|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 24, 2022 19:26:23 GMT
It's going to be difficult to make that stick though, whereas in most places it's a lot more obvious. Many voters will recall having a Labour MP for Wansdyke until 2010 - indeed he is now the West of England Mayor. On paper, this should be easier for Labour than what faces them in the two London seats of Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green. Both were Labour -held until 2010 and very rarely has Labour not been the main challenger there. In 2019 Labour fell back to 3rd place in those seats - but I confidently expect that to be an aberration in that the LD candidates were high profile Labour defectors via Change UK.. In NE Somerset many may feel misled by the 2019 LD claims - and be disinclined to believe that talk again - if Labour appears to be performing well nationally.
Cities of London & Westminster was not Labour held!
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,267
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 24, 2022 19:27:20 GMT
It's going to be difficult to make that stick though, whereas in most places it's a lot more obvious. Many voters will recall having a Labour MP for Wansdyke until 2010 - indeed he is now the West of England Mayor. On paper, this should be easier for Labour than what faces them in the two London seats of Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green. Both were Labour -held until 2010 and very rarely has Labour not been the main challenger there. In 2019 Labour fell back to 3rd place in those seats - but I confidently expect that to be an aberration in that the LD candidates were high profile Labour defectors via Change UK.. In NE Somerset many may feel misled by the 2019 LD claims - and be disinclined to believe that talk again - if Labour appears to be performing well nationally.
But one of the two parties will need to be convinced. It's not impossible that might happen but when there is such a divide and the LibDems do well locally I don't see it being an easy decision. I would argue that in both those London seats the LibDems appeal was based on high profile candidates and that Labour are the obvious challengers. However they have never won CLWS. I don't think the LibDems will target either. They will certainly target Wimbledon though and I think Labour won't.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 19:28:17 GMT
Many voters will recall having a Labour MP for Wansdyke until 2010 - indeed he is now the West of England Mayor. On paper, this should be easier for Labour than what faces them in the two London seats of Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green. Both were Labour -held until 2010 and very rarely has Labour not been the main challenger there. In 2019 Labour fell back to 3rd place in those seats - but I confidently expect that to be an aberration in that the LD candidates were high profile Labour defectors via Change UK.. In NE Somerset many may feel misled by the 2019 LD claims - and be disinclined to believe that talk again - if Labour appears to be performing well nationally.
Cities of London & Westminster was not Labour held! Sorry - that is correct! But Labour had been the main challenger there - and ,of course, recently gained control of Westminster Council.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 19:32:39 GMT
Many voters will recall having a Labour MP for Wansdyke until 2010 - indeed he is now the West of England Mayor. On paper, this should be easier for Labour than what faces them in the two London seats of Cities of London & Westminster and Finchley & Golders Green. Both were Labour -held until 2010 and very rarely has Labour not been the main challenger there. In 2019 Labour fell back to 3rd place in those seats - but I confidently expect that to be an aberration in that the LD candidates were high profile Labour defectors via Change UK.. In NE Somerset many may feel misled by the 2019 LD claims - and be disinclined to believe that talk again - if Labour appears to be performing well nationally.
But one of the two parties will need to be convinced. It's not impossible that might happen but when there is such a divide and the LibDems do well locally I don't see it being an easy decision. I would argue that in both those London seats the LibDems appeal was based on high profile candidates and that Labour are the obvious challengers. However they have never won CLWS. I don't think the LibDems will target either. They will certainly target Wimbledon though and I think Labour won't. I think Wimbledon could be a 3 way contest - Labour having held the seat 1997 - 2005 and had a strong result there in 2017. Labour needs to fight it out there - and a MRP poll this year had Labour narrowly winning the seat with the Tories third. If Labour is polling circa 40% nationally, it should be able to reach 30% - 35% in Wimbledon.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,267
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 24, 2022 19:39:22 GMT
But one of the two parties will need to be convinced. It's not impossible that might happen but when there is such a divide and the LibDems do well locally I don't see it being an easy decision. I would argue that in both those London seats the LibDems appeal was based on high profile candidates and that Labour are the obvious challengers. However they have never won CLWS. I don't think the LibDems will target either. They will certainly target Wimbledon though and I think Labour won't. I think Wimbledon could be a 3 way contest - Labour having held the seat 1997 - 2005 and had a strong result there in 2017. Labour needs to fight it out there - and a MRP poll this year had Labour narrowly winning the seat with the Tories third. If Labour is polling circa 40% nationally, it should be able to reach 30% - 35% in Wimbledon. I hope that Labour will realise that the LibDems are currently in a stronger position and stop being so tribal! The LibDems will have to do the same elsewhere in seats they have won before. So far you have appeared to suggest that it should always be the LibDems who give Labour a clear run.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 39,267
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Jun 24, 2022 19:41:06 GMT
The one thing that could have caused the Lib Dems to have lost Tiverton was a pact with Labour. There won't be official pacts, but in reality there was something unspoken which had the same effect. Previously it's often not worked but the electorate appear to be becoming more aware of what to do if they want to dislodge a Tory.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jun 24, 2022 19:51:00 GMT
Is having a pact, which you deny having, not a tad dishonest? Even undemocratic? How do you sell this pact which you deny having to the local party? Do you think the electorate are stupid? 1. It’s not dishonest, because it’s obvious 2. It’s not undemocratic, because it gives the voters a choice of which party they want to vote for (unlike the SDP/Liberal Alliance, in which candidates of one party were foisted on the voters without giving them the choice) 3. It sells itself 4. Yes, because they voted Lib Dem instead of Conservative
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 19:53:30 GMT
I think Wimbledon could be a 3 way contest - Labour having held the seat 1997 - 2005 and had a strong result there in 2017. Labour needs to fight it out there - and a MRP poll this year had Labour narrowly winning the seat with the Tories third. If Labour is polling circa 40% nationally, it should be able to reach 30% - 35% in Wimbledon. I hope that Labour will realise that the LibDems are currently in a stronger position and stop being so tribal! The LibDems will have to do the same elsewhere in seats they have won before. So far you have appeared to suggest that it should always be the LibDems who give Labour a clear run. I am not suggesting that Labour should be given a clear run in Wimbledon. Of course, the LDs will target the seat but Labour should also campaign actively in a seat it held until 2005.Labour remains better placed to day in Wimbledon than it appeared to be in Portsmouth South in 2010. Many thought Labour's success there in 2017 to be a fluke - yet it now seems pretty secure for the party. Much the same might be said re-Cambridge.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,234
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 24, 2022 19:57:13 GMT
Is having a pact, which you deny having, not a tad dishonest? Even undemocratic? How do you sell this pact which you deny having to the local party? Do you think the electorate are stupid? There is no pact, so there is nothing to deny. There will be a Lib Dem candidate and a Labour candidate in all by-elections (can't speak for the Greens). HQ support for each candidate will be allocated on a case by case basis. And the evidence so far is that the electorate is prepared to take its cue from the behaviour of the parties. This also seems to be working to some extent at a local level. I fail to discern what is disingenuous about any of this.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,077
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 24, 2022 20:11:56 GMT
Is having a pact, which you deny having, not a tad dishonest? Even undemocratic? How do you sell this pact which you deny having to the local party? Do you think the electorate are stupid? 1. It’s not dishonest, because it’s obvious 2. It’s not undemocratic, because it gives the voters a choice of which party they want to vote for (unlike the SDP/Liberal Alliance, in which candidates of one party were foisted on the voters without giving them the choice) 3. It sells itself 4. Yes, because they voted Lib Dem instead of Conservative Liked bar 4 , you are spot on re the sdp and liberals
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jun 24, 2022 20:18:01 GMT
There is no pact. The liberals just know labour were at a weak point in 2019, and there are in any case pretty much no lib lab marginals so are targeting gains from the conservatives.
We should be confident that if we don't carry on making a mess of everything, our prospects against the liberals are pretty good, as the liberals will find it tougher when the question being asked of the electorate is who they want forming the next government. In effect they are then just a labour proxy in areas that (by virtue of the low labour vote) don't like labour. Naturally this makes gains tough.
Really their bark is worse than their bite. Labour are the party to be worried about.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 20:23:04 GMT
There is no pact. The liberals just know labour are at a weak point, and there are in any case pretty much no lib lab marginals so are targeting gains from the conservatives. We should be confident that if we don't carry on making a mess of everything, our prospects are pretty good, as the liberals will find it tougher when the question being asked of the electorate is who they want forming the next government. Compared with 2019 it is far from obvious that Labout is at a weak point.It seems to enjoy a poll lead of 6% or 7% - depite its decline in Scotland having chipped circa 2% off its GB vote share.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jun 24, 2022 20:24:17 GMT
There is no pact. The liberals just know labour are at a weak point, and there are in any case pretty much no lib lab marginals so are targeting gains from the conservatives. We should be confident that if we don't carry on making a mess of everything, our prospects are pretty good, as the liberals will find it tougher when the question being asked of the electorate is who they want forming the next government. Compared with 2019 it is far from obvious that Labout is at a weak point.It seems to enjoy a poll lead of 6% or 7% - depite its decline in Scotland having chipped circa 2% off its GB vote share. I meant 2019 was the weak point - apologies for the lack of clarity.
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jun 24, 2022 20:24:51 GMT
Have never been to that part of the coast between Exmouth and Seaton, are some of the towns more upmarket/expensive than others? I assume there is an older demographic, but Exmouth is younger? I don't pretend to know the stats but would suggest Exmouth is a fair bit younger - it has a pretty vibrant nightlife (I mean that in a relative sense - it's not Ibiza, but it has a couple of nightclubs and youth-orientated bars). Some of that is people coming in from Exeter for a trip to the seaside as it's got an okay train service from the university/college part of Exeter. But it's also got a decent youth population, and is good for working age commuters. It's also got a child-friendly, sandy beach. Also, it has to be said, Exmouth has a bit more grot. It's a nice place, and there are significant very posh areas with detached homes and so on. But the housing stock isn't as good as elsewhere overall. That's partly due to the sandy beach and access - it's not Great Yarmouth by any means, but there is an aspect of being a seaside resort of the type we all know, which has known some slightly trickier times as holiday habits have evolved. Sidmouth and Budleigh Salterton are a good deal older and posher. It's not impossible to commute in to Exeter - people do, but it's a drive and somewhat of a faff. They aren't really "resorts" in the same way as Sidmouth is shingle and Budleigh pebble. They have visitors as they have some pretty views and so on (and Sidmouth has a very popular folk festival so is very busy one week a year). But the people there are basically residents, and these are essentially nice and fairly pricey retirement areas. Nothing is uniform of course - but that's very much the vibe - better off pensioners. Elsewhere on that stretch, you have largely rather chocolate-boxy villages - Salcombe Regis, Beer, Colaton Raleigh, and so on. Again, nothing is uniform and you'll get a cluster of Council and ex-Council properties here and there which feel a bit run down. But by and large it's pretty upmarket. Sidmouth can't be a resort because it has a shingle beach? Actually some significant English resorts have shingle beaches- have you never been to Brighton? Anyway, whilst it may be true that the town beach at Sidmouth the principal beach material is shingle the Jacobs Ladder beach is firm red sand except when the tide is fully in,with pebbles under the cliffs, and much nicer than, say, Exmouth. This was my beach of choice as a child (ever since the wartime barbed wire was removed) and I have been returning to it from time to time ever since.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,077
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 24, 2022 20:28:02 GMT
There is no pact. The liberals just know labour were at a weak point in 2019, and there are in any case pretty much no lib lab marginals so are targeting gains from the conservatives. We should be confident that if we don't carry on making a mess of everything, our prospects are pretty good, as the liberals will find it tougher when the question being asked of the electorate is who they want forming the next government. In effect they are then just a labour proxy in areas that (by virtue of the low labour vote) don't like labour. Naturally this makes gains tough. Another angle would be a lot of Conservatives would be annoyed at blowing a 80 seat majority(higher on the new boundaries) and would think another term with an outright majority can be squeezed out a la 1992
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Jun 24, 2022 20:29:22 GMT
1. It’s not dishonest, because it’s obvious 2. It’s not undemocratic, because it gives the voters a choice of which party they want to vote for (unlike the SDP/Liberal Alliance, in which candidates of one party were foisted on the voters without giving them the choice) 3. It sells itself 4. Yes, because they voted Lib Dem instead of Conservative Liked bar 4 , you are spot on re the sdp and liberals Yes I would certainly "like" this post for 1-3, but obviously 4 is loony.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 20:29:36 GMT
There is no pact. The liberals just know labour were at a weak point in 2019, and there are in any case pretty much no lib lab marginals so are targeting gains from the conservatives. We should be confident that if we don't carry on making a mess of everything, our prospects are pretty good, as the liberals will find it tougher when the question being asked of the electorate is who they want forming the next government. In effect they are then just a labour proxy in areas that (by virtue of the low labour vote) don't like labour. Naturally this makes gains tough. Another angle would be a lot of Conservatives would be annoyed at blowing a 80 seat majority(higher on the new boundaries) and would think another term with an outright majority can be squeezed out a la 1992 The majority has now fallen to 72!
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,234
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 24, 2022 20:30:35 GMT
1. It’s not dishonest, because it’s obvious 2. It’s not undemocratic, because it gives the voters a choice of which party they want to vote for (unlike the SDP/Liberal Alliance, in which candidates of one party were foisted on the voters without giving them the choice) 3. It sells itself 4. Yes, because they voted Lib Dem instead of Conservative Liked bar 4 , you are spot on re the sdp and liberals The difference is that the SDP and Liberals campaigned on an agreed joint manifesto in 1983 and 1987. It was effectively one party platform, albeit presented by two autonomous parties. There is no prospect of a joint platform being agreed between Labour, Lib Dems and (if needed) Greens or of candidates standing down for each other. Policy positions will remain distinct, though agreements on specific areas may be possible. Where that leads remains to be seen.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,077
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 24, 2022 20:30:44 GMT
Another angle would be a lot of Conservatives would be annoyed at blowing a 80 seat majority(higher on the new boundaries) and would think another term with an outright majority can be squeezed out a la 1992 The majority has now fallen to 72! Wafer thin if you ask Month Python
|
|
|
Post by graham on Jun 24, 2022 20:33:56 GMT
The majority has now fallen to 72! Wafer thin if you ask Month Python I believe there are also two MPs elected as Tories who no longer receive the party whip. Theoretically - were they to be assigned to the Opposition - that lowers the majority to 68!
|
|