FlyTheNest

Or previous PM's for that matter.

Good-afternoon, everyone

SpinningHugo wrote:
I'd be amazed if JC brought anyone back, save at the junior level. They wouldn't have been generous to him if he'd lost badly, so why be generous when he has lost well.

Well I think he might want a few high-profile returnees precisely in order to give a good (magnaminous) impression. Would like to see Nandy and McGovern in, personally.

Cooper? Meh.

I am taking the piss of my own predictive skills,almost invariably wrong.

HindleA wrote:I reserve the right to claim,the evidence is there,I was indisputably correct.on any prediction I made.I didn't actually give one elsewise that proved me indisputably wrong,(but elevating to a score draw in assumptive terms)yet.I look forward,and work towards hopefully being so indisputably wrong in the future.

Douglas Adams wrote:The guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.

Personally I don't particularly rate Cooper regardless of the DWP thing.

BBC2 has an hour-long programme at 9pm tonight titled: Jo Cox: Death of an MP.

The documentary tells the story of the horrific attack on 16 June 2016 and events surrounding it through the testimony of those closest to the crime – including Jo Cox's family, eyewitnesses and those who knew the murderer, Thomas Mair.
With what the BBC is describing as "unique access to West Yorkshire Police’s murder investigation", the programme will draw together for the first time all the CCTV, archive footage and evidence that was gathered by the investigating officers.
The result will be a "forensic exploration" of what the prosecutors at Mair’s trial called a "terrorist murder" airing later this summer on BBC2.

Nearly a year ago,good grief,said Charlie Brown.

From the GQ thing

"The central message for Labour to absorb is that they lost, and that they are a long way from victory. There is much smugness and hubris mixed in with their jubilation, and already signs that they are more interested in rubbing their result in the faces of moderates than in moving on to what they need to do to win"

What's a win?

The SNP clearly and unequivocally won in Scotland - 35 of 59 seats is a big majority - and, at the same time, the direction of travel is clearly and unequivocally against them.

The Conservatives clearly 'won' the election across the UK as the largest party in parliament, but they fell short of a majority (and so didn't win), lost seats compared to the last election (and so clearly didn't win) and really radically failed to meet the predictions made at the beginning of the campaign and, to an extent, radically failed to meet the predictions made at the end of the campaign - The Sun's last tweet before the exit poll said 'We're hearing 400 seats for the Conservatives'. Forecasts in early May were 391-415 seats which fell to 337-366 seats in the last week (save for YouGov who predicted a hung parliament) - and again, having called an election that wasn't needed expressly in order to consolidate your power base by increasing your majority, this was a disaster for the conservative party.

To 'Win', Labour would have had to move towards Blair's achievements in 1997 - he gained 145 seats. This time labour needed to gain just under a hundred seats for a simple majority, and in reality about 110-120 to see a term through. That would have been a long way beyond astonishing. They have lost three general elections in a row, and in terms of seats they are back a little ahead of where they were in 2010, but with such a big rise in the vote share, and such a big share of the vote, and outperforming expectations by so much (seat predictions early May 155-185, rising to 199-209 with a YouGov 253 outlier in the last week) - it's difficult to argue that this wasn't a tremendous success even if they didn't win.

(Yes, I am cheating a bit by taking the YouGov last week figures out by they are so far outside the other predictions I think it makes sense to call it the outlier it is.)

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/06/1 ... _accuracy/

Fascinating, captain.

gilsey wrote:Are the Tories in Terminal Decline?
http://averypublicsociologist.blogspot. ... cline.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The problem the Tories have is their policies have, for the last seven years, relentlessly attacked people in work, and younger people in particular. With their indifference regarding wages, security at work, job quality, house building, and their continued application of zombie austerity, they are bedding down a reflex hostility to their party that will last for longer, which is going to negatively impact their chances among these age groups, while their present support continues to die off.

edited to add - 'links are not endorsements'

I think he will have some new faces in....and it doesn't have to be from the old guard either - it wasn't just them who showed some reluctance

I still think Ed Miliband and Clive Lewis would be great additions....and he could look at Nandy and the next generation as well. He will know though who he can trust at this critical time as he cannot take the risk of further undermining from within the SC

HindleA wrote:Nearly a year ago,good grief,said Charlie Brown.

Exactly one year on Friday. Won't ever forget that day

adam wrote:From the GQ thing

"The central message for Labour to absorb is that they lost, and that they are a long way from victory. There is much smugness and hubris mixed in with their jubilation, and already signs that they are more interested in rubbing their result in the faces of moderates than in moving on to what they need to do to win"

What's a win?

I don't think I linked it here, but I did see an article last week suggesting this could be the election every party lost, with appropriate explanations. Prescient.

@gilsey ,FWIW I always so assume,sorry if my response came across as addressed to you rather than link.I have Yoda turned into.


http://www.yodaspeak.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA wrote:I have Yoda turned into.


http://www.yodaspeak.co.uk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yoda turned into I have.

FFIY

howsillyofme1 wrote:

HindleA wrote:I reserve the right to claim,the evidence is there,I was indisputably correct.on any prediction I made.I didn't actually give one elsewise that proved me indisputably wrong,(but elevating to a score draw in assumptive terms)yet.I look forward,and work towards hopefully being so indisputably wrong in the future.

I add you to my list of incredible predictors

So far

Hindle
Tem ermmmmmm that's it so far

I was shit!

To be fair, I only said a 1 in 4 chance of a hung Parliament, and no tory landslide, though I was pretty sure on the day Labour had done a lot better.

pk1 wrote:

HindleA wrote:Nearly a year ago,good grief,said Charlie Brown.

Exactly one year on Friday. Won't ever forget that day

I was at our school production sitting next to our local MP and we talked about the attack. At that stage we knew no more but as I was walking up the road I saw him ahead of me on the phone. Once I got in ad saw the news that she'd died I guessed that's what he was on the phone about.

O level Yoda -fail.

adam wrote:From the GQ thing

"The central message for Labour to absorb is that they lost, and that they are a long way from victory. There is much smugness and hubris mixed in with their jubilation, and already signs that they are more interested in rubbing their result in the faces of moderates than in moving on to what they need to do to win"

What's a win?

The SNP clearly and unequivocally won in Scotland - 35 of 59 seats is a big majority - and, at the same time, the direction of travel is clearly and unequivocally against them.

The Conservatives clearly 'won' the election across the UK as the largest party in parliament, but they fell short of a majority (and so didn't win), lost seats compared to the last election (and so clearly didn't win) and really radically failed to meet the predictions made at the beginning of the campaign and, to an extent, radically failed to meet the predictions made at the end of the campaign - The Sun's last tweet before the exit poll said 'We're hearing 400 seats for the Conservatives'. Forecasts in early May were 391-415 seats which fell to 337-366 seats in the last week (save for YouGov who predicted a hung parliament) - and again, having called an election that wasn't needed expressly in order to consolidate your power base by increasing your majority, this was a disaster for the conservative party.

To 'Win', Labour would have had to move towards Blair's achievements in 1997 - he gained 145 seats. This time labour needed to gain just under a hundred seats for a simple majority, and in reality about 110-120 to see a term through. That would have been a long way beyond astonishing. They have lost three general elections in a row, and in terms of seats they are back a little ahead of where they were in 2010, but with such a big rise in the vote share, and such a big share of the vote, and outperforming expectations by so much (seat predictions early May 155-185, rising to 199-209 with a YouGov 253 outlier in the last week - it's difficult to argue that this wasn't a tremendous success even if they didn't win.

(Yes, I am cheating a bit by taking the YouGov last week figures out by they are so far outside the other predictions I think it makes sense to call it the outlier it is.)

great point Adam

Also we have seen a lot of comparisons with the past - especially the Blair years - that focused on seats. The Tories and 'moderates' have done this a few times

As you said the voter percentage is much higher than any election since 2001 and the electoral maths has now turned against Labour so that actually they are not over-represented in Parliament any longer.....

Labour are also 34 seats down on what they had due to Scotland....this is a significant reduction - also of course the LD collapse, predominantly to the benefit of the Tories

There have been two big transfers of seats since 2010 - the LD->Tory and Labour->SNP neither of which have helped the Labour seat total.....

and neither of which were due to Corbyn or the current leadership......

Possibilities of the government trying to do a last minute sneaky ousting of Bercow?

Theresa May has left Downing Street for the Commons, where she will be in the chamber for the election of the speaker when MPs meet for the first time.

(just to be clear I know nothing at all and have heard less, it's just my low opinion of some people shining through).

Temulkar wrote:

howsillyofme1 wrote:

HindleA wrote:I reserve the right to claim,the evidence is there,I was indisputably correct.on any prediction I made.I didn't actually give one elsewise that proved me indisputably wrong,(but elevating to a score draw in assumptive terms)yet.I look forward,and work towards hopefully being so indisputably wrong in the future.

I add you to my list of incredible predictors

So far

Hindle
Tem ermmmmmm that's it so far

I was shit!

To be fair, I only said a 1 in 4 chance of a hung Parliament, and no tory landslide, though I was pretty sure on the day Labour had done a lot better.

Stop being modest...it was still better than most of us. Still haven't seen TE to explain why his predictions were so wrong! 20% and 150 seats I think was one of his

More people bloody voting,a good thing,personally I can't wait for the next one.

adam wrote:Possibilities of the government trying to do a last minute sneaky ousting of Bercow?

Theresa May has left Downing Street for the Commons, where she will be in the chamber for the election of the speaker when MPs meet for the first time.

(just to be clear I know nothing at all and have heard less, it's just my low opinion of some people shining through).

Wouldn't be advisable with the numbers they have.

Try that one and not succeed...they really need to keep the Speaker onside right now.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:
I'd be amazed if JC brought anyone back, save at the junior level. They wouldn't have been generous to him if he'd lost badly, so why be generous when he has lost well.

Well I think he might want a few high-profile returnees precisely in order to give a good (magnaminous) impression. Would like to see Nandy and McGovern in, personally.

Cooper? Meh.

Well, you'd have to ditch someone to do that.

Now I think the shadow cabinet is an embarrassment, but I am not a Labour supporter., and it would be a kick in the teeth to the loyalties of, say, Burgon and Long-Bailey to demote them now, however useless.

To be fair,who would foresee as if actively trying to lose stupidity of the Tory campaign.

pk1 wrote:

HindleA wrote:Nearly a year ago,good grief,said Charlie Brown.

Exactly one year on Friday. Won't ever forget that day

If there's anything I hate the media for more than anything else - and even worse it applies to certain "liberal" useful idiots, not just the more predictable right - it was their deliberate and calculated attempt to depoliticise and decontextualise what was AN EXPLICTLY POLITICAL ASSASSINATION from the outset.

Great to see Tracy Brabin returned with a massive majority last week, btw. Certain unlovely types were almost salivating at the thought of a Tory gain there.

Ouch.

Away with your nonsense.Abrahams,Healey to name but two perfectly capable and in the latter case indisputable proven record and popular in housing circles as to knowledge and conscientiouness,in contrast to fucking nobody as yet,unless they have bothered to name somebody yet.

adam wrote:Possibilities of the government trying to do a last minute sneaky ousting of Bercow?

Theresa May has left Downing Street for the Commons, where she will be in the chamber for the election of the speaker when MPs meet for the first time.

(just to be clear I know nothing at all and have heard less, it's just my low opinion of some people shining through).

Not being pushed to a vote, according to Daily Politics.

SpinningHugo wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:
I'd be amazed if JC brought anyone back, save at the junior level. They wouldn't have been generous to him if he'd lost badly, so why be generous when he has lost well.

Well I think he might want a few high-profile returnees precisely in order to give a good (magnaminous) impression. Would like to see Nandy and McGovern in, personally.

Cooper? Meh.

Well, you'd have to ditch someone to do that.

Now I think the shadow cabinet is an embarrassment, but I am not a Labour supporter., and it would be a kick in the teeth to the loyalties of, say, Burgon and Long-Bailey to demote them now, however useless.

Aren't there a few vacancies anyway? (a couple of retirements, Abbott voluntarily stepping aside etc)

I don't think either of the two you have named need to worry much tbh.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

pk1 wrote:

HindleA wrote:Nearly a year ago,good grief,said Charlie Brown.

Exactly one year on Friday. Won't ever forget that day

If there's anything I hate the media for more than anything else - and even worse it applies to certain "liberal" useful idiots, not just the more predictable right - it was their deliberate and calculated attempt to depoliticise and decontextualise what was AN EXPLICTLY POLITICAL ASSASSINATION from the outset.

Great to see Tracy Brabin returned with a massive majority last week, btw. Certain unlovely types were almost salivating at the thought of a Tory gain there.

Hear hear. Still makes me shudder.

To be fair Keeley makes me turn red such is my shame on someone who knows what she is talking about.Just one of those little easy issues.

AnatolyKasparov wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Well, you'd have to ditch someone to do that.

Now I think the shadow cabinet is an embarrassment, but I am not a Labour supporter., and it would be a kick in the teeth to the loyalties of, say, Burgon and Long-Bailey to demote them now, however useless.

Aren't there a few vacancies anyway? (a couple of retirements, Abbott voluntarily stepping aside etc)

I don't think either of the two you have named need to worry much tbh.

Abbott isn't going. She is part of the core alongside McDonnell. Are there any other senior vacancies?

Mandy has been really critical. He won't bring her in I'd expect.

Bush thinks Vernon Coaker and some junior people.

JC has not exactly surprised on the upside with his ecumenical spirit. And now, why should he? Screw them.

Bercow confirmed as Speaker

Tories banged on the tables for about 30 seconds as May arrived for the crunch meeting in front of her politicians, many of whom have expressed anger at the result.
A senior MP at the meeting of the party’s 1922 Committee described the prime minister as “contrite and genuine but not on her knees” as she repeatedly apologised....
Another MP...said: “She was very concerned about people who have lost their seats. The party is going to help them, some of them are in dire financial situations. ”

- May tells Tory MPs: 'I got us into this mess and I'm going to get us out of it'

(cJA emphasis)

We've learned former Tory MPs didn't live within their means
I feel incredulous and angry about the double standards at play here, is it just me?

This the one?


Rory Cellan-Jones @ruskin147

Political pundits are brilliant - they utterly failed to predict the election result but they already know why it happened & what comes next
7:31 AM · Jun 10, 2017

CJA


No not just you,clearly not in dire financial circumstances unless totally of their own making,fucking insulting.

SpinningHugo wrote: Abbott isn't going

She announced she was stepping aside just days before the election! Did you miss it?

Now, I agree she isn't necessarily gone PERMANENTLY - but that's not what I said. For now, there is a vacancy.

As for Nandy she called it wrong last year - should have returned after Jez's second leadership win like Starmer/Champion/Healey et al did. Flirted a bit unwisely with Blue Labour stuff as well - including some silly conference that featured that racist cabbie.

She was apparently quite generous to Corbyn on election night though - so we'll see.

OK. A sort of constitutional question. I know that once Parliament was dissolved there were officially no MPs and as such noone could be called an MP in the interim period. Does an elected member take up or resume the title of MP following the election result or when Parliament is reconvened? I mean do they have to be sworn in or something, or are they MPs from the moment the returning officer calls the result?

And another. What parliamentary roles do remain during the interim period?

Not following but there will be at least one deputy speaker vacancy.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... april-2017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


UK House Price Index summary: April 2017

HindleA wrote:Not following but there will be at least one deputy speaker vacancy.

It was only today that I realised she had not been re-elected. Quite shocked to learn that seat had been Labour's since the 1930s but is now in Tory hands.

seeingclearly wrote:OK. A sort of constitutional question. I know that once Parliament was dissolved there were officially no MPs and as such noone could be called an MP in the interim period. Does an elected member take up or resume the title of MP following the election result or when Parliament is reconvened? I mean do they have to be sworn in or something, or are they MPs from the moment the returning officer calls the result?

And another. What parliamentary roles do remain during the interim period?

AFAIK it is only t̶h̶e̶ ̶C̶a̶b̶i̶n̶e̶t̶ the government (not the entire party) that continues during an election period.

Hansard says this about being sworn in:

At the start of a new Parliament, all MPs (whether or not they have been MPs in the past) must take the oath of allegiance or make a solemn affirmation.

After the Commons Speaker has taken the oath, MPs come forward one by one to swear or affirm at the despatch box. MPs take the oath/affirm in order of seniority:

Father of the House (the longest continuous serving Member)
Cabinet Ministers
Shadow Cabinet Ministers
Privy Counsellors
Other Ministers
Other Members in order of seniority (by the Parliament of first entry or, for those with broken service, that of most recent entry)
A Table Clerk at the despatch box offers a choice of affirmation or oath cards to read. If the MP wishes to swear on a sacred text, that will be provided. At the Table are:

the New Testament
the Old Testament (in English and Hebrew, or in Hebrew)
the Old and New Testament
the Koran
the Granth
the Welsh Bible
the Gaelic Bible
Those books which may not be handled by non-believers are kept in slip-cases.

The MP takes the oath or affirms, then moves along the Table to the next Table Clerk and signs the Test Roll, a parchment book headed by the oath and affirmation which is kept by the Clerk of the House of Commons.

Finally, the MP is introduced to the Commons Speaker by the Clerk of the House. After shaking the Speaker’s hand, the MP goes behind the Speaker’s Chair, where staff will take a signature for recognition purposes and ask how the MP wishes to be known in House documents.

The initial period of swearing in lasts for about two hours. Most MPs are sworn on the first day, although the House of Commons will also meet for swearing-in on following days.

http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elec ... wearingin/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

My seat,demographics,boundary changes in 2010 local candidate etc,I fully expected.Hence Clay Cross went Blue, is a strange shaped constituency and not as surprising as it seems.

And I am inconveniently caught agonisingly close to two equidistant Labour seats.

Village remains red.

So with a likelihood of a second election this year, can we legitimately use 'Winter is coming' as a meme?

HindleA wrote:And I am inconveniently caught agonisingly close to two equidistant Labour seats.

Send peevish messages to the Tory interloper daily.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;