Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

The best thing about our system is that every single person in the country gets an equal vote under equal circumstances. Unless a National ID card scheme is introduced this will just alienate poorer voters. Just another way to rig the system.

Soul Requiem wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Again it's not difficult to understand. I am as it stands a Conservative voter, will never be voting Labour under the current leadership. That therefore means that until the Lib Dems have a  platform for a majority my vote will continue to go blue.

You didn't answer the question. Your total non-response just makes you look blinkered.

That is my answer, I'll stop voting Tory the moment the Lib Dems are a viable option. Am I supposed to care if you of all people think I'm blinkered?

Absolutely classic

This is what confuses me. People talk of loyalty to the conservative party when its quite plain to see that the bunch with the blue rosettes have nothing to do with the conservative party other than sharing a name and an election machine.

There has been a successful reverse take over by Ukip.

I don't get where the loyalty still comes from unless the person concerned either likes and buys in to what they are doing, or are completely blinkered.

To be fair and balanced a similar thing happened to Labour although they finally ditched Corbyn and are only slowly getting themselves together

lostinwales wrote:People talk of loyalty to the conservative party when its quite plain to see that the bunch with the blue rosettes have nothing to do with the conservative party other than sharing a name and an election machine.

What is the true Conservative Party then? It has always changed and been in a state of flux over the centuries.

Just in the last 60 or so years - Heath's Tories were a lot different from Thatcher's. Major was somewhat different to Thatcher. Cameron was v. different to the three unsuccessful leaders that preceded him. Now Johnson is in and that's different to Cameron's lot.

Which is the true iteration in your view?

Soul Requiem wrote:

Pr4wn wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Again it's not difficult to understand. I am as it stands a Conservative voter, will never be voting Labour under the current leadership. That therefore means that until the Lib Dems have a  platform for a majority my vote will continue to go blue.

You didn't answer the question. Your total non-response just makes you look blinkered.

That is my answer, I'll stop voting Tory the moment the Lib Dems are a viable option. Am I supposed to care if you of all people think I'm blinkered?

I did specify “other than a viable alternative”.

Why do people have loyalty to any party? don't you look at what each candidate is offering and vote for what you think is best?

Duty281 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:People talk of loyalty to the conservative party when its quite plain to see that the bunch with the blue rosettes have nothing to do with the conservative party other than sharing a name and an election machine.

What is the true Conservative Party then? It has always changed and been in a state of flux over the centuries.

Just in the last 60 or so years - Heath's Tories were a lot different from Thatcher's. Major was somewhat different to Thatcher. Cameron was v. different to the three unsuccessful leaders that preceded him. Now Johnson is in and that's different to Cameron's lot.

Which is the true iteration in your view?

That is a good point. Parties don't stand still, but you'd hope for a natural evolution. What has happened under Johnson is that the old heads have all been kicked out (the ones with functional brain cells anyway). What is left is very limited in ability, but has a few things going for it. The first is simplicity of message. There don't seem to be any dissenting voices (or none left) giving the illusion of certainty. Alongside that they seem to have no shortage of money and they still have a powerful election machine, although actual membership of the party has collapsed. Of course having friends in the right places doesn't do any harm.

As we know from Labour there is a very important message that membership does not equate to electoral success. However membership helps ground a party. No membership means nobody to ask awkward questions, hold the party leadership to account. Johnson hates scrutiny, and one way or another has ended up with power but little in the way of responsibility, at least until the next main elections come around.

The Northern Ireland Protocol is lawful, a High Court judge in Belfast has ruled.

A group of unionist politicians, including Arlene Foster and Lord Trimble, had challenged the protocol in judicial review proceedings.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the government would "study in detail" the High Court ruling, after being asked about it during Prime Minister's Questions.

DUP MP Ian Paisley asked if the government would "reverse the mistakes of the Northern Ireland Protocol, seize the moment, defend the union to unilaterally fix and put Northern Ireland out of its commercial, social and economic misery".

Mr Johnson said: "Nothing will affect the position of Northern Ireland as part of the UK - we will make sure we uphold that."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-57666255

He just can't stop, can he?

A thoroughly nasty and dismal by-election comes to an end today. Could be the end of Starmer, too.

Tories are 1/6 favourites to win Batley and Spen, with the one poll that has been conducted showing them in the lead (47-41) and Labour internally preparing for a defeat. But Labour's brilliant postal vote operation has saved them before, and it may just carry them over the line again. Galloway predicted to come 3rd with around 10% of the vote, most of that 10% from the Muslim community who would usually vote Labour. He is, of course, only running to try and get Starmer out. All the rest expected to lose their deposits.

Like many a good football manager, Starmer has pledged not to resign even if he loses tonight.

Labour hold, despite Galloways best efforts.

If you’d told me Galloway would get 20%, I’d have said there is no chance of Labour holding. It’s Hancock wot won it.

At least that absolute weapon Galloway failed

Galloway needs to disappear back into obscurity, shouting all the Love sacks he wants on his Russian TV slot.

Definitely the Hancock factor helped win this for Labour. Starmer needs to focus on the things Labour did right here and build on them for future by-elections, and in the meantime keep pressure on the Govt. whenever he can.

Samo wrote:Galloway needs to disappear back into obscurity, shouting all the Love sacks he wants on his Russian TV slot.

Definitely the Hancock factor helped win this for Labour. Starmer needs to focus on the things Labour did right here and build on them for future by-elections, and in the meantime keep pressure on the Govt. whenever he can.

Good quality candidates always help. They chose very well in this case.

I know Starmer isn't getting much traction (or whatever you want to call it) but it does seem that Labour, internally, are slowly getting their act together. In all honesty I would expect that under Corbyn they would have put up a far left candidate with no feeling for the community and then blamed the media when they inevitably failed.

At the same time the Conservative machine, so effective in recent years, is showing signs of faltering. I have not heard much if anything out of the losing candidate this time around but the guy who lost in Chesham and Amersham came across as far too arrogant.

It depends on what you define as faltering, they've eaten up another chunk of the majority in B&S, they'll be pretty confident of taking it at the next general election where local issues will play a smaller part.

Soul Requiem wrote:It depends on what you define as faltering, they've eaten up another chunk of the majority in B&S, they'll be pretty confident of taking it at the next general election where local issues will play a smaller part.

I don't entirely disagree, but Galloway will almost certainly not be there for that one, and that is 8000 votes which, if they go anywhere, are likely to go to Labour. I do appreciate that you have to balance that against where the 25-30K extra voters will go at that GE.

You could say that its not actually a satisfactory result for anyone, but best for Labour as they have overcome a significant gap in the polls in recent days.

My thoughts on the Conservative machine are more to do with Chesham and Amersham. It is not working as hard as it should. You have a leader who runs on BS and doesn't listen to the experts, and then you have a candidate who only felt he had to turn up to win. They don't listen and they overestimate Johnson's popularity.

I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case), but I'm struggling to think of another success they can point to. Once we're back to normal, or in the new post-covid normal, there's a lot of promises the party needs to keep, and no credible excuses if they don't, unless they're going to blame the EU for everything until the end of time.

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:It depends on what you define as faltering, they've eaten up another chunk of the majority in B&S, they'll be pretty confident of taking it at the next general election where local issues will play a smaller part.

I don't entirely disagree, but Galloway will almost certainly not be there for that one, and that is 8000 votes which, if they go anywhere, are likely to go to Labour. I do appreciate that you have to balance that against where the 25-30K extra voters will go at that GE.

You could say that its not actually a satisfactory result for anyone, but best for Labour as they have overcome a significant gap in the polls in recent days.

My thoughts on the Conservative machine are more to do with Chesham and Amersham. It is not working as hard as it should. You have a leader who runs on BS and doesn't listen to the experts, and then you have a candidate who only felt he had to turn up to win. They don't listen and they overestimate Johnson's popularity.

That's the main thing to take from it; Labour are struggling to maintain their vote and the loyalty they had in the north is evaporating quickly. On the other hand the Tories had this down as a banker two weeks ago and the idiocy of Matt Hancock has let them down.

I mentioned it before with regards to C&A, the Lib Dems if given a sniff at a by election are very very good mobilising their vote, locally they're more popular than they are nationally which helps in by elections. Hopefully it signals an upturn in fortunes for them, we all need them to get back to their 2010 popularity.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

GSC wrote:At least that absolute weapon Galloway failed

Don't often get unanimity on here, but this is a position I think we can all get behind.

Wow, that was a close result, to end a thoroughly nasty campaign. Can't agree with many of the posts on here, unfortunately!

1) The Hancock factor. I don't think it mattered one thrupenny bit. And, even if it did, it was probably balanced out by the news - coincidentally released on the day of the by-election, really amazing coincidence, huh? - that Nissan were expanding in Sunderland. Johnson not 'unlocking' the nation was probably a bigger factor.

2) Labour chose a good candidate - they didn't, at least not in terms of maximising their chance of winning the by-election. She may be a good candidate in her own right, though I doubt it and some of her comments have left a lot to be desired, but ultimately she is a non-Muslim woman in a same-sex relationship (I think) who supports LGBT rights. This ultimately didn't go down well with the conservative Muslim community, hence why Galloway picked up an astonishing number of votes (22%). If Labour had just picked a Muslim candidate they'd have romped home, because Galloway's vote would have been nullified.

3) The Tory election machine is showing signs of faltering -  no, it isn't. It's usual at by-elections for governing parties to get a kicking, then for those same governing parties to pick themselves up at GE time. Hartlepool massively exceeded normal expectation. This, too, has also done likewise, and the Tories will probably take this seat at the next GE (current polling would indicate so). Chesham was closer to normal. The Tories may be feeling disappointed this morning, but that's only because their expectations are mammoth. Their election machine is still smooth.

Anyway, it's relief, huge relief, for Starmer who now gets to crack on being LOTO. He'll be hoping no more problematic by-elections come up. Under three years before the next GE to build a solid election platform.

Finally I wonder how different the result would have been if the Greens had stood? Their candidate chose not to stand after historic homophobic tweets came to life. Had the Greens stood, maybe they'd have taken a few hundred off Labour and made it even tighter, or even got the Tories over the line...?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they deserve a lot of credit for the procurement. But health is devolved, so the actual rollout beyond England doesn't have much to do with them at all.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they do deserve a lot of credit for the procurement.

And the roll-out. Main problem for the Tories going forward will be dealing with the economic situation, especially the likely spike in inflation, but Labour are not exactly providing a meaningful challenge just yet.

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they do deserve a lot of credit for the procurement.

No not really. They did what had to be done. It wasn't some sort of heroic act.

As a kid, I used to live in the next constituency (and very close to the border between the two). Even though these were urban industrial Yorkshire constituencies with historic mills and mining that all closed prior to and during the Thatcher era, there was always a considerable Conservative vote - variously some elements of self sufficiency that aligned with Thatcher's economic position and (unfortunately) some of racism from the white population that found a happier home on the right than the left (other than sometimes the hard left).

Happy that Labour won, not because I'm hugely enamoured with them or Starmer in particular (who has struggled to break through in the time of COVID), but at least the voters seem to be holding Boris and the Conservatives to account for mis-handling the pandemic and for the associated sleaze and double standards, as recently exemplified by Hancock.

Duty281 wrote:Wow, that was a close result, to end a thoroughly nasty campaign. Can't agree with many of the posts on here, unfortunately!

1) The Hancock factor. I don't think it mattered one thrupenny bit. And, even if it did, it was probably balanced out by the news - coincidentally released on the day of the by-election, really amazing coincidence, huh? - that Nissan were expanding in Sunderland.

I'm very happy that that didn't swing the result. Maybe Johnson should have sent in some gunboats somewhere instead.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they do deserve a lot of credit for the procurement.

No not really. They did what had to be done. It wasn't some sort of heroic act.

They did get a move on with the vaccination program unlike a lot of countries, most of whom are still lagging behind now. I don't think anyone is giving the government any credit for the actual vaccine.

dummy_half wrote:Happy that Labour won, not because I'm hugely enamoured with them or Starmer in particular (who has struggled to break through in the time of COVID), but at least the voters seem to be holding Boris and the Conservatives to account for mis-handling the pandemic and for the associated sleaze and double standards, as recently exemplified by Hancock.

Not sure about that as the Tory vote only went down by a couple of %.

People in Batley wouldn't give a flying f$$$ about Nissan in Sunderland, which is about 100 miles and 2 hours away. Will have been far more impacted by COVID delta and the apparent unequal rules for travel to Pakistan compared with India a couple of months ago.

Soul Requiem wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they do deserve a lot of credit for the procurement.

No not really. They did what had to be done. It wasn't some sort of heroic act.

They did get a move on with the vaccination program unlike a lot of countries, most of whom are still lagging behind now. I don't think anyone is giving the government any credit for the actual vaccine.

Vaccination on its own has been good. I am not sure about other similar countries lagging behind as they have all picked up the pace - but there is a separate discussion about that.

What is very concerning is that our current infection rates are bigger than the rest of the EU put together.

Duty281 wrote:...
2) Labour chose a good candidate - they didn't, at least not in terms of maximising their chance of winning the by-election. She may be a good candidate in her own right, though I doubt it and some of her comments have left a lot to be desired, but ultimately she is a non-Muslim woman in a same-sex relationship (I think) who supports LGBT rights. This ultimately didn't go down well with the conservative Muslim community, hence why Galloway picked up an astonishing number of votes (22%). If Labour had just picked a Muslim candidate they'd have romped home, because Galloway's vote would have been nullified. ...

They played the Jo Cox angle for all its worth, and I don't think that did her or the campaign any harm at all, not least because of the publicity it earned her.

Yes she is in a same sex relationship.

What I had not twigged is that she is a political newbie, and was not even a long term Labour member.

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:I do think there are problems ahead for the Tories once the vaccines are finally all rolled out. It's been an undoubted success story (never mind that they kind of owed us it after their handling of the pandemic in 2020, and also that the credit for the rollout is not entirely theirs in any case),

Spot on - it has Jack to do with them. The plaudits for the vaccine goes totally to the vaccine researchers and developers nobody else but do not tell a Tory supporter that. It was not BoJo, Hancock or Gove who developed the vaccine.

Well they do deserve a lot of credit for the procurement.

No not really. They did what had to be done. It wasn't some sort of heroic act.

They did get a move on with the vaccination program unlike a lot of countries, most of whom are still lagging behind now. I don't think anyone is giving the government any credit for the actual vaccine.

Vaccination on its own has been good. I am not sure about other similar countries lagging behind as they have all picked up the pace - but there is a separate discussion about that.

What is very concerning is that our current infection rates are bigger than the rest of the EU put together.

I wonder to what extent that is cyclic in terms of locking down to reduce rates/going back up outside of one.

GSC wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Vaccination on its own has been good. I am not sure about other similar countries lagging behind as they have all picked up the pace - but there is a separate discussion about that.

What is very concerning is that our current infection rates are bigger than the rest of the EU put together.

I wonder to what extent that is cyclic in terms of locking down to reduce rates/going back up outside of one.

There is likely to be some element of this, but the main issue was that the delta variant got into the UK population relatively early and with multiple outbreaks, in part because of the failure of the Government to restrict travel to and from India (obviously a country where we have much closer links than most of the rest of Europe).

Well that was a nasty by-election campaign, mainly due to Mr Galloway and his divisive tactics. The hounding and abuse of Leadbetter was disgusting and v disturbing given what happened to her sister. I'm aware that female MPs get disportionately more abuse on social media - does this extend to physical intimidation too?

Agree that Labour chose a v good candidate, real relief for Starmer, he would have been portrayed as a serial loser if they'd lost this and it would have sparked more Labour infighting. The Hancock affair would also have played a role.

Starmer needs to be bolder, particularly on Brexit which is a developing s***storm, set the agenda more rather than being worried of scaring off older Red Wall voters. The treatment of EU citizens by UK government at moment is a disgrace and will cost our economy and services dear yet there is radio silence on the issue from Starmer for fear of offending Steve in Darlington.

MrInvisible wrote:Well that was a nasty by-election campaign, mainly due to Mr Galloway and his divisive tactics. The hounding and abuse of Leadbetter was disgusting and v disturbing given what happened to her sister. I'm aware that female MPs get disportionately more abuse on social media - does this extend to physical intimidation too?

Agree that Labour chose a v good candidate, real relief for Starmer, he would have been portrayed as a serial loser if they'd lost this and it would have sparked more Labour infighting. The Hancock affair would also have played a role.

Starmer needs to be bolder, particularly on Brexit which is a developing s***storm, set the agenda more rather than being worried of scaring off older Red Wall voters. The treatment of EU citizens by UK government at moment is a disgrace and will cost our economy and services dear yet there is radio silence on the issue from Starmer for fear of offending Steve in Darlington.

Yes. I have long held an opinion of the type of person the Conservatives think makes up the British public. (lets just say the word 'gammon' comes to mind). Makes complete sense that Labour have also decided who their target audience is. Of course under Corbyn that audience was the 'working class' only their take on who that is was at a guess around 50 years out of date, but you would have thought they have moved on from there.

lostinwales wrote:

Duty281 wrote:...
2) Labour chose a good candidate - they didn't, at least not in terms of maximising their chance of winning the by-election. She may be a good candidate in her own right, though I doubt it and some of her comments have left a lot to be desired, but ultimately she is a non-Muslim woman in a same-sex relationship (I think) who supports LGBT rights. This ultimately didn't go down well with the conservative Muslim community, hence why Galloway picked up an astonishing number of votes (22%). If Labour had just picked a Muslim candidate they'd have romped home, because Galloway's vote would have been nullified. ...

They played the Jo Cox angle for all its worth, and I don't think that did her or the campaign any harm at all, not least because of the publicity it earned her.

Yes she is in a same sex relationship.

What I had not twigged is that she is a political newbie, and was not even a long term Labour member.

Yes, Labour took a cynical option in regard to picking a candidate, eschewing far more qualified and worthy candidates. I believe she only became a member so she could contest this by-election for Labour.

It was, in my view, the wrong cynical option, because the conservative (by which I mean largely homophobic and sexist) Muslim community that resides in this constituency took a very dim view of her and many voted for Galloway. If Labour had chosen a Muslim candidate they would have romped home.

It is indicative of a wider decline. The 2019 GE review conducted by the Labour Party showed that Muslim voters (and BAME voters in general) are becoming less likely to vote Labour, which means it will become even tougher for Labour to retain seats such as this one (which is likely to go blue at the next GE).

It seems the only voters not deserting Labour are the Scousers. Starmer needs to do something because Labour are just drifting towards oblivion.

Lets see how Leadbetter does as an MP before deciding Labour picked the 'wrong candidate'.  Other than the family ties, she is a relative newcomer to politics, which isn't necessarily a bad thing (given how often we hear complaints about MPs coming from similar backgrounds).  I don't know anything about the qualified and worthy alternative candidates that Duty refers to, but surely it would equally be cynical to pick an alternative candidate, based solely on their religious beliefs/ethnicity.

The last couple of elections including this by-election here have been odd, in that there has been such a strong performing 3rd candidate - independent Halloran got 12% of vote in 2019, apparently including many right-leaning voters in 2019 whilst Galloway got 20% this time round.

Completely agree about Labour not taking their Muslim voters for granted, but given how they recovered Bradford West from losing that to Galloway, I don't see a precedent for losing this part of the electorate en-masse.  Labour have a lot to do clearly to regain their old strongholds, but I personally see more of an issue for them to regain their old Midlands seats and the likes of Blyth Valley in North East rather than struggling to hold a newly marginal seat like Batley and Spen.  Really don't see that going Tory at next election.

Covid is going to have an impact on politics for a long time - so far, its just been on handling the health pandemic, with voters (mostly) rewarding the Tories for the vaccination success whilst overlooking the catastrophic disasters of 2020.  The economic impact hasn't really bitten yet - just wait til furlough ends, and when Sunak has to start raising taxes and cutting spending during his next budget.  He won't be able to please everyone then, and signs are that we are in for plenty more austerity despite Johnson's rhetoric and rebranding.

Sunak is a cunning political operator and will surely want to make a move for the top job before he starts to become unpopular from the cutbacks and tax raising which are going to be paying for Covid for the next few years and his own carefully constructed brand starts to become tarnished.

Interesting times -for the wrong reasons.

There is a fragility around both main parties. I don't see Labour making major steps forward as yet, but the Conservatives, having given their souls to populism, are in a situation where they cannot deliver on, well, anything really, and they can only blame everybody else for so long.

MrInvisible wrote:Lets see how Leadbetter does as an MP before deciding Labour picked the 'wrong candidate'.  Other than the family ties, she is a relative newcomer to politics, which isn't necessarily a bad thing (given how often we hear complaints about MPs coming from similar backgrounds).  I don't know anything about the qualified and worthy alternative candidates that Duty refers to, but surely it would equally be cynical to pick an alternative candidate, based solely on their religious beliefs/ethnicity.

The last couple of elections including this by-election here have been odd, in that there has been such a strong performing 3rd candidate - independent Halloran got 12% of vote in 2019, apparently including many right-leaning voters in 2019 whilst Galloway got 20% this time round.

Completely agree about Labour not taking their Muslim voters for granted, but given how they recovered Bradford West from losing that to Galloway, I don't see a precedent for losing this part of the electorate en-masse.  Labour have a lot to do clearly to regain their old strongholds, but I personally see more of an issue for them to regain their old Midlands seats and the likes of Blyth Valley in North East rather than struggling to hold a newly marginal seat like Batley and Spen.  Really don't see that going Tory at next election.

Covid is going to have an impact on politics for a long time - so far, its just been on handling the health pandemic, with voters (mostly) rewarding the Tories for the vaccination success whilst overlooking the catastrophic disasters of 2020.  The economic impact hasn't really bitten yet - just wait til furlough ends, and when Sunak has to start raising taxes and cutting spending during his next budget.  He won't be able to please everyone then, and signs are that we are in for plenty more austerity despite Johnson's rhetoric and rebranding.

Sunak is a cunning political operator and will surely want to make a move for the top job before he starts to become unpopular from the cutbacks and tax raising which are going to be paying for Covid for the next few years and his own carefully constructed brand starts to become tarnished.

Wrong candidate only in the sense of contesting this by-election. I imagine as an actual MP Leadbitter will be the usual anonymous drone, like the vast majority of the 650 MPs, voting the way their whips tell them to and having little independent thought of her own. More qualified candidates would be those who, perhaps, have direct experience in politics e.g. a councillor.

I agree that it would have been equally cynical to pick a candidate for their religion.

The Tories only fell 300 votes short of winning this in a by-election. In a General Election, where there vote will be stronger, they will surely win it. I mean look at Chesham - Tories lost that by 8,000 votes, but there's little doubt it'll go blue again at the next GE. Of course Batley is a little more complicated with extra factors coming into play, but it's still on course to turn blue.

It will be tough for the Tories to ride the economic hardship around the corner, especially the likely spike in inflation, but Labour are still not a credible opposition in the eyes of many, so for now the Tories are on safe ground. I actually think polling has indicated that tax rises, in certain areas, are quite popular with voters at the moment.

Under three years till the next GE and there's little doubt the Tories will win another thumping majority. Electorally-speaking, the Tories are in robust health, while Labour are in intensive care. Starmer has three years to articulate a consistent and coherent vision for the country, and save his party in the process.

You seem to be making an assumption that at some level the tories are competent, even if it is only when it comes to getting elected. I know we both have our natural bias but it genuinely feels as if that competence is slowly leaching away.

Labour is a mess because in part in can't agree with itself. That seems to be down to the more extreme members getting a taste of power under the the gnome messiah and now believing their way is the only way. Conservative problems are different but their whole structure is starting to stink. They can still raise money but in a reflection of their leadership I suspect the kind of people who made their election strategies work are disappearing.

I'm not sure how competent the Tories are in getting elected. They're propped up by obscene funding, the ancient broadcasting rules and the knackered FPTP system. At General Election time, it's them v Labour and hardly anyone else matters.

And, at least for now, Labour are utterly hopeless. While Labour continue to be hopeless, and the same systems are in place, I can't see beyond further Tory majorities.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9806517/Journalists-face-14-years-prison-embarrassing-Government-proposed-law-change.html

Just incase there was any doubt left this government were charging head on into full blown fascism.

Bloody hell.

Dawn Butler kicked out of parliament for the day for calling Johnson a liar and refusinhg to retract.

Interesting timess.

This is good from Ian Dunt:

'The question of Johnson’s moral character is answered by referring to something else entirely: his popular support. It’s equivalent to someone asking if you liked a film, and you answering that it was very popular. That was not the question. Some things matter irrespective of whether other people like them.'

https://www.politics.co.uk/week-in-review/2021/07/23/week-in-review-two-years-of-boris-johnson-have-corroded-britains-public-life/

Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

Still, he makes a good point

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

I value his opinion as little as you value mine I shall assume. He's a writer for remainers so hardly a surprise.

Soul Requiem wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

I value his opinion as little as you value mine I shall assume. He's a writer for remainers so hardly a surprise.

I am always interested in reading what you write. Just because I disagree with most of it doesn't mean it does not have value.

I don't think its a good look to dismiss Dunt just because you can apply a convenient label. If you are going to filter journos based on labels there are a few labels which are probably of more fundamental importance.

Soul Requiem wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Soul Requiem wrote:Good from Ian Dunt seems an oxymoron to me.

I am stunned by that revelation.

Personally I think he's good value, but each to their own.

I value his opinion as little as you value mine I shall assume. He's a writer for remainers so hardly a surprise.

Good to see you playing the man and not the ball as usual.

Care to comment on the actual content of the piece, or is it just the usual fingers-in-ears guff?