UK General Discussion II

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Black-faced -seriously?  In the early 21st century?  Are they still doing minstrel shows over there?

Over in the Netherlands, they're still doing Black Pete at Xmas.


Really!


And children can play with Black Pete and Saint Nicholas!
 

[swl]

Every year there is a debate about Zwarte Piet in the Netherlands. I don't find it racist, but I am a foreigner, maybe I am missing something.

The House of Commons voted to recognize the state of Palestine. It does not have practical implications right now since they cannot impose it on the government, but if they have a Labour government next year it may be different.

[YL]

A Freudian slip.

[You kip if you want to...]

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/10/15/the-inside-story-of-the-labour-reshuffle-that-never-was/

Before Heywood, Miliband was planning to get Cooper and Balls to swap jobs.

[politicus]

Black-faced -seriously?  In the early 21st century?  Are they still doing minstrel shows over there?

The cultural context for this is quite different in Europe. It was always part of a racist stereotype in the US, but is (or at least was..) a bit more innocent in Europe where the tradition for doing this predates a resident black population.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

This is a thing now.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

This is a thing now.

that's it , Mike Read has convinced me. I'm a UKIP guy now.

[YL]

MORI poll on Britain's EU membership:

"If there were a referendum now on whether Britain should stay in or get out of the European Union, how would you vote?"

Stay in: 56%
Get out: 36%

I suspect the large margin is a bit of a fluke, but still this is encouraging.

[Јas]

MORI poll on Britain's EU membership:

"If there were a referendum now on whether Britain should stay in or get out of the European Union, how would you vote?"

Stay in: 56%
Get out: 36%

I suspect the large margin is a bit of a fluke, but still this is encouraging.

Probably not a fluke - their poll from May had much the same result 54-37.

Their numbers are quite different from the other pollsters though - nobody else has had 'In' above, or even near to, 50%.

[afleitch]

Here's a handy guide who what party wants what out of the Lord Smith Commission on further Scottish devolution:

[politicus]

Thanks. So Labour is being isolated on income tax. What caveats do they have?

The Tory and LibDem party symbols (a kindergarden style doodle three and a golden bird..) don't make much sense. What was the thinking behind them? (if there was any).

EDIT: I see the LibDem supposed to be a "liberty bird"  and some marketing experts have voted it the best logo of the three major parties (with Labour's rose at the bottom!). Definitely not how I would have ranked them.

[Cassius]

Thanks, so Labour is being isolated on income tax. What caveats do they have?

The Scottish Tory and LibDem party symbols (a kindergarden style doodle three and a golden bird..) don't make much sense. What was the thinking behind them? (if there was any).

The Tory symbol was an exercise in rebranding by the main party when Cameron became leader. Out went the torch symbol that the party had used since the 80's (I believe) and in came this god-awful abomination. I suppose it was another (failed) attempt to distance the party from its immediate past.

[Beagle]

Not sure if this is the right place, but can you help me out - I'm trying to track down a saying (or quotation?) that I've probably picked up here, something along the lines of "I hate politics and that is why I'm a Conservative"? The gist was that the Tories are the party which governs least and that makes them attractive to people who wish that the status quo is maintained at all costs. I would like to know the origin and the usual phrasing, if indeed there is one.

[YL]

Lib Dem wins parliamentary by-election with over 50% of the vote

(And yes, this is utterly ridiculous.)

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Lib Dems circa 2010: The House of lords is undemocratic, filled with people only relevant because of their parentage and should be elected by the people!

now: Hooray! The Lords have elected the great-grandson of one of our leaders! Yay!!

Also, love the inexplicable snipe at Labour in the Lib Dem Voice piece.

[afleitch]

Johann Lamont is to stand down as Labour leader in Scotland.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This doesn't really feel like a surprise.

[afleitch]

This doesn't really feel like a surprise.

Without recent events she'd have stayed only for the fact that since the 2011 cull there is no one left.

[You kip if you want to...]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

[afleitch]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

There's a bit of fear that 2010 wasn't Labour's floor. That it could sink further below what it got. The polls themselves don't show a great deal of CON to LAB switchers. There's an over-reliance on Lib Dem 2010 voters leaking back to Labour where it counts and an over expectation that UKIP won't damage them. What you could find is that in traditionally suburban seats like Bolton West that Labour hold by a gnats wing, the Lib Dem voters who have stayed with them from 1997, could leak disproportionately back to the Conservatives, gifting them the seat from Labour. There is also a problem in Scotland, which while it may be fleeting, currently shows Labour performing as badly (and the SNP performing as well) at Westminster as they are at Holyrood, with voting intentions at 2011 levels. While Labour are maxed out in Scotland, they can't really afford to fall back.

[You kip if you want to...]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

There's a bit of fear that 2010 wasn't Labour's floor. That it could sink further below what it got. The polls themselves don't show a great deal of CON to LAB switchers. There's an over-reliance on Lib Dem 2010 voters leaking back to Labour where it counts and an over expectation that UKIP won't damage them. What you could find is that in traditionally suburban seats like Bolton West that Labour hold by a gnats wing, the Lib Dem voters who have stayed with them from 1997, could leak disproportionately back to the Conservatives, gifting them the seat from Labour. There is also a problem in Scotland, which while it may be fleeting, currently shows Labour performing as badly (and the SNP performing as well) at Westminster as they are at Holyrood, with voting intentions at 2011 levels. While Labour are maxed out in Scotland, they can't really afford to fall back.

The irony of all this is that, back in 2010, part of the reason Ed's campaign got off the ground was exactly because he was supposed to be good at appealing to former-LD/Green/SNP types. He was meant to be the most capable of bringing those voters 'home'...

[YL]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

There's a bit of fear that 2010 wasn't Labour's floor. That it could sink further below what it got. The polls themselves don't show a great deal of CON to LAB switchers. There's an over-reliance on Lib Dem 2010 voters leaking back to Labour where it counts and an over expectation that UKIP won't damage them. What you could find is that in traditionally suburban seats like Bolton West that Labour hold by a gnats wing, the Lib Dem voters who have stayed with them from 1997, could leak disproportionately back to the Conservatives, gifting them the seat from Labour. There is also a problem in Scotland, which while it may be fleeting, currently shows Labour performing as badly (and the SNP performing as well) at Westminster as they are at Holyrood, with voting intentions at 2011 levels. While Labour are maxed out in Scotland, they can't really afford to fall back.

The irony of all this is that, back in 2010, part of the reason Ed's campaign got off the ground was exactly because he was supposed to be good at appealing to former-LD/Green/SNP types. He was meant to be the most capable of bringing those voters 'home'...

... because he, almost certainly, was.  (At least as far as LDs and Greens are concerned.)  The fact that Ed Miliband isn't a brilliant leader doesn't mean that he wasn't the best choice out of those available.  Some people mythologise his brother, but I see very little reason why.

I know crossbreaks can be dodgy, but in fact Labour are still getting close to a third of 2010 Lib Dem voters in most polls.  So that's not where the problem really is, and nor is there any evidence in Ashcroft's constituency polling for afleitch's Bolton West scenario: he's had double digit Labour leads there, including one quite recently.

I think there are two real problems for Labour at the moment.  One is Scotland, and again we're unfortunately relying on crossbreaks (which look awful for them) to see how bad it is, but certainly a scenario where the SNP win large numbers of currently Labour seats looks possible.  The other is a more general enthusiasm problem; Labour just aren't making much of a case to vote for them.  I'm still intending to vote for them, but really that's just a negative vote against the current government.  And of course there's UKIP, but they're damaging all three main parties.

[You kip if you want to...]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

There's a bit of fear that 2010 wasn't Labour's floor. That it could sink further below what it got. The polls themselves don't show a great deal of CON to LAB switchers. There's an over-reliance on Lib Dem 2010 voters leaking back to Labour where it counts and an over expectation that UKIP won't damage them. What you could find is that in traditionally suburban seats like Bolton West that Labour hold by a gnats wing, the Lib Dem voters who have stayed with them from 1997, could leak disproportionately back to the Conservatives, gifting them the seat from Labour. There is also a problem in Scotland, which while it may be fleeting, currently shows Labour performing as badly (and the SNP performing as well) at Westminster as they are at Holyrood, with voting intentions at 2011 levels. While Labour are maxed out in Scotland, they can't really afford to fall back.

The irony of all this is that, back in 2010, part of the reason Ed's campaign got off the ground was exactly because he was supposed to be good at appealing to former-LD/Green/SNP types. He was meant to be the most capable of bringing those voters 'home'...

... because he, almost certainly, was.  (At least as far as LDs and Greens are concerned.)  The fact that Ed Miliband isn't a brilliant leader doesn't mean that he wasn't the best choice out of those available.  Some people mythologise his brother, but I see very little reason why.

With the benefit of hindsight, I'd agree that Ed was the best on offer.

[DC Al Fine]

I actually think that, over the course of the last month, Ed has become damaged goods.

The narrative even within the party seems to have gone from 'He means well and could surprise people' to 'When's his next misstep due?'.

The irony in the events of the last month seems to be that Heywood has scared the PLP so much that it's damaged Ed more than Clacton's damaged Cameron. There's a lot in saying that the Tories expected to lose Clacton.

There's a bit of fear that 2010 wasn't Labour's floor. That it could sink further below what it got. The polls themselves don't show a great deal of CON to LAB switchers. There's an over-reliance on Lib Dem 2010 voters leaking back to Labour where it counts and an over expectation that UKIP won't damage them. What you could find is that in traditionally suburban seats like Bolton West that Labour hold by a gnats wing, the Lib Dem voters who have stayed with them from 1997, could leak disproportionately back to the Conservatives, gifting them the seat from Labour. There is also a problem in Scotland, which while it may be fleeting, currently shows Labour performing as badly (and the SNP performing as well) at Westminster as they are at Holyrood, with voting intentions at 2011 levels. While Labour are maxed out in Scotland, they can't really afford to fall back.

I've heard it stated before, that Labour's vote is much more efficient the Tories'. Parties with relatively efficient votes tend to get screwed as their support declines because small wins turn into small losses. e.g. Bloc Quebecois 2011. With that in mind, how low would Labour's support have to go before their vote distribution would start harming them?

[Silent Hunter]

You've got no viable Labour leader who isn't associated with the last recession and won't for a while.