Labour needs to do more to see a #progressivemajority
When Nick Clegg meets his MPs today and polls them, I expect he’ll tell them that the party is in a lose-lose situation. Here is why.
Clegg does not want to prop up Gordon Brown’s party because that would make the Libdems more unpopular.
But going into a coalition with the Tories would incur much bigger costs. Clegg has repeatedly said he sees the Libdems as the only true progressive party and that it wants to supplant Labour as the real opposition. Going into an alliance with the Conservatives m not only destroys the idea that the Libdems are the official opposition, but will also throw away a lot of support.
Reading the grassroots – it’s clear that the Libdems overwhelmingly want voting reform to be their principle policy. Not surprising, since the current system works badly against them. But is Cameron likely to agree to anything approaching meaningful vote reform? I doubt it.
And lastly, if you see yourself as the only true progressive force, how do you justify allying with the least progressive party around (other than the DUP of course)?
It looks like Clegg holds the cards, but he’s actually in a very weak position.
The election results were good for the left, given the odds. The BNP lost, UKIP didn’t get anywhere and the Tories failed to get a majority despite all that money and press support behind them. Hell – their main opposition was a highly unpopular leader of a tired party that had no vision and ran one of the lamest campaigns in recent history. They are trying hard to ignore the grim reality but it’s still there.
If Labour want that coalition for the sake of people they claim to be fighting for – then the party needs to make it much easier for Clegg to come over.
For a start, Brown can’t stay as leader. Secondly, they need to adopt the main Libdem policies (which can’t be that hard).
I’d even go as far as saying: make Clegg PM – his approval ratings are far higher than any Labour minister. That would keep Libdems happy and keep Labourites (because they want to stay in power) happy.
On that point, can Labourites please stop going on about how the Libdems are so right-wing and want to slash everything? Here are the figures in graphical form.
Labour ministers should stop being so power-hungry and think about the people they’re seeking to represent. If they truly think the Tories will be terrible for those people, then they need to think about offering more incentives to Clegg.
Nigel Farage likely helped Bercow retain his seat
A small point about the BBC and its infatuation with the right. One of the highlights of the campaign results is how badly the right has done.
But its article on the relection of Speaker John Bercow is: Election 2010: Speaker John Bercow beats Nigel Farage
But the main challenger to Bercow was the independent candidate John Stevens who was backed by the network of independent candidates and supported by Martin Bell.
Stevens was also the candidate selected by Hang ‘em as the one to vote for.
Bercow got 22,000 votes, Stevens got 10,000 and Farage only 8,000. Had Farage not parachuted in but supported the local man, Bercow might even have been defeated, so if anything Farage helped re-elect him by splitting the vote.
A message for Nick Clegg…
The sun was shining on the sea,
Shining with all his might:
He did his very best to make
The billows smooth and bright–
And this was odd, because it was
The middle of the night.
The moon was shining sulkily,
Because she thought the sun
Had got no business to be there
After the day was done–
“It’s very rude of him,” she said,
“To come and spoil the fun!”
The sea was wet as wet could be,
The sands were dry as dry.
You could not see a cloud, because
No cloud was in the sky:
No birds were flying overhead–
There were no birds to fly.
The Walrus and the Carpenter
Were walking close at hand;
They wept like anything to see
Such quantities of sand:
“If this were only cleared away,”
They said, “it would be grand!”
“If seven maids with seven mops
Swept it for half a year.
Do you suppose,” the Walrus said,
“That they could get it clear?”
“I doubt it,” said the Carpenter,
And shed a bitter tear.
“O Oysters, come and walk with us!”
The Walrus did beseech.
“A pleasant walk, a pleasant talk,
Along the briny beach:
We cannot do with more than four,
To give a hand to each.”
The eldest Oyster looked at him,
But never a word he said:
The eldest Oyster winked his eye,
And shook his heavy head–
Meaning to say he did not choose
To leave the oyster-bed.
But four young Oysters hurried up,
All eager for the treat:
Their coats were brushed, their faces washed,
Their shoes were clean and neat–
And this was odd, because, you know,
They hadn’t any feet.
Four other Oysters followed them,
And yet another four;
And thick and fast they came at last,
And more, and more, and more–
All hopping through the frothy waves,
And scrambling to the shore.
The Walrus and the Carpenter
Walked on a mile or so,
And then they rested on a rock
Conveniently low:
And all the little Oysters stood
And waited in a row.
“The time has come,” the Walrus said,
“To talk of many things:
Of shoes–and ships–and sealing-wax–
Of cabbages–and kings–
And why the sea is boiling hot–
And whether pigs have wings.”
“But wait a bit,” the Oysters cried,
“Before we have our chat;
For some of us are out of breath,
And all of us are fat!”
“No hurry!” said the Carpenter.
They thanked him much for that.
“A loaf of bread,” the Walrus said,
“Is what we chiefly need:
Pepper and vinegar besides
Are very good indeed–
Now if you’re ready, Oysters dear,
We can begin to feed.”
“But not on us!” the Oysters cried,
Turning a little blue.
“After such kindness, that would be
A dismal thing to do!”
“The night is fine,” the Walrus said.
“Do you admire the view?
“It was so kind of you to come!
And you are very nice!”
The Carpenter said nothing but
“Cut us another slice:
I wish you were not quite so deaf–
I’ve had to ask you twice!”
“It seems a shame,” the Walrus said,
“To play them such a trick,
After we’ve brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!”
The Carpenter said nothing but
“The butter’s spread too thick!”
“I weep for you,” the Walrus said:
“I deeply sympathize.”
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.
“O Oysters,” said the Carpenter,
“You’ve had a pleasant run!
Shall we be trotting home again?’
But answer came there none–
And this was scarcely odd, because
They’d eaten every one.
#ProgressiveMajority – the popular vote!
We can’t let the story of a Tory mandate take hold in the tabloids or Sky News.
For every two people who voted Conservative, THREE people voted progressive.
Right now Labour and the Lib Dems together have over 52% of the popular vote. Add in Greens, the Irish SDLP and Alliance and the Progressive Majority has nearer 54% of the vote. That’s without even counting nationalists!
Only 36% of people voted for the Tories. Just two-thirds of the progressive vote.
There is a progressive majority in this country today.
Our collapsing electoral system may have failed to fully reflect it. And that’s a crisis.
But for every two people who voted Tory, three of us voted progressive.
We have more of a mandate than them.
Let’s get building bridges.
UPDATE: A crestfallen Clegg is kicking it forward. This was never going to be easy.
Now it’s up to us to hit refresh, get together and take our country back. #ProgressiveMajority
Ebenezer and The Case of the Election Night Tweeter
Its is not often that you see one of the country’s top opinion-formers picking his nose. As I rounded the corner opposite the pub, I was greeted by the sight of Ebenezer, the celebrated blogger, raising his stubby finger towards his nostril. As it entered the nose, he gave his whole hand an expert twist, as if he were operating a corkscrew. He grimaced as something was levered loose, which he pulled out and began rolling between his thumb and his forefinger.
Meanwhile, his other hand was perched over the keyboard of his laptop, his fingers furiously typing.
His eyes were distracted from the screen as I approached, which put an end to his trowelling. He let his non-keyboard hand flop down below his thigh, and I percieved him flick something out onto the pavement by his tiny table. Then he stood up, and offered the hand in greeting.
I may have paused for a spit-second before I shook it, but I don’t think he noticed.
Ebenezer sighed in mock exasperation. “At last!”
I smiled, and protested. “Not my fault, I left the flat an hour ago. They’re working on the Northern line so I had to get a bus.”
He played along. “Well, you should have known. There’s an app for that, yeah?” He waved his nose-picking hand at the metal chair opposite his, and sat down.
There was half a free-sheet newspaper splayed across the seat. Upside down, the new Prime Minister’s gurning face looked back at me. I picked it up and chucked it onto the ground, somewhere near where the bogey had probably landed.
Then I sat down and placed my iPhone carefully on the table. Ebenezer rolled his eyes at me. “What are you drinking?” he said. I could see he had a half-finished pint of some kind of dark ale on the go, leaned up against his laptop.
“I’ll probably just have a coffee for the moment,” I said. I stood up with the idea of ordering, but a waitress had clocked me and was already striding over. She was bursting out of a tight white shirt and had one of those black ties with a huge knot sitting over the centre of her chest.
When I ordered my a decaf latte, Ebenezer let out an audible snort, and shook his head. The girl bit her lip to suppress a smile, then disappeared inside.
“That knot must have been, like, a quadruple windsor or something” he said when she was out of view.
I decided to change the subject. “What are you working on?”
“Just a blog. But not for the main blog, though. Just my blog. Its about Dave.”
I nodded solemnly. Dave was dead.
“Yeah, I’ve been meaning to write something too. He was one of the first blogs I read when I started. Loads have people have been doing it. Its a good tribute I reckon.”
Dave Carswell was an old-school socialist, trapped in the second decade of the twenty-first century. He had worked in social care sector, but not front-line, and had been active in the unions for many years. He had also been a councillor too, in somewhere like Lewisham, but I think that had been a pretty short-lived experience. Whenever he wrote about that kind of local politics, his words would drip with condescension.
I just knew him as an Angry Old Blogger. He was good for a laugh if you desired some good old fashioned anti-Tory prejudice, the kind of craic you could really only find on the sites of the older guys. Whenever the younger generation attempted the same sort of stuff, it felt a bit false, as if they were desperate to live-up to some retro-ideal. But when Dave mentioned Mrs Thatcher and the milk, you knew it was authentic. His was a very real and very verbose passion.
“So, did you know him well then?” I asked. “I saw him at a couple of the meet-ups, but I knew him mostly from the blogs.”
Ebenezer shrugged. “Its not really an obituary” he said. “More of a review of his last few posts and tweets.”
I understood. Dave Carswell had scored a couple of big hits during the election campaign. “That’s great,” I said. “You could talk about the #LiberalDemoCrap hashtag, that was him. And that review of the first debate where he compared Brown to Michael Foot, that was awesome. Did you read that one?”
“Yeah, the first couple of thousand words, but…” Ebenezer’s voice trailed off for a moment, as if someone had pulled the plug on his inner motor. I could see he was choosing carefully what to say next.
“It’s about the run-up to his death. There was something not quite right about it.”
“You mean, it wasn’t a heart attack?”
He shook his head. “No no, it was definitely a heart attack. But there’s more…”
I cut him off in mid-sentence. “Hey look, if you’re going to write something about burn-out, about him blogging too much, its already been done. One of the obituaries was all about that, I re-tweeted it this morning.”
It was true. Dave had definitely blogged too much in those final days. He had fisked dozens of Cameron’s speeches, and written lengthy ripostes to most of the Telegraph’s front pages. He had played every spoof poster photoshopping game, and would forward links from elsewhere quite relentlessly. I was ashamed to admit it, but I had actually stopped following him on twitter about 10 days before polling, because he had been clogging my stream with RTs. He had dedicated resources to this election that only the unemployed or the retired could spare, though I was never clear whether Dave actually fell into either of these categories, or whether he was just self-employed.
“Well that’s part of it, yeah,” said Ebenezer. “He totally wiped himself out. The amount he was doing, staring at all those screens all day, it was bound to do some damage eventually.”
I was astonished at Ebenezer’s complete lack of self-awareness of his own life-style. He had about six computers set-up in his flat. And a man who posted exegesis on sock-puppetry in local government at 3am had no business casting aspersions over people like Dave, who at least kept to blogging inside normal social hours, 8am to midnight.
But I bit my tongue, for it seemed he was about to say something interesting.
“The thing is, he died at the wrong time.”
I was quick to score a cheap point. “No disrespect or anything, but to die on the first day of this new government may not be the worst thing to happen.”
Ebenezer ignored my attempt at humour. Instead, he messed about with his laptop for a moment. I looked beyond him and noticed the ‘free wi-fi’ logo on the glass pane of the pub door, below the Mastercard symbol. With a maestro like flourish, he clicked the laptop for a final time, and then spun it around to face me. It was Dave’s twitter page.
“Have a look at that!” said Ebenezer, triumphantly.
I was lost. “Its Dave’s tweets, right?”
“Right, but look at the last one.”
I read it aloud off the screen. It was just a short tweet about the new Prime Minister’s and the political fudge that had finally earned him his invitation to the Palace.
“Why so special?” I asked. “I tweeted the same thing. We all did, probably.”
“Yes. But this tweet was posted after Dave died.”
I bent forward in my chair and looked at Ebenezer. What game was he playing?
Eventually I thought of something to say. “Seriously dude, that’s bullshit. You don’t even know when he died.”
Ebenezer snapped shut the lid of his laptop, hard. It made a loud clap, that could have been a crack, and I winced.
“But I do! I do!” he whispered. “I have a contact in the police, who told me that Dave died around 3am on Friday morning.”
I leant back in my chair in disgust. “Get. To. Fuck. You. Twat. You don’t have any contacts in the Met…”
“Yes I do actually” said Ebenezer, suddenly no more than a schoolboy. “There’s this guy, right. He runs a forum where they review giant glass dildos and foreskin clamps and shit like that. Anyway, I traced his IP address back to a policestation in Brent. And but so now he does stuff for me. Nothing major or anything, he just confirms official reports that aren’t public yet. It gives me an edge.”
“What on earth were you doing tracing back IPs from a dildo site?” This revelation made me genuinely angry, because usually Ebenezer was militantly in favour of Internet privacy.
He blanked the question.
“So Dave had his heart attack at 3am, the police surgeon said.” He looked at me for acknowledgement, and I nodded my assent, conceding the point.
“And that figures, because it was at about 3am that it became clear who was going to get the most seats. After the results came in from Southampton and the recount up in Kettering, we could see which way the farts were blowing.”
I smiled. “So Dave had a heart attack because of the election result?”
“Right. He’d invested so much time working against it, he must have been livid. Pushed him over the edge.” His voice was almost breaking up.
I joined the dots that Ebenezer had sketched out for me, and asked the question he wanted me to ask. “So how did he send a tweet at 2pm? Someone must have hacked into his account, right?”
Ebenezer gave me a wry smile, as if to say, now who’s bullshitting. Why on earth would someone spend so much effort hacking into a twitter account, just to post something asinine about the election.
“No one hacked the account” he said, as if in conclusion.
I put my hands over my face and forced a muffled scream through them. “You cannot seriously be thinking what I think your thinking.”
He flipped open the laptop, and woke the screen from sleep. Dave’s tweets flickered back onto the screen. His nose picking finger pressed up against the LCD. “Look at the time stamp of the last tweet.”
I read off the screen. “2:05pm. Yes, I know, after Dave died, so you say.”
“Yes. After Dave died. But before our new Prime Minister announced his coalition. He didn’t make the announcement until at least a quarter to three. I know because I tweeted it when it happened, and Dave had already beaten us to it. I remember thinking it was odd because he never had any inside information before.”
I was speechless. Irritated at Ebenezer behaving like a hypocrite, annoyed that he was wishing ghosts into twitter.
“So that’s the gist of my obituary,” he said. “A guy obsessed with politics right up until the grave… and beyond!” He made a butterfly with his hands and fluttered it towards my face. I pushed him away.
“Seriously man, that’s really cruel. He had a wife, didn’t he?”
“Divorced.”
“Yeah, but still. Thousands of people read your blog every day. Its a really shitty thing to do.”
The mention of his blog statistics seemed to rip Ebenezer back into reality. He sheepishly slumped forward on his bulky frame, losing a couple of inches of height.
Just then, the waitress returned with my coffee. I thanked her, and she smiled. I didn’t smile back, and Ebenezer was much less interested in the knot in her tie than he had been before. She shuffled off.
The chime of a birdsong broke the silence. I was glad of new messages, so I leant forward and picked up my iPhone, to see what was new. It was a slight surprise to see that my screen was blank. The noise had not come from my phone.
Ebenezer nodded towards the floor. A little brown bird was hopping over the discarded free-sheet, twittering away.
I avoided Ebenezer’s gaze and reached for my coffee, and we sat drinking in silence, waiting for something new to happen.
Election Night Live Blog (and BBC TV feed)
My David Cameron – Disobey Murdoch remix
A special election day remix of the Ian Cawsey’s My David Cameron poster video…
Majority Government – or tabloid rule?
A hush is spreading. The sun is bright and hopeful, there’s smiling on the streets. One in seven of us, even more, could vote today.
And perhaps, just perhaps, we’re electing a Majority Government.
What does it mean? When the dust settles, in a week or three, we could have a new government, elected by a strong majority of voters, ready to roll up their sleeves and get to work — for all of us.
A National Government? A Reform Parliament? Maybe even a good one.
This couldn’t be a government of one party alone. Nor could it be a Conservative one. Even if the Tories win a majority in Parliament, they’ll have little more than a third of the vote. And they’ve made it clear that if they fall short, they’ll try to govern alone.
The Tories have turned their faces away from a deal with the voting majority. They’ll only go into coalition with the tabloids.
So our hopes for Majority Government hang between Liberal Democrats — and Labour. And either side could screw that up.
It’s a new and delicate dance, demanding courage and humility. For not a few politicians, this is quite a stretch. But here’s how it could go:
Gordon Brown’s time is done. But only he is prime minister. Only he can bless a Majority Government out of the gate. But he can never lead it.
Brown must say that Labour wants a Majority Government with the Lib Dems, while acknowledging that the coalition will choose its own leader and that this may not be him. Then he has to step back as caretaker, and let others negotiate for him. Labour will have to go beyond its comfort zone and genuinely share power.
This can’t be a Labour Government, but a government for all. Who knows, perhaps Greens, Scots, Welsh or Irish will be welcome too?
The Lib Dems must say that this is a vote for change and reform, and that they’re ready for a coalition built on fairness. Forget first chances — most people haven’t voted for any one of the three: the next government needs a mandate from the majority.
The Lib Dems will be right to make genuine partnership and fixing the broken electoral system red lines. But they must not overreach.
And no-one can leak, or they’ll lose the public’s trust.
Our next prime minister could be Alan Johnson, Nick Clegg or Jack Straw for all I care. They must be brave, smart and modest: leader, listener, and bridge-builder. Rebuilding a sustainable economy and the public finances and reforming our politics is hard and responsible work, and we need everyone involved.
In the background, as Sunny says, Labour needs a months-long conversation, a real contest, and new foundations. Go back to the roots with humility, listen, and think again.
But we need a responsible Majority Government fast. Otherwise the tabloid story – of Tory triumph – will grip us. And that would be the most lethal and corrupt of lies – making minorities of majorities and majorities of minorities, and leaving us saddled with a weak and nasty Tabloid Government. Shiver.
Either way we’re making history. Let’s do all we can to get it right.
And if the majority needs to take to the streets to be heard, that Parliament Square flashmob was a start, and this Demo for Democracy looks like a good idea.
Demo for democracy Saturday, for real change!
Although the outcome of the election is still uncertain, one thing’s for sure: our voting system will deliver an arbitrary and unfair outcome and we will have a parliament which does not reflect what people voted for.
It is therefore highly likely that lots of people, many of them young people who have become involved in politics for the first time, will be angry and disillusioned and looking for change.
We are organising, along the rest of the democracy movement (Unlock Democracy/Charter 88, Power2010, Vote for a Change, Avaaz, 38 degrees, Compass etc) a rally and protest for the afternoon of Saturday May 8th at 2pm in Trafalgar Square.
The unions, the green movement and other sectors are also involved so it has the potential to be a large mobilisation and with the viral power of the web could be even bigger.
Party activists (once they have recovered!) will also be showing out we hope. We are asking people to wear purple – the colour of the franchise.
If necessary, we’ll gather again outside Parliament on the 15th.
We will be gathering to demand reform, an end to the old politics and for this to be the last election under the broken first past the post system. We will call for a citizens convention to draw up a new voting system to be put to referendum and there will be a new website (not branded by any organisation) with a petition that calls people to the rally.
This must be the last election under our broken system.
No more wasted votes. No more stitch ups.
Join the Facebook event page!
The Sun Front Page Parodies – the Video
A selection of today’s parodies set to the poetry of the great John Cooper-Clarke [warning, audio NSFW]
Watch: If there were no Rupert Murdoch
Philippa Stroud – a correction
Over the last few days, a sizeable number of articles have been published about Conservative Party candidate, Philippa Stroud, which contain a error of material fact.
As Ms Stroud has, seen fit, through her lawyers, to contact a number of media organisations and invoke the provisions of s106 of the Representation of the People Act, under which it an offence to knowingly publish an untrue statement about the character or conduct of a parliamentary candidate during an election period, we feel compelled to issue the following correction on behalf of the blogosphere.
It has been suggested, by numerous sources, that in 1999, Ms Stroud ‘wrote’ a book entitled ‘God’s Heart for the Poor’ in which she allegedly explains how to deal with people showing signs of ‘demonic possession’.
Further inquiries indicate that although Ms Stroud is, indeed, listed as one of two co-authors by Amazon, this is, in fact, incorrect, as indicated by the following statement, which appears on the personal website of the books’ other listed author, Christine Leonard:
God’s Heart for the Poor, ghosted biography/how to for Philippa Stroud. Kingsway, Aug 1999 Out of print
It would appear, therefore, that Ms Stroud ‘wrote’ this particular book only in the same sense that Wayne Rooney is the ‘author’ of an ‘autobiography’ and Katie Price is a successful ‘novelist’; and so, on behalf of the blogosphere, we unreservedly withdraw the claim that Ms Stroud is a published author.
Any further correspondance on this matter will, as matter of course, be referred to the response provided to the plaintiff in the case of Arkell vs Pressdram.
What are your predictions? Election day open thread
What do you think will be the share of the national vote? And who will end up forming government, with how many seats?
As there won’t be much news today, or articles asking you to vote this or that way, tell us your predictions.
Here is my prediction: Conservatives around 36%, Labour 29% and Libdems 28%.
I think the Libdem vote will be slightly higher than projected by others because of a surge in the youth vote. But it’s very unlikely to hit 30%. Like the professional pollsters, I also don’t think Libdems will come second in the popular vote (which is unfortunate).
There’s no point using the Uniform Swing Calculator to project seats using these percentages. That model is dead.
With such a low share of the vote, I’m hoping that Gordon Brown announces his resignation as party leader as soon as possible and Harriet Harman and Alan Johnson take over as caretaker leader to call for a proper leadership debate and vote. If the Libdems come close in third place, then a coalition with Labour would have much more democratic mandate than a Conservative government with just over a third of the national vote.
It’s very likely the Tory supporting papers will try and call the election early for the Conservatives. We have to resist the Tory coup as much as possible.
At around 10pm the live-chat applet will be launched for constant discussion.
If you’re stuck for somewhere to go and watch the election, you could always come to the Royal Festival Hall.
So… what’s your projected share of the vote, projected seats (if you really want to) and any other predictions on what to watch out for?
VOTE!
The sky over London is pathetically empathic, brooding and low and just about to break into a weird little squall. I’ve been woking 14-hour days for the past six, and I’m bleeding and I’m tired and pissed off, and Torygeddon seems to be coming, and there’s nothing I can do or say to make that better. No matter how much I scream and stamp I can do nothing to stop what’s coming over the hill, not on my own.
Apart from vote, of course.
Which is the only thing we can possibly do tomorrow that matters.
So here’s how it goes: you. Vote. Yes, you, with your quietly freakish views and your weird opinions that no mainstream party will ever quite understand. Vote.
Yes, you, with your sulkishly correct intimation of having been betrayed time after depressing time, in small ways, with politicians taking away your faith and your fervor piece by piece. Vote. I know you think it doesn’t matter, not where you are. It matters.
I don’t care how much you hate them, every single one, how much you want to tear it all up and sit in your living room and throw guilty glares at the TV and not be implicated in this whole fucking mess. You are implicated already. Now go out there and take some sodding responsibility.
Not that you should vote for just anyone, of course. You should vote for whoever is going to beat the Tories in your area. Not just because they’re evil, or because they’re incompetent, or because (with the exceptions of a few notable people who I know read this blog) they hate you and everything you stand for. Vote for progressives because Tories are scummish and dull and boring. They are boring. Look at that sky. Taste the clammy May air, how grey and hopeless it is, spring sap run to rot. Remember when it tasted like this? That was the early 90s. Do you remember the early 90s? Vote.
Because if you don’t get out there and tick whatever box you need to tick, right now if you’re at home, or as soon as you can get out of work, I shall consider whatever happens tomorrow your fault. And you should too, because it will be. Turn in your internet license, you’ve got no more business ranting at empty cyberspace if you can’t put your shoes on and engage with hard copy the one time it matters.
Which is right now.
Get your shoes on, get out of the house and vote. Put the internet away. This is it. Game on.
Go.
WTF? Sun paints Cameron as Obama for front page
This has to be the biggest joke ever…. tomorrow’s front page of the Sun
via @JonathanHaynes
———————
TEMPLATE: You can make your poster from here (via @political_cream)
Update: The parodies have already started! Got any more? We’ll publish them
by @xerode
———-
by @mattleys
———-
———-
another one by @xtaldave (strong language)
———-
by @THEjaydoubleyou
———-
by @charlie109
———–
by @political_cream
———–
by @YouAreNotGavin
———–
by @brokentv
———–
by @donnachadelong
———–
Another one by @chezghost (strong language)
———–
by @franticplanet
———–
by @tommyhawkins
———–
by @richardpmilner
———–
by @disastronaut
———–
by @stevedesigner
———–
by @stevedesigner
———–
by @JSlayerUK
———–
by @michellelgraham
———–
by Bam bam
———–
by @Cro_Mag_Non
———–
by @colinstaniland
———–
by @brumplum
———–
by @hmgovt
———–
by @BeauBodOr
———–
by @BeauBodOr
———–
by @toreSupra
———–
TEMPLATE: You can make your poster from here (via @political_cream)
(upload the pic to your Twitpic.com account or something and then post the link below. The best ones will be added above)
YouGov predicts minority Tory government
YouGov’s final eve-of-election poll results show the Conservatives ahead on 35%, with Labour and the Liberal Democrats neck-and-neck on 28.
Con 35% (+2 since 2005)
Lab 28% (-8 since 2005)
Lib Dem 28% (+5 since 2005)
Others 9% (+1)
Sample: 6,483, polled on 4th and 5th May 2010. On those figures, Labour is back to its 1983 levels of support, under Michael Foot.
YouGov also polled nearly 2,000 respondents in Labour-held marginal seats that would go to the Conservatives on a swing of 3-7%:
Con 36% (+3 since 2005)
Lab 33% (-11)
Lib Dem 23% (+6)
Others 8% (+2)
Sample: 1,909, polled on 4th and 5th May 2010.
This means the swing from Labour to the Conservatives is 5% nationally, but 7% in key Labour marginals.
On these figures I would expect the Conservatives to gain around 100 seats from Labour.
It will be a closer race for second place in overall votes, and it’s harder to call Con-Lib and Lab-Lib marginals. But I would expect Liberal Democrats to gain more from the Tories than they lose – and for them to gain up to 20 seats from Labour.
Overall, YouGov President Peter Kellner’s prediction of the outcome tomorrow is:
Conservative: 300-310 seats
Labour: 230-240
Lib Dem: 75-85
Others: around 30
[Sunny adds: If that turns out correct, Cameron would not have enough seats to form a majority government.]
How close are Libdem and Labour candidates really?
contribution by various ippr researchers
Those who advocate a post-election ‘progressive alliance’ between Labour and the Liberal Democrats do so based on the understanding that the two parties co-habit a significant chunk of the political spectrum.
Yet what most commentators appear to be missing is that the two parliamentary parties as they stand are not the two parties that will exist on Friday morning.
Who are the new MPs we are about to send to Westminster, what are their political beliefs, and – crucially – could they work together in the event of a hung parliament?
To help us tackle these important questions the ippr conducted an online poll of 255 prospective parliamentary candidates (PPCs), excluding sitting MPs and targeted at those expecting to win safe seats or fighting marginals.
Our first finding was that if proportional representation is the ‘deal breaker’ in a hung parliament, both David Cameron and Gordon Brown will find it difficult to persuade their backbenchers to back electoral reform.
All of the Conservative PPCs polled supported first past the post, while only 10% of Labour PPCs backed proportional representation or a mixed system as used in Scotland and Wales.
Our second set of findings provides better news for those hopeful for a progressive alliance. The poll found that Labour and Lib Dem PPCs have much more in common with each other than either set of candidates do with the Conservatives, an ideological overlap which is a necessary precursor to a deal which hopes to survive more than a few months.
Most Labour and Liberal Democrat PPCs agreed that the redistribution of income from rich to poor should be a priority, whereas only 30% of our Conservative respondents agreed.
On the issue of benefits, the same battle lines emerged: 59% of Conservatives disagreed with the statement that ‘too many people’s lives would be damaged by cutting benefits’, compared to just 7% of Labour PPCs and 17% of Lib Dem candidates.
On other issues, division emerged within the prospective alliance, but not necessarily as expected. On Foreign policy and climate change, the Liberal Democrat PPCs camped to the left of Labour rather than occupying the middle ground, and the same was true on whether Britain is over-reliant on the City.
91% of Lib Dem PPCs agreed that we have been too reliant on the City for growth and should curb its role, compared to 44% of Labour PPCs.
All said, the Class of 2010 bring with them one potential deal breaker: electoral reform. On other important ideological issues, however, a hefty plot of common ground exists to give hope for those advocating an alliance.
A final finding, however, sours the tone of the election in more general terms: 75% of the new cohort were chosen by less than 200 party members and 28% by less than 100, indicative of a lingering disconnect between people and politics despite predictions of a high turn out at the ballots tomorrow.
‘Third Party’ campaign in Barking is BNP front
A recently registered ‘publishing company’ that has been distributing glossy anti-Labour pamphlets in the Barking and Dagenham and Rainhill constituencies has been exposed as a BNP ‘false flag’ operation following an investigation by Searchlight.
The 12 page ‘Barking and Dagenham Sentinal’, which is devoted entirely to personal attacks on Margaret Hodge and John Cruddas, bears the imprint of Sentinal Publications Ltd, a company registered on 1 April, this year, by Adam Walker, using a service address in Edinburgh.
Although the BNP’s website quotes Griffin as stating that:
“The BNP has long been the victim of these third party campaigns and it seems that the Labour Party is getting some of its own medicine back,”
Before going on to claim that:
“This magazine has been produced by a loose coalition of non-BNP people,”
In reality, Walker is a BNP Officer in the North East and the party’s official candidate in Bishop Auckland, in addition to being one of several BNP officers on the staff of the party’s two MEPs and, therefore, paid out of EU funds.
UDPATE
It’s just struck me that’s its worth ensuring that this doesn’t fall down the Internet memory hole, so…
Evening Standard sitting on report on Tory PPC Shaun Bailey (updated)
I can confirm today, after several days of digging around, that editors at the London Evening Standard newspaper are sitting on a story on Hammersmith Conservative PPC Shaun Bailey.
I also know the story was written up more than a week ago and involved several days of work by its deputy political editor Paul Waugh.
The story revolves around Shaun Bailey and his charity MyGeneration.
Questions were first raised in the media in a small Times story titled: Rising stars face questions on Tory community work:
Shaun Bailey, candidate in neighbouring Hammersmith, faces scrutiny from the commission after an independent examiner discovered £16,000 worth of unreceipted expenditure in the charity he runs.
…
The independent examiner said that the charity’s accounts showed that £15,952 worth of payments were made from a budget of £201,859 “without any supporting records” .Mr Bailey told The Times yesterday that the charity had been unprepared to deal with its rapidly growing budget. “We had a little panic, we have the stuff,” he said. “What you are dealing with is a kid from the estate who had a good idea to do this and never had a wider view of accountants and lawyers. We have raised this money, spent it on the kids. We just didn’t know.”
The story was then also reported by Civil Society mag, The Third Sector magazine and the Fulham Chronicle.
Since then more questions have come to light, as noted by Political Scrapbook blog.
And so Paul Waugh at the London Evening Standard started digging into the story.
He later submitted the story – and I will make it clear I have no idea what it said – but it never saw the light of day.
I did contact Paul Waugh and he did not want to comment on the record.
But I was told by sources that no one at CCHQ leaned on the Standard to shelve it.
Several people have pointed out, quite fairly, that the newspaper has become less partisan since Alexander Lebedev bought it.
But I’m still curious as to why a story clearly of public interest has not seen the light.
Update: Paul Waugh responds:
It is frankly ludicrous to suggest there is any conspiracy in this story not appearing. It simply fell off the news list because there were other, bigger stories – not least the second TV debate – to cover in a busy general election campaign. Believe me, if I had found anything ‘explosive’, we would have reported it.
Is this why the media haven’t reported on Phillipa Stroud?
Unity earlier wrote a post linking to another blog that I cannot substantiate fully so I’ve edited it out. Let me explain what I believe is going on.
Since the original article in the Observer, thousands of people on Twitter and blogs have asked why broadcasters did not chase up the Phillipa Stroud story.
The question was also asked by Benjamin Cohen at Channel 4 and at the New Statesman.
First, I’ve heard from two sources in the media, at broadcasters, that Phillipa Stroud’s lawyers have gotten involved in the story.
But this isn’t about libel.
My understanding is that the Representation of People’s Act 1983, has been brought into the mix.
The relevant bit states that:
Section 106 makes it illegal to publish any false statement of fact in relation to the candidate’s personal character or conduct, unless he can show that he had reasonable grounds for believing that statement to be true. It is also illegal to publish a false statement of a candidate’s withdrawal from an election.
What I can’t confirm is whether Stroud’s lawyers cited that act or lawyers at broadcasters themselves have.
Either way, it puts broadcasters, who are obliged by law to be balanced, in a difficult position. The statement by Phillipa Stroud says:
Philippa makes no apology for being a committed Christian. However, it is categorically untrue that she believes homosexuality to be an illness. Indeed, Philippa was deeply offended that The Observer has suggested otherwise.
But the statement does not deny that she actually worshipped for homosexuals to be saved, as is alleged in the Observer article, or founded a church that did exactly that.
So a broadcaster would have difficulty standing up that allegation because:
1. Phillipa Stroud is not giving interviews.
2. All this allegedly happened several years ago.
3. There’s too much other stuff going on.
But it’s not that difficult because, as I understand it, the Observer has been perfectly happy to offer broadcasters information as well as contact details of people they interviewed.
My source tells me there is is another reason why broadcasters are not reporting on the issue: that is, the media are no longer scared of the New Labour media machine and are easily intimidated by the CCHQ machine.
There’s little point in blaming Ms Stroud for the lack of media coverage – she is expected to protect her own interests.
But we should however question why the media, especially the BBC, find it easier to report on the comments of a previously unknown candidate in an unwinnable seat (Manish Sood) – for more than half a day – but say little about potentially damaging revelations about a prominent Conservative candidate who is chair of a highly influential think-tank very close to Cameron.
I’ll offer you more examples of this today.
[This isn't the case, from my sources, for Channel 4 however. It seems they just missed the boat on the story and then decided it was too late to pursue given no new allegations had turned up.]
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or rss feeds.
» What would you ask the Labour leader candidates?
» Complete tits
» How bad is the feline obesity crisis?
» Why don’t MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours?
» Obama is right to slam BP – and why capitalists should too
» Why does Phillip Blond see civic cohesion as a security issue?
» So what if the Labour candidates went to Oxbridge?
» Last night’s Labour hustings: will it get interesting or turn to torture?
» It’s now down to Ken to win London for Labour
» The Labour people need
» Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed?
|
11 Comments 66 Comments 20 Comments 13 Comments 10 Comments 18 Comments 4 Comments 25 Comments 49 Comments 31 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » Red posted on His best speech ever? Jon Cruddas on how Labour needs to reinvent itself » Kate Belgrave posted on His best speech ever? Jon Cruddas on how Labour needs to reinvent itself » Mike Killingworth posted on What would you ask the Labour leader candidates? » cjcjc posted on Complete tits » Flowerpower posted on His best speech ever? Jon Cruddas on how Labour needs to reinvent itself » john b posted on How bad is the feline obesity crisis? » Mike Killingworth posted on Complete tits » Lou posted on Ashcroft to launch "devastating" attack on Cameron » Dick the Prick posted on Ashcroft to launch "devastating" attack on Cameron » Sarah AB posted on Complete tits » tim f posted on What would you ask the Labour leader candidates? » TJC posted on What would you ask the Labour leader candidates? » TJC posted on What would you ask the Labour leader candidates? » BenSix posted on What would you ask the Labour leader candidates? » Barry Tebb posted on Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed? |
