Council elections 2019

rolf_f

john80 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

Thanks - it felt quite good! It could be argued to be a tactical voting fail but the bigger picture is what matters here and party politics should be considered as an utter triviality given what is going on in the world. Corbyn has the power to do great good (effectively by forcing another referendum which will hopefully result in the end of Brexit and therefore allow us to concentrate on working with Europe to stop the climate catastrophe rather than focussing the next decades work on worrying how we simultaneously stop all those awful immigrants from coming here whilst at the same time still having enough nurses, hotel cleaners, fruit pickers etc - but he probably won't because he is as weak as May.

Good luck with the EU sorting out climate change. For an organisation that can't stop moving between offices due to self interest I am not entirely sure how you see them sorting out climate change.

And us crawling back under our stone will help how? We are good at influencing the EU from within. We won't be from outside. And I'm really not sure what office moves has to do with anything. And it's not as though we don't do that all the time here either.

robert88

It is amusing that we are talking about Brexit on the council elections thread and about the council elections on the Brexit thread.

Pross

Robert88 wrote:

It is amusing that we are talking about Brexit on the council elections thread and about the council elections on the Brexit thread.

It has become the be all and end all of UK politics which is one of its biggest dangers. Once (if?) it is finally resolved we'll probably discover all sorts of legislation that was sneaked through unnoticed while everyone was distracted by the Brexit farce.

Stevo_666

TimothyW wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

Do you?

I mean, I linked some numbers - pre the election, 7615 tory councillors, 6407 labour.

So lets subtract the councillors lost since then shall we?

7615-1330= 6285 Conservative
6407-85= 6322 Labour

Oh, looks like Labour won the election. Go Labour.

As mentioned by RJS above, its about the seats contested - which is also the subject of the thread. If you have to include council wards and seats where there was no election in order to claim no win for a party then that's pretty weak.

If you follow that logic then you should be sending messages of congratulations to Nicola Sturgeon as they likely have a majority of council seats in Scotland without even having any elections this year

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Rolf, if you even think its might be possible that Corbyn can transform himself from socialist dinosaur to electable politician with sensible policies in the next 2 weeks then I really do worry about you

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Rolf, if you even think its might be possible that Corbyn can transform himself from socialist dinosaur to electable politician with sensible policies in the next 2 weeks then I really do worry about you

His party are currently polling higher than the Tories, so it's clearly not so cut and dried.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Rolf, if you even think its might be possible that Corbyn can transform himself from socialist dinosaur to electable politician with sensible policies in the next 2 weeks then I really do worry about you

His party are currently polling higher than the Tories, so it's clearly not so cut and dried.

Corbyn developing sensible policies in the next 2 weeks? There must be better odds on a 3-legged horse winning the Grand National.

rick_chasey

Who said being sensible equated to being electable?

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Who said being sensible equated to being electable?

I didn't, but it was one of my criteria in my post above to Rolf.

rick_chasey

So you don't think the leader of the party polling highest is electable.

But you do think this current shower of sh!t of a government is.

You can see why I suspect a level of cognitive dissonance here.

Either you think being sh!t is no barrier to being elected or you do.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

So you don't think the leader of the party polling highest is electable.

But you do think this current shower of sh!t of a government is.

You can see why I suspect a level of cognitive dissonance here.

Either you think being sh!t is no barrier to being elected or you do.

Read my post again.

I gave two criteria in my post above to Rolf which was my test for whether I should worry about him - electability and sensible policies. You can have one without the other, as Labour govts have demonstrated in the past.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Rolf, if you even think its might be possible that Corbyn can transform himself from socialist dinosaur to electable politician with sensible policies in the next 2 weeks then I really do worry about you

No need to worry Stevo. I don't but I am being quite specific. I'd vote for whoever was most likely to win of the options clearly pushing for a second referendum. If I feel I can trust Corbyn to deliver on that then I will consider voting Labour in the European elections but that does of course mean he'd have to make a decision on something which seems unlikely. I'd hate to have him as PM but then, in fairness, he'd probably be less bad than the Cameron May combo. But that's like picking which limb you'd most like to have amputated.

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So you don't think the leader of the party polling highest is electable.

But you do think this current shower of sh!t of a government is.

You can see why I suspect a level of cognitive dissonance here.

Either you think being sh!t is no barrier to being elected or you do.

Read my post again.

I gave two criteria in my post above to Rolf which was my test for whether I should worry about him - electability and sensible policies. You can have one without the other, as Labour govts have demonstrated in the past.

Sure, but it's not just about whether you personally are worried or not. UKIP/Farage didn't even have any policies beyond leaving the EU and they managed to win the UK European elections and panic Cameron into calling a referendum. It wouldn't be that far off the current trends if Corbyn managed to scrape a GE win or dead heat and form a coalition with the SNP.

orraloon

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

slowbike

orraloon wrote:

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

Reminds me of a phone call with an excited brother (quite some years ago)

Brother "I've saved £500"
Me "What have you bought?"
Brother "Some kit - but I've saved £500!"
Me "How much was it"
Brother "Only £900"
Me "Did you need that bit of kit"
Brother "Not really"
Me "So you've spent £900 - not saved anything ... "



Conservatives have "Lost" many local elections - they went from a position of being in control of the council, to no longer being in control. They've LOST their control.

I really don't see how anyone in central government take that as a hint that the public want them to deliver brexit more quickly ...

Let's see what happens for the EU elections - they'll spin that any which way they like too ...

rjsterry

orraloon wrote:

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

It's a casino so you have lost and so has he. The casino has won.

knedlicky

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame

Good for you.
You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

I think that's true if one had PR but I'm not so sure with FPTP.

Stevo_666

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Rolf, if you even think its might be possible that Corbyn can transform himself from socialist dinosaur to electable politician with sensible policies in the next 2 weeks then I really do worry about you

No need to worry Stevo. I don't but I am being quite specific. I'd vote for whoever was most likely to win of the options clearly pushing for a second referendum. If I feel I can trust Corbyn to deliver on that then I will consider voting Labour in the European elections but that does of course mean he'd have to make a decision on something which seems unlikely. I'd hate to have him as PM but then, in fairness, he'd probably be less bad than the Cameron May combo. But that's like picking which limb you'd most like to have amputated.

Rolf, at least you realise a Corbyn/SNP coalition would be a bad thing. Let's try to build on that.

Stevo_666

orraloon wrote:

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

Bad analogy. It's actually like my football analogy a couple of pages back. We won 4-2 a while ago and we've just won 4-3.

Bit dont worry, as Scottish football fan I guess you're used to losing frequently

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

orraloon wrote:

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

Bad analogy. It's actually like my football analogy a couple of pages back. We won 4-2 a while ago and we've just won 4-3.

Bit dont worry, as Scottish football fan I guess you're used to losing frequently

3-2 - the Conservative score would be lower than the previous 'match'. Not sure why anyone needs an analogy to understand an election result anyway. I mean what is there to simplify?

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

orraloon wrote:

Here's a question for the beancounter(s) in our midst.

I have £1,000. I go to the casino. I come home with £600. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

While I was in the casino, the bloke next to me came in with £500, lost £100 and went home with £400. Does that make me a winner or a loser?

Bad analogy. It's actually like my football analogy a couple of pages back. We won 4-2 a while ago and we've just won 4-3.

Bit dont worry, as Scottish football fan I guess you're used to losing frequently

3-2 - the Conservative score would be lower than the previous 'match'. Not sure why anyone needs an analogy to understand an election result anyway. I mean what is there to simplify?

Because some people clearly didn't get it. See my comments in the other thread about Labour voters

rjsterry

Given the vast majority of the 8425 seats contested were in shire districts - a home advantage if you like - if the Conservatives had actually lost on overall seat count they'd have a real existential problem on their hands. If they can't win in the shires they'd be toast.

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

Given the vast majority of the 8425 seats contested were in shire districts - a home advantage if you like - if the Conservatives had actually lost on overall seat count they'd have a real existential problem on their hands. If they can't win in the shires they'd be toast.

Maybe, although to the extent that this is a protest vote on Brexit, then expect a bounce back in these districts when it is done.

rick_chasey

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Given the vast majority of the 8425 seats contested were in shire districts - a home advantage if you like - if the Conservatives had actually lost on overall seat count they'd have a real existential problem on their hands. If they can't win in the shires they'd be toast.

Maybe, although to the extent that this is a protest vote on Brexit, then expect a bounce back in these districts when it is done.

Brexit will not be done for a generation, even if a withdrawal is agreed upon.

Stevo_666

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Given the vast majority of the 8425 seats contested were in shire districts - a home advantage if you like - if the Conservatives had actually lost on overall seat count they'd have a real existential problem on their hands. If they can't win in the shires they'd be toast.

Maybe, although to the extent that this is a protest vote on Brexit, then expect a bounce back in these districts when it is done.

Brexit will not be done for a generation, even if a withdrawal is agreed upon.

Given how long it typically takes the EU to do a trade deal, you could be right.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Given the vast majority of the 8425 seats contested were in shire districts - a home advantage if you like - if the Conservatives had actually lost on overall seat count they'd have a real existential problem on their hands. If they can't win in the shires they'd be toast.

Maybe, although to the extent that this is a protest vote on Brexit, then expect a bounce back in these districts when it is done.

Brexit will not be done for a generation, even if a withdrawal is agreed upon.

Given how long it typically takes the EU to do a trade deal, you could be right.

We are indeed a lot quicker than the EU by virtue of our approach of not actually doing anything apart from spending two years saying "We want you to do this - let me know when you agree" and then being surprised when they don't. I guess if you have two slack countries you can get a trade deal pretty quickly on that basis but it probably won't be what we want.

And yes Stevo - the idea of a Labour SNP coalition is a pretty grim thought. Not that it would last long I suspect.

rick_chasey

Austerity is probably a bigger story in these elections, having said all this.

rjsterry

Ouch.

https://www.conservativehome.com/thecol ... uture.html

rolf_f

rjsterry wrote:

Ouch.

https://www.conservativehome.com/thecol ... uture.html

Ouch indeed but just another Tory Fwit demonstrating all the competencies he is berating TM about. Is there one non-idiot among them?

rjsterry

Rolf F wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Ouch.

https://www.conservativehome.com/thecol ... uture.html

Ouch indeed but just another Tory Fwit demonstrating all the competencies he is berating TM about. Is there one non-idiot among them?

I do take issue with this point though.

Nigel Farage has matured, and has some serious and credible Euro-Parliamentary candidates

Rees-Mogg's sister, Anne Widdecombe and the guy who used to edit Loaded?

And the 88,000 members aren't actually party members in that they have no say on policy or the leadership: it's just a fanclub.