|
|
Post by Philip Davies on Dec 24, 2014 0:20:10 GMT
I wonder who won this by-election?
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Dec 24, 2014 17:49:35 GMT
The Conservatives might just have scraped in (but by less than about 500 votes)
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,887
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 24, 2014 18:24:16 GMT
The Conservatives might just have scraped in (but by less than about 500 votes) That was far funnier then, before the Conservatives actually started choosing candidates like that, witness last three by-elections. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 24, 2014 20:55:05 GMT
I'm trying to imagine what the boundaries might be. Being called West Chalfont implies it probably doesn't include all the Chalfonts - perhaps excludes Llittle Chalfont but includes Chalfont St Peter and Chalfont St Giles. I'd imagine it would include Gerrards Cross and logically would exclude Chesham therefore requiring additional territory from Beaconsfield constituency - Denham, Iver perhaps Beaconsfield itself but probably not Burnham etc. IN other words it would likely take the more strongly Conservative elements of two of the safest Conservative seats in the country and as such would be an absolute dream seat for the Conservatives, probably as safe as somewhere like, er, Christchurch
|
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Dec 24, 2014 21:34:57 GMT
I'm trying to imagine what the boundaries might be. Being called West Chalfont implies it probably doesn't include all the Chalfonts - perhaps excludes Llittle Chalfont but includes Chalfont St Peter and Chalfont St Giles. I'd imagine it would include Gerrards Cross and logically would exclude Chesham therefore requiring additional territory from Beaconsfield constituency - Denham, Iver perhaps Beaconsfield itself but probably not Burnham etc. IN other words it would likely take the more strongly Conservative elements of two of the safest Conservative seats in the country and as such would be an absolute dream seat for the Conservatives, probably as safe as somewhere like, er, Christchurch The programme went out on 14 October 1994 and Partridge refers to the by-election taking place "next week" - that would be Thursday 20 October 1994, eight weeks before Dudley West. Tony Blair had just become Labour leader and the polls gave Labour a 30 or so point lead. (EDIT: And how could I forget! Polling day itself was when the Guardian broke the Cash for Questions affair!) West Chalfont looks just the sort of semi-urban seat, like Christchurch, that in 1994 the Liberal Democrats would pick up with tactical voting, especially as the candidate is a local councillor, the Tory candidate seems to be Daniel Finkelstein, and the Labour candidate is a young Nicola Murray who we know went on to be utterly useless as leader of the party. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 22:05:55 GMT
Those two posts by Pete and psephos represent exactly why this forum is bloody brilliant.
|
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Dec 24, 2014 22:14:02 GMT
Those two posts by Pete and psephos represent exactly why this forum is bloody brilliant. And I thought I would be blocked by you for t-words or what have you. Boogieeck has had some interesting thoughts post-blocking, you should un-block him and read them. AND GORD BLESS US EVERY ONE. |
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Dec 24, 2014 22:20:02 GMT
You two are the saddest loneliest little boys I have ever met. I would like to organise a play day for you. Your parents could meet up in the library car park and once they have dragged you out of the reference section take you to see a film, maybe Dr Zhivago in 3D, then go for a burger in Wimpy. Home and in bed by 9, school tomorrow. Will the reference section have back sufficient back copies of Rob Waller's almanacs? Because I'm not wasting my time going otherwise. I shall stay here with my bucket of Lego Santa brought me (I looked under the tree). |
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Dec 24, 2014 22:21:59 GMT
You two are the saddest loneliest little boys I have ever met. I would like to organise a play day for you. Your parents could meet up in the library car park and once they have dragged you out of the reference section take you to see a film, maybe Dr Zhivago in 3D, then go for a burger in Wimpy. Home and in bed by 9, school tomorrow. Anyway I've seen Dr Zhivago. I want to see The Interview. But those imperialist Hollywood Yankee pigs at Sony have pulled it. Capitalist scum, denying me my Boxing Day treat. Adrian Psephos (age 13 3/4) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 22:54:15 GMT
You two are the saddest loneliest little boys I have ever met. I would like to organise a play day for you. Your parents could meet up in the library car park and once they have dragged you out of the reference section take you to see a film, maybe Dr Zhivago in 3D, then go for a burger in Wimpy. Home and in bed by 9, school tomorrow. Will the reference section have back sufficient back copies of Rob Waller's almanacs? Because I'm not wasting my time going otherwise. I shall stay here with my bucket of Lego Santa brought me (I looked under the tree). Next year we should all get together at write our own version of Robert Waller 's almanac? Maybe in time for the 2010 election after the 7th Periodic Review.... *spits and shines thick-rimmed glasses* |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 23:02:58 GMT
God (if he exists) bless you, every one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Dec 24, 2014 23:32:35 GMT
Will the reference section have back sufficient back copies of Rob Waller's almanacs? Because I'm not wasting my time going otherwise. I shall stay here with my bucket of Lego Santa brought me (I looked under the tree). ? Maybe in time for the 2010 election after the 7th Periodic Review.... *spits and shines thick-rimmed glasses* I entirely concur.  And I'll tell you this too: Routledge won't be interested! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 23:55:18 GMT
Next year we should all get together at write our own version of Robert Waller 's almanac? Maybe in time for the 2010 election after the 7th Periodic Review.... *spits and shines thick-rimmed glasses* I entirely concur. And I'll tell you this too: Routledge won't be interested! These days, Robert, they don't need to be  |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Dec 25, 2014 1:49:23 GMT
I'm trying to imagine what the boundaries might be. Being called West Chalfont implies it probably doesn't include all the Chalfonts - perhaps excludes Llittle Chalfont but includes Chalfont St Peter and Chalfont St Giles. I'd imagine it would include Gerrards Cross and logically would exclude Chesham therefore requiring additional territory from Beaconsfield constituency - Denham, Iver perhaps Beaconsfield itself but probably not Burnham etc. IN other words it would likely take the more strongly Conservative elements of two of the safest Conservative seats in the country and as such would be an absolute dream seat for the Conservatives, probably as safe as somewhere like, er, Christchurch The programme went out on 14 October 1994 and Partridge refers to the by-election taking place "next week" - that would be Thursday 20 October 1994, eight weeks before Dudley West. Tony Blair had just become Labour leader and the polls gave Labour a 30 or so point lead. (EDIT: And how could I forget! Polling day itself was when the Guardian broke the Cash for Questions affair!) West Chalfont looks just the sort of semi-urban seat, like Christchurch, that in 1994 the Liberal Democrats would pick up with tactical voting, especially as the candidate is a local councillor, the Tory candidate seems to be Daniel Finkelstein, and the Labour candidate is a young Nicola Murray who we know went on to be utterly useless as leader of the party. But the Liberal Democrat suffers from the 'Lord Taylor Issue', if we can call it that. |
|
|
|
Post by MeirionGwril on Jan 7, 2015 20:31:02 GMT
As a matter of interest, and not wishing to upset y'all, are there *any* women on this forum... |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jan 7, 2015 21:28:35 GMT
As a matter of interest, and not wishing to upset y'all, are there *any* women on this forum... |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Jan 8, 2015 22:25:33 GMT
As a matter of interest, and not wishing to upset y'all, are there *any* women on this forum... Yes, but not very many. Sharon is probably the most prominent at the moment, but zoe is quite well-known as well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 22:28:55 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2015 23:12:21 GMT
As a matter of interest, and not wishing to upset y'all, are there *any* women on this forum... Yes, but not very many. Sharon is probably the most prominent at the moment, but zoe is quite well-known as well. There's also oldwarhorse and @fionabloor who have both posted within the past month. On our side there is also the Europhile sally of ConHome fame who we haven't heard from for quite some time. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Jan 9, 2015 17:30:41 GMT
Yes, zoe is a woman...
|
|
