politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With just about all the LE2018 results now in the clear winner

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With just about all the LE2018 results now in the clear winners were the LDs gaining most seats and councils

BBC News

Read the full story here

TheWhiteRabbit

Is it a landslide for the LDs? No.

Is it good news with almost now downsides? Yes.

Can other parties say that - definitely not.

HYUFD

The LDs are projected to be on 16% nationally, ten years ago they got 25% in the 2008 Local Elections.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2008

That today's results are seen as a relative triumph for the LDs shows how far they have fallen from their peak

Yorkcity

Why Barnsley Central ? Just heard Dan Jarvis on Look North say he is doing both jobs in much the same way a cabinet minister does.

dixiedean

HYUFD said:

The LDs are projected to be on 16% nationally, ten years ago they got 25% in the 2008 Local Elections.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2008

That today's results are seen as a relative triumph for the LDs shows how far they have fallen from their peak

Indeed. Though they have to start somewhere. It would be churlish not to acknowledge they are moving forwards. Tory Remain areas where they can squeeze the Labour vote. At least they now know where to prioritise.

MaxPB

I think where the Lib Dems struggle is turning bin collections into national vote share. This is a good result for them, but last year they achieved 18% NEV in May then got 7.5% in June. They need to start translating local success into national success.

ydoethur

Certainly they are the only ones who should be unambiguously happy with the results. The Tories didn't suffer a wipeout but this isn't a party reaching beyond its enlarged core. Labour are hardly even managing that.

The one fly in the ointment is if this persuades Cable - who looks old, staid and out of touch at a time when vigour, imagination and empathy are needed - to stay on. I hope he doesn't, that he says he has brought the party back from the brink and now it needs a fresh impetus, but for all his qualities he's never come across as self aware.

flubadub

Mike Smithson in 'Lib Dems did well' shock

flubadub

Mike Smithson in 'Lib Dems did well' shock

JackW

Yorkcity said:

Why Barnsley Central ? Just heard Dan Jarvis on Look North say he is doing both jobs in much the same way a cabinet minister does.

As the Mayoralty is presently a blank canvas it's probably a cabinet minister without portfolio.

another_richard

Yorkcity said:

Why Barnsley Central ? Just heard Dan Jarvis on Look North say he is doing both jobs in much the same way a cabinet minister does.

That should be easy for a man who gave a London address on his election nomination statement.

ydoethur

MaxPB said:

I think where the Lib Dems struggle is turning bin collections into national vote share. This is a good result for them, but last year they achieved 18% NEV in May then got 7.5% in June. They need to start translating local success into national success.

I think that will come with time if they show they are still a viable national party. And locals are a good way of doing that.

One way they skilfully prospered in the Blair years was by posing as the one truly national party. So they were the non-toxic, non-establishment Unionists in Scotland and Wales, the party of the soft right to keep Labour honest in the north and the party of the soft left to challenge the Tories in the south.

Now the divide is metropolitan vs the rest and as these elections show (even if less starkly than expected) it is a pretty formidable divide. So they could easily pose as the real, sensible, Remainer alternative with some centrist social democratic views in the big conurbations, while showing as the non-batshit-crazy alternative to the Tories elsewhere.

Of course, such balancing only works in opposition. It was more buggered than a reluctant Turkish conscript the moment they entered government and had to make actual choices (and for all their qualities, they made some poor ones, especially on tuition fees). Yet for fifteen years it worked superbly and previously for 25 years it had worked effectively enough to keep them alive. There is no reason why it couldn't work again.

RobD

flubadub said:

Mike Smithson in 'Lib Dems did well' shock

They did so better than all the rest. After so many years you can’t blame him for celebrating a bit!

Yorkcity

JackW said:

Yorkcity said:

Why Barnsley Central ? Just heard Dan Jarvis on Look North say he is doing both jobs in much the same way a cabinet minister does.

As the Mayoralty is presently a blank canvas it's probably a cabinet minister without portfolio.

Very true , they should get their act together and have a Yorkshire mayor.

Can not see that , but they should be able to get South Yorkshire to work.

Roger

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

another_richard

MaxPB said:

I think where the Lib Dems struggle is turning bin collections into national vote share. This is a good result for them, but last year they achieved 18% NEV in May then got 7.5% in June. They need to start translating local success into national success.

The LibDems have disappeared from large parts of the country.

As an example in NE Lincolnshire they won seven wards in 2006:

http://www.andrewteale.me.uk/leap/results/2006/112/

this year they had a total of three candidates:

https://www.nelincs.gov.uk/councillors-and-democracy/elections-and-electoral-registration/election-results/local-elections-3rd-may-2018/

ydoethur

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

I think she views Boris as Lyndon Johnson viewed Edgar Hoover - she knows he's useless, lazy, dishonest and incompetent but she'd rather have him inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in.

SandyRentool

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

JackW

RobD said:

flubadub said:

Mike Smithson in 'Lib Dems did well' shock

They did so better than all the rest. After so many years you can’t blame him for celebrating a bit!

If you'd have managed a positive Burnley FC comment in that post I think OGH would have recommended you be placed on his next honey trap visit to the Russian embassy !!

RoyalBlue

Clear winners? No. Better than flatlining? Yes.

The Lib Dems can clearly claim South-West London as a stronghold. It in no way compensates for their losses in the South West or parts of Scotland in recent years.

MaxPB

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

Because if she sacks him she will immediately face a leadership election. He has the backing of the ERG.

RobD

JackW said:

RobD said:

flubadub said:

Mike Smithson in 'Lib Dems did well' shock

They did so better than all the rest. After so many years you can’t blame him for celebrating a bit!

If you'd have managed a positive Burnley FC comment in that post I think OGH would have recommended you be placed on his next honey trap visit to the Russian embassy !!

Drat. Must try better.

Yorkcity

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

I think she views Boris as Lyndon Johnson viewed Edgar Hoover - she knows he's useless, lazy, dishonest and incompetent but she'd rather have him inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in.

Nice way to describe our next PM.

JackW

SandyRentool said:

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

Snookered himself there ....

MikeSmithson

https://twitter.com/MSmithsonPB/status/992469451198095360

Roger

MaxPB said:

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

Because if she sacks him she will immediately face a leadership election. He has the backing of the ERG.

ERG?

SandyRentool

In Harrogate the LibDems lost 5 seats to the Tories, leaving them with 7.

Not wall to wall success for the Yellows.

Torby_Fennel

HYUFD said:

The LDs are projected to be on 16% nationally, ten years ago they got 25% in the 2008 Local Elections.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2008

That today's results are seen as a relative triumph for the LDs shows how far they have fallen from their peak

You're a strange one for sure. Keep it up though... you make me laugh.

SouthamObserver

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

ydoethur

Yorkcity said:

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

I think she views Boris as Lyndon Johnson viewed Edgar Hoover - she knows he's useless, lazy, dishonest and incompetent but she'd rather have him inside pissing out than on the outside pissing in.

Nice way to describe our next PM.

While things are desperate, I don't think they're so desperate that we're going to turn to Hoover!

SandyRentool

Oh, and the LibDems didn't field a single candidate in Craven.

MaxPB

Roger said:

MaxPB said:

Roger said:

According to Ch4 News 'Boris tried to call a vote at last weeks cabinet about the customs union which Mrs May would have lost and just two days after losing her Home Secretary it would have been a humiliation'.

It is completely baffling why she doesn't sack him. Having a psychopathic back-stabber in her cabinet must be debilitating.

Because if she sacks him she will immediately face a leadership election. He has the backing of the ERG.

ERG?

European Research Group. It has about 75 MPs on it, more than enough to trigger a leadership election that will fatally wound May.

Yorkcity

SandyRentool said:

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

What was the defence ?

another_richard

SandyRentool said:

Oh, and the LibDems didn't field a single candidate in Craven.

Deary me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claire_Brooks will be turning in her grave.

JackW

Report Cards For Elections :

Con C- .. Lab C- .. LibDem B- .. Green C .. UKIP F

SandyRentool

Yorkcity said:

SandyRentool said:

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

What was the defence ?

She's been on an awareness course, so everything is fine. But Jo hadn't actually read what she'd posted before he defended her.

Richard_Nabavi

SouthamObserver said:

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

It's extraordinary because it's wrong, and extrapolating a first-time pilot to a GE is brave.

Richard_Nabavi

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

kle4

Yorkcity said:

SandyRentool said:

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

What was the defence ?

I'm going to guess it is something like 'Time served, repentance, sensitivity training' etc. The timing, however, makes it clear what the reason for reinstatement was about.

another_richard

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

kle4

'Wapping majorities'?

another_richard

SandyRentool said:

Yorkcity said:

SandyRentool said:

Jo Johnson on Ch4 defending the reinstatement of the racist.

What was the defence ?

She's been on an awareness course, so everything is fine. But Jo hadn't actually read what she'd posted before he defended her.

There must be easy money to be made in awareness courses for politicians.

Richard_Nabavi

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

kle4

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

They need to secure some territory, any territory, before they can worry about breaking out wider again.

Though that is a problem for them. Plenty of areas they cannot play the 'only the LDs can beat X here' card, as they have been supplanted.

SouthamObserver

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

It's extraordinary because it's wrong, and extrapolating a first-time pilot to a GE is brave.

1.67% of 30 million is 500,000+. Voter ID needs a lot more work.

MaxPB

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

Off topic, I bought a pretty massive position in IAG after the Brexit kerfuffle a couple of years ago. I actually forgot about it until now because the results came out this morning and they are primed to buy Norwegian. I'm sitting on a pretty huge gain, does anyone know the implications of selling the stake whilst I'm still resident in Switzerland? I don't mind paying any UK CGT due, but I don't know if I'd be liable.

Where are you tax resident? If it's Switzerland then you will need to pay CGT there.

Yes Switzerland, but I'll be back in the UK before the end of the year. The CGT rate here is the same as income tax which is much lower than the 28% I'd end up paying in the UK.

I just don't want to be liable for the rest on entry to the UK.

SouthamObserver

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

JackW

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

It's extraordinary because it's wrong, and extrapolating a first-time pilot to a GE is brave.

1.67% of 30 million is 500,000+. Voter ID needs a lot more work.

Voter ID and the Home Office - What could possibly go wrong ?!

MaxPB

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Labour ones too by the looks of things in Harringey.

another_richard

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

But there's a danger of reinforcing their own perspectives and prejudices.

SW London is rather niche.

Danny565

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

SouthamObserver

MaxPB said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Labour ones too by the looks of things in Harringey.

My guess is that Haringey was more a Momentum issue.

Richard_Nabavi

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

It's extraordinary because it's wrong, and extrapolating a first-time pilot to a GE is brave.

1.67% of 30 million is 500,000+. Voter ID needs a lot more work.

The 1.67% figure is not substantiated, is based on a tiny sample, and we know for certain it's wrong because it didn't take account of people coming back later.

But, even if it's roughly right, that's not bad for a first-time trial of something completely new.

Incidentally, they also observed one case of possible personation, or at least confusion

https://democracyvolunteers.org/2018/05/03/special-report-voter-id-pilots-in-english-local-elections-03-05-18/

kle4

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

another_richard

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

They need to secure some territory, any territory, before they can worry about breaking out wider again.

Though that is a problem for them. Plenty of areas they cannot play the 'only the LDs can beat X here' card, as they have been supplanted.

Not bothering to put up candidates in whole districts gives the impression that you're not interested in large parts of the country.

With UKIP disintegrating the LibDems had an opportunity to get the NOTA vote.

MaxPB

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

But there's a danger of reinforcing their own perspectives and prejudices.

SW London is rather niche.

There is definitely some mileage for them in targeting the 55%+ remain areas. I think they will do well even if they are starting from a low base. They could probably get back to 30-35 seats in 2022 by doing that, assuming Jez continues to pursue Brexit as he is now.

initforthemoney

kle4 said:

'Wapping majorities'?

didn't do the printers any good

SandyRentool

Meanwhile, Mackem Tories reinstate a winning candidate who described Diane Abbott as a "filthy, bulbous pig".


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-44004241

JackW

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

OGH didn't write or imply "massive triumph".

SouthamObserver

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

But there's a danger of reinforcing their own perspectives and prejudices.

SW London is rather niche.

Haven’t they done well in South Cambridge, too?

JosiasJessop

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

I live in South Cambs. We had several things from the Conservatives (and a door-knock), one leaflet from Labour, and nothing from Labour. Though it seems my own ward elected two Conservatives and one Labour (with the third Conservative being one vote behind)

Gardenwalker

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

MaxPB

SandyRentool said:

Meanwhile, Mackem Tories reinstate a winning candidate who described Diane Abbott as a "filthy, bulbous pig".


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-44004241

Insulting, but tbh I'm not as bothered by this one as the other one. This one isn't racist, he's just a regular dick head, they need representation in government too...

JackW

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SouthamObserver said:

So 1.67% of those who tried to vote in the trial areas were not able to do so because they did not have the ID required. Extrapolate that to a general election and you are looking at around 500,000 people being denied the right to cast a ballot. That is an extraordinary number.

It's extraordinary because it's wrong, and extrapolating a first-time pilot to a GE is brave.

1.67% of 30 million is 500,000+. Voter ID needs a lot more work.

The 1.67% figure is not substantiated, is based on a tiny sample, and we know for certain it's wrong because it didn't take account of people coming back later.

But, even if it's roughly right, that's not bad for a first-time trial of something completely new.

Incidentally, they also observed one case of possible personation, or at least confusion

https://democracyvolunteers.org/2018/05/03/special-report-voter-id-pilots-in-english-local-elections-03-05-18/

As a trial I find the government guilty of a total and complete waste of time, effort and money. Send the prisoner down ....

MaxPB

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Sack her and make sure to have her deported. That is unforgivable.

another_richard

MaxPB said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Labour ones too by the looks of things in Harringey.

They don't seem to have made much progress in Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith, Lambeth, Islington, Lewisham, Southwark and Waltham Forrest.

JackW

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Nanny knows best.

SouthamObserver

Sky has just updated its projection.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/992476749467406336?s=21

Danny565

kle4 said:

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

It's not particularly progress even compared to the recent past. 16% is less than the 18% they got last year in the local elections, and up a bit from 13% that they got when these seats were last contested in 2014.

I guess the definition of "triumph" depends on what your expectations were. If one was expecting the Lib Dems to fold completely, then I suppose these results are a "triumph" - they 're clearly going to have some presence in local councils, and probably at Westminster, for years to come. But in terms of recovering to their strength of the pre-Coalition years (let alone challenging either of the Big Two, which was their big goal not so long ago), I see very little in this set of results that indicates that.

Gardenwalker

MaxPB said:

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Sack her and make sure to have her deported. That is unforgivable.

Heh. I would but she’s Northern Irish.
Guess I have to wait for the final customs union solution to play out.

MaxPB

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Labour ones too by the looks of things in Harringey.

They don't seem to have made much progress in Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith, Lambeth, Islington, Lewisham, Southwark and Waltham Forrest.

Look at the specific wards where they made gains in Haringey and it looks like the same gains they made vs the Tories in SW London. Affluent, remain voting areas. Those that you mention have a much higher level of social housing than the likes of Muswell Hill and Crouch End where the Lib Dems did well.

The issue is that Labour have such a huge lead wherever there is social housing that it is almost impossible to unseat them without some kind of right to buy scheme (which explains Dave's/George's plan for housing association RTB).

another_richard

MaxPB said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

But there's a danger of reinforcing their own perspectives and prejudices.

SW London is rather niche.

There is definitely some mileage for them in targeting the 55%+ remain areas. I think they will do well even if they are starting from a low base. They could probably get back to 30-35 seats in 2022 by doing that, assuming Jez continues to pursue Brexit as he is now.

They'd need to make hefty gains from Labour to do that.

And while Corbyn's promising the goodies on student debt and housing what can the LibDems offer which is better ?

AndreaParma_82

4 wards declared so far in Tower Hamlets

http://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=43&V=1&RPID=12803558

The night is still young...

not_on_fire

RoyalBlue said:

Clear winners? No. Better than flatlining? Yes.

The Lib Dems can clearly claim South-West London as a stronghold. It in no way compensates for their losses in the South West or parts of Scotland in recent years.

To be fair they made a decent comeback in Scotland at the last GE, winning back 3 seats and missing out on a 4th by 2 votes

Danny565

SouthamObserver said:

Sky has just updated its projection.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/992476749467406336?s=21

Hmm, I suspect the Tories might have a tiny (1%?) lead in the Projected Vote when Rallings & Thrasher publish in a couple of days.

FrancisUrquhart

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Or more former strong Lib Dem areas....causation vs correlation...

initforthemoney

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Take back control.

Alistair

SandyRentool said:

Oh, and the LibDems didn't field a single candidate in Craven.

That's absolutely craven.

JosiasJessop

JosiasJessop said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

I live in South Cambs. We had several things from the Conservatives (and a door-knock), one leaflet from Labour, and nothing from Labour. Though it seems my own ward elected two Conservatives and one Labour (with the third Conservative being one vote behind)

That should have been 'nothing from the Lib Dems'. I blame having done a 23-mile walk and having eaten a pizza. I'll leave PBers to guess the topping ...

SquareRoot

Anyone know how accurate the you gov . London poll was wrt the actual votes????

The_Apocalypse

kle4 said:

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

Agreed.

ydoethur

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Make her watch The Last Jedi 155 times playing a tape saying 'Laura Dern's acting is the Hawaiian pizza of cinema' so she understands the enormity of her offence.

SandyRentool

SouthamObserver said:

Sky has just updated its projection.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/992476749467406336?s=21

Progressive Alliance; Jezza in Number 10.

FrancisUrquhart

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Make her watch The Last Jedi 155 times playing a tape saying 'Laura Dern's acting is the Hawaiian pizza of cinema' so she understands the enormity of her offence.

I wouldn't wish a forced viewing of the Last Jedi on my worst enemy....

another_richard

SouthamObserver said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

But there's a danger of reinforcing their own perspectives and prejudices.

SW London is rather niche.

Haven’t they done well in South Cambridge, too?

They have, as they have done in the past, but being the Cambridge commuter belt its not that dissimilar to SW London.

MaxPB

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Make her watch The Last Jedi 155 times playing a tape saying 'Laura Dern's acting is the Hawaiian pizza of cinema' so she understands the enormity of her offence.

A cruel and unual punishment. Though deserved for that level of offence.

RobD

AndreaParma_82 said:

4 wards declared so far in Tower Hamlets

http://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=43&V=1&RPID=12803558

The night is still young...

Wow they are counting fast, polls don't close for another 2 hours!

another_richard

MaxPB said:

another_richard said:

MaxPB said:

SouthamObserver said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Tory Remain areas. You have to start somewhere.

Labour ones too by the looks of things in Harringey.

They don't seem to have made much progress in Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith, Lambeth, Islington, Lewisham, Southwark and Waltham Forrest.

Look at the specific wards where they made gains in Haringey and it looks like the same gains they made vs the Tories in SW London. Affluent, remain voting areas. Those that you mention have a much higher level of social housing than the likes of Muswell Hill and Crouch End where the Lib Dems did well.

The issue is that Labour have such a huge lead wherever there is social housing that it is almost impossible to unseat them without some kind of right to buy scheme (which explains Dave's/George's plan for housing association RTB).

The LibDems have often done well in middle class wards which are in districts permanently dominated by Labour.

ydoethur

MaxPB said:

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Make her watch The Last Jedi 155 times playing a tape saying 'Laura Dern's acting is the Hawaiian pizza of cinema' so she understands the enormity of her offence.

A cruel and unual punishment. Though deserved for that level of offence.

It was Bob Hope who said that if the police ever caught John Dillinger, they would make him watch Hope's underwhelming debut in Going Spanish twice.

RobD

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2018/05/04/0505-MATT-GALLERY-WEB-P1_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.png?imwidth=1240

titters

PClipp

Danny565 said:

kle4 said:

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

It's not particularly progress even compared to the recent past. 16% is less than the 18% they got last year in the local elections, and up a bit from 13% that they got when these seats were last contested in 2014.

I guess the definition of "triumph" depends on what your expectations were. If one was expecting the Lib Dems to fold completely, then I suppose these results are a "triumph" - they 're clearly going to have some presence in local councils, and probably at Westminster, for years to come. But in terms of recovering to their strength of the pre-Coalition years (let alone challenging either of the Big Two, which was their big goal not so long ago), I see very little in this set of results that indicates that.

Patience, Danny. It`s like a plane taking off... you know.... slow at first, and then.... whoom!

Verulamius

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

Off topic, I bought a pretty massive position in IAG after the Brexit kerfuffle a couple of years ago. I actually forgot about it until now because the results came out this morning and they are primed to buy Norwegian. I'm sitting on a pretty huge gain, does anyone know the implications of selling the stake whilst I'm still resident in Switzerland? I don't mind paying any UK CGT due, but I don't know if I'd be liable.

Where are you tax resident? If it's Switzerland then you will need to pay CGT there.

Yes Switzerland, but I'll be back in the UK before the end of the year. The CGT rate here is the same as income tax which is much lower than the 28% I'd end up paying in the UK.

I just don't want to be liable for the rest on entry to the UK.

20%. 28% only for carried interest gains, residential property gains.

JackW

RobD said:

AndreaParma_82 said:

4 wards declared so far in Tower Hamlets

http://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=43&V=1&RPID=12803558

The night is still young...

Wow they are counting fast, polls don't close for another 2 hours!

They're counting the 2014 elections.

Gardenwalker

The Lib Dems (3) have been eliminated from Hackney Council. It’s a bit sad that in liberal Islington and Hackney, not a Lib Dem is now to be found.

I am envious of the good burghers of Crouch End.

Can we have PR for local elections please?

MaxPB

Verulamius said:

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

Off topic, I bought a pretty massive position in IAG after the Brexit kerfuffle a couple of years ago. I actually forgot about it until now because the results came out this morning and they are primed to buy Norwegian. I'm sitting on a pretty huge gain, does anyone know the implications of selling the stake whilst I'm still resident in Switzerland? I don't mind paying any UK CGT due, but I don't know if I'd be liable.

Where are you tax resident? If it's Switzerland then you will need to pay CGT there.

Yes Switzerland, but I'll be back in the UK before the end of the year. The CGT rate here is the same as income tax which is much lower than the 28% I'd end up paying in the UK.

I just don't want to be liable for the rest on entry to the UK.

20%. 28% only for carried interest gains, residential property gains.

I have no idea what that means.

JackW

PClipp said:

Danny565 said:

kle4 said:

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

It's not particularly progress even compared to the recent past. 16% is less than the 18% they got last year in the local elections, and up a bit from 13% that they got when these seats were last contested in 2014.

I guess the definition of "triumph" depends on what your expectations were. If one was expecting the Lib Dems to fold completely, then I suppose these results are a "triumph" - they 're clearly going to have some presence in local councils, and probably at Westminster, for years to come. But in terms of recovering to their strength of the pre-Coalition years (let alone challenging either of the Big Two, which was their big goal not so long ago), I see very little in this set of results that indicates that.

Patience, Danny. It`s like a plane taking off... you know.... slow at first, and then.... whoom!

Whoom! Bang! Crash! ?????

Verulamius

MaxPB said:

Verulamius said:

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

MaxPB said:

Off topic, I bought a pretty massive position in IAG after the Brexit kerfuffle a couple of years ago. I actually forgot about it until now because the results came out this morning and they are primed to buy Norwegian. I'm sitting on a pretty huge gain, does anyone know the implications of selling the stake whilst I'm still resident in Switzerland? I don't mind paying any UK CGT due, but I don't know if I'd be liable.

Where are you tax resident? If it's Switzerland then you will need to pay CGT there.

Yes Switzerland, but I'll be back in the UK before the end of the year. The CGT rate here is the same as income tax which is much lower than the 28% I'd end up paying in the UK.

I just don't want to be liable for the rest on entry to the UK.

20%. 28% only for carried interest gains, residential property gains.

I have no idea what that means.

The normal rate of cgt for higher rate taxpayers is 20%. For gains arising from disposals of residential property (eg second homes) the rate is 28%. Similarly the rate of tax on carried interest for private equity managers is also 28%.

ydoethur

Gardenwalker said:

The Lib Dems (3) have been eliminated from Hackney Council. It’s a bit sad that in liberal Islington and Hackney, not a Lib Dem is now to be found.

I am envious of the good burghers of Crouch End.

Can we have PR for local elections please?

While it would be an excellent reform, I think politicians are too scared it would lead to PR at Westminster as well.

saddo

ydoethur said:

Gardenwalker said:

Middle class alert.

I have just opened the fridge and discovered a half-eaten Hawaiian pizza.
I believe the nanny must have left it there and presume it was fed to my 3 year old for lunch.

Thoughts?

Make her watch The Last Jedi 155 times playing a tape saying 'Laura Dern's acting is the Hawaiian pizza of cinema' so she understands the enormity of her offence.

Obviously you have to immediately scrap the fridge after the serious pineapple on pizza infestation.

Make her pay for the new one

not_on_fire

Richard_Nabavi said:

another_richard said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

What strikes me most about the LibDems' good showing is that it was very concentrated in a small number of winnable contests. That suggests good targeting.

Or a retreat into their comfort zone and abandonment of much of the country.

That's another way of describing it! But resources are finite, and they've got to start somewhere.

Indeed - they have correctly spent the last couple of elections addressing the risk of being wiped out entirely. There’s a good chance they will continue to recover - memories of the coalition are beginning to fade. Thanks to Brexit it feels like a bygone era.

not_on_fire

JackW said:

PClipp said:

Danny565 said:

kle4 said:

Danny565 said:

LOL at Mr Smithson trying to present 16% as a massive triumph.

I remember when the consensus was that Clegg had flopped in his first set of local elections with 'only' 25%.

Because we can only judge a current situation in reference to the past, not the present. It's clearly progress. Can it be sustained? Can it be taken further so they are closer to where they have been in the past? Unclear, and I don't think their chances are high, but progress is still progress.

It's not particularly progress even compared to the recent past. 16% is less than the 18% they got last year in the local elections, and up a bit from 13% that they got when these seats were last contested in 2014.

I guess the definition of "triumph" depends on what your expectations were. If one was expecting the Lib Dems to fold completely, then I suppose these results are a "triumph" - they 're clearly going to have some presence in local councils, and probably at Westminster, for years to come. But in terms of recovering to their strength of the pre-Coalition years (let alone challenging either of the Big Two, which was their big goal not so long ago), I see very little in this set of results that indicates that.

Patience, Danny. It`s like a plane taking off... you know.... slow at first, and then.... whoom!

Whoom! Bang! Crash! ?????

And KABOOM