2024 UK general election predictions and general discussion.

[Matt.GC]

I can't get over emotional about Sadiq Kahn as I don't live in London. I'm interested in the electoral sense just like I am with all the other mayoral elections. But ultimately, unless you actually live or work in London, very little of his actions will have an impact on you.

So you have to question why there's so much emotion and coverage around him from national government, and in national media. Why does Sunak slag him and his London centric policies off so much when he is the Prime Minister of the entirety of the UK? Why did an MP from Ashfield, a place that is over 130 miles away from London and has nothing to do with the mayor of London's office, see it fit launch a racist attack based on a conspiracy theory that he'd just made up?

London's previous mayors consisted of someone who was kicked out of the Labour party for remarks they considered anti-Semitic, and the other was one of the most dishonest, corrupt, incompetent, and populist politicians to ever be elected to high office in this country. Issues of far higher national importance than some ULEZ charge that 95% of the rest of the UK populace will never be impacted by. I don't get a vote in Wales, or for the Mayor of Bristol, yet because of where I live I found myself on a Welsh 20mph road the other week and in the Bristol Clean Air Zone on on Tuesday night. Yet I'm expected to hate Sadiq Kahn for implementing policies that have zero impact on me in a city that is 138 miles away instead?

Maybe Sadiq Kahn is a little bit too Islamic looking for some people's liking? Maybe this makes him an easy target when you're a government presiding over a country that you've dealt significant damage to, and you're in serious electoral trouble. Deflect attention from the skeletons by blaming the 'other' entities.

Edit to avoid double posting:

Houchen has won the Tees Valley Mayoralty for a second term. Like Street, he's distanced himself from the rest of the Tories whilst campaigning. No doubt Tory MP's will be wheeled out to use this as their good news story.

BBC News - Local election results 2024 live: Starmer tells Sunak to go as Labour wins Blackpool South - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68609729

 

[Benzin]

I can't get over emotional about Sadiq Kahn as I don't live in London. I'm interested in the electoral sense just like I am with all the other mayoral elections. But ultimately, unless you actually live or work in London, very little of his actions will have an impact on you.

So you have to question why there's so much emotion and coverage around him from national government, and in national media. Why does Sunak slag him and his London centric policies off so much when he is the Prime Minister of the entirety of the UK? Why did an MP from Ashfield, a place that is over 130 miles away from London and has nothing to do with the mayor of London's office, see it fit launch a racist attack based on a conspiracy theory that he'd just made up?

London's previous mayors consisted of someone who was kicked out of the Labour party for remarks they considered anti-Semitic, and the other was one of the most dishonest, corrupt, incompetent, and populist politicians to ever be elected to high office in this country. Issues of far higher national importance than some ULEZ charge that 95% of the rest of the UK populace will never be impacted by. I don't get a vote in Wales, or for the Mayor of Bristol, yet because of where I live I found myself on a Welsh 20mph road the other week and in the Bristol Clean Air Zone on on Tuesday night. Yet I'm expected to hate Sadiq Kahn for implementing policies that have zero impact on me in a city that is 138 miles away instead?

Maybe Sadiq Kahn is a little bit too Islamic looking for some people's liking? Maybe this makes him an easy target when you're a government presiding over a country that you've dealt significant damage to, and you're in serious electoral trouble. Deflect attention from the skeletons by blaming the 'other' entities.

Edit to avoid double posting:

Houchen has won the Tees Valley Mayoralty for a second term. Like Street, he's distanced himself from the rest of the Tories whilst campaigning. No doubt Tory MP's will be wheeled out to use this as their good news story.

BBC News - Local election results 2024 live: Starmer tells Sunak to go as Labour wins Blackpool South - BBC News

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68609729

Leadsom already been on that train. Testament to the current government apparently.

Currently 2nd (only by 4) to the Lib Dems. None for Reform so far.

 

[GaryH]

There is one problem with ULEZ

“It’s about having clean air”

Drive a very polluting vehicle, no problem just pay us some money and you can drive it in to London.

If it were about clean air, polluting vehicles would be banned full stop.

 

[rob666]

As others have already said...it takes time.
Bans are for the future, this is to encourage people to use alternatives, nudging.

 

[Benzin]

As others have already said...it takes time.
Bans are for the future, this is to encourage people to use alternatives, nudging.

Nah ULEZ is to make sure the government can force us into those 15 minute cities where to leave you'll have to agree in advance and can only travel a set distance.

Or whatever nonsense those wingnuts spout.

 

[Dave]

There is one problem with ULEZ

“It’s about having clean air”

Drive a very polluting vehicle, no problem just pay us some money and you can drive it in to London.

If it were about clean air, polluting vehicles would be banned full stop.

It’s nudge tactics, same as the tax on tobacco rather than banning it.

 

[WillPS]

There is one problem with ULEZ

“It’s about having clean air”

Drive a very polluting vehicle, no problem just pay us some money and you can drive it in to London.

If it were about clean air, polluting vehicles would be banned full stop.

Except that's not viable, is it? People were buying non-compliant vehicles brand new less than 10 years ago which were at the time being sold on the grounds of their environmentally friendliness - I know, I was one of the suckers who bought one. "It's so green you won't even have to pay VED on it!" said the salesman.

A cliff edge helps nobody; it'd be unreasonable to completely stop people driving the car in, but it's fair enough to penalise them for it, IMHO.

I can still drive my "Eco friendly" 15 reg diesel car in to Birmingham, but to do so is expensive and makes me think every time 'is this worth it?' and 'is there a way around this?' (i.e. keeping the car out of the ULEZ area, or using public transport). So far I haven't paid the ULEZ fee, but I don't casually drive in to the centre and park up as I once did. That's a ULEZ win.

And also I can't escape the fact my "eco friendly" diesel car is in fact nothing of the sort, and that makes me think maybe I ought to not drive this any more. That's another ULEZ win.

For now the cost of just paying a ULEZ when/if I need to is a better deal than buying a compliant car, but as more ULEZ zones appear the bigger a consideration it'll become, the more I'll need to pay and it's another consideration when considering the ongoing economic viability of the car; either the car dies or it'll get to the point where it's no longer affordable to keep going.

 

[Squiggs]

It seems like we are dangerously close to the scenario where the Lib Dems are going to pick up the second-largest number of seats in these elections, ahead of the Tories.

Obviously, local elections are a very different beast to general elections, but that is still a wild position to find ourselves in.

 

[Tom]

It seems like we are dangerously close to the scenario where the Lib Dems are going to pick up the second-largest number of seats in these elections, ahead of the Tories.

Obviously, local elections are a very different beast to general elections, but that is still a wild position to find ourselves in.

That's extremely difficult to achieve at a general election, but we can only hope.

Reform's five-year strategic plan to transform the Conservative Party into a right-wing populist one is now well underway, but they have calculated that it can only come following a hammering at a general election.

 

[Benzin]

They'll try and spin it, but it has been an AWFUL local & mayoral election for the Tories.

Wonder how many more rats will be joining Reform UK with 30p Lee.

 

[Alsty]

Bit of a shocker in the West Midlands mayoral race. It was widely expected that the incumbent Conservative mayor Andy Street would hold on but in a close contest, Richard Parker from Labour have taken it by 1508 votes.

Richard Parker elected West Midlands mayor in blow for Tories

The result, which followed a full recount in Coventry, will come as a huge blow to the Conservatives.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Matt.GC]

Andy Street actually saw a smaller fall in support than Ben Houchen did. It's other forces that are paving the way for Labour, with the Greens and independent candidates doing well across the country.

But nonetheless, these local, mayoral, and PCC results are backing up what pollsters are saying about the GE. The Conservative brand is highly toxic, and a collapse in Tory support, which has been very consistent for over 2 years now, is what is causing electoral change rather than a swell in support for Labour. Labour are still the 'not Tory'/default choice in a General Election. That's what makes this so different to the 90's, when Labour were popular. Now they're not.

Labour are also used to pressure on the left, and SNP success has made this worse since 2008. The Tories are not used to competition on the right. Reform are now stealing much of the right, Labour are parked in the centre. If I was Sunak, I'd move to the centre and go to the polls sooner rather than later to get it over with and save some face. If I was Starmer, I'd sit back munching popcorn.

 

[Dobba]

Starmer will be too busy protecting his racist 'senior Labour source' for popcorn this week.

 

[Dave]

Starmer will be too busy protecting his racist 'senior Labour source' for popcorn this week.

Eh?

 

[Dobba]

Eh?

The senior party source that compared Muslim voters who weren't voting for them to Hamas when BBC's Midlands Today political editor asked for a quote. They know who said it, but they're protecting them so nobody can find out when they're still sat on the party's NEC.

 

[Tom]

The senior party source that compared Muslim voters who weren't voting for them to Hamas when BBC's Midlands Today political editor asked for a quote. They know who said it, but they're protecting them so nobody can find out when they're still sat on the party's NEC.

Believe you’re exaggerating a Daily Mail exaggeration on that one.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

The senior party source that compared Muslim voters who weren't voting for them to Hamas when BBC's Midlands Today political editor asked for a quote. They know who said it, but they're protecting them so nobody can find out when they're still sat on the party's NEC.

If they're asking for a quote that's off the record, or on background, then revealing the source is a career ending offence. Good luck ever getting a source to be candid with you again, that's it, career over.

Protection of sources

The NUJ's long history of defending the right of journalists to protect sources, is at the heart of the union's commitment to members.

www.nuj.org.uk

Additional note, the story isn't new and is two days old. It's already been condemned.

'Racist' remark condemned by Labour Party ahead of mayoral count

The Conservatives also describe as "vile" the comment made in the West Midlands mayoralty race.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Dave]

The senior party source that compared Muslim voters who weren't voting for them to Hamas when BBC's Midlands Today political editor asked for a quote. They know who said it, but they're protecting them so nobody can find out when they're still sat on the party's NEC.

It wasn’t a Labour Party spokesperson (or senior party source) and Labour have condemned it.

As others have said unless the person owned up they won’t know who said it as the reporter won’t reveal the name.

 

[Dobba]

Believe you’re exaggerating a Daily Mail exaggeration on that one.

The BBC reported it, because that's who asked for the quote. But you've got your excuse for not caring prepared at least.

If they're asking for a quote that's off the record, or on background, then revealing the source is a career ending offence. Good luck ever getting a source to be candid with you again, that's it, career over.

Protection of sources

The NUJ's long history of defending the right of journalists to protect sources, is at the heart of the union's commitment to members.

www.nuj.org.uk

Additional note, the story isn't new and is two days old. It's already been condemned.

'Racist' remark condemned by Labour Party ahead of mayoral count

The Conservatives also describe as "vile" the comment made in the West Midlands mayoralty race.

www.bbc.co.uk

Ah, the quote (that made itself up) has been condemned. No need to look into who in a senior position in the party said it, let's all move on.

It wasn’t a Labour Party spokesperson (or senior party source) and Labour have condemned it.

As others have said unless the person owned up they won’t know who said it as the reporter won’t reveal the name.

Why does the reporter need to reveal the name? The party they represent obviously know who said it, so when is Starmer going to tell us all who it is and how they've been removed from the party?

Spoiler: He won't because then he'd actually have to remove them, rather than just have MPs saying that's what should happen, which he has no intention of doing.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

The BBC reported it, because that's who asked for the quote. But you've got your excuse for not caring prepared at least.

Ah, the quote (that made itself up) has been condemned. No need to look into who in a senior position in the party said it, let's all move on.

Why does the reporter need to reveal the name? The party they represent obviously know who said it, so when is Starmer going to tell us all who it is and how they've been removed from the party?

Spoiler: He won't because then he'd actually have to remove them, rather than just have MPs saying that's what should happen, which he has no intention of doing.

Frank Hester.

Why do we hold Labour to higher standards? Although I do generally agree that Caesar's wife should be beyond reproach.