together.

    But the broader picture of electoral evidence points to the opposite.

    The centre party high water mark in much of the country (mostly the south) remains February 1974 Heath v Wilson, when in comparison with other elections the political differences between the parties weren't wide. They got squeezed a little in the second election of the same year, which focused voters on the choice of Tory/Labour. In 1979 Thatcher v Callahan, the Tories were swinging right and Labour beginning to be pulled left (allowing the Liberals to pitch "the real fight is for Britain") yet the centre party vote fell back considerably. In 2010 the policy differences Brown v Cameron weren't yawning; the LibDems did well, in 2017 May v Corbyn they were, and they didn't.

    1983 was genuinely exceptional. Generally, a clear choice between main party prospectuses squeezes the centre party(ies), rather than "opening up space". Similarly UKIP did well when all the parties were officially 'remain' and sank back now that the Tories are clearly on the Brexit side.

    That's an interesting post, especially as Ian is a LibDem, and I think there's a lot in it. The thing is that the major parties are genuinely interesting in a way that they weren't in, say, 2010, when Labour was worn out and the Tories were uninspiring. Now, the Tories have Brexit and Labour has Corbyn. I was having dinner last night with a not very political former colleague, a libertarian social liberal in her 30s who I could well imagine voting LibDem. She turned out to be hugely enthusiastic about Corbyn (the left in general less so) and eager to vote for him again, and said all her friends felt the same.

    Like SeanT's taxi-driver this is an anecdote, but possibly a not untypical one. Conversely, I have friends who voted for Brexit and they are genuinely impressed how May is steadily taking it forward despite the obviously tricky situation. They aren't too bothered by the details and if she successfully reaches the Out square on the snakes and ladders board, I think they'll vote for her without hesitation (another reason why I think the Tories would be stupid to change her).

    I don't think the stasis will break until the next election, when we'll have a showdown and somebody will lose. At that point, I think some supporters of the losers will start to think "Hmm".
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Good morning, everyone.

    Alas, as I've said before, Corbyn's an anchor. Labour tribalists and the Cult won't desert the Party/him, and those rightly afraid of the bearded tit getting his hands on power can't afford to desert the Conservatives.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    F1: this news broke annoying late, otherwise I could've done something with it. Anyway, Hamilton's getting a five place grid penalty for changing his gearbox:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/43674309
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 1,966
    Off topic, but keep an eye on what's happening in Brazil. If Lula does not hand himself over to the police in the next 24 hours, I could foresee a chain of events that lead either to revolution, or imposition of martial law. Its democracy is looking fragile.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008

    IanB2 said:

    "As in the 1980s, the drift of the two larger parties to their respective outer wings should be an opportunity for them,
    (snip)

    But the broader picture of electoral evidence points to the opposite.

    The centre party high water mark in much of the country (mostly the south) remains February 1974 Heath v Wilson, when in comparison with other elections the political differences between the parties weren't wide. They got squeezed a little in the second election of the same year, which focused voters on the choice of Tory/Labour. In 1979 Thatcher v Callahan, the Tories were swinging right and Labour beginning to be pulled left (allowing the Liberals to pitch "the real fight is for Britain") yet the centre party vote fell back considerably. In 2010 the policy differences Brown v Cameron weren't yawning; the LibDems did well, in 2017 May v Corbyn they were, and they didn't.

    1983 was genuinely exceptional. Generally, a clear choice between main party prospectuses squeezes the centre party(ies), rather than "opening up space". Similarly UKIP did well when all the parties were officially 'remain' and sank back now that the Tories are clearly on the Brexit side.

    That's an interesting post, especially as Ian is a LibDem, and I think there's a lot in it. The thing is that the major parties are genuinely interesting in a way that they weren't in, say, 2010, when Labour was worn out and the Tories were uninspiring. Now, the Tories have Brexit and Labour has Corbyn. I was having dinner last night with a not very political former colleague, a libertarian social liberal in her 30s who I could well imagine voting LibDem. She turned out to be hugely enthusiastic about Corbyn (the left in general less so) and eager to vote for him again, and said all her friends felt the same.

    Like SeanT's taxi-driver this is an anecdote, but possibly a not untypical one. Conversely, I have friends who voted for Brexit and they are genuinely impressed how May is steadily taking it forward despite the obviously tricky situation. They aren't too bothered by the details and if she successfully reaches the Out square on the snakes and ladders board, I think they'll vote for her without hesitation (another reason why I think the Tories would be stupid to change her).

    I don't think the stasis will break until the next election, when we'll have a showdown and somebody will lose. At that point, I think some supporters of the losers will start to think "Hmm".
    Yep. For Labour the crunch comes when (if) it becomes obvious they can't win from the left but dislike returning to the centre. For Tories, if Brexit doesn't work out well. Either way that's the point of opportunity for the LibDems. History suggests they do better picking up disgruntled Tories, since disgruntled Labour supporters more readily vote Tory than vice versa.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594

    F1: this news broke annoying late, otherwise I could've done something with it. Anyway, Hamilton's getting a five place grid penalty for changing his gearbox:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/43674309

    Oh crap. I’d missed that too, not the greatest start to the season for the champions.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,608
    I have a theory. Third (or fourth) parties thrive when the traditional parties have pissed off a minority of the population over one issue or another.

    In the case of UKIP, it was the fact that all the parties at Westminster were all (to varying degrees pro-EU.

    In the case of the LibDems in 2005 and 2010, it was substantially because Tony Blair's government supported the invasion of Iraq. (Before that it was, to a large extent, because the LDs got very, very good at getting tactical Labour votes.)

    I suspect there will be a modest LibDem revival in the coming four years. Why? Because there will be Brexit losers (and they will be sore as hell). And because governments tend to piss off people over time, no matter how well they perform. (People attribute success as due to their own efforts. While failure is the fault of the governments policies.) But this does somewhat depend on the LDs being visible. Being led by a droning geriatric does not help the LD cause. They need to find their David Steel, Paddy Ashdown or Charles Kennedy.

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,608
    Interesting counterfactual: if David Penhaligon had not died in a car crash in 1986, he may have followed David Steel as leader. If so, the LibDems would have been a significantly more Eurosceptic party. How would history have played out then?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 933
    Good read David, the most realistic one for me seems a change in the Conservative leadership, although with some people conflating Brexit with being more right wing that might not be enough to do it. Also as Nick notes I think May is actually someone people vote for so getting rid of her may prove worse than not doing so.

    I think Ian is largely right, listening to a podcast the other day and the basic point was made that with the parties quite a distance apart people will come down and make a decision for one or the other rather than feel safe enough to vote for a third party.

    Plenty of people who don't like either May or Corbyn will vote for them (or their parties) as they like them more than the other. Although I think the numbers are overstated, from the last election (and on a podcast I heard at some point) around 70% voted positively for each party as opposed to slightly over 20% voting negatively (for one to stop the other).

    Getting all the negative voters from each party and adding them to the Lib Dems gives you something that looks a lot better, although whilst these people may think of themselves as the centre I'm not sure there is really a set of policies that cut across all these people. As popular as fighting Brexit is for centrist parties, its not necessarily centrist, or all that representative of all those voting negatively. As for the rest of it you have moderate Labour and moderate Tory voters who probably have quite different views.

    A long way of saying I agree with Nick, stasis until the next election.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Sandpit, yeah, but if they have a 0.3-0.4s advantage, at least it helps stop them running away with it.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008
    edited April 7
    rcs1000 said:

    I have a theory. Third (or fourth) parties thrive when the traditional parties have pissed off a minority of the population over one issue or another.

    In the case of UKIP, it was the fact that all the parties at Westminster were all (to varying degrees pro-EU.

    In the case of the LibDems in 2005 and 2010, it was substantially because Tony Blair's government supported the invasion of Iraq. (Before that it was, to a large extent, because the LDs got very, very good at getting tactical Labour votes.)

    I suspect there will be a modest LibDem revival in the coming four years. Why? Because there will be Brexit losers (and they will be sore as hell). And because governments tend to piss off people over time, no matter how well they perform. (People attribute success as due to their own efforts. While failure is the fault of the governments policies.) But this does somewhat depend on the LDs being visible. Being led by a droning geriatric does not help the LD cause. They need to find their David Steel, Paddy Ashdown or Charles Kennedy.

    I agree the last point - if Brexit has obvious negative outcomes, the LDs are well placed to benefit, whereas Labour's strategy appears predicated on Brexit turning out not too bad.

    But I don't agree your theory. The LibDems didn't do well under Blair on the back of masses of anti-Iraq left-leaning voters (outside a few heavily Muslim areas like Bradford). Their extra support came mostly from moderate centre-right voters who knew Blair would win anyway (and didn't fear him that much) and despaired at the state of the Tory Party (decay under Major, battyness under Hague/IDS/Howard thru insipid early Cameron).
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,889
    rcs1000 said:

    I have a theory. Third (or fourth) parties thrive when the traditional parties have pissed off a minority of the population over one issue or another.

    In the case of UKIP, it was the fact that all the parties at Westminster were all (to varying degrees pro-EU.

    In the case of the LibDems in 2005 and 2010, it was substantially because Tony Blair's government supported the invasion of Iraq. (Before that it was, to a large extent, because the LDs got very, very good at getting tactical Labour votes.)

    I suspect there will be a modest LibDem revival in the coming four years. Why? Because there will be Brexit losers (and they will be sore as hell). And because governments tend to piss off people over time, no matter how well they perform. (People attribute success as due to their own efforts. While failure is the fault of the governments policies.) But this does somewhat depend on the LDs being visible. Being led by a droning geriatric does not help the LD cause. They need to find their David Steel, Paddy Ashdown or Charles Kennedy.

    Bring back Lembit for leader.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,310
    Really interesting thread header - many thanks.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594

    Mr. Sandpit, yeah, but if they have a 0.3-0.4s advantage, at least it helps stop them running away with it.

    Looking at P2 from yesterday, it looks like the red cars with that sort of advantage though. At least there’s long straights here though, so there’s opportunity for overtaking. Seeing someone like Hamilton or Verstappen (or Alonso in times past) out of position at the start doesn’t usually make for a dull race.

    Pit stop strategy could be an interesting one here too, Pirelli reckons that two stops is optimal but not by much over a single stop. I wonder if Lewis might go with the more agreessive option as everyone else plays it safe with the one stop?
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,411
    edited April 7
    Sean_F said:

    Bring back Lembit for leader.

    The Out Of This World Option.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 20,148
    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    Is the right answer, as was seen at the Labour leadership contest in 2015. The centrist Labour types and the Lib Dems need some policy differentiator, right now it looks like the Conservatives are sliding towards the centre ground.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Just seen on Twitter that The Last Kingdom has been cancelled by the BBC. No idea why. However, Netflix appears to have saved it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 22,608
    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I have a theory. Third (or fourth) parties thrive when the traditional parties have pissed off a minority of the population over one issue or another.

    In the case of UKIP, it was the fact that all the parties at Westminster were all (to varying degrees pro-EU.

    In the case of the LibDems in 2005 and 2010, it was substantially because Tony Blair's government supported the invasion of Iraq. (Before that it was, to a large extent, because the LDs got very, very good at getting tactical Labour votes.)

    I suspect there will be a modest LibDem revival in the coming four years. Why? Because there will be Brexit losers (and they will be sore as hell). And because governments tend to piss off people over time, no matter how well they perform. (People attribute success as due to their own efforts. While failure is the fault of the governments policies.) But this does somewhat depend on the LDs being visible. Being led by a droning geriatric does not help the LD cause. They need to find their David Steel, Paddy Ashdown or Charles Kennedy.

    I agree the last point - if Brexit has obvious negative outcomes, the LDs are well placed to benefit, whereas Labour's strategy appears predicated on Brexit turning out not too bad.

    But I don't agree your theory. The LibDems didn't do well under Blair on the back of masses of anti-Iraq left-leaning voters (outside a few heavily Muslim areas like Bradford). Their extra support came mostly from moderate centre-right voters who knew Blair would win anyway (and didn't fear him that much) and despaired at the state of the Tory Party (decay under Major, battyness under Hague/IDS/Howard thru insipid early Cameron).
    Assuming Brexit is net short-term positive for the economy (which is far from a certainty), there will still be Brexit losers.

    But I agree that it was because people were not afraid of Tony Blair, that they felt they could vote LibDem.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Sandpit, Red Bull may well try that. Their straight line speed may be poor.

    I do wonder if Grosjean for a podium might be worth a look. Have to be long, but could happen.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008
    rcs1000 said:

    IanB2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I have a theory. Third (or fourth) parties thrive when the traditional parties have pissed off a minority of the population over one issue or another.

    In the case of UKIP, it was the fact that all the parties at Westminster were all (to varying degrees pro-EU.

    In the case of the LibDems in 2005 and 2010, it was substantially because Tony Blair's government supported the invasion of Iraq. (Before that it was, to a large extent, because the LDs got very, very good at getting tactical Labour votes.)

    I suspect there will be a modest LibDem revival in the coming four years. Why? Because there will be Brexit losers (and they will be sore as hell). And because governments tend to piss off people over time, no matter how well they perform. (People attribute success as due to their own efforts. While failure is the fault of the governments policies.) But this does somewhat depend on the LDs being visible. Being led by a droning geriatric does not help the LD cause. They need to find their David Steel, Paddy Ashdown or Charles Kennedy.

    I agree the last point - if Brexit has obvious negative outcomes, the LDs are well placed to benefit, whereas Labour's strategy appears predicated on Brexit turning out not too bad.

    But I don't agree your theory. The LibDems didn't do well under Blair on the back of masses of anti-Iraq left-leaning voters (outside a few heavily Muslim areas like Bradford). Their extra support came mostly from moderate centre-right voters who knew Blair would win anyway (and didn't fear him that much) and despaired at the state of the Tory Party (decay under Major, battyness under Hague/IDS/Howard thru insipid early Cameron).
    Assuming Brexit is net short-term positive for the economy (which is far from a certainty), there will still be Brexit losers.

    But I agree that it was because people were not afraid of Tony Blair, that they felt they could vote LibDem.
    Plus centre-left voters in the south were much more relaxed about voting tactically to unseat the local Tory when a Labour government appeared already nailed on nationally.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 20,148
    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,411
    There was the most disturbing news yesterday from the Caol and Mallig on Highland by-election, as detailed on PB in the most excruciating detail, as the LibDems (Hanovarian Back To Basics Candidate) duped the populace with promises full sugar Iron Bru and deep fried Mars bars for all.

    LibDems Winning Up North .....Talking Balls And Tampering With The Voters Up North.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,310
    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    TM has shown a willingness to do some frankly quite unconservative things in her time in office. Similarly Corbyn is obviously content to tear up a bunch of new Labour orthodoxies.
    I'm not sure either have answers - but both are searching.

    By contrast - I'm not clear what new ideas the Lib Dems have.
    A quick look on their website reveals plenty of sensible sounding proposals - but it's all a bit meh. Kitemarks for employers, reviews into generational unfairness, more transparency on pay reporting...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594

    Mr. Sandpit, Red Bull may well try that. Their straight line speed may be poor.

    I do wonder if Grosjean for a podium might be worth a look. Have to be long, but could happen.

    The RBS may well go for the long one stop, to keep track position. The two stop relies on being able to quickly clear slower cars in front of you.

    Grosjean could well qualify well, but for a podium he’d have to beat a Ferrari or Bottas. Can’t see that, so 20/1 or thereabouts?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008
    edited April 7

    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
    Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. Sandpit, I was thinking of a little longer. (hoping for 51 or thereabouts).

    The Red Bulls need, one way or the other, clear air. I think, upon further consideration, it depends whether they're bottled up. If they are, they need to pit into a gap and pump in fast times. If they're in free air but slower (ie probably behind a Ferrari) then one stop could well make more sense.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,575
    JackW said:

    There was the most disturbing news yesterday from the Caol and Mallig on Highland by-election, as detailed on PB in the most excruciating detail, as the LibDems (Hanovarian Back To Basics Candidate) duped the populace with promises full sugar Iron Bru and deep fried Mars bars for all.

    LibDems Winning Up North .....Talking Balls And Tampering With The Voters Up North.

    Mark Senior is missed voice on PB. He stood up for the LD's
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 10,008
    edited April 7
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
    Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
    p.s. And because their happiness at Brexit has blinded many of them to the causes of Brexit, which for many people had little to do with the EU. And for which Brexit is likely to prove a most ineffective remedy.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 933
    It probably doesn't help that some senior figures in the centre and the media with them have insulted and mocked those to the left and the right of them.

    Closet racists, far left, loonies, trots, fruitcakes, cultists.

    A large portion of them have been lecturing from up on high and looking down on those that haven't fallen in line.

    Let us assume for a second that those referred to as moderates in both parties and their supporters in the media are actually right and the direction both parties have taken is wrong. Why the hell would anyone, who wasn't already on board, want to listen to these people?

    There have been plenty of valid complaints along the way but, speaking at least for myself on the left, there have just been personal attacks that have done anything but endear me to those giving them out. I'm not sure if the feeling is replicated on the right but I get the feeling it is to an extent.

    It'd probably be easier for the Conservatives but I feel within Labour for the moment it would have to be from the left reaching across to the centre rather than the centre trying to appeal left.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,997
    Fab article, thanks David.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,819
    Not sure I agree with the premise. If you look at the US there was a time when Democrats and Republicans seemed almost interchangeable. Now they talk past each other in a conversation of the deaf. And any attempt to create a more centrist force has failed. Why should we not go the same way?

    I see our politics becoming ever more bipolar It’s not good but there are a series of forces pushing us that way. The extremes push potential leaders out to appeal to them and contempt for the other does likewise. The great British public may eventually call time on this but there is no sign of them doing so to date.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 111
    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting counterfactual: if David Penhaligon had not died in a car crash in 1986, he may have followed David Steel as leader. If so, the LibDems would have been a significantly more Eurosceptic party. How would history have played out then?

    I've knocked on thousands of doors for the LibDems over the years, mainly in the West Country. LibDem voters from these far-flung parts were much more inclined to see themselves as independent minded localists rather than particularly liberal (not that the EU with its fondness for dictating from the centre was liberal but..)

    Unsurprisingly Pre-Brexit a clear majority of them were eurosceptic. Actually the membership was pretty evenly split too. It was only the activists and the leadership who were euro-devotees.

    Those voters have since received the clearest possible two-fingered message that they are not welcome. It would be decades, if ever, before they return.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,889

    It probably doesn't help that some senior figures in the centre and the media with them have insulted and mocked those to the left and the right of them.

    Closet racists, far left, loonies, trots, fruitcakes, cultists.

    A large portion of them have been lecturing from up on high and looking down on those that haven't fallen in line.

    Let us assume for a second that those referred to as moderates in both parties and their supporters in the media are actually right and the direction both parties have taken is wrong. Why the hell would anyone, who wasn't already on board, want to listen to these people?

    There have been plenty of valid complaints along the way but, speaking at least for myself on the left, there have just been personal attacks that have done anything but endear me to those giving them out. I'm not sure if the feeling is replicated on the right but I get the feeling it is to an extent.

    It'd probably be easier for the Conservatives but I feel within Labour for the moment it would have to be from the left reaching across to the centre rather than the centre trying to appeal left.

    A further problem is that they are often very self-serving. The little people get global competition; they are in positions where there are no penalties for failure.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,932

    JackW said:

    There was the most disturbing news yesterday from the Caol and Mallig on Highland by-election, as detailed on PB in the most excruciating detail, as the LibDems (Hanovarian Back To Basics Candidate) duped the populace with promises full sugar Iron Bru and deep fried Mars bars for all.

    LibDems Winning Up North .....Talking Balls And Tampering With The Voters Up North.

    Mark Senior is missed voice on PB. He stood up for the LD's
    When / why did he leave?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 933
    edited April 7
    Sean_F said:

    It probably doesn't help that some senior figures in the centre and the media with them have insulted and mocked those to the left and the right of them.

    Closet racists, far left, loonies, trots, fruitcakes, cultists.

    A large portion of them have been lecturing from up on high and looking down on those that haven't fallen in line.

    Let us assume for a second that those referred to as moderates in both parties and their supporters in the media are actually right and the direction both parties have taken is wrong. Why the hell would anyone, who wasn't already on board, want to listen to these people?

    There have been plenty of valid complaints along the way but, speaking at least for myself on the left, there have just been personal attacks that have done anything but endear me to those giving them out. I'm not sure if the feeling is replicated on the right but I get the feeling it is to an extent.

    It'd probably be easier for the Conservatives but I feel within Labour for the moment it would have to be from the left reaching across to the centre rather than the centre trying to appeal left.

    A further problem is that they are often very self-serving. The little people get global competition; they are in positions where there are no penalties for failure.
    That is another part I was going to get onto, whilst there is no reason centrist politicians have to be like previous centrist politicians some of the names that come to mind for people seem to be George Osbourne, Tony Blair and then if they are really desperate David Miliband. For some there might be a sense of association between the idea and politicians they don't like (or rate)

    @FrancisUrquhart

    He passed away.

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/09/25/remembering-mark-senior-poster-on-pb-2004-2017/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,819
    JonWC said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting counterfactual: if David Penhaligon had not died in a car crash in 1986, he may have followed David Steel as leader. If so, the LibDems would have been a significantly more Eurosceptic party. How would history have played out then?

    I've knocked on thousands of doors for the LibDems over the years, mainly in the West Country. LibDem voters from these far-flung parts were much more inclined to see themselves as independent minded localists rather than particularly liberal (not that the EU with its fondness for dictating from the centre was liberal but..)

    Unsurprisingly Pre-Brexit a clear majority of them were eurosceptic. Actually the membership was pretty evenly split too. It was only the activists and the leadership who were euro-devotees.

    Those voters have since received the clearest possible two-fingered message that they are not welcome. It would be decades, if ever, before they return.
    I remember attending many conferences and meetings with the SDP. It also had a strong strand of Euro scepticism despite Roy’s leadership. This came out to a degree under David Owen but it was always there and the Liberals we dealt with were the same. EU enthusiasm was always a distinctly minority interest, normally of the elite who got to play on the EU stage and pretend that they were important.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217
    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217
    edited April 7

    Mr. Sandpit, I was thinking of a little longer. (hoping for 51 or thereabouts).

    The Red Bulls need, one way or the other, clear air. I think, upon further consideration, it depends whether they're bottled up. If they are, they need to pit into a gap and pump in fast times. If they're in free air but slower (ie probably behind a Ferrari) then one stop could well make more sense.

    Morning, Mr.D.
    Notable that all six Ferrari engines cars were in the top ten fastest through the speed trap. While that might change when Mercedes turn up the engine a bit for the race, it very much looks as though Ferrari are fully competitive in terms of power (though there are still questions about their fuel consumption).

    Might make Hamilton's life a bit difficult tomorrow.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594
    JonWC said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting counterfactual: if David Penhaligon had not died in a car crash in 1986, he may have followed David Steel as leader. If so, the LibDems would have been a significantly more Eurosceptic party. How would history have played out then?

    I've knocked on thousands of doors for the LibDems over the years, mainly in the West Country. LibDem voters from these far-flung parts were much more inclined to see themselves as independent minded localists rather than particularly liberal (not that the EU with its fondness for dictating from the centre was liberal but..)

    Unsurprisingly Pre-Brexit a clear majority of them were eurosceptic. Actually the membership was pretty evenly split too. It was only the activists and the leadership who were euro-devotees.

    Those voters have since received the clearest possible two-fingered message that they are not welcome. It would be decades, if ever, before they return.
    Interesting take, and goes some way to explaining the 7% in the polls.

    Hopefully the LDs will find their feet when Brexit is done, there are plenty of Conservatives (and probably more than a few Labourites too) who would be happy to vote LD in their seat, but if only they dropped the Pro-EU monomania.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,617

    JackW said:

    There was the most disturbing news yesterday from the Caol and Mallig on Highland by-election, as detailed on PB in the most excruciating detail, as the LibDems (Hanovarian Back To Basics Candidate) duped the populace with promises full sugar Iron Bru and deep fried Mars bars for all.

    LibDems Winning Up North .....Talking Balls And Tampering With The Voters Up North.

    Mark Senior is missed voice on PB. He stood up for the LD's
    When / why did he leave?
    He died last year.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217
    rkrkrk said:

    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    TM has shown a willingness to do some frankly quite unconservative things in her time in office. Similarly Corbyn is obviously content to tear up a bunch of new Labour orthodoxies.
    I'm not sure either have answers - but both are searching.

    By contrast - I'm not clear what new ideas the Lib Dems have.
    A quick look on their website reveals plenty of sensible sounding proposals - but it's all a bit meh. Kitemarks for employers, reviews into generational unfairness, more transparency on pay reporting...
    The ability of a leader to articulate a relatively simple, distinctive and compelling message should not be underestimated. I don't think invisible Great Uncle Vince is quite the man to do it.
    And consider how long it took a Macron to emerge in France while the parties of left and right consistently proved their inadequacies in government.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 15,174
    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 10,617
    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,576
    edited April 7

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 15,174
    edited April 7
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    How on earth would Osborne have got the membership to elect him? I suppose he could have engineered blocking all the other candidates, as per Gordon Brown. But otherwise he would have faced say Andrea Leadsome and she would have beaten him purely on the EU issue.
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 1,945
    I think the general population have retreated to their traditional positions of left and right and politics will be treading water until after Brexit is sorted. By that I mean the whatever deal is finally agreed and completed and passed through Parliament.

    After that, there will be a clearer view of what is going to happen in the future and normal politics can restart. I could imagine the LD's campaigning on rejoining the EU in full - Schengin, Euro membership etc and getting nowhere, the Labour party dumping the extreme left and moving to a more sensible left of centre position. This will strike a cord and they will probably win the subsequent election. The Tories will be tarred with the Brexit negotiating brush and will lose.

    I also think that power will switch between the Tories and Labour at each election until a coherent position is established that chimes with the electorate.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,067
    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Rafael Behr had a good sketch:

    In an interview last week, she declined to say it would be “worth it”. She has never repudiated her vote for remain and refuses to say how she would vote in a hypothetical rerun.

    A more devious politician would simply pretend to be more enthusiastic. But May is no actor. She is a devout Christian, a clergyman’s daughter, which helps explain, I think, her ability to sustain total devotion to a plan, regardless of its material impact on the country. She finds comfort in submission to duty on a plane above the grubby temporal realm of economics and trade. In that respect, May is in tune with the spirit of current politics.


    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/03/i-see-no-sign-that-this-politics-of-devotion-is-doing-us-any-good
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 15,174

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    Happy to be corrected on my use of terms, but not to be accused of being a Tory astroturfer.

    Never voted Tory in my life.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 28,932
    ydoethur said:

    JackW said:

    There was the most disturbing news yesterday from the Caol and Mallig on Highland by-election, as detailed on PB in the most excruciating detail, as the LibDems (Hanovarian Back To Basics Candidate) duped the populace with promises full sugar Iron Bru and deep fried Mars bars for all.

    LibDems Winning Up North .....Talking Balls And Tampering With The Voters Up North.

    Mark Senior is missed voice on PB. He stood up for the LD's
    When / why did he leave?
    He died last year.
    Thanks...not sure how I missed that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    It might be that Osborne simply did not have a thick enough skin to stay the course ?
    I remember his reaction to being booed at the London Olympics and wonder if he's a more sensitive soul than is generally thought ?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 15,174

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    and, anyway:

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,280

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 43,720
    Mr. B, aye. And if the Mercedes gearboxes are a bit fragile, that'd be a critical advantage for Ferrari over the course of a season.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    It might be that Osborne simply did not have a thick enough skin to stay the course ?
    I remember his reaction to being booed at the London Olympics and wonder if he's a more sensitive soul than is generally thought ?
    Yes, he’s the stereotypical bully who can’t take being on the receiving end of what he dishes out himself. He showed his true colours during the referendum campaign and has only doubled down on that behaviour since he left the cabinet.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    Does one have to be a Tory astroturfer to find antisemetism disturbing, and what is it about the synonym that you object to ?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,576

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,750
    Politics has now polarised between the Tories who are pushing through Brexit, thus rendering UKIP redundant and a left-wing Labour Party which thus renders the Greens redundant as the article suggests.

    The 7 or 8% or so the LDs are currently polling is not that different from the 10% of the country who are diehard Remainers. Until we have actually left the EU and the transition period has ended there therw will be little room for them to appeal to voters who may be losing out to Brexit economically rather than just have an ideological opposition to that. While hopes that the LDs might unite with Labour moderates are unlikely unless Corbyn is defeated at a general election but Corbynism keeps a grip on Labour
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,750
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    Osborne has a -60 rating eith Yougov to May's -39, I doubt he would have been the answer.

    https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/George_Osborne

    Neither May nor Corbyn are natural MPs, May is more a Deputy as you say while Corbyn is a more natural backbench rebel than leader
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,750
    IanB2 said:

    "As in the 1980s, the drift of the two larger parties to their respective outer wings should be an opportunity for them,

    The 1983 result, when the Alliance was brand new and Labour had actually physically split (not just nationally but locally) fuels the expectation, reflected by the above quote from the lead, that the centre party should do better when the main parties are politically far apart, and worse when they are close together.

    But the broader picture of electoral evidence points to the opposite.

    The centre party high water mark in much of the country (mostly the south) remains February 1974 Heath v Wilson, when in comparison with other elections the political differences between the parties weren't wide. They got squeezed a little in the second election of the same year, which focused voters on the choice of Tory/Labour. In 1979 Thatcher v Callahan, the Tories were swinging right and Labour beginning to be pulled left (allowing the Liberals to pitch "the real fight is for Britain") yet the centre party vote fell back considerably. In 2010 the policy differences Brown v Cameron weren't yawning; the LibDems did well, in 2017 May v Corbyn they were, and they didn't.

    1983 was genuinely exceptional. Generally, a clear choice between main party prospectuses squeezes the centre party(ies), rather than "opening up space". Similarly UKIP did well when all the parties were officially 'remain' and sank back now that the Tories are clearly on the Brexit side.

    May v Corbyn is not as polarised a choice as say Mogg/Boris v Corbyn.

    If that were the choice next time it would be the most polarised since Thatcher v Foot in 1983 and the LDs may be able to capitalise as the SDP did then
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 933
    Off topic I realise but Lord Sugar had an interesting night on Twitter!

    https://twitter.com/Lord_Sugar

    You may think he has gone mad but it is all part of a clever long term strategy following on from the host of the American version of his show.

    @rottenborough

    He says there is but provides no real reasoning for it if you read the article, he just makes the statement.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 20,280

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,981
    The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.

    But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.

    This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.



  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 6,217
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    It might be that Osborne simply did not have a thick enough skin to stay the course ?
    I remember his reaction to being booed at the London Olympics and wonder if he's a more sensitive soul than is generally thought ?
    Yes, he’s the stereotypical bully who can’t take being on the receiving end of what he dishes out himself. He showed his true colours during the referendum campaign and has only doubled down on that behaviour since he left the cabinet.
    I’m not entirely convinced by the idea of the editor of a local newspaper ‘bullying’ the prime minister, but it’s a view, I guess.
    Anyway, stuff to do. Got to go.

  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,550

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    I have proposed judophobe, as being more easily understood by the yoof and the hard of understanding, and following the usual formulation (as in islamophobe). Antisemitism, if you don't know what Semite means, could be an alternative to monetarism or something. Val Vaz's little hiccup indicates that there is a real problem here.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    Osborne has a -60 rating eith Yougov to May's -39, I doubt he would have been the answer.

    https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/George_Osborne

    Neither May nor Corbyn are natural MPs, May is more a Deputy as you say while Corbyn is a more natural backbench rebel than leader
    I think May and Corbyn are natural mps who are both excellent with their constituencies, surely you meant leaders
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
    The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.

    Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
  • Torby_FennelTorby_Fennel Posts: 292
    It's certainly true that over half of the active members (though not the overall membership) of my local Lib Dem branch (myself included) are people who have joined up since the EU referendum. As 2015 was the year that changed the make up of Labour then 2016 was the year that changed the make up of the Lib Dems.

    The big difference, of course, is that Labour has become a scarily unquestioning personality cult whereas the change in the Lib Dem membership has been rather more events driven. We newer members haven't fundamentally altered the character of the party as the issues we care about the most are the same ones that the pre-2016 members care about.

    I think it would also be fair to say that we newer Lib Dems are still finding our feet - but finding them we certainly are.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,750
    edited April 7

    The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.

    But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.

    This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.



    The Tories almost never field a full slate of candidates in all inner city areas just as Labour never field a full slate in all rural areas.

    The Tories currently have no councillors in Manchester or Barking for example and in Epping Forest where I am after nominations closed yesterday Labour have not put up candidates in a number of the villages only Epping and Loughton have a Labour candidate in every ward. There are no Labour councillors in Epping Forest currently
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 42,750

    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    A fine article, but I was struck by this: ...Tories being headed by an chief administrator rather than a leader..
    Clearly a missing adjective, probably starting with a vowel.
    Admirable; incompetent; honest; overpromoted... ?

    Theresa May is undoubtedly somebody who would make a more efficient Deputy than leader. She's a hard worker, intelligent, has an ability to master detail and doesn't go about stealing the limelight. At the same time she has little imagination and an inability to understand or relate to other people. In many ways, she is an abler and less unpleasant version of Gordon Brown.

    That being said - and this is what has kept her in office for the last year - it is far from obvious there is any alternative out there who would do better at this moment. Hammond is essentially similar to May. Boris is cracked. Rudd is a lightweight. Most of the others are too junior. Labour are a joke.

    Osborne was a fool to leave the Commons. He as PM with Hammond as Chancellor and Boris as Party Chairman would have been a truly formidable combination, and I say that as somebody who is no fan of Osborne. But he has, and there we are. I think she is safe for three years.
    Osborne has a -60 rating eith Yougov to May's -39, I doubt he would have been the answer.

    https://yougov.co.uk/opi/browse/George_Osborne

    Neither May nor Corbyn are natural MPs, May is more a Deputy as you say while Corbyn is a more natural backbench rebel than leader
    I think May and Corbyn are natural mps who are both excellent with their constituencies, surely you meant leaders
    Sorry I meant PMs not MPs
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,981

    It's certainly true that over half of the active members (though not the overall membership) of my local Lib Dem branch (myself included) are people who have joined up since the EU referendum. As 2015 was the year that changed the make up of Labour then 2016 was the year that changed the make up of the Lib Dems.

    The big difference, of course, is that Labour has become a scarily unquestioning personality cult whereas the change in the Lib Dem membership has been rather more events driven. We newer members haven't fundamentally altered the character of the party as the issues we care about the most are the same ones that the pre-2016 members care about.

    I think it would also be fair to say that we newer Lib Dems are still finding our feet - but finding them we certainly are.

    Good to hear it Torby. Democracy isn't something you have, it's something you do. Without party members putting in the hours it would all be a waste of time.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 5,237
    DavidL said:

    Not sure I agree with the premise. If you look at the US there was a time when Democrats and Republicans seemed almost interchangeable. Now they talk past each other in a conversation of the deaf. And any attempt to create a more centrist force has failed. Why should we not go the same way?

    I see our politics becoming ever more bipolar It’s not good but there are a series of forces pushing us that way. The extremes push potential leaders out to appeal to them and contempt for the other does likewise. The great British public may eventually call time on this but there is no sign of them doing so to date.

    There are structural reasons that will push the US more to a two-party state than the UK: primaries and [self]-gerrymandering.

    The loss of the PR elections for the European Parliament will make it harder for other parties to make progress against the duopoly though.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 933
    edited April 7

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
    The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.

    Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
    There is always talk of people leaving when certain leaders get elected, whilst some may not like his pro Palestinian views there is not going to be a huge exodus.

    Gotta go catch you all later.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 15,174
    Union leaders starting to notice what the Cult are doing to their movement?

  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 14,584

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
    The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.

    Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
    There is always talk of people leaving when certain leaders get elected, whilst some may not like his pro Palestinian views there is not going to be a huge exodus.

    Gotta go catch you all later.
    I don't think that is the point to be fair. This is in the context of the present issue with Corbyn and anti semitic views in parts of the labour party and real fear in the Jewish community
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 66,840
    YouGov Times poll

    Con 42 (-1)

    Lab 41 (+2)

    LD 7 (-1)

    Changes since last week.



    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/71448b70-39df-11e8-9a8f-0b0aae019371
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,997
    edited April 7

    It's certainly true that over half of the active members (though not the overall membership) of my local Lib Dem branch (myself included) are people who have joined up since the EU referendum. As 2015 was the year that changed the make up of Labour then 2016 was the year that changed the make up of the Lib Dems.

    The big difference, of course, is that Labour has become a scarily unquestioning personality cult whereas the change in the Lib Dem membership has been rather more events driven. We newer members haven't fundamentally altered the character of the party as the issues we care about the most are the same ones that the pre-2016 members care about.

    I think it would also be fair to say that we newer Lib Dems are still finding our feet - but finding them we certainly are.

    IMO The LD poll number is stuck below 10% whilst it is the party of Remain/Rejoin.

    And they have no hope in the Westcountry, traditionally source of many seats, whilst opposing the result of the referendum.

    Edit to add: I've spoken to thousands of LD voters over the years down here; not one ever mentioned the leader, nor national policy. Local policies drove LD support down here. And many of the activists as well as voters were firmly localist, not somewhat that tallies well with Europhilia.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,824
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    You have to stand for something, not just against something. No one in the centre is clear what they are standing for.

    take away Brexit and the Tories are also struggling. Indeed who anywhere has the answer as to what alternative(s) there might be to our disfunctional semi-oligarchic capitalism (other than unattractive tyranny)?
    I agree. All the Brexit headbangers who will enthusiastically agree with my first post will recoil in horror at the idea that Brexit has demolished traditional Conservatism. But it has.
    Absolutely. The Tory party has always existed to oppose radical change. And protect economic stability. They are astray from failing to recognise that Brexit will be a radical change, and will risk the economy - because of their strong desire to reverse a decision taken in history, and take a different path. But history doesn't work like that, and cutting across country to try and find that alternative path is far from easy.
    You mistake the purpose of the Conservative party. They do not exist to oppose radical change. They exist to act as a brake on the ambitions of politicians (not quite the same thing.

    Given the path the EU is (and needs to) take leaving is a profoundly conservative thing to do.

  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,481
    The most interesting thing about UKiP's atrophy is that it shiws their vote was all about the EU and immigration. Outside of these matters, there is no market for social conservatism in this country. The conservatives should take note when considering reactionaries like Mogg for their next leader.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,889

    The Tories' poll rating is pretty reasonable given how long they've been in power. The biggest obvious risks to them winning next time would be either a UKIP or a Lib Dem revival. Neither looks remotely likely.

    But I wonder if things are actually going wrong under the bonnet.

    This thread suggests they are struggling to actually field a full slate of candidates for the locals.



    As it happens, the Conservatives are fielding a full slate in London, for the first time in ages.

    Paul Goodman makes a good point that the danger for the Conservatives in London is not of losing everything (they won't) but rather getting hammered in boroughs like Redbridge, Ealing, and Enfield, where they were recently very competitive.
  • franklynfranklyn Posts: 123
    I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime.
    I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us.
    British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.

    We were most grateful for the labour MPs who came to lend their support, and also, and totally unreported in the press, at least two senior (non-Jewish) Conservative MPs.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 11,795

    YouGov Times poll

    Con 42 (-1)

    Lab 41 (+2)

    LD 7 (-1)

    Changes since last week.



    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/71448b70-39df-11e8-9a8f-0b0aae019371

    After all that caterwauling..
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 18,594

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
    ‘Tory astroturfers’ like Richard Angell. It’s open war within the party, and it seems quite forgivable to be racist so long as you support Jeremy and all he stands for.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,067

    YouGov Times poll

    Con 42 (-1)

    Lab 41 (+2)

    LD 7 (-1)

    Changes since last week.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/71448b70-39df-11e8-9a8f-0b0aae019371

    polling shows that Mr Corbyn’s personal ratings have dropped sharply. A YouGov poll of 1,662 people for The Times reveals that the proportion of those who say he is doing “badly” has jumped by 19 points since December 19-20 to 56 per cent, with the proportion who say he is doing “well” down 14 to 31 per cent.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,067
    What will a good muslim boy make of this?

    “QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.

    The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.


    https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21739990-reaction-queens-purported-muslim-extraction-has-been-varied-arab?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/muslimsconsiderqueenelizabethstiestotheprophetmuhammadisthecaliphaqueen

    Should make the Trump visit interesting......
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212
    franklyn said:

    I was present at the demonstration in Parliament Square two weeks ago called by Jewish groups to express their anxieties as to the perceived anti-Jewish feeling in elements of her Majesties loyal Opposition (and by definition potentially the next government). I m not a natural protester; I am a semi-retired 67 year old professional. The demonstration, called at less than 24 hours notice, brought some 2000 very atypical political protesters...predominantly mild aged, wearing suits and ties, and overwhelmingly feeling a level of anxiety at our position as loyal British Jews, of a type which none of has ever experienced in our lifetime.
    I can honestly say that in quite a high profile professional career, I have never experienced antisemitism. I have personal friends who are of all faiths and none, and of a whole variety of racial backgrounds. But what is perceived to be going on under Mr Corbyn's watch is quite frightening to us.
    British Jews have always been a tiny minority of the population, but have always tried to punch above their weight in British Society, in the professions, the arts, science, academia, philanthropy and their dearest collective wish is to be allowed to continue to contribute in our usual low-key, unobtrusive way.

    We were most grateful for the labour MPs who came to lend their support, and also, and totally unreported in the press, at least two senior (non-Jewish) Conservative MPs.

    Thank you. I for one hope that the Jewish community in Britain will continue to flourish, prosper and contribute and not be scared by those with malevolent views towards it.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,035

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    Happy to be corrected on my use of terms, but not to be accused of being a Tory astroturfer.

    Never voted Tory in my life.
    An insult too far for sure.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 29,067
    More Tory Astroturfers.....in the Guardian.....

    The depth of the split in the Labour party’s ruling body over antisemitism and racism has been laid bare in leaked minutes that show fierce disagreements over disciplinary action.

    Key supporters of Jeremy Corbyn attempted to block action against Labour members facing complaints, according to the minutes obtained by the Guardian.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/06/leaked-minutes-show-labour-at-odds-over-antisemitism-claims
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 14,178

    What will a good muslim boy make of this?

    “QUEEN ELIZABETH must claim her right to rule Muslims.” So ran a recent headline on the Arab Atheist Network, a web forum. It was only partly in jest. According to reports from Casablanca to Karachi, the British monarch is descended from the Prophet Muhammad, making her a cousin of the kings of Morocco and Jordan, not to mention of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader.

    The claim, first made many years ago, is gathering renewed interest in the Middle East. Why is not clear, but in March a Moroccan newspaper called Al-Ousboue traced the queen’s lineage back 43 generations.


    https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21739990-reaction-queens-purported-muslim-extraction-has-been-varied-arab?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/muslimsconsiderqueenelizabethstiestotheprophetmuhammadisthecaliphaqueen

    Should make the Trump visit interesting......

    The Queen - as anyone else - has more than 10 trillion 41-greats grandparents. Even allowing for royal intermarriage, it would be surprising if none of them was Mohammed.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 19,035

    Morning all,

    Not convinced that Labour will turn quickly. Reading the latest on NEC trying to block action against jew haters it seems to me it will take years, maybe even decades for the party to return to moderate control. And they haven't even started. Far from it.

    Is "jew haters" the new, officially approved term for use by Tory astroturfers after I wondered a couple of threads back if people generally understand what anti-semitism means?
    And as I replied, I doubt Corbyn understands what antisemitism means either. How else to explain the mess he and the party have got into over it?
    And after our discussion, a new term emerges. Coincidence?
    You are being a little silly. If Labour spent less time fretting about 'Tory astroturfers' (real and imagined), and more time on sorting itself out, then it would not be in this mess.

    But Corbyn evidently doesn't want to sort it out. After all, he's had plenty of opportunities.
    The European leader of the Jews has said today that if Corbyn became Prime Minister Jews would flee the UK.

    Can we really imagine that in todays multicultural society a leader of a community would express views not heard of since WW2
    G, that sounds like claptrap to me, he sounds much worse than the anti-semites to me. Hopefully he is at the head of any queue leaving. Sounds a bit like those thick pop stars that claim they will leave if taxes go up but never do.
This discussion has been closed.