Chesham and Amersham

[Chris from Brum]

Apr 6, 2021 8:20:32 GMT Richard Allen said:

Anyway condolence to the good people of this seat whose lives are about to be intruded upon by an army of smug yellow bastards.

Assuming you're referring to us, we have little enough to be smug about at the moment.

[bsjmcr]

Apr 6, 2021 7:27:06 GMT Harry Hayfield said:

With regard to the actual by-election (when it is held and all in due time and course) this will provide a test of the so called "Let's get the Conservatives out in 2024" arguement that has been heightened on social media thanks to the Conservative leads of late in the polls. Namely, the Greens cannot win this pending by-election and in all reality neither can Labour, therefore should they stand down and allow the Liberal Democrats a clear run (and increase the likelihood of a Con LOSS) or stand and therefore make it an almost certain Con HOLD.

If the latter happens, then like Sir Keir, I believe that the next election will be held on May 4th 2023, with the new boundaries in place, voter ID laws in place and the Prime Minister calling the election at his choosing (and that the Conservatives will win their third complete term in office, and extend their governance of the United Kingdom for a potential 28 years since 2010)

Normally I'd agree with this, I've made it clear how deposit-losing parties shouldn't really bother standing, even just to save money, and in return Labour could also not stand in unwinnable distant-third areas, but this should have been done in Hartlepool of all places (LDs/Greens standing down) which would go down to the wire, and not here.

[Defenestrated Fipplebox]

Apr 6, 2021 9:34:29 GMT bsjmcr said:

Apr 6, 2021 7:27:06 GMT Harry Hayfield said:

With regard to the actual by-election (when it is held and all in due time and course) this will provide a test of the so called "Let's get the Conservatives out in 2024" arguement that has been heightened on social media thanks to the Conservative leads of late in the polls. Namely, the Greens cannot win this pending by-election and in all reality neither can Labour, therefore should they stand down and allow the Liberal Democrats a clear run (and increase the likelihood of a Con LOSS) or stand and therefore make it an almost certain Con HOLD.

If the latter happens, then like Sir Keir, I believe that the next election will be held on May 4th 2023, with the new boundaries in place, voter ID laws in place and the Prime Minister calling the election at his choosing (and that the Conservatives will win their third complete term in office, and extend their governance of the United Kingdom for a potential 28 years since 2010)

Normally I'd agree with this, I've made it clear how deposit-losing parties shouldn't really bother standing, even just to save money, and in return Labour could also not stand in unwinnable distant-third areas, but this should have been done in Hartlepool of all places (LDs/Greens standing down) which would go down to the wire, and not here.

Sheffield Hallam was unwinnable for Labour for years, maybe it would still be if they'd not stood a candidate in the past.

These electoral pacts where parties stand down deprive the voters of being able to make a choice, I whole heartedly dislike them.

Personally I'd get rid of deposits as they are a barrier to people and parties standing for election.

[mrsir]

The Greens will probably do well here (save their deposit anyway) so definitely shouldn’t stand down.

[ricmk]

HS2 could be tricky for Lib Dems actually. National party clearly in favour, Bucks party somewhere between passive-aggressive and just aggressively against it. However surely what's done is done and there would be something King Canute, or at least Arthur Dent, about seriously trying to stop it now and running a by-election around that?

[andrew111]

Apr 6, 2021 9:01:40 GMT ilerda said:

Depriving the voters of a proper choice in a by-election just to reduce the Government’s majority from 88 to 87 seems like a bit of a poor show to me.

No surprise that you don't endorse the Tories standing down!

[Richard Allen]

Apr 6, 2021 9:09:10 GMT Chris from Brum said:

Apr 6, 2021 8:20:32 GMT Richard Allen said:

Anyway condolence to the good people of this seat whose lives are about to be intruded upon by an army of smug yellow bastards.

Assuming you're referring to us, we have little enough to be smug about at the moment.

Well that hasn't stopped some of your fellow party members

Besides, the term is too good to get rid of.

[andrew111]

Apr 6, 2021 9:58:28 GMT ricmk said:

HS2 could be tricky for Lib Dems actually. National party clearly in favour, Bucks party somewhere between passive-aggressive and just aggressively against it. However surely what's done is done and there would be something King Canute, or at least Arthur Dent, about seriously trying to stop it now and running a by-election around that?

I have no doubt there are plenty of side issues around it, inadequate compensation etc.. But green policy is against and they will campaign hard on that

[Richard Allen]

Apr 6, 2021 9:54:14 GMT mrsir said:

The Greens will probably do well here (save their deposit anyway) so definitely shouldn’t stand down.

Indeed. They have held their deposit at 2 of the last 3 elections here.

[Pete Whitehead]

UKIP did very well in the area in 2013 largely on the back of opposition to HS2 - they won Great Missenden and were close in a couple of other divisions. Obviously they aren't a force now but I could see the Reform Party attracting a decent vote on that and some other issues (I don't even know their policy on HS2 but I assume they are opposed)

[Richard Allen]

Apr 5, 2021 18:34:06 GMT andrewp said:

Apr 5, 2021 18:27:31 GMT heslingtonian said:

To be fair she wasn't a backbencher for most of her Parliamentary career. She reached the Cabinet as Secretary of State for Wales and was also a Minister (I'm wanting to say Employment Minister but not 100% certain) in John Major's Government. She must have been one of the last MPs who served as Ministers in John Major's Government. I can think of Liam Fox but not many others.

There are a few others. Sir Paul Beresford, John Redwood, Edward Leigh, Greg Knight, David Davis, Andrew Mitchell, Oliver Heald

Going back a little further Redwood is one of only two ministers from the Thatcher government still in the house, the other being Sir Peter Bottomley. Margaret Becket was a minister under both Callaghan and Wilson, albeit only a few weeks in the case of the latter.

[carlton43]

Apr 6, 2021 7:27:06 GMT Harry Hayfield said:

With regard to the actual by-election (when it is held and all in due time and course) this will provide a test of the so called "Let's get the Conservatives out in 2024" arguement that has been heightened on social media thanks to the Conservative leads of late in the polls. Namely, the Greens cannot win this pending by-election and in all reality neither can Labour, therefore should they stand down and allow the Liberal Democrats a clear run (and increase the likelihood of a Con LOSS) or stand and therefore make it an almost certain Con HOLD.

If the latter happens, then like Sir Keir, I believe that the next election will be held on May 4th 2023, with the new boundaries in place, voter ID laws in place and the Prime Minister calling the election at his choosing (and that the Conservatives will win their third complete term in office, and extend their governance of the United Kingdom for a potential 28 years since 2010)

I would just love to see such a by-election with Labour and Green standing down to give the LDs a clear shot; and to see them then crash and burn in a bad defeat; and to see a revolution in both Green and Labour for not having stood.  

A Win, Win WIN situation.

[mboy]

No parties should stand down here.

[YL]

History suggests that in Con/LD by-election battles most Labour voters do the right thing without the party needing to tell them to do it, and whether those who don't would vote Lib Dem if Labour didn't stand must be very debateable. Plus a formal pact might put some potential Con to LD switchers off.

[ilerda]

The Lib Dem’s won’t win simply by swallowing up the entirety of the Labour vote - there just simply isn’t enough of it. They’ll also need a good chunk of the “moderate” Tory vote.

And herein lies the perennial yellow problem. They try to position themselves as being between two polarised extremes, but in doing so they constantly run the risk of one side thinking they’re too close to the other side to be trustworthy.

As we saw with the old SDP and with CHUK, there simply isn’t enough that unites centrist Labour voters and centrist Tory voters, and so anyone trying to offer that package will be unable to stay on the incredibly thin tightrope.

[liverpoolliberal]

Apr 6, 2021 11:02:06 GMT mboy said:

No parties should stand down here.

No parties should stand down anywhere.

[Richard Allen]

Apr 6, 2021 11:12:19 GMT ilerda said:

The Lib Dem’s won’t win simply by swallowing up the entirety of the Labour vote - there just simply isn’t enough of it. They’ll also need a good chunk of the “moderate” Tory vote.

And herein lies the perennial yellow problem. They try to position themselves as being between two polarised extremes, but in doing so they constantly run the risk of one side thinking they’re too close to the other side to be trustworthy.

As we saw with the old SDP and with CHUK, there simply isn’t enough that unites centrist Labour voters and centrist Tory voters, and so anyone trying to offer that package will be unable to stay on the incredibly thin tightrope.

It only really works when the party holding the seat is extremely unpopular.

[Deleted]

Of course this talk of "standing down" also allows the LibDems to blame everyone else for their failures rather than facing the uncomfortable truth that not that many people want to vote for them

[ilerda]

Apr 6, 2021 11:19:11 GMT Richard Allen said:

Apr 6, 2021 11:12:19 GMT ilerda said:

The Lib Dem’s won’t win simply by swallowing up the entirety of the Labour vote - there just simply isn’t enough of it. They’ll also need a good chunk of the “moderate” Tory vote.

And herein lies the perennial yellow problem. They try to position themselves as being between two polarised extremes, but in doing so they constantly run the risk of one side thinking they’re too close to the other side to be trustworthy.

As we saw with the old SDP and with CHUK, there simply isn’t enough that unites centrist Labour voters and centrist Tory voters, and so anyone trying to offer that package will be unable to stay on the incredibly thin tightrope.

It only really works when the party holding the seat is extremely unpopular.

Very true. On reflection it worked in Sheffield Hallam - as the seat moved leftwards but retained a strong small-c conservative element, the writing was on the wall for the Tories. The Lib Dems were successful in using their strong local government base to show Labour voters they were the ones who could take out the Tories, and persuading Tory voters that they were a safer bet than letting a Labour candidate win.

But these were rather unique circumstances, and there aren't many seats where a similar thing could happen.

[heslingtonian]

Apr 6, 2021 10:35:24 GMT Richard Allen said:

Apr 5, 2021 18:34:06 GMT andrewp said:

There are a few others. Sir Paul Beresford, John Redwood, Edward Leigh, Greg Knight, David Davis, Andrew Mitchell, Oliver Heald

Going back a little further Redwood is one of only two ministers from the Thatcher government still in the house, the other being Sir Peter Bottomley. Margaret Becket was a minister under both Callaghan and Wilson, albeit only a few weeks in the case of the latter.

Technically Sir Edward Leigh was appointed a Minister on 2 November 1990 (according to the Parliament website) and Thatcher stood down on 28 November 1990 so I think he counts as a third.