|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 6, 2021 11:42:53 GMT
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. Part of the reshuffle following Geoffrey Howe's resignation. He was later sacked under John Major because the Belgian government complained about him. |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Apr 6, 2021 12:10:30 GMT
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. From what I understand Cheryl Gillan was a fairly good constituency MP who will have built up some what of a personal vote over the years. If the Liberal Democrats can take some of this soft Tory support plus squeeze the Labour vote they have a credible chance. It has been done before in seats like Newbury and Christchurch. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Apr 6, 2021 12:41:18 GMT
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. Isn't the issue rather that so-called "centrists" aren't actually anywhere near the real centre ground (i.e. they're nowhere near the key swing demographic)? People who read the Mail tend to have a good deal in common with people who read the Mirror, but no "centrist" would ever read either of those papers, less still share very much of the common ground there. But I suppose we can't expect "centrists" to come up with a more accurate description of themselves, as the words I can think of aren't particularly kind... |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Apr 6, 2021 12:49:03 GMT
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.
Liked to agree with the first 2 paragraphs, not so much for the last one. Without deposits the number of frivolous candidates grows, which creates almost unusable ballot papers. |
|
|
|
Post by Defenestrated Fipplebox on Apr 6, 2021 13:08:50 GMT
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.
Liked to agree with the first 2 paragraphs, not so much for the last one. Without deposits the number of frivolous candidates grows, which creates almost unusable ballot papers.
No ballot paper is unusable, longer ones are just ones you don't happen to like.
Please define what you mean by frivolous candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Apr 6, 2021 13:12:08 GMT
An election pact would not flip this seat in a by-election, but the HS2 issue just might, especially since the Conservatives are likely to select a pro-HS2 candidate and the other parties are likely to select anti-HS2 candidates.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Apr 6, 2021 13:13:03 GMT
Liked to agree with the first 2 paragraphs, not so much for the last one. Without deposits the number of frivolous candidates grows, which creates almost unusable ballot papers.
No ballot paper is unusable, longer ones are just ones you don't happen to like.
Please define what you mean by frivolous candidates.
On the contrary, I have no personal problem with long ballot papers, I find them fascinating, but lot of voters don't. As for the second part - nope, can't bothered, as that would suggest an undeserved seriousness. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 6, 2021 14:36:42 GMT
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 Their real core vote is minute. They have long been a dustbin for the angry, the disaffected, the displaced, the between parties, the don't knows and the general riff raff of everyday politics. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Apr 6, 2021 14:40:50 GMT
I think the LDs could do well here. In fact it's probably one of the best 50 constituencies for them to fight at by-election at the moment.
Early prediction: Con 50%, LD 40%, Others 10%.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979 
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Apr 6, 2021 14:49:17 GMT
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 Their real core vote is minute. They have long been a dustbin for the angry, the disaffected, the displaced, the between parties, the don't knows and the general riff raff of everyday politics.
This is demonstrably true - and I say that as someone with *some* LibDem sympathies at the heart of my being.
There are just too many seats where the LibDem vote has gone massively up and down in the space of just two or three elections for all of them to be unrepresentative outliers.
Mind you, judging by the Hartlepool polling, the UKIP/BXP/Reform vote is pretty soft and flabby too. Not unlike the voters.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Apr 6, 2021 14:50:23 GMT
Their real core vote is minute. They have long been a dustbin for the angry, the disaffected, the displaced, the between parties, the don't knows and the general riff raff of everyday politics.
This is demonstrably true - and I say that as someone with *some* LibDem sympathies at the heart of my being.
There are just too many seats where the LibDem vote has gone massively up and down in the space of just two or three elections for all of them to be unrepresentative outliers.
Mind you, judging by the Hartlepool polling, the UKIP/BXP/Reform vote is pretty soft and flabby too. Not unlike the voters.
Ooh, I've gone past 2000 posts; Somebody buy me a small present!
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 6, 2021 15:19:23 GMT
Liked to agree with the first 2 paragraphs, not so much for the last one. Without deposits the number of frivolous candidates grows, which creates almost unusable ballot papers.
No ballot paper is unusable, longer ones are just ones you don't happen to like.
Please define what you mean by frivolous candidates.
Anyone not passing the Carlton Kosher test of acceptability. A hefty deposit reduces the numbers and that is always a good thing. My preferred ballot is a maximum of 4 and a preference for 2. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Apr 6, 2021 15:25:05 GMT
An election pact would not flip this seat in a by-election, but the HS2 issue just might, especially since the Conservatives are likely to select a pro-HS2 candidate and the other parties are likely to select anti-HS2 candidates. Surely if they are smart they choose a mildly HSR sceptic with no Twitter baggage saying otherwide to see off that angle. Another HSR sceptic back bencher does not matter with that majority and with project under way; but a dented majority does matter. They are not losing that seat under any circumstance. Don't even think about it. |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,096
|
Post by ilerda on Apr 6, 2021 15:28:14 GMT
The new Tory MP for Aylesbury has managed to be a HS2 sceptic whilst still getting on as a new backbencher. So I don't think it's necessarily a requirement for whoever is selected to be a massive cheerleader for it. CCHQ understand the local sensitivities and wouldn't want to jeopardise the seat by being too strict about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Apr 6, 2021 15:29:24 GMT
An election pact would not flip this seat in a by-election, but the HS2 issue just might, especially since the Conservatives are likely to select a pro-HS2 candidate and the other parties are likely to select anti-HS2 candidates. Surely if they are smart they choose a mildly HSR sceptic with no Twitter baggage saying otherwide to see off that angle. Another HSR sceptic back bencher does not matter with that majority and with project under way; but a dented majority does matter. They are not losing that seat under any circumstance. Don't even think about it. I would be very surprised if they lost it too, but by elections are oddities. And the HS2 issue does matter here. Cheryl Gillan was not mildly sceptical but resolutely opposed. |
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Apr 6, 2021 15:30:53 GMT
No ballot paper is unusable, longer ones are just ones you don't happen to like.
Please define what you mean by frivolous candidates.
Anyone not passing the Carlton Kosher test of acceptability. A hefty deposit reduces the numbers and that is always a good thing. My preferred ballot is a maximum of 4 and a preference for 2.Yourself and Mr Boothroyd grow ever closer. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Apr 6, 2021 15:35:46 GMT
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. Part of the reshuffle following Geoffrey Howe's resignation. He was later sacked under John Major because the Belgian government complained about him. That sounds an intriguing story (not least given the state of some senior politicians in Belgium at the time) - what went on? |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Apr 6, 2021 16:20:35 GMT
Liked to agree with the first 2 paragraphs, not so much for the last one. Without deposits the number of frivolous candidates grows, which creates almost unusable ballot papers.
No ballot paper is unusable, longer ones are just ones you don't happen to like.
Please define what you mean by frivolous candidates.
paging johnloony  |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Apr 6, 2021 17:02:29 GMT
Part of the reshuffle following Geoffrey Howe's resignation. He was later sacked under John Major because the Belgian government complained about him. That sounds an intriguing story (not least given the state of some senior politicians in Belgium at the time) - what went on? Sorry, wrong government - it was the Dutch government. Wonder what ever happened to that journalist. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Apr 6, 2021 17:12:33 GMT
I think the LDs could do well here. In fact it's probably one of the best 50 constituencies for them to fight at by-election at the moment. Early prediction: Con 50%, LD 40%, Others 10%. I agree with that. I think if a "normal" by-election occurred with all candidates standing, I could see that being something close to the result.
I think this by-election would be an ideal petri dish however for the policy propounded, by the likes of me and Merseymike amongst others, that there needs to be at the next GE a cross-party one-off agreement to do whatever is necessary to help the best-placed anti-Tory candidate to win, with the primary purpose of implementing PR for future elections.
This would require a hell of a LOT of internal discipline across all the parties; some will have to get used to standing down just this once . It's a very short-term sacrifice for a very long term benefit. However I appreciate it wont be easy and it is counter-intuitive to stand aside, albeit for the 'greater good'. In many seats Labour would be the beneficiary of this pact, but in quite a few they wont ..like this one! Here is a great chance for Labour to show some leadership and stand aside. Of course it wont happen, as Starmer, Davey , Lucas et al havent even had 'pre-discussion discussions' about any such policy [and they may never do]. Indeed I suspect Labour will stand here..get 5% or so and think "ah well maybe next time".
if you want the Tories to continue ruling ad infinitum with 40% support, just carry on regardless. if Starmer wants to be the next PM he needs to wake up and smell the coffee.
|
|
