Tag Archives: Corbyn;

Boris Johnson, Brexit, Conservative Friends of Israel, elections, Jewish lobby in UK, MPs, Party Politics, Uncategorized

If Food Supplies Are Held Up Because of Brexit, The Conservatives Are Toast

18 Comments

The failure of the so-called “political class”, aka Westminster Bubblers, is manifest more clearly every day. We now know, if we did not already know, that the government of this country is in the hands of incompetent chancers, that the Opposition is in the hands of bad jokes, that the British Constitution is not a finely-tuned machine but a broken bit of clockwork, and that the Queen is about as much use as a human rubber stamp.

Brexit looms, but the fact is that now it either will not happen at all or will happen only in some very vague way (Brexit In Name Only). The only way that it can now happen as a real thing is if Boris Johnson, for reasons of blatant self-interest, manages to get it over the line, and that is looking increasingly unlikely.

In the law, a saying was always “justice delayed is justice denied”. Apply that to the 2016 Referendum.

 

Now no-one expected that the UK would leave the EU the very next day. There are processes, procedures, timetables etc. However, the British Government, or what passes for it, should have within a short space of time triggered the Article 50 process, which (under the Lisbon Treaty) gives a state wishing to exit the EU two years in which to complete the leave process. In fact, Theresa May did not even send the triggering letter for nearly a year after the 2016 Referendum; she then asked for extension of time when the process should already have been completed.

Had the 2-year process (it can be less— 1 year, 18 months, whatever) been started soon after the Referendum result, the whole Brexit process would have been finished by the Autumn of 2018 at the latest. Now here we are, more than a year later, and with no obvious closure in sight.

I always said, right from the start, that a huge campaign would be waged by the international conspiracy to keep the UK in or tied to the EU. The EU is a major building-block of the New World Order strategy. The UK is a major building-block of the EU. You get my meaning.

I favour the UK getting out of the EU, I favour Brexit, but the Brexit process has been so criminally mishandled that it is hard to avoid the conclusion that that mishandling was done deliberately.

Whatever the truth of all that, the fact is that the sheer duration of this whole process, which has now gone on for over three years, has not only delayed democratic decision from being implemented, but has denied democracy itself. Now it is said by the Remain partisans that it is so long since the 2016 Referendum that huge numbers of people have changed their minds or even just died, and so it is bizarre to implement the Referendum decision.

That view is not without force: the process has dragged on. People may well have a different view now, but that is in part why the process should have been expedited and handled properly. If a general election were called and held and if then the results were delayed in being implemented for 3 or 4 years, I daresay that many people would start to say “I have changed my mind!”…

So here we are, still in a state of uncertainty. I cannot say whether the UK will leave or (in the Remainers’ propagandistic “transformational vocabulary”) “crash out” of the EU “without a deal”, i.e. on basic WTO terms, or whether some “deal” not very dissimilar to Theresa May’s one(s) will be accepted both by the person presently posing as Prime Minister and by the UK Parliament. It is an open question as I write.

What about the next election?

It now appears that any general election will not be called until October (assuming that Parliament is not recalled until October) and so may not happen until November, or even later.

Boris Johnson wanted to make the next general election all about Brexit. That way, fervent pro-Brexit voters would join with those who would vote Conservative-label whatever, giving the Conservative Party a Commons majority fuelled by Brexit anger. That has now been denied to him.

As time goes by, the inadequacies so obvious in Boris-Idiot will become ever more apparent. That is a major reason why Boris needs a swift election. Time is not on his side, in my opinion.

At present, most of the opinion polls put the Conservatives well in the lead, by 3, 5, 10, even 14 points over Labour. Neither the LibDems nor Brexit Party are at 25% in the polls, though a recent outlying poll had the LibDems close to 20%. A national average below 25% will not change political history.

In 2005, the LibDems got 22%, then increased that to 23% in 2010. In 2015, the LibDem vote declined to 7.9%, and in 2017 to 7.4%, but the LibDems’ propensity to embed themselves in particular seats meant that they retained 8 seats in 2015 and (by reason of Britain’s mad and unfair FPTP voting system) won a total of 12 seats in 2017.

At present, the Conservatives are polling generally above 30%, in one outlier at 35%. Labour is in the doldrums, somewhere in the 23%-29% range. That is very poor, bearing in mind the overall situation.

Present polling would place the Conservatives in Commons-majority territory, though the size of that majority could be anywhere from single figures to triple figures.

The Jews have been on Corbyn’s back for years, and he has (perhaps typically) chosen to ignore the threat from them rather than take the war to them. So he has chosen (along with John McDonnell) to parrot “holocaust” nonsense and the like (eg on officially-marked “holocaust” days), rather than fight the lies and fakery of the whole “holocaust” scenario and mega-scam. Meanwhile, Tom Watson, Corbyn’s supposed deputy, someone completely in the pocket of the Jewish lobby, has chosen this crucial time, of all times, to highlight yet more “Labour antisemitism” propaganda!

In other words, Labour remains a house divided and in fact divided in more ways than one. That does not attract voters. Also unattractive to much of the electorate is the fact that so many Labour MPs now are blacks and browns. The Labour core vote now is really the black-brown part of the population, together with public service workers (notably NHS) and others paid or supported via State monies of one kind or another.

The white British voters are mostly not voting Labour now: the Scottish ones mostly vote SNP and Conservative (about 70% in all), whereas the English are voting primarily Conservative (42.4% in UK in 2017, but that figure disguises a higher percentage in England itself). It is not that voters generally like or respect the Conservatives, but that Labour is a complete turn-off for many. A vote not for, but against…

Labour however has some good cards to play in terms of policy: rail nationalization, utilities regulation, rights of tenants and employees. It is just that it is not being allowed by the pro-Conservative/pro-Israel msm from putting that message effectively to most voters. There is also the point that, despite the complete unfitness of Boris Johnson for public office, his age and vigour (albeit misdirected vigour) helps him vis-a-vis Corbyn, who is presented in the msm as old and (by implication) useless.

I do not see Labour as coming back, in electoral terms, in most of England and Wales outside London and the West Midlands/Northern rustbelts. Could anything change that? There is one thing. Breakdown of public order and/or resupply of basic goods.

The Yellowhammer report, if accurate, indicates the possibility of shortages of fuel, medicines, even fresh food, if the UK leaves the UK without a “deal” of some kind. If that were to happen, then people would rapidly turn, not to Labour, as such, but against the Conservative government.

There are other nuances: Brexit Party has deflated from its stellar start, and the Conservatives have rejected an electoral pact, but if the UK does not fully leave the EU in reality, Brexit Party, like Antaeus, would contact its native earth and be reinvigorated. That would cut into the Conservative vote. On 15%, Brexit Party weakens, but not mortally, the Conservatives’ chances; on anything over 20%, Brexit Party would cull dozens if not hundreds of Conservative MPs even if Brexit Party itself were to win few seats.

Another Con Coalition?

Jo Swinson, entirely in the pocket of the Jewish lobby, has now said that she would never “work with” Corbyn (because of “anti-Semitism”, she says; but she is completely pro-finance capitalism anyway). That would seem to rule out a coalition or arrangement with Labour (so long as Corbyn heads it); it does not rule out a coalition with the Conservatives.

Conclusion

I should say that, at this stage, despite most polls showing the Conservatives many points ahead of Labour, the next general election is quite open. It is unlikely that Labour can win a Commons majority, but it is just about possible that, if chaos or the appearance of chaos soon rules, Labour could, if largest party, come to an arrangement with the SNP and smaller parties (Plaid, Greens, some Northern Irish) to form a minority government.

A Boris Johnson government with a real majority would be a catastrophe. You might as well relocate the UK government to Tel Aviv.

Much depends on whether Boris Johnson makes major mistakes between now and then. Apart from that, the election may well be dependent more than usually upon…events.

Notes

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7458401/Labour-Leave-voters-switch-Nigel-Farages-Brexit-Party-vote-Tories.html

 

Update, 14 September 2019

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/sep/13/criminal-gangs-will-cash-in-on-no-deal-brexit-police-warn

Update, 15 September 2019

The opinion polls are all over the place: Opinium just published this poll:

…which would give the “Conservatives” a Commons majority of as much as 92.

On the other hand, ComRes has published this (see below), which might see Labour as the largest party in the Commons (265 seats as against the Conservatives’ 261) but about 61 seats short of a majority, in which case the only way in which Corbyn could rule would be via an arrangement with the SNP (Jo Swinson having already ruled out the LibDems, who on this showing might have 45 MPs), with Plaid Cymru, Green and Irish MPs in the mix. What would the SNP want as an inducement? Probably more funding for Scotland, and the right to call another Independence referendum whenever they like. I imagine that the Kremlin will be taking a keen interest, in view of, inter alia, the nuclear submarine bases in Scotland.

Update, 22 September 2019

The two latest polls indicate the political uncertainty about: the YouGov poll might mean a Conservative plurality in the Commons, but no majority (perhaps about 6 short of a majority, so not so different to the present situation); the Opinium poll, in a general election, would give the Conservatives a Commons majority of around 156!

Enthusiasm lacking at the 2019 Conservative Party Conference!

Boris Johnson, Brexit, Conservative Friends of Israel, elections, Jewish lobby in UK, Labour Friends of Israel, MPs, Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

Boris Johnson, A Kind of Coup d’Etat and the Likely Early General Election: Thoughts

109 Comments

https://twitter.com/election_data/status/1167432703035236352?s=20

The Brexit mess has become entangled with the straight party-political fight. There are many who despise the Conservative Party who are quite hard-line Leave/Brexit partisans. Me for one. To be pro-Brexit is not necessarily to be pro-Conservative Party, and still less to be in favour of Boris Johnson.

The most recent polling (even more recent than that shown above) shows that most voters oppose the tactical prorogation of Parliament, a higher percentage than those who simply oppose (or support) “no deal” Brexit.

This prorogation feels like a coup d’etat even though, in strictly factual or logical terms, it is not one. This may be because the prorogation does not stand alone. At about the same time as the prorogation has been announced, the eminence grise in Johnson’s wake, Dominic Cummings, has taken it upon himself to sack a Special Adviser (SpAd) even though said SpAd worked to Sajid Javid, who was not even informed until the matter was a fait accompli.

There’s more. Boris Johnson is apparently “considering” preventing Conservative MPs who do not show complete loyalty to him over the Brexit matter (or otherwise?) from standing as MPs in a future (perhaps even the upcoming) general election.

These actions display a mindset which could be called dictatorial or even tyrannical. There are some people who should never hold power, not even so much because they might exercize it in a dictatorial way, but because they would misuse it in a tyrannical way.

The mindset of Boris Johnson is basically tyrannical. When he was Mayor of London and (co-incidentally) large-scale riots erupted, he veered between complete panic and a kneejerk tyranny which included his decision to buy water-cannon, which weapons in the end were never used and in fact could not be used (because not approved by the Home Office for use on British streets). Boris-Idiot is useless in a crisis.

People of Britain….beware. This rootless, part-Jew, part-Muslim-origined narcissist, born and largely brought up overseas, will say, or do, or promise, anything at all to get what he wants, which is (and is only…he has no real ideology or ideals, or even plans) to be in the spotlight.

One can only dread what might happen to this country if Boris Johnson is actually able to have and exercize real power, actually able to pass laws directly affecting the people of the UK and their lives. He is unrestrained by any feeling or understanding of, or for, law, ethics, religion, or even simple decency.

Only one thing stands in the way of Johnson— his non-majority in the House of Commons. It now looks as though Johnson’s plan is to use Brexit to achieve a (misnamed) “Conservative” majority in the Commons. Typically, the msm has got it wrong. Johnson does not want a majority to enforce “no deal” or other Brexit. Au contraire; he wants to use the Brexit situation to gamble on getting that Commons majority, after which he and his pro-Israel, pro-Zionist, pro-finance-capitalist Cabinet of criminals and agents of Israel will start to destroy what is left of the freedoms, rights and public decencies left in the UK.

Not long ago, a few months ago, even a few weeks ago, it was possible to think that the Labour Party might become the largest party in the House of Commons after the next general election. I do not think that that is at all likely now.

The Conservative Party can only get a majority in the Commons if Labour is unpopular. That binary choice —Conservative/Labour— was axiomatically the way things were in past decades. The three-party and four-party politics (if the SNP is included, five-party politics) of the past 10-20 years altered that binary, but have not replaced it.

If Brexit Party, or the LibDems, or any other party, could get above (about) 25% of the popular vote, then whichever party did that would reach the FPTP tipping-point and would have a large bloc in the Commons. Below that imprecise level, and the party concerned either gets no MPs or a handful, depending on the degree of concentration of votes in particular constituencies rather than across the board. The Germans, as always, have a word for such concentration, the Schwerpunkt. In 2015, UKIP had no Schwerpunkt anywhere, “only” 12.6% of the popular vote. Result: only 1 MP.

The record low vote-share registered for a successful candidate in a Westminster election was that achieved by Alasdair McDonnell of the SDLP at Belfast South in 2015: 24.5%. That illustrates rather well the problem faced by non-main parties. The Green Party has only ever had one MP, Caroline Lucas. She was elected for Brighton Pavilion in 2010 on a vote-share of 31.9%. The national vote for Green Party was below 1%. In fact, at the General Election 2017, the Green Party still got only 1.6% (a decline from the 3.6% won in 2015), but Caroline Green’s own 2017 vote went up to 52.3%. In 2005, the Green Party candidate at Brighton Pavilion got a 21.9% vote but that was not enough to win (he came in 3rd).

Leaving aside unusual circumstances, exceptional candidates, fairly equal 3-way or 4-way splits in a constituency etc, a party needs about 25% or more  across the board to succeed. The recent polls (meaning those taken since Boris Johnson became leader of his party) all put the Conservatives well ahead of Labour, in one or two cases 11 points ahead. Not that voters generally like Johnson, but even fewer rate Jeremy Corbyn.

Corbyn not only scores below Johnson on every indicator (except “is he ‘caring’?”), but Corbyn, as “potential Prime Minister”, scores even below the LibDem leader, Jo Swinson! JO SWINSON! What can one say? Yes, of course the Jew-Zionist termites in the msm have trashed Corbyn for 4 years, but that is not the whole story. The anti-Corbyn propaganda has been able to hugely amplify Corbyn’s real deficiencies.

Labour is now a point or two behind, not the Conservatives (they are, incredibly, miles ahead of Labour) but the LibDems! The figures differ slightly, but tell similar stories. The most significant fact of all, though, is not that the Conservatives are ahead of Labour, nor that the LibDems are ahead of Labour (the latest poll, from DeltapollUK, in fact has Labour ahead of the LibDems) but that both are below that 25% Rubicon (Con 35%, Lab 24%, LibDem 18%, Brexit Party 14%).

The above poll would, even without any Con-Brexit Party electoral pact, give the Conservatives a Commons majority of somewhere in the region of 124. If that were to happen, there could, somewhere down the line, be actual civil war breaking out, bearing in mind the kind of policies the Cons would implement, e.g. getting rid of State pensions for the under-75s (the first State old age pension brought in by Lloyd George in 1911 was from 70 years of age).

As I have blogged previously, the Labour Party is now, at core, the party for the ethnic minorities, the NHS and other public service workers, and those dependent on State benefits (excluding pensioners). That is why it struggles to get beyond 30% in elections (eg the recent Peterborough by-election).

The Labour Party, at this time of national importance, is almost invisible. I do not entirely blame Corbyn. The previous ZOG/NWO “Labour” governments of Blair and Brown betrayed the (white, esp. English, Welsh) British people in various ways. Corbyn-Labour has tried to reconnect, but how can it when Labour puts up deadheads such as Kate Osamor and Fiona Onasanya as MPs? How can it, when Corbyn expresses support for Irish tinker “traveller” riff-raff and “Roma” thieves and scavengers?

This is not just me talking. Look at those polls, such as the Survation graphic at top of this blog article. Boris Johnson, Conservative Party leader, a part-Jew, of cosmopolitan origins, who attended Eton and Oxford, where he even belonged to the Bullingdon Club, scores better than Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn on “does he have the common touch?”! You really could not make it up.

It pains me to have to say it, because Corbyn is at least anti-Zionist (though cringingly half-heartedly when it comes to the Jewish lobby in the UK and France), but I think that Labour is unsalvageable now, whether under Corbyn or not.

Labour is “socialist” now, at least more than at any time since 1997 or even 1992, but that is not enough. It is not “national” in the sense of “nationalist” (neither is the Conservative Party, but Johnson pretends to be, sometimes). What the voters really, unconsciously, want is social nationalism, but there is no party offering that in an acceptable way, and no major party offering it at all. Hence voter apathy.

Can Labour do anything to salvage what might be a general election as soon as November or even October? It could. Whether it will, who knows? My points:

  • If Labour really hit hard on how the Conservatives intend to attack pensioners via sharp and swift increases in pensionable age, via cuts to old age care, via other cuts to pensioners’ incomes;
  • If Labour really went all out to save its white English vote;
  • If Labour made, harder, the points where it has voter support: railways, old age care, utilities; NHS funding, education;
  • If Labour really went into all-out attack on the Jewish Lobby, especially in terms of msm coverage of Labour itself, but also in terms of attacking exploitation of British workers by horrible predators such as Philip Green;
  • If Corbyn stops being or seeming invisible and inaudible.

I have no confidence that Labour can do any of the above effectively. It is in a ghetto of blacks, browns, NHS employees, and people reliant on State benefits. However, these are its core support areas. If it is thought to have abandoned them, Labour might well do even worse.

Brexit Party is proving to be a damp squib so far. It too is not social-national, in fact it is the mirror image of Labour— “national” without being “socialist”…

Brexit Party is now languishing in the polls, around 15%. Good for a “new” party (really the UKIP snake without its old skin), but unless BP can get voter support somewhere well above 20% soon, it will sink the way UKIP did.

Polls usually narrow before Election Day. If they do not, we could be looking at a very solid Conservative Party majority and so a government which, even in advance, is making some of its own MPs uneasy… However, if Labour can somehow recover from 21%-24% to somewhere around 30%, then we may be back to more or less where we are today, a minority Conservative government.

There is an outside chance that, from the desperation of the 30% of eligible voters who do not vote, there might come a surprise anti-Conservative upsurge at the last minute.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alasdair_McDonnell

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brighton_Pavilion_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/schwerpunkt

Even former Labour Party candidates have not only abandoned Labour but are looking not unkindly upon “one nation” traditional Conservatism!

https://twitter.com/remainwithkate/status/1167366602217742336?s=20

https://twitter.com/_IanMoss/status/1167369085346299904?s=20

https://twitter.com/remainwithkate/status/1167370282971123712?s=20

Meanwhile… a fine example of the Westminster Bubble: a few thousand (thousands, or hundreds?) of demonstrators make noise around the Palace of Westminster, achieve nothing, change nothing, but go home with the delusionary warm feeling that they have…and ITV News reports on it as if at the Storming of the Bastille!

https://twitter.com/MarcherLord1/status/1168077918896943105?s=20

These people would, most of them, never throw a stone, let alone a Molotov Cocktail, and they think that they will rattle what is now a near-tyrannical Boris-Idiot government? They will not even rattle the windows of the nearest Waitrose cafe!

Look again at that tweet, above, by one Paul Brand of ITV [nb: since posting of this article, apparently deleted]: “Traffic has been brought to a standstill.” No! Traffic brought to a standstill? At one roundabout in Central London? Call out the Preobrazhensky and Izmailovsky Guards! Notify the Tsar!

More. Here is Katie Hopkins, making a good point about how unrepresentative the Remain side is, though her point about the ethnic minorities could be made equally in relation to the Leave side. Also few blacks and browns. That, in a way, is why the international conspiracy (NWO/ZOG) is encouraging mass invasion of white Europe by blacks and browns (The Great Replacement), because most of the ethnic minorities cannot organize and will not stand up for what we have known as civil rights and freedoms.

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1168066456497598464?s=20

Of course, Ms. Hopkins supports Israel, so naturally supports Boris-Idiot…

https://twitter.com/KTHopkins/status/1167789420029849600?s=20

Where the opinion polls have been since late last year:

Update, 3 September 2019

A stray tweet seen; if true, may be ominous for “Labour”:

https://twitter.com/DavidStonehous7/status/1168591927081656321?s=20

Meanwhile…

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-prorogue-parliament-brexit-dominic-cummings-email-court-scotland-a9089911.html

Update, 4 September 2019

The above opinion poll, if accurate and if mirrored on Election Day, would be a Conservative Party majority in the Commons of about 92…

Look at the scheiss that entered Parliament in 2010 and 2015, and imagine what another 100 Con MPs might be like. “Load up, load up…”

Update, 8 September 2019

Update, 8 October 2019

Boris Johnson, Brexit, by-elections, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Deadhead MPs, Defence, elections, immigration, Jewish lobby in UK, Labour Friends of Israel, MPs, Party Politics, society, The Great Replacement, Uncategorized, white flight

Can Labour Win A 2019 General Election?

11 Comments

Introduction

Two days ago, I wrote a blog piece entitled “Can The Conservatives Win A General Election (or are they doomed)?”

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/07/28/can-the-conservatives-win-a-general-election-or-are-they-doomed/

My conclusion was that the Conservatives are unlikely to “win” a general election in the sense of achieving a House of Commons majority, but that it is not unlikely that the Conservative Party might, after a general election in late 2019 or early 2020, still be the largest party, i.e. the party with the largest number of MPs.

Until recently, I thought that Labour would probably be the largest party in the Commons after a 2019/2020 general election; now I am unsure. I still think that Labour might beat the Conservatives in terms of numbers of MPs, but the chances must now be close to 50-50.

I now want to lay out my thoughts about Labour’s chances

Just as the Conservative Party has been running out of rank and file members and also (good) ideas for several decades, the Labour Party, though in recent years, under Corbyn, increasing its membership and activist support base, has at the same time been —-what would be the correct term?–laagering or hunkering-down or being concentrated in ever-fewer loyal constituencies. The membership of the Conservatives is still getting older on average (the majority now being over 51, and almost 50% being 65+ years old), whereas the Labour membership is more evenly-aged and far greater in numbers. The Conservatives can muster, at least on paper, about 160,000, whereas Labour has over 500,000 members or registered supporters. All the same, Labour now has 247 MPs, while the Conservative Party has 311.

It is a truth universally acknowledged…that it is better to win 2 constituencies barely than it is to win 1 constituency by a huge majority. That in a nutshell is the problem faced by both major System parties but particularly Labour:

“Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party now has the 10 of safest seats [sic] in the UK, according to a new House of Commons analysis of marginal constituencies…The briefing adds that the number of very safe seats – those won by a margin of over 50 per cent – increased by 21 in 2015 to 37 in June’s election. Labour have all of the top 28.” [The Independent]

Piling up votes in safe seats does nothing, or very little, for a political party under the British “First Past The Post” [FPTP] electoral system. Labour is piling up empty votes. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that Labour is now, to a large extent “the party of the blacks and browns” and other ethnic minorities (except Jews). The tendency of the ethnic minorities to huddle in concentrations, whether for historical, economic, cultural or other reasons, has resulted in concentrations of the Labour vote in areas already historically Labour-voting.

Another aspect to the above is the flight of white English people out of areas becoming “diverse” (in reality, changing from white non-diverse to non-white non-diverse), thus concentrating in those “ghetto” constituencies (or particular wards within constituencies) the “ethnic” vote.

Coming to Brexit, Corbyn has managed to sit on the fence so far. More Labour voters voted Remain than voted Leave, but more Labour constituencies voted Leave than voted Remain, another proof of the concentration of the Labour vote.

In one sense, Corbyn’s fence-sitting means that Labour can in theory appeal to both Leave and Remain voters; in practice, it may make Corbyn and so Labour seem undecided and indeed the victim of events, rather than the setter of the agenda.

Beyond all that, though, Labour has a policy message which might appeal to many, if it can be heard: nationalization or more regulation of public utilities and rail transport, curtailment of the excesses in the private-rental housing sector, an end to the demonization, bullying and even quiet killing by neglect of the disabled, sick, unemployed etc.

Even if Labour is the party of “blacks and browns”, that voter bloc, when combined with the votes of public service workers and those dependent on State benefits, must in theory add up to a vote of something like 30%.

Many commentators have said that, after a period of fragmentation, voters are returning to the main two parties. They say that because, in 2017, the main two parties got 89.1% of the popular vote (Conservative Party 48.8%, Labour Party 40.3%). This consolidation, however, was the result of specific factors which no longer apply.

In 2017, the LibDem popular vote slumped further from its post-Con Coalition collapse in 2015: from 7.9% in 2015 to 7.4% in 2017. Likewise, UKIP, having attained 12.6% in 2015, fell back to 1.8% (UKIP contested only 378 seats). In other words, Con and Lab were really the only two games in town in 2017.

The situation today is very different. The LibDems can appeal on several fronts: to Remainers, because the Liberal Democrat Party is the only unalloyed Remain party of any importance; to those who dislike both main System parties; to the “socially liberal” in London and the South of England (mainly). The LibDems are therefore in theory able to draw from the dissatisfied of both Labour and Conservative. It is important to understand that this is not a “LibDem surge”, more a negative vote against the two main System parties and Brexit Party, though also a vote for a clearly pro-EU party, the only one left [in England].

Then we have Brexit Party. Its mere existence, even on 10% or 15% of the nationwide popular vote, means that the Conservative Party can almost certainly not get a Commons majority. If Brexit Party stands (as promised) in 650 seats and gets an average 20%, then Conservative MPs will die like flies as their seats are taken by the LibDems, by Labour and, in a few cases, by Brexit Party itself.

Labour is fighting against the Jewish-Zionist contrived “antisemitism” protest or faked “storm”. That is not too interesting to the general public, but may support a wider narrative about “Corbyn the extremist”, someone supposedly not patriotic, a supporter of radical and in some cases very unpopular causes in the past. There again, there is the public scepticism about whether Corbyn can do the job of Prime Minister. However, it might be said in response that if Boris-idiot can do it, why can Corbyn not do it? That does rather beg the question, though…

Looking at the electoral picture in the round, I think that Labour will be able to mobilize its core vote of maybe 25%, maybe beyond that to 30%. The Conservative vote is tied to Brexit Party. If BP stands in 650 seats and if BP can get 15%, then I cannot see the Conservative Party getting more than about 30%. The LibDems will siphon off quite a few Remainer votes from both Lab and Con; overall that LibDem vote might amount to 15% or even 20%. “Socially-liberal” Jo Swinson is very pro-capitalist and her party might be an option for pro-EU former Conservative voters as well as some pro-EU and anti-Corbyn Labour ones.

The upshot seems to be that any 2019 or early 2020 general election might produce a Commons with Labour as largest party but as many as 60 MPs short of a majority; alternatively, a Conservative bloc far larger than that of Labour but still about 10 short of a majority. In other words, about where things are now.

My conclusion is that Labour might “win” in the sense of becoming the largest party in the Commons, but cannot at present get a majority.

Notes

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-safe-seat-marginal-constituencies-house-of-commons-jeremy-corbyn-theresa-may-a7886571.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Commons_of_the_United_Kingdom

Update, 21 September 2019

This, below, is all too typical of the sort of person now prominent in “Labour” and what is left of the trade unions:

“Riccardo La Torre, firefighter and Eastern Region Secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, branded the coast patrol “despicable” and said: “These have-a-go, racist vigilantes have no place in any kind of enforcement or emergency activities and will only serve to make conditions and tensions worse.”

“These groups claim to be the voice of the working class, but now they want to act as an arm of the authorities by patrolling beaches to apprehend struggling working-class people desperately trying to get to safety.” [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/far-right-britain-first-beach-patrols-calais-dover-anti-migrant-a9113471.html]

So “Riccardo La Torre” (que?), a regional secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, thinks that migrant invaders from Africa and the Middle East are “working class people, trying to get to safety”?!

From, er, France? There you have in a nutshell, the craziness that is much of “Labour” now. Alien migrant-invaders are “working class people” who should be allowed to occupy the UK at will (and be subsidized too)! Note the fag-end “Marxism”, trying to shoehorn the facts into some 1980s polytechnic back-of-postcard Marxism-Leninism.

Update, 23 September 2019

This creature might well be Home Secretary under a Labour government…

https://twitter.com/PaulWal96323461/status/1175921860481036289?s=20

Alison Chabloz, Boris Johnson, Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Conservative Friends of Israel, David Icke, Deadhead MPs, free speech, Ian Millard, Jewish lobby in UK, Jez Turner, Labour Friends of Israel, MPs, Party Politics, Starmer, Tommy Robinson, Uncategorized

Panorama and Labour: The Jewish-Zionist “Claque” Is Out In Force (Again)

66 Comments

I have not seen the Panorama programme which the msm is going mad about today (Thursday 11 July 2019). I see that the same old crowd of “usual suspects” is on Twitter banging on about about how “anti-Semitic” Labour or the Labour leadership is (my response? “If only!”). Those tweeting are 90% Jews, 10% non-Jew doormat types.

The “claque” is doing what it does best, which is to create a storm in the msm and on Twitter, all either co-ordinated or effectively co-ordinated. The aim? Ultimately, to wrest back control of Labour.

The “Zionist” element has for a long time now strongly influenced Britain’s main System parties, meaning the Conservatives, Labour and (to a lesser extent) the LibDems and, formerly, Liberal Party. That influence, seen since the 19th Century, manifest in the 1917 Balfour Declaration etc and in the covert support for Churchill and his war-with-Germany policy of the 1930s and early 1940s, became even more open when the UK and France conspired with Israel to invade and occupy the Suez Canal area in 1956. It moved from influence to control after 1989-90, when Bush snr. proclaimed the New World Order and the major Western governments became openly “ZOG” (Zionist Occupation Government).

John Major (Conservative Friends of Israel member and with a secret mistress, Edwina Currie, a Jewess) took over the Conservative Party as leader and the government as Prime Minister; Tony Blair (possibly part-Jew; very fervent Labour Friends of Israel member) replaced Major in 1997. He was surrounded by Jews both as Labour Party leader and as Prime Minister.

CsFurPsXgAEzfOQ

freinds-reunited1

When, against all the odds, Labour’s leadership fell to Jeremy Corbyn, immediately a huge Jewish (Zionist) and/or Zionist-led “claque” protest erupted. Most Labour MPs were and are still “under control” to a greater or lesser extent. A few had even been been (or were later) exposed as actual agents of Israel.

Ruth Smeeth MP, a Jewess from a Jewish part-gangster family background, and formerly head of public affairs for the UK end of the Israel public relations effort called BICOM, was exposed by Wikileaks as a “confidential contact” of the U.S. Embassy in London.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8304495/WikiLeaks-cables-Gordon-Brown-forced-to-scrap-plan-for-snap-election.html

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/uk-labour-mp-ruth-smeeth-was-funded-israel-lobby

Joan Ryan, not Jewish (though I have not discovered whether or not she has a part-Jewish background) was another one exposed. She was ordered, or agreed, to channel a million pounds from Israeli Government funds in order to buy or “take down” selected MPs:

[above, Joan Ryan MP treacherously plots with Israeli intelligence and political officer Shai Masot, who is also a reserve officer in the Israeli Navy, to receive a one million pound pro-Israel, pro-Jew slush fund to corrupt Westminster politics]

https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/asa-winstanley/joan-ryan-mp-who-fabricated-anti-semitism-quits-labour

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/06/the-incredible-disappearance-of-shai-masot/

Joan Ryan, facing deselection as Labour candidate after having been found out, joined the doomed pro-Israel “centrist”-label party, “Change UK” or “CHUKUP”. Ruth Smeeth stayed in the Labour Party (either because ordered to or for reasons of personal careerism and money); and both are still MPs.

https://twitter.com/PalestinePR/status/1149212573851627522

Corbyn has faced a wall of basically Jewish hatred and opposition since he became leader. Attempts to unseat him, vilify him and his family etc. At the higher levels, this is not about Corbyn’s support for Palestine, and not about “anti-Semitism”, but about the wish of highly-placed Jewish persons and organizations to control both main UK System parties, having lost control of one.

Not that the Jewish-Zionist control and/or influence over Labour has gone. Many pro-Israel and pro-Jew Labour MPs or ex-Labour MPs are still in Parliament: mentally-unstable John Woodcock, not only pro-Israel and pro-China (both “donated” to him, by the way) was one of the worst, but he is now deselected and out of Labour, having been caught out as a sex pest and nuisance, and has no chance of staying in Parliament once there is a general election. Others remain and have been, like the rest of the “claque”, active on Twitter today and yesterday:

All, as far as I know, members of Labour Friends of Israel…

Why are they still Labour MPs?

I should make my own position clear. I could probably best be labelled “social national”. I have never been a Labour Party member, supporter or even voter. To that extent I might be termed objective. I oppose Zionism (as well as Islamism). I look to the emergence of a real social national party and movement, to “safe zones” within the UK, and to the eventual triumph of social nationalism in the UK.

My attitude to Corbyn (blogged about several times previously) is that it was fated that he become Labour leader (e.g. nominated by exactly the minimum number of MPs required, many of whom actually opposed him and later voted against him!). I do not believe that he is a particularly good Labour leader, as such; in fact he is really not a leader at all. He is poorly-educated and has little knowledge of the world, of history (even modern history and the politics of the 20th Century, supposedly his special interest). His ex-wives say that he scarcely if ever reads a book (something that he has in common with Boris-Idiot, “our” new or soon-to-be Prime Minister), and is certainly no intellectual.

I like the fact that Labour is now less under the Jewish-Zionist heel than it was, though I note that Corbyn and (worse) McDonnell feel the need to pay occasional lip-service to the “holocaust” mythus and fakery. Strange pathology: the Zionists are trying to kill them, yet they go along with such nonsense, which is the biggest weapon the Zionists have, bigger even than their nuclear arsenal! Pretty stupid.

Likewise, Corbyn and much of Corbyn-Labour will talk endlessly about economic exploitation by Jews in Israel-Palestine, but say that to mention the similar exploitation by Jews in the UK, France or elsewhere is “anti-Semitic”. How inconsistent. How silly.

This latest “anti-Semitism” noise (for that is all it is) in the msm and in social media will only destroy Corbyn and his advisers if he and they allow that to happen. I blogged before about this: if you give “them” an inch, they take a mile (or should that be “pound”?…).

Labour’s biggest problem is not “anti-Semitism” (in fact, doubling down on what little there is might get the Labour Party more votes), and is not even the plain treachery of many of its own MPs (starting near the top with Tom Watson, a complete doormat for the Jewish-Zionist element), but is structural in terms of constituencies and demographics: the fact that Labour votes are increasingly concentrated in relatively few constituencies; the fact that Labour’s core vote is now not the (vanishing) English “working classes”, which are not now voting Labour very much (the Scottish equivalent having already decamped), but the “blacks and browns” etc, along with, speaking generally, those who live one way or another off State funds (public service workers, the unemployed, the disabled): see https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/the-day-that-the-labour-party-committed-suicide/

It may be that, when a real social national party emerges, a good part of the present rank and file Labour Party will be ready to support it, if not brainwashed by the whole “holocaust” mythus propaganda. To that extent, these contrived storms in a Westminster teacup could be useful in awakening people to the menace of alien control and the need for true social nationalism.

Notes

https://twitter.com/kosherKojak/status/1151192041847775232

Update, 15 October 2019

Below, “@Rattus2384”, a long-term Jew Zionist online stalker and troll, does what he does best: sadistically smirking over the difficulties caused by Jews to those who are not (((their))) doormats. “Rattus” is Stephen Applebaum (presumably the name started off as “Apfelbaum” —apple tree— a century or so ago). Applebaum (who also tweets as “@grubstreetsteve”), is a one-time scribbler and soi-disant film critic who has more recently been described as a “house husband”. He is an active member of Zionist groups such as the malicious fake “charity” called the “Campaign Against Antisemitism” or “CAA”.

https://twitter.com/Rattus2384/status/1183121129961132033?s=20

Update, 10 July 2020

Well, here we are, a year on. The Jews did manage to retake control of what is left of the Labour Party. Corbyn stepped down after the 2019 General Election debacle, which saw the Conservative Party achieve a Commons majority of 80.

That Commons majority was achieved by default. The Conservative Party share of the vote scarcely increased vis a vis 2017 (an increase of one point), and relatively few 2017 Labour voters switched to the Conservative Party (though some did, in formerly solid Labour constituencies) but far more simply walked, i.e. abstained. The graphic below explains where the voters went in 2019:

In short, the Conservatives did not win, not on their own merits, but Labour did lose. The result speaks for itself: a Conservative majority of 80 in the Commons.

The Labour Party is now led by Keir Starmer, former Director of Public Prosecutions, probably a freemason, certainly a member of Labour Friends of Israel. His wife is a Jewish lawyer, his children are being brought up as Jewish.

Starmer has appointed other Labour Friends of Israel members as members of the Shadow Cabinet. Rachel Reeves and others.

As for the Jewish lobby MPs mentioned in my original blog post, many are now no longer MPs: Tom Watson, Ruth Smeeth, Anna Turley, Joan Ryan (now 65-y-o), Mary Creagh, John Woodcock— all gone.

Sadly, almost all, as far as I can discover, have been (((found))) new and lucrative positions:

Tom Watson is now head of “UK Music“, a trade body formerly headed by Michael Dugher, another Zionist-lobby pro-Israel doormat ex-MP.

Anna Turley became head of the Co-operative Party (in effect, a Labour offshoot) in 2019. A sinecure. She also “won” £75,000 libel damages from the trade union, Unite, in December 2019.

Mary Creagh likewise has found a well-paid niche as head of “Living Streets“, a charity funded largely by government monies (her salary is £100,000+).

John Woodcock, exposed as a pathetic sex pest and nut, has become a government-paid snoop, focussing on the so-called “far-Right”.

Update, 13 January 2025

Well, the world has turned a few times. Of those mentioned above, John Woodcock was made “Lord Walney” by “Conservative” PM “Boris” Johnson and, until recently, was making money snooping on “the far right”; now dismissed.

Ruth Smeeth, the part-Jew Israeli and US paid agent exposed by Wikileaks, has also now been “elevated” and, ludicrously, sits in the Lords as “Baroness” Anderson. She is now married to a very unpleasant Labour MP called Gareth Snell.

Anna Turley lost her seat, but managed to blag a few lucrative posts until she got back into the old MP racket in 2024, and is now Minister without Portfolio in the doomed Starmer-stein Labour Friends of Israel (mis-) government.

Stella Creasy remained an MP.

Mary Creagh lost her seat in 2019, but got back into Parliament in 2024, and is now a Starmer-stein minister.

As for “Rattus”/”@grubstreetsteve”, aka Stephen Applebaum or Apfelbaum, his relentless sadistic and malicious Twitter trolling came to an end in early 2023, when he “went up the chimney”. Some of his last few tweets attacked me and this blog. Bye-bye blackbird…

Brexit, elections, Party Politics, Uncategorized

EU Elections 2019 in Review: Labour

4 Comments

Labour did not do well at the EU elections: 3rd-placed with 2,347,255 votes, a 13.7% vote share, and 10 MEPs (down from 20). Labour only got two-thirds as many votes as the LibDems, and far less than half as many votes as Brexit Party attracted.

Remain whiners are saying that that happened because Labour did not proclaim itself as anti-Brexit and/or pro a second EU referendum. That is a doubtful proposition, in that it seems that more Labour voters voted Leave than Remain in 2016. What probably is correct is in saying that Labour’s message was mixed, or that Labour and Corbyn were “fence-sitting” re. Brexit (true, but what else can he do?). Parties that had a clear Brexit message (Brexit Party, LibDems, Greens) did better than those with mixed messages (Conservative and Labour). In the Russian proverb, “if you chase two hares, you won’t catch one”.

True, Change UK and UKIP had clear messages either way on Brexit and both failed miserably, but in the case of UKIP, Brexit Party simply took its votes and was seen as the bandwagon on which to jump; Change UK was just seen as a joke (there was something of that in UKIP too, it having joined with the “alt-Right” wastes of space “Sargon of Akkad” Carl Benjamin, “Prison Planet” Paul Watson and “Count Dankula” Mark Meechan).

Labour did not come in 1st place in any of the EU constituencies and, in the 5 constituencies where it came 2nd, was far behind Brexit Party (and typically with less than half of the votes of Brexit Party), with the sole exception of London, where Labour came 2nd to the LibDems (23.9% vote, LibDems on 27.2%).

Labour’s campaign was weak, and the Jewish-Zionist element was, as always, still there, sniping from cover at Corbyn and his (as far as I can see) very limited if even existent “anti-Semitism”.

Labour’s best argument in respect of Westminster elections has been, for the past 9 years, that it is not the Conservative Party. That trend has continued and strengthened under Corbyn. Is that enough?

True, Labour has policies designed to appeal to the middle-of-the-road voter (public ownership of some utilities, rail lines etc, a fairer deal for tenants, promises of more money for NHS etc).

On the other hand, if a voter wants to really give the Conservatives a kick, particularly in usually-Conservative-voting areas or in marginal Con-LibDem (Westminster) constituencies, that angry former Labour voter or floating voter might well do better to vote Brexit Party rather than Labour, because in strongly Conservative areas, Labour has no chance anyway in most years, whereas the LibDems are often the second party in such areas. Such a voter could (obviously) just vote LibDem straight off. Many voters, though, if there is a 3-way Con-LibDem-Brexit Party split (realistically), may want to vote Brexit Party rather than LibDem in the hope that a BP candidate can come through the middle to win, or because the LibDems enabled the 2010-2015 “coalition” government.

As to the impact of Brexit Party on Labour seats in the North and Midlands, I should assess it as potentially very damaging, but difficult to quantify. It is not just that Corbyn is said to be unpopular. It is also a question of Labour’s failure to stand up for (real) British people, for white neighbourhoods and communities. Labour failed to stem mass immigration and in fact encouraged it (of course, we now know from a whistleblower that Labour Jews such as Barbara Roche, and Phil Woolas, deliberately imported millions of non-European immigrants in order to destroy our race and culture).

There is also the connected fact that Labour never even admitted the nature and extent of the sexual exploitation of young girls by Pakistani gangs across the country, and particularly Northern England. In fact, Labour covered up the crimes, assisted by Common Purpose organization members in the police and in local councils.

The Labour voters who voted Green in the EU elections (held under proportional voting) will mostly return in a Westminster election (held under FPTP voting) because in the Westminster election, a Green vote is a wasted vote, without doubt.

If Brexit Party can take away 10% or more of what would otherwise be the Conservative vote, the Conservative Party is badly damaged (as when UKIP got 12% in 2015). If Brexit Party can get an overall 20%, the Conservative Party is toast except in a few very safe seats. Labour voters should therefore (whatever they think of Farage and his party) vote Brexit Party and not Labour, unless Labour is in a very strong position to win in any particular seat.

Labour has a good chance of forming a minority government or even a (small?) majority one if a general election is held soon, meaning in 2019, maybe 2020. The Conservatives are despised, divided, and weakened both internally and by the upstart Brexit Party. I blogged recently about how the Conservatives might try to limp on to 2022, when the reduction in MP numbers to 600 and accompanying boundary changes will cost Labour as many as 30 MPs. Much depends also on whether Brexit Party is a flash in the pan or a growing menace to the Conservatives.

I wrote the following after the Stoke-on-Trent by-election of 2017:

“Labour has been declining for years. Corbyn is both symptom and cause. The disappearance of the industrial proletariat has swept away the bedrock underneath Labour, replacing it by the sand of the “precariat”. Labour imported millions of immigrants, who are now breeding. The social landscape becomes volatile. The political landscape too.”

I see no reason to change my view.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Roche

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Woolas

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/7198329/Labours-secret-plan-to-lure-migrants.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7095191/DAN-HODGES-Labour-declare-party-smug-metropolitan-elite.html

Update, 6 June 2019

The tweet below, from the Peterborough by-election, illustrates my often-posted belief that the Labour core vote is now largely composed of the “blacks and browns”:

More proof…

In other words, Labour is now the party of the blacks and browns.

Update, 21 September 2019

…from the Independent, “reporting” on beach patrols at Dover; all too typical of the sort of persons now prominent in “Labour” and what is left of the trade unions:

“Riccardo La Torre, firefighter and Eastern Region Secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, branded the coast patrol “despicable” and said: “These have-a-go, racist vigilantes have no place in any kind of enforcement or emergency activities and will only serve to make conditions and tensions worse.”

“These groups claim to be the voice of the working class, but now they want to act as an arm of the authorities by patrolling beaches to apprehend struggling working-class people desperately trying to get to safety.”
[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/far-right-britain-first-beach-patrols-calais-dover-anti-migrant-a9113471.html]

So “Riccardo La Torre” (que?), a regional secretary of the Fire Brigade Union, thinks that migrant invaders from Africa and the Middle East are “working class people”, who are “trying to get to safety”?!

Safety from, er, France? There you have in a nutshell, the craziness that is much of “Labour” now. Alien migrant-invaders are “working class people”, who should be allowed to occupy the UK at will (and be subsidized too)! Note the fag-end “Marxism”, trying to shoehorn the facts into some 1980s polytechnic back-of-postcard Marxism-Leninism.

Alt-Right, Brexit, free speech, Ian Millard, immigration, Party Politics, Reminiscences and Musings, Russia and Russian relations, society, The Great Replacement, Uncategorized, white flight

Peter Hitchens and His Views

31 Comments

I am impelled to write a few words about Peter Hitchens after having just seen an interview with Owen Jones [see below], which interview dates from 2017.

I have already written a blog post about Owen Jones:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/01/04/a-brief-word-about-owen-jones/

To examine the views and influence of Hitchens in detail would necessitate a blog article of inordinate length, but Wikipedia has a considerable amount of information about him:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hitchens

I should like to focus mainly on a few matters raised in that interview.

As to Hitchens himself, he is an odd fellow, apparently fairly well-educated. His family background had elements of tragedy (his mother bolted with an unfrocked priest, and the couple later died via a suicide pact in an Athens hotel). Not mentioned in the interview is that Hitchens (like Owen Jones) has part-Jewish roots, his maternal grandmother having been half-Jewish, in that her mother was Jewish. It was on that basis that Hitchens’ even more eccentric brother, Christopher, declared himself in latter years to be “Jewish” (taking the traditional Jewish course of deciding via the matrilineal side alone).

The interview mentions his having attended a naval school, but that must have been in early years, he then having attended The Leys School, Cambridge, an institution which has schooled a number of well-known people: at least one Rothschild, a few kings (albeit from Bahrain and Tonga), a number of MPs and journalists (in some cases both, as with Martin Bell).

Hitchens then went on to the City of Oxford College (a college of further education) and finally to Alcuin College, part of the University of York.

It may be that the university education and milieu that Hitchens found in Alcuin College permanently influenced his attitude. Wikipedia says of Alcuin College that,

“From early days of the college an uproar for secession of the college from the remainder of the university has been present.[3] It is a self-styled Separatist Movement and at times presented as a running gag at the University of York about Alcuinites….For many years Alcuin College was very much the outcast on the university campus, the only college physically separate from the others except for a bridge from the library…“

The photograph of Alcuin College in winter shows an almost Soviet bleakness and isolation.

Alcuin_College_in_Snow_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1691889

Hitchens, though characterizing himself in the Owen Jones interview as having been a “joiner” in his youth, has also been an outsider, defector and maverick. I wonder whether he applied to the University of York because Oxford and/or Cambridge (in both of which cities he had attended school) refused his application, or perhaps he made no application to Oxbridge because (I speculate) his developing extreme socialist views made him reject such “bourgeois” places of learning. A better interviewer than Owen Jones, such as the late and great Brian Walden, might have explored all that.

Hitchens was from 1968 (aged 17) to 1975, a member of the Trotskyist “tendency” called the International Socialists [IS], the forerunner of the Socialist Workers’ Party [SWP]. He joined two years before he went to York. Later, in his forties, he became a card-carrying member of the Conservative Party, but only for the six years 1997-2003, and —typically— at the very nadir of Conservative fortunes, which is interesting, psychologically. Does he court unpopularity? Does he deliberately express unpopular or contrary views?

Hitchens is known as what might fairly be called a “reactionary”, someone who thinks that Britain was a better place in the 1950s, no ifs no buts. In fact, I believe that I watched him say that or something like that on TV once. My own view is different, that some aspects of life in the UK are better now, though many are certainly worse. This blog post is about Peter Hitchens, not Ian Millard, but in my view, things that are better now than in the 1950s (which I scarcely remember, having been born in 1956) or the early 1960s (which I certainly do remember) would include

  • central heating as the norm;
  • wider selection of fruits and vegetables (and in general a healthier or at least more varied diet);
  • less antiquated snobbism;
  • more understanding of animal welfare;
  • far easier access to information (via Internet);

Whereas, on the other side, the aspects of British life now that mean that UK life is worse (than in the early 1960s, anyway) are (and Hitchens has a point, because it is a longer list by far)

  • the general pressure of life now (of course, I was a child in, say, 1963, so my perception is affected to that extent but I think the judgment is still valid);
  • pervasive lack of freedom of expression;
  • pervasive “political correctness” etc;
  • the cost of living, though that is a complex question; it includes
  • the cost of real property both for sale and rent, and the impossibility for most people to buy a property without family money;
  • British people swamped by mass immigration;
  • real pay and social benefits etc generally reducing;
  • hugely less choice of employment for most people;
  • many people in full-time work unable to live on the poor pay offered;
  • unwanted millions of immigrants and their offspring;
  • congested roads and railways (and refer to the above line);
  • a huge new mixed-race population;
  • a huge amount of crime;
  • public and private housing shortages (refer to immigration, above);
  • huge numbers of drug-contaminated persons;
  • workers exploited in terms of having ever-shorter lunch breaks etc, “on call” after hours etc;
  • public services near to collapse in some respects;
  • intensive farming, with consequent harm to wildlife;
  • standards in all areas (NHS, schools, social security, Westminster MPs, police etc) falling like a stone

We often hear (eg from very young Remain whiners) that, eg, “foreign travel is easier now”, whereas that is mostly illusion. True, there were some silly aspects “back then”, such as being restricted as to foreign currency taken on holiday (you even had to have the amount, bought from somewhere like Thomas Cook, written in your passport!), and that silliness (a kind of postwar sacred cow) lasted until Mrs Thatcher stopped it in 1979 or 1980! Yes, true, but that was about it.

If you listen to Remain whiners (esp. the under-30s), you read or hear that Brexit will mean either no visa-free travel to the EU states, or no travel allowed at all! They really believe that, pre-1972, British people were almost imprisoned, as if Cuban, Chinese or Soviet citizens!

Until blacks and browns abused it in the 1980s to import relatives illegally, you used to be able to get a “British Visitor’s Passport” from post offices for a small amount; the passport was valid for short visits to almost all Western European states (not many people went to Eastern Europe as tourists until the 1990s). I had one in 1978 or 1979, in between possession of two ordinary passports, when I wanted to travel to France at short notice. I think that it cost about £5 and took about 5 minutes to be issued at Lanark Road Post Office, Little Venice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_passport#The_British_visitor’s_passport

Transport to the European mainland: true, there were no budget airlines as such in the 1950s, 1960s, but there were routes and ways not now in existence: in the 1950s and 1960s, people could take their cars by air to France! The main route was Lydd (Kent) to Amiens. This was not only for the rich: 5,000 cars (20,000 passengers) as early as 1950, and over 50,000 cars (250,000 passengers) by 1955 (incredible when you recall that rationing lasted until 1955!):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_City_Airways#The_1950s

Yes, you might have to show your passport or wave it (you still do…)

There were excellent hovercraft services (though only from 1970-2000) across the Channel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoverspeed

The idea that some Remain whiners have that young people will be unable to travel if the UK leaves “Europe” (meaning the EU) is laughable to those who know. As a child I travelled with parents; and then (from 1971) as a teenager, I travelled alone to Paris, Amsterdam etc. No visa required, UK not in EEC (the then EU).

I might add that it actually takes longer to fly to Paris in 2019 than it did in 1970 or even 1960!

Anyway, back to Hitchens and his views.

True, the early 1950s did still have rationing (until 1954), the result of the stupid and terrible war against the German Reich: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_the_United_Kingdom#Timeline

One cannot say that Hitchens approves of that aspect of 1950s lifestyle, though, and (if I understand him aright), he thinks that the British war against Germany could have been avoided, but I may be mistaken here. He certainly thinks that of the First World War, which he says, surely rightly, destroyed British naval supremacy and economy.

Where Hitchens is certainly mistaken is in saying (in the interview) that Churchill’s refusal to countenance the German peace proposals of 1940 was “unquestionably the right and moral thing to do”. Oh really? Right and moral, to continue a war only started because triggered by a treaty obligation that could never have been fulfilled (the Anglo-French worthless “guarantee” to Poland) and when an honourable peace via armistice was on the table?

Such a peace might have been bought at the price of German victory in the East, but would that have been so bad? The destruction of the Stalin/Bolshevik regime? The saving of most of Eastern Europe from both wartime destruction and post-1945 Stalinism? The prevention of the enormous damage, loss of life and hurt across Western and Southern Europe and North Africa? Hitchens says, however, that he is “sceptical” about Churchill overall.

Hitchens is on surer ground when he says that British history has gone, in that no-one knows British history. He cites David Cameron-Levita being unable to translate the two words “Magna Carta” from Latin! After 6 years at Eton! That was when “Scameron” was a guest on the Letterman Show. Shaming for the whole country. Not just the Magna Carta bit. Cameron came over more like a part-Jew public entertainer (and not a good one) than a British statesman. Oh…wait…

[the bit about Magna Carta starts around 8 minutes in]

Scameron was also proven, though I think on another occasion, not to have heard of the Bill of Rights! Hitchens cites an apparently intelligent 6th-former whom he met, and who had passed exams in English History, and yet who did not know which side Oliver Cromwell was on during the English Civil War!

I have had similar encounters. Few people under 40 now know even the most basic facts about British history, and less about European history generally. An indictment of the British educational system. One should, though, be wary of thinking that this kind of ignorance developed overnight. I recall having a brief conversation with a South London couple I met by a swimming pool in Sousse, Tunisia, in 1986, and who, it transpired, had no idea at all that what is now Tunisia had been (part of) a Roman imperial province. Not knowing who was Nelson or Drake, though, is arguably of a different order.

Hitchens says, again correctly, that “we” “have no idea now what it means to be English or British”, but does not go on to examine the racial implications. Come to think of it, that may be one reason why so many people in the UK want to denounce others to Twitter, Facebook, the police, employers etc for holding the “wrong” views, i.e. because the denouncers have no idea of the English historical struggle for free speech (John Hampden etc…) and no respect for it.

CxDUqlFWgAAY3LX

D635NrZW0AAGWQo

scan25

Owen Jones talks about how open-minded (he says…) Corbyn is, and implies that he, Jones, is the same. Oh yes? Take a look at my blog post about him…

Hitchens himself is really little different. He once had a short and at first reasonable discussion with me on Twitter about the early Zionists, in 2017 or 2016, but then a Jew tweeted to him about how I was apparently an evil “neo-Nazi”, after which, just like Owen Jones, inter alia, Hitchens blocked me. I was unaware then that Hitchens is part-Jew, though not to the extent that would have rendered him liable to sanctions under the 1936 Nuremberg law(s), his maternal grandmother having been only part-Jew (Mischling) and his maternal grandfather not a Jew. In fact, under those laws he would even have been able to work as a journalist.

Hitchens says that Enoch Powell’s so-called “Rivers of Blood” speech “was a disgrace”. Why? He dislikes its tone, it seems. What about its truth, though? He also says that “the intermarriage [resulting from immigration] is great”. I begin to wonder what major part of modern British society he does dislike, when push comes to shove! To be fair to Hitchens, he does disapprove of the ghetto communities established by Pakistanis and others in, mainly, the Midlands and North of England. He is certainly not “white nationalist”, let alone social-national. If he were, he would be sacked at once. Long live freedom!…

An area in which I do find myself largely in agreement with Hitchens is in intervention by the “West” (in my terms, “NWO/ZOG”) in the affairs of the Middle East. Iraq, Syria, Libya. He opposes it. That’s something.

As to Russia, Hitchens seems to take an objective view (informed by better historical knowledge than most msm scribblers), eg:

https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/russia/

I apprehend that Hitchens likes the social conservatism of most Russians.

So what is my overall view of Peter Hitchens? I should say that he is someone of considerable intellect, though nowhere near as intelligent as he himself imagines. Someone of considerable education, but who imagines that he knows more and better than almost anyone else, and believes that it is his role in life to pronounce on the truth of any given social, political, historical or ethical topic. Someone who harks back to a supposed golden age prior to, perhaps, 1959, or 1989 (at very latest). Someone who sees what is wrong in the present society but appears to have no programme or (Heaven forbid!) ideology to move from here to there (to a better society).

Hitchens takes a reasonable view such as “the family is a good thing” and tests it to destruction. Likewise, in his critique of both socialism and the contemporary Conservative Party, he goes to an extreme, saying that the Conservative Party is “extreme Left-wing”, by which he means “socially liberal”. He defends traditional marriage and his arguments here have force.

Hitchens thinks that the Conservative Party is dying (understandable, looking at its MPs and ministers) but, yet again, goes to an extreme, wishing that it could have lost the 2010 General Election so that it might have died, and so made room for a new and socially-conservative party. I wish that it had lost too, but for other reasons!

Hitchens reminds me of two other scribblers of note, Peter Oborne and (now rather forgotten) Paul Johnson.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Oborne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Johnson_(writer)

All three are often intuitively correct on some issues, risibly mistaken on others. They are alike in other ways, too. As the Russians say, they are all “Maximalisti”.

Hitchens (like Owen Jones) blocked me on Twitter for ideological reasons. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) makes a very comfortable living from the System msm. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) poses no danger to the existing state of affairs, despite making much noise. Hitchens (like Owen Jones) is a mass media pussycat pretending to be a tiger.

I like to read Hitchens’ words occasionally. He is often right, not always. However, his words are commentary, not inspiration. He says in the interview that Britain is finished and that the only serious history of contemporary Britain will one day be written in Chinese! Maybe, but God moves in mysterious though sometimes sanguinary ways. As a Christian and a student of history, Hitchens should know that.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Hitchens

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcuin_College,_York

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Workers_Party_(UK)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Walden

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens#Early_life_and_education

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mischling#Jewish_identity

http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/04/04/mass-hysteria/

Hitchens’ most recent Mail on Sunday article:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7045469/PETER-HITCHENS-green-seats-prove-careering-catastrophe.html

Other recent articles by Hitchens:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6993553/PETER-HITCHENS-time-view-police-just-like-failed-industries.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7019091/PETER-HITCHENS-country-slowly-choked-death-rights-wrongdoers.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnCvl2T_o5o

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7070715/PETER-HITCHENS-did-warn-Marshmallow-Lady.html

Hitchens’ recent book (which I have not yet read, but which promises to be at least as myth-shattering as those of the unjustly neglected historian Correlli Barnett)

Update, 18 September 2020

Since the above was written, Peter Hitchens has been almost a lone voice struggling against the “Coronavirus” panic and the allied government-proclaimed fear propaganda.

Update, 24 April 2022

Hitchens is now in the small minority of public figures unwilling to go along with the msm noise against Russia, and for Ukraine (meaning the Kiev regime of the Jew-Zionist Zelensky).

Carl Benjamin, Deadhead MPs, elections, Jewish lobby in UK, Labour Friends of Israel, MPs, Party Politics, Sargon of Akkad, Uncategorized

Deadhead MPs, An Occasional Series: The Jess Phillips Story

29 Comments

Apologia

So here we are again, in the “deadhead MPs” zone. The problem I have is that so very many MPs are now deadheads, meaning MPs who fall below the bar even for mediocrity. Mediocrity alone does not qualify an MP to be immortalized here. The MP must be outstandingly poor. How to say where that line is set, when so many now qualify? Anyway, having already chosen a number of MPs to participate in this series, here is a well-deserving example: Jess Phillips MP [Lab, Birmingham Yardley].

Jess Phillips

Background

Jess Phillips is the daughter of two “socialist”-oriented persons, who apparently walked around naked all the time at home, in front of their children. Very odd. Even the East Germans (some of them) only did that on specified Baltic beaches. The online magazine, Conservative Woman, commented thus:

“‘Teach girls at school about orgasms, says Labour MP’. That startling newspaper headline, alone, would have been sufficient for most readers to guess that the source was an interview given by that shameless self-publicist Jess Phillips.“

“Her interview also revealed that not only was Phillips brought up in a ‘naked household . . . an environment where nothing was embarrassing’, today in her own home she often goes around nude. Jess further boasts of being ‘open about sex’ with her two sons, currently aged 10 and 14, which must be delightful for them, though it is unclear whether or not she is clothed during their intimate chats.”

“If Phillips’s tale of home nudity is actually true and not a wind-up, far from being charmingly eccentric, it is revolting. Were a father revealed to be exposing himself to school-age daughters, with whom he frankly discusses sex, it would likely be career-ending, certainly for an MP, and might also interest both social services and police.”

“But don’t expect Jess Phillips to have her collar felt – she won’t be wearing one.”

Readers of the profile were not complimentary to Jess Phillips:

“Phillips is as mad as a barrel of polecats anyway. The fact that people actually vote for her is astonishing.”

and

“I’d like to like Jess Phillips, because at least she seems to have an infectious laugh. The trouble is, I remember her laughing also at male suicide statistics. Seemed to think it funny that suicide is the leading cause of death in British men aged 20-49. Not so funny really.”

It seems that her parents, though “socialist”, set up a private company in order to make money out of the NHS, her mother having been Deputy Chief Executive of the NHS Confederation and Chair of South Birmingham Mental Health Trust. That private company was active from 2003 until at least 2010, but is now defunct. Jess Phillips’ mother died in 2011.

Jess Phillips attended a local grammar school for girls, then the University of Leeds (Economic and Social History and Social Policy, a “soft” degree); she then took a post-graduate diploma in Public Sector Management at the University of Birmingham.

“At 16 I was a raver, a party animal to say the least. Weekends would start early on a Friday night, round at my friend’s house where we’d get ready. Then we’d be out, maybe to a local party at someone’s house. Then on Saturday it was an all-night rave until the wee small hours of Sunday.”

The only known jobs done by Jess Phillips are working for her parents until 2010 (when she was 29), and (from 2010) working as a business development manager at Women’s Aid domestic abuse charity. It is unclear for how long this position lasted. In the 2010-2015 period, Jess Phillips was also engaged in paid political activity as a councillor and as a member of at least two local quango panels. On occasion, Jess Phillips has made reference to having done waitressing and other work, but I think that we can be sure that we are talking days or weeks rather than months or years, assuming that she ever did those jobs at all.

Jess Phillips is married to one Tom Phillips. They have two children. I have been unable, as yet, to discover whether her husband is of Jewish or part-Jewish origin or indeed whether she herself is.

Controversies as MP

Jess Phillips

  • was selected as candidate not by open competition but via an approved “all-women shortlist”;
  • is a member of Labour Friends of Israel and has made a number of pro-Jewish interventions; Jews on Twitter etc often seem to give her support (may be part-Jew);
  • invented an altercation with Diane Abbott MP in which, Phillips claimed, “‘I roundly told her to fuck off.’ When asked what Ms Abbott did after that suggestion, Ms Phillips replied: ‘She fucked off.'” According to Diane Abbott in a January 2018 Guardian interview: “Jess Phillips never told me to fuck off. What was extraordinary is that she made a big deal of telling people she had”. Phillips later apologised.” [Huffington Post]
  • “Phillips told Owen Jones in December 2015 that she had told Corbyn and his staff “to their faces: ‘The day that … you are hurting us more than you are helping us, I won’t knife you in the back, I’ll knife you in the front‘”, if it looked as though he was damaging Labour’s chances of winning the next general election. Responding to criticism about her use of language, Phillips said on Twitter: “I am no more going to actually knife Jeremy Corbyn than I am actually a breath of fresh air, or a pain in the arse” [Wikipedia]
  • walks around in the nude at home, despite having two sons living with her;
  • has quarrelled with UKIP MEP candidate Carl Benjamin aka “Sargon of Akkad”, who said, in 2015, that “he would not even rape her”. Jess Phillips has now dredged that up, four years later, and has been making her usual and no doubt well-paid round of the TV and radio studios in order to make more publicity for herself out of it; she has even made complaint to the police about it, four years on (and, no doubt coincidentally, during the EU election campaign)!
  • has threatened several times to resign from the Labour Party but somehow never quite manages to do it (see below for details of how much money she drags down solely by being an MP);
  • “In July 2018 it was reported that Phillips served as deputy editor of The House, the in-house Parliamentary magazine published by the Dods Group, which had been purchased by Conservative Party donor and former Tory vice-chairman Michael Ashcroft, earning an annual salary of £8,000 for two hours’ work per month.” [Wikipedia]. So she does maybe 2 hours work each month for that obscure magazine, which pays her about £700 per month, i.e. about £350 an hour. Not bad compared to most of her poverty-stricken constituents, who are probably lucky to get £10 a hour!
  • draws a salary of £80,000 and also claims a quarter of a million pounds each year in expenses, most of which consists of “staff pay”, which includes £50,000 a year paid to her husband as “Constituency Support Manager” (house husband?); she also claims about £30,000 a year for accommodation (about 50% more than average);
  • constantly makes the rounds of TV studios, radio studios, Press interviews (all or mostly paid…)

Ambition

“In March 2019, she said: “I think I’d be a good prime minister” and that “I feel like I can’t leave the Labour Party without rolling the dice one more time. I owe it that. But it doesn’t own me. It’s nothing more than a logo if it doesn’t stand for something that I actually care about – it’s just a f***ing rose.” [Wikipedia]

Conclusion

The mystery is (or would be, were it not so common in the House of Commons now) why this ignorant, uncultured, foul-mouthed creature was ever thought suitable to be an MP. Birmingham Yardley is a safe Labour seat, and it seems that no way exists for her to be removed, unless her local Labour Party deselects her. Incredibly, despite her saying time and again that Labour means nothing to her, she has been reselected. She makes a very good living out of being a caricature loudmouth MP, and I see no possibility that she will leave Labour unless another party offers her a continued sinecure. Unfortunately.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Yardley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_Confederation

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/05747465

https://www.bigissue.com/interviews/letter-to-my-younger-self/jess-phillips-i-found-early-motherhood-horrendous/

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/over-exposed-jess-the-naked-mp/

https://www.mpsexpenses.info/?#!/mp/757

Tweets and published remarks about Jess Phillips

In case people think that I select only tweets hostile to Jess Phillips, here is one from (another) “Labour” and pro-Zionist doormat, Stella Creasy MP (Labour Friends of Israel etc), who wants to make “misogyny” [meaning trenchant criticism of any female, female MP that is] a “hate crime”! Note: Stella Creasy and Jess Phillips are both personal friends and members of Labour Friends of Israel.

and here is another tweet supporting Jess Phillips, this time from vastly privileged System mouthpiece Dan Snow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Snow  , the son of BBC talking head Peter Snow. Dan Snow: St. Paul’s School, Balliol College, Oxford, married to the second daughter of the 6th Duke of Westminster (who was one of the richest men in Britain). “Snow presented his first programme in October 2002 just after graduating from university, co-presenting the BBC’s 60th anniversary special on the Battles of El Alamein with his father” [Wikipedia]. “With his father”?…Oh, that’s handy… Nepotism Central…Also a Remain drone (of course), Dan Snow thinks that making a silly remark should “instantly” disqualify a political candidate! He’s a well-educated, er, idiot…(correction, a well-educated and above all well-connected idiot).

and here’s another, but this time obscure, idiot who also believes that only “approved” and uncontroversial candidates should be allowed. Oh, right, like in Asian fake “democracies” such as China…

https://twitter.com/Judechina1/status/1125729138084646913

Here (below), a tweeter commenting on how Jess Phillips manages to rip off the taxpayers for hundreds of thousands of pounds a year:

https://twitter.com/patrick161616/status/1117423762025193473

I have to admit that I found the following tweet rather funny!

and here are some people who seem to think that Jess Phillips has been telling untruths about being the target of an attack. Surely not…

https://twitter.com/VanishingPoin_t/status/1177511730957520898?s=20

Update, 6 October 2019

Jess Phillips is an even more horrible bitch than I thought…

https://twitter.com/groovyguyzone/status/1180448166778474496?s=20

Update, 18 January 2020

I have seen it written that Jess Phillips’ husband is no longer employed by her on her Parliamentary expenses (or at all).

Update, 31 July 2020

Jess Phillips is so ignorant about basic facts and procedures in law and public life that she committed a plain contempt of court at or near the end of the recent trial of ex-MP Charlie Elphicke. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/07/30/former-tory-mp-charlie-elphicke-guilty-sexually-assaulting-two/

I expect that the judge and police/CPS will turn a blind eye. I myself think that she should suffer some penalty. What an incredibly stupid woman she is.

Update, 15 November 2023

Update, 6 July 2024

Narrowly re-elected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birmingham_Yardley_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2020s

Update, 18 July 2025

It just occurred to me that, with Jess Phillips, the apple did not fall far from the tree. She, like her parents, combines pseudo-socialism with grabbing as much money as possible, and with using Labour Party networking in order to do that.

I saw tweets about her today:

Just a straight-out enemy of the future of white Europe.

Update, 25 October 2025

Brexit, Party Politics, Uncategorized

What Now for General Election 2019?

3 Comments

Introduction and background

I have blogged within the past day about the result of the UK local elections:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/04/the-uk-local-elections-have-been-held-my-view/

We have seen what happened in those elections:

  • the Conservative Party humiliated and suffering a defeat worse than many (but not I) anticipated;
  • the Labour Party, though losing few seats (82), also humiliated, in that, at this point in the conventional electoral cycle, the norm is for the governing party to lose and possibly lose heavily, but for the official Opposition party to make gains, perhaps considerable gains;
  • the Liberal Democrats, who have not, in general, recovered since their rout at the 2015 General Election (and who in fact did worse at the 2017 General Election in terms of popular vote share —7.4% in 2017 as against 7.9% in 2015— though better in terms of House of Commons seats —12, up from 8), had a “good” result in these local elections, more than doubling the number of LibDem councillors.

Local councillors elected (only about a third of the over 20,000 total were in contest this time) were 3,561 (Con), 2,023 (Lab) and 704 (LibDem); others (mainly Independents) elected numbered 1,310, a large increase.

The totals of local government seats now held (mostly council seats) by the three main System parties: Con 7,615, Lab 6,327, LibDems 2,576.

The 2019 local elections gave the System parties the following vote shares: Con 28%, Lab 28%, LibDems 19%, Others (and spoiled votes) 25%.

The electoral swing percentages: 7% down for Con, 1% down for Lab, and 8% up for the LibDems.

It can be seen from the above that these elections were disastrous for the Conservatives, not successful for Labour. As to the LibDems, their upsurge was mainly a protest vote by pro-Remain former Conservative voters. Not very important. I do not want to waste more time than I have already on washed-up UKIP or on the Green protest vote.

Had the Nigel Farage vehicle, the Brexit Party, been contesting the local elections, the Conservative and Labour parties would have done very much worse, the LibDems about the same (their votes coming exclusively from Remainers and from those who think that mass immigration actually somehow benefits the people of the UK).

The 2019 EU election

It is now too late for the EU election not to be held in the UK. The pathetic “deal” cobbled together (as I write this, not quite agreed between Theresa May and Corbyn) will not be able to prevent the EU election happening. Thus Brexit Party comes into play.

Look at the film clip below. Nigel Farage arriving at a rally in Newport, Wales, on 30 April 2019. His reception is not just warm or supportive; it is ecstatic, an ovation by followers who seem almost to worship him.

Reminiscent of the entry of Adolf Hitler into the speech hall at Nuremberg in 1934, as shown in Triumph of the Will [dir. Leni Riefenstahl, 1935]. None of the substance and depth, of course, but superficially rather similar.

Opinion polls: Brexit Party was recently running at about 30% (2 May) and may by now be higher, maybe even 35%. That figure, though, relates purely to the upcoming EU elections

As regards Westminster elections, Brexit Party was running at 14% a few days ago, but it might well rise, perhaps considerably, from there. Labour is on about 30% and Conservatives around 25%.

Brexit Party is pretty much the only game in town as regards the EU election in the UK. Indeed, if Conservative/Labour do agree some unsatisfactory last-minute and cobbled-together “deal” to put to the EU, i.e. “Brexit In Name Only”, Brexit Party might well do even better on 23 May.

Possible General Election 2019

The System parties are assuming that, if some kind of limited faux-Brexit is presented to the British people, with or without a fake “Second Referendum” or “People’s Vote”, that that will shoot the Brexit Party’s fox. I’m not so sure.

There is huge dissatisfaction around, not only around Brexit (from both main directions), but also around the continuing other issues that bedevil the UK: the continuing low levels of pay and “welfare” (social security), overcrowded rail, poorly maintained roads, the spending cuts of a decade now impacting services such as NHS and police; immigration is continuing on a very large scale, too.

The msm and Westminster Bubble crowd have not fully caught up with what is happening. Look again at the Con, Lab and LibDem local results. Labour did not do well in terms of pressing ahead, but did not much slip back. The Conservatives suffered a really big hit. The LibDems did well mainly at the expense of the Conservatives.

In any 2019 General Election, the Conservatives, under whoever is their new leader, would face a three-front war: against Labour, LibDems and Brexit Party. It has been assumed up to now that Brexit Party would take the role and have the effect of being a spoiler alone. Maybe now it might be more than a mere spoiler. Half the Conservative voters of 2017 are saying that they will not vote Conservative next time. I have already blogged about how that could mean a loss of 100 or even 200 Commons seats for the Conservatives. Most ex-Con voters will vote Brexit Party.

It may well be that Brexit Party can do well enough to create its own bloc of seats. Maybe 50. Maybe even 100. Labour will also benefit from the Conservatives losing votes to both Brexit Party and the LibDems.

I cannot see the LibDems doing better than staying at about the same level that they are on now (12 MPs), but votes for them from former Conservative voters may easily let in either Labour or the Brexit Party, depending on the seat in question. Having said that, it is not impossible that a small number of LibDem candidates might slip past the Con, Lab and Brexit party candidates in closely-fought 3-way or 4-way splits.

So the Conservatives will be losing Remain votes to the LibDems, Leave votes to Brexit Party. It may be, also, that those floating voters whose priorities lie elsewhere than with the EU/Brexit situation will go with Labour.

The Conservatives may be left as a niche party for the wealthy, the smug affluent, the buy to let parasites, the Zionist Jews etc. In a sense that was always so, but other categories of voter made up the weight in elections.

The Conservative Party may be permanently reduced to a hard core of 25% of the electorate, and perhaps to an even lower level than that. The ethnic minorities (except the Jews) are estranged from the Conservatives and are fast-increasing in number. The “blacks and browns” etc vote Labour. Many of the English/British (i.e. white) middleaged and elderly are either disappearing by effluxion of time or are defecting to Brexit Party; only 16% of voters under 35 favour the Conservatives; only 4% of those under 25. Very many of the young or quite young vote Labour or Green.

The msm seems to be saying now that the most likely outcome is a hung Parliament, with the Conservatives as biggest party in the Commons. I tend to stick with my prediction of 2+ years standing, that Labour will be the biggest party, though without a majority, if an election really is called this year. There is an outside chance that Labour might get a majority, but if its remaining Northern English base continues to erode, a Commons majority is not going to happen.

Notes

https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-what-bruising-results-mean-for-labour-and-the-conservatives-11710446

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

Some tweets

In the clip immediately below (from Sky newspaper review), journalist Brendan O’Neill, with loudmouth “Fleet Street Fox” (Susie Boniface), addresses the Labour lack of success in the local elections:

In fact, there were no less than 39,000 spoiled papers in all! Many had “BREXIT”, “Brexit Party” or Swastikas drawn on them…

https://twitter.com/EddieDempsey/status/1124075048984350727

and here below we see Lisa Nandy MP trying to avoid mentioning that the Labour vote is now at least partly (in some areas, almost entirely) an ethnic non-white vote. Seems that the Conservatives of Smethwick, at the famous 1960s by-election, were right: “if you want a n****r for a neighbour, vote Labour”! Lisa Nandy is trying to say that “graduates” (meaning “the educated”?…hardy ha ha in the era of “everyone gets a First” degrees) prefer Labour. Everyone and his dog is now a nominal “graduate”, who has gone to “uni” and got a crap (in many cases) “degree” leading to (also in many cases) a low-wage job, thus (ditto) leading to socio-political dissatisfaction…

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtEs1OZ_tYo

Afterthought

My main article, above, says nothing about Change UK, the new party for Remainers and pro-Zionists. The article does not cover Change UK because Change UK is doomed and (as I said in another blog post) all but pointless. It is running at about 4% in the opinion polls re the EU elections, but better (some polls even had it recently at 10%!) re. any general election.

Readers will recall that UKIP had support, at the 2015 General Election, of 12.6%, yet gained no MPs (except for the ex-Con MP, Carswell). UKIP’s support was evenly spread throughout England and Wales; it had no Schwerpunkt or concentration of support in a few constituencies (which is how the LibDems and Greens, both with lower levels of support nationally, score). It follows from that that Change UK, even with 10% of votes (5% is more likely) has no chance of getting anywhere in any general election in 2019.

The significant thing about Change UK is that it will pull even more votes from the Conservatives, already losing votes to Brexit Party and LibDems.

Update, 7 May 2019

In the past days, while “Change UK” has apparently already sunk without trace (and almost nothing is heard about it), Brexit Party is really developing into something. Today, it was announced that there will be EU elections in the UK on 23 May, only 16 days from today. Brexit Party looks odds-on to be largest UK party and perhaps to take most of the seats allocated to the UK.

and nearly 2,000 people (see link below) turning out for Farage and his Brexit Party in Peterborough, where a by-election will be held in early June.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/nigel-farage-brexit-rally-peterborough-16240485

Update, 11 May 2019

“A ComRes poll for the Sunday Telegraph showed that if a Westminster general election were called, Labour would reap the largest share of the vote with 27%; the Brexit party would garner 20% ahead of the Conservatives on 19%. The Liberal Democrats would win 14%, followed by ChangeUK (7%) and the Greens (5%) with Ukip trailing on 2%.” [The Guardian]

Update, 18 May 2019

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7042737/Ministers-threaten-bring-government-accept-Boris-PM.html

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1128326/Brexit-news-Michael-Portillo-UK-EU-withdrawal-general-election-Brexit-Party-Theresa-May

Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

Some More Thoughts About the Next General Election in the UK

4 Comments

A 2019 General Election?

A recent ComRes poll indicated that only about half of those who voted Conservative in the General Election of 2017 are intending to vote that way in the next general election, which might come any time between Summer 2019 and early June 2022. I have been thinking and blogging etc for a year or so that 2019 might be the year. Mainstream commentators have recently been gravitating to the same view.

The Brexit chaos has highlighted the incompetence of the Theresa May and other Conservative Party governments stretching back to 2010: roads, rail, social security/”welfare”, the migration-invasion (mass immigration), crime etc.

As I have more than once blogged and (before I was banned in our “free” country, tweeted), the choice for many may be between a Labour Party government which may well prove to be incompetent, and a Conservative Party government which has already, time and again, proven its incompetence.

Labour, Conservative, UKIP, Brexit Party

Labour is now slightly ahead of the Conservatives in the opinion polls, probably because

  • UKIP, though effectively washed-up as an electoral force, has managed, under its latest leader, Batten, to halt its downward slide;
  • Brexit Party now exists and is taking votes mainly from the Conservatives;
  • also, Theresa May is now finally seen almost universally as the disaster she is.

No-one expects UKIP to win seats in any general election this year; after all, 1 in 8 voters voted UKIP in 2015, but the rigged/unfair UK electoral system deprived it of its merited success. On strict PR voting, UKIP’s 12.6% popular vote would have given UKIP about 80 MPs. Indeed, had many not seen a vote for UKIP as a wasted vote, that number could have been doubled or even trebled. In Mrs. May’s now-famous screech, “nothing has changed!” as far as that is concerned.

UKIP will probably get a few percentage points of the vote in English and Welsh constituencies, maybe even 5%, but that will not win any seats. What it will do, though, is deprive the Conservatives (mainly) of those votes (nearly 600,000 in 2017). Many constituency seats are won and lost by less than a thousand votes.

Now we have Brexit Party, which I had thought would fight only the EU elections, but which, it seems (see Nigel Farage’s comments in Notes, below), now intends to fight the next UK general election.

My initial skepticism about Brexit Party has been proven wrong, at least in the opinion polls. Brexit Party is now running at anything up to 30% re. the EU elections, and, in initial polling, 14% in respect of Westminster elections. That latter polling may already have been superseded by events, but even 14%, at a general election, is huge, inasmuch as it means that Brexit Party and UKIP in aggregate may take away from (mainly) the Conservatives as much as 20% of the votes in any given English or Welsh constituency. In an average constituency with average GE turnout that works out at about 8,000 votes!

As usual, most of the Twitterati get it wrong. Look at the tweets below by one Tom Clarke, who seems to be a fairly typical Remain and anti-nationalist tweeter. He says, probably correctly, that 27% is not enough to “take power” but fails to see the side-effects in terms of depriving others of power…He also bleats about “mandate”. What about the 52% who voted Leave in 2016?

In fact, Twitter is a poor guide to elections and popular votes. The twitterati voted Remain in 2016 (losing side), thought that Trump had no chance of becoming US President (wrong again), and are (or often seem to be) almost all pro-immigration, virtue-signalling idiots etc…

Core votes

The Labour core vote, though no more than 25% of eligible voters, is solid because it is composed of those unlikely to be enticed by other parties presently around, and particularly by the Conservative Party: almost all “blacks and browns” (and other ethnic minorities, except for Jews); almost all of the poorly-paid, unemployed, and disabled. Others, while not “core vote”, add up to possibly another 10% of the eligible electorate: those 18-24 (only 4% favour Conservative), voters under 35 (only 16% favour Conservative). Increasing numbers of persons in their 30s, 40s and older are victims of buy-to-let parasites and bully landlords, or are not getting much personal or social benefit from their work. Labour’s policies speak to them. The Conservatives have nothing to say to such people except “pay up or get out! And don’t complain about repairs!” and “poor pay? Get a different job!”

When one thinks “who today would vote Conservative?” the answer, in broad brush terms must be

  • the wealthy
  • the affluent
  • buy to let parasites
  • those who own their homes outright and are financially stable
  • those elderly who are stick-in-the-mud creatures of frozen voting habits

That is the 25% or so core vote, to which must be added

  • those who hate Labour or Corbyn enough to vote Conservative simply in order to keep Labour and/or a Labour candidate out.

Here is an important point: the Labour core vote may be and probably is growing; the Conservative core vote is shrinking.

The Brexit Party and UKIP strike both at the Conservative core vote and the potentially-Conservative non-core vote.

Would Boris Johnson make a difference?

Doubtful. I concede that I am as anti-Boris as almost anyone could be, but my antipathy is matched by many voters: Boris is apparently the choice for Con leader (and so, unless there is a general election, Prime Minister by default) of about 70% of Conservative Party members (if one can believe sources such as the Daily Express), but even if correct, that is 70% of (at most) 120,000 Con Party members, i.e. 84,000 voters out of at least 40 million (in 2017, about 32 million voted).

In polls of the wider public, Boris Johnson is only a few percentage points ahead of other possible Con leaders.

Conclusion

Since 2017, I have thought that the most likely result of the next UK general election is Labour to win most seats, but not enough to have an overall majority. Now, for the first time, I am questioning that and wondering whether a strong general election campaign by both Brexit Party and UKIP might weaken the Conservative vote to the point where, nationally, the Conservatives might get as little as 30% (could it drop even to 25%?) as compared to 42.4% in 2017 and 36.9% in 2015.

I am of course no psephologist, but using online tools etc, it seems not unlikely that, if the Conservative vote falls to 30% and Labour is five points ahead, Labour might end up with about 300 seats and the Conservatives about 250. Others, about 100. No overall majority.

If, though, the Con vote were 25% and the Lab vote five points ahead, the Conservatives would end up with perhaps 225 or fewer seats, while Labour might get about 320. Yet again no overall majority for Corbyn, but closer.

However, we are uncharted territory, and in the “glorious uncertainly” of the British electoral system, it is not impossible that, in dozens and perhaps hundreds of constituencies, the Conservatives might come in second rather than first, their vote sapped by voters voting for UKIP, Brexit Party and others.

The ComRes poll cited at the start of this article said that only just over half of 2017 Con voters were planning to vote Con next time. In 2017, about 13,600,000 or so voted Con. If that is reduced to about 7 million, then the Conservative Party is toast.

In that event, the parliamentary Conservative Party would be reduced to a half, even a quarter of its present strength, and Labour under Jeremy Corbyn might actually be elected with a considerable majority. After that, anything might happen.

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_general_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Independence_Party#House_of_Commons_2

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/nigel-farage-thinks-his-brexit-party-can-win-general-election-1-5998829

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/24/nigel-farage-brexit-party-use-eu-elections-oust-remain-parliament

Afterthoughts, 25 April 2019

In my concluding sentences, above, I explored what might happen if Brexit Party (and/or UKIP, but Brexit Party is plainly taking off in a way that UKIP now is not) were to take away a large number of votes from the Conservatives. I examined what would happen if, nationally, the Conservatives went from 35%-45% down to 30% or 25% (or even lower).

Nigel Farage has made comments indicating that Brexit Party might make inroads into the Labour vote too, especially in the North where Labour was once monolithic in its supremacy in most constituencies.

The polling percentages and national vote percentages can only take you so far. In 2017, Theresa May led the Conservatives to inconclusive victory-defeat and 317 MPs, despite getting 42.4% of the national vote, a level not achieved by any political leader since Mrs Thatcher in 1983. In 2015, David Cameron-Levita’s Conservatives only got 36.9% of the national vote, yet 330 MPs. Only in an electoral system as Alice in Wonderland as that of the UK could that make any sense.

In other words, predictions are tricky when it comes to exact or even inexact numbers.

However, in my view, Brexit Party (and what is left of UKIP support) will hit the Conservatives harder than Labour. Indeed, some voters in seats where Labour never wins may vote tactically to unseat Conservatives, even if the result is that a LibDem or other may get in as a result. One can easily imagine seats fought until now as effectively a two-way split which may now be fought as a three-way or even four-way split.

If Brexit Party can go up from its 14% polling (Westminster voting intention; in EU elections the figure may be as high as 30%) to 25%+, that raises the serious possibility of Brexit Party MPs being elected. If about half the 2017 Conservative voters are not going to vote Conservative (as ComRes reports), are they going to abstain or vote elsewhere? The fact that they bothered to vote before seems to suggest that they will vote again. That means that even in the handful of seats where the Conservatives won in 2017 with over 60% of the vote, the Conservative share of the vote might go from 60% or so to 40%. (the safest Conservative seat is North East Hampshire: 65.5% in 2017).

In the circumstances above, defending a 60% vote share and ending up with perhaps 40%, the Conservatives would still win in most cases, but that would not be the case in more typical constituencies, where the Conservative MP won in 2017 with 50%, 40% or an even lower percentage of the votes cast. A Con MP who got 40% in 2017 might end up getting 30% or even 20% next time.

If Brexit Party can maintain momentum, it (with UKIP’s effect added) will cripple the Conservatives, who will lose swathes of seats. For example, in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, Boris Johnson received about 50% of the vote in 2017. Most of the rest (40%) went to Labour. Were half or even a quarter of the Conservative votes to be cast elsewhere, Labour would win (even if the votes “cast elsewhere” were not cast for Labour). In that example, Boris would end up with less than 40% and (if Labour’s 2017 40% vote were to hold up), the Labour candidate would win. That could be replicated in hundreds of seats, in theory. Most would fall to Labour, a few might go to or revert to LibDem, but it is also possible that some would fall to the Brexit Party. At present, unreal though it feels, it is not totally impossible to foresee Nigel Farage’s Frankenstein coming to life (energized by the Brexit hullabaloo itself) and actually ending up as a bloc of anywhere between a few MPs and as many as 50.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uxbridge_and_South_Ruislip_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/insights/ge2017-marginal-seats-and-turnout/

https://fullfact.org/news/how-many-seats-are-safe-and-how-many-votes-count-under-first-past-post/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIkaOb1Ivr4QIVDFXTCh3Ing2pEAAYASAAEgK6fvD_BwE

and Farage has now confirmed that Brexit Party will fight the next general election. The Conservatives are toast.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/8938714/nigel-farage-brexit-party-general-election/

Update, 27 April 2019

Times columnist Iain Martin tweeted on 27 April 2019 that “Disintegrating Tories need a leader who can get the Brexit Party to shut up shop.” It is clear to him, quite evidently, that Brexit Party, even if only as a “super-protest”, has the ability to smash the Conservative Party forever by reducing a typical Conservative vote in a marginal or even hitherto “safe” constituency by anything up to 8,000 votes…

The corollary is —almost— equally true: if Brexit Party (and UKIP) either did not exist or were not popular, the Conservatives would be well ahead of Labour for the next general election.

27 April 2019

Interesting analysis from 2017: had Labour won 7 more seats (requiring only 2,227 votes!), Corbyn might now be Prime Minister!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-election-results-votes-away-prime-minister-theresa-may-hung-parliament-a7782581.html

and here is John Rentoul, writing in The Independent, saying outright part of what I have been saying (I think that he is the first msm commentator of importance to have done so), that is that the Conservative Party is a dead duck (he says “smoking ruin”!) and likely to run only third after Labour and Brexit Party at the next UK general election:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-betrayal-corbyn-pm-farage-european-elections-a8888991.html

Not sure that Rentoul is right about Labour manifesto policy though: Corbyn might just continue to sit on the fence. It is working for him so far…

Meanwhile, Britain Elects tweets thus:

If that polling is right, the combined Brexit Party and UKIP vote at the possible/probable 2019 General Election is now running above 20%. Today 21%, tomorrow 25%, even 30%? Anything above 10% (as in 2015—UKIP got over 12% that year) is pretty bad for the Conservatives; anything above 20% will kill them stone dead. They would lose not even 100, but 200 MPs.

Update, 1 May 2019

With only 1 day to go before the UK local elections, I saw this tweet:

Meanwhile…

This is incredible! I am not a “supporter” of Farage or “Brexit Party”, but this is the sort of reception that few get! Reminiscent of the Fuhrer (though without the depth or substance, of course). Brexit Party is on a roll! Only three weeks to go before the moment of truth (EU elections).

Brexit, Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

The Political Mood is Changing

21 Comments

There has been a see-sawing between the two main System parties for several years. At first, say in 2014-2015, it looked as though Labour was about to go into possibly terminal decline. I have no doubt that, had any of the pro-Israel, pro-EU candidates in the first post-GE 2015 Labour leadership contest (Liz Kendall, Chuka Umunna, Yvette Cooper) won, that would have come to pass. As we know, Corbyn won that contest, and Labour, though it came in second at the 2017 General Election, reduced the Conservative government to minority status. Since then the parties have generally been close together in the opinion polls, with the Conservatives usually slightly higher.

Since the 2017 election, the only difference between the two is that Corbyn has been favoured by fewer as a potential prime minister. Theresa May had the edge but no ringing endorsement (a typical result was Corbyn 25%, Theresa May 35%, Don’t Know 40%). I have not seen a recent poll about the System party leaders, but there have been recent polls vis a vis the upcoming EU election and re. Westminster voting intentions (the next general election might in theory only be in 2022, but there seems to be an acceptance that it might in fact be this year, as I predicted was not unlikely).

Here are recent poll results (questions asked about 3-8 days ago), collated by Britain Elects. The position of Nigel Farage’s pop-up Brexit Party is volatile, but it is plainly one of the two most favoured; UKIP is evidently some way behind all of Brexit Party, Labour and Conservative Party, but the important point is that both Brexit Party and UKIP will take votes mainly from the Conservatives in the EU elections (always assuming that the UK participates) and (if Brexit Party and UKIP put up candidates) in the general election of 2019 (if it happens). There are also local elections coming (2 May 2019) but the beneficiary there will be Labour, UKIP not being able to fight most seats and Brexit Party not standing at all.

It can be seen that YouGov is more bullish on Brexit Party’s chances than is ComRes, and that BP’s ratings vary daily or so even from a single pollster. However, there is some reason to believe that Farage’s new vehicle is riding even higher now (some estimates put its reach at over 30%).

An amateur or perhaps semi-professional psephologist has come up with this seat prediction for the EU election in the UK (based on a YouGov opinion poll):

https://twitter.com/OwenWntr/status/1118497987045613568

Well, that’s for the EU Parliament. What about Westminster? The msm consensus now is what I have been predicting for a couple of years, Labour probably the largest party, but without overall majority. Where does that leave the Conservative Party? Quite possibly up a certain well-known creek without a paddle.

As I said here above, only a few years ago Labour looked like collapsing into becoming a niche party with maybe a 25% popular vote. Now things look very different: Corbyn has bent like the bamboo before the wind as the Jews (and the heavily Jew-influenced msm) have accused him of “anti-Semitism” (the Circuit judge in the Alison Chabloz appeal hearing recently confirmed that “anti-Semitism” is not a crime in England anyway…pass it on…).

The Zionist storm has been ferocious around Corbyn since 2015, but he simply sways with the wind. If I had not read that Corbyn scarcely reads books (one of his ex-wives said that he read not one book during their 4 years together!), I would take Corbyn for an acolyte of Sun-Tzu.

Well, much has happened since Corbyn took over. A membership/support base of about 200,000 has become one of 500,000+, Labour no longer has financial problems, its members and supporters are often young, and its poll ratings are finally improving.

Now it is the Conservative Party that may be facing an existential crisis. We read that only about 5% of Conservative rank and file members want Theresa May to stay as Leader, that donations have completely dried up, that the median age of Conservative Party members is 51 (with many over 80 or even 90), and that the supposed 120,000+ membership number is either only a paper figure or shows huge numbers of completely inactive members who take no part in the party even locally or socially, but are signed up to bank direct debits.

Only 16% of voters under 35 intend to vote Conservative, while the figure for under-25-years is a mere 4%. True, Conservative voters have always been mainly middle-aged and elderly, but not to this extent.

The Conservatives have usually trumped Labour on competence (in public perception, but God knows why…), but that is now faltering. The Conservatives can say that a Corbyn government would be incompetent, but the voters have seen that (as with David Cameron-Levita) the Theresa May Conservative government has been proven so: the NHS deteriorating, the police incapable of stopping the rise in violent crime, the increase in Internet snooping and monitoring of ordinary white British citizens by police, MI5 etc, the numbers being made homeless or literally starved to death thanks to the incompetent “welfare” “reforms” of Iain Dunce Duncan Smith and the jew “lord” Freud etc; then there are the potholed roads, the bursting and inefficient railways, not to mention the millions of unwanted immigrants, often from backward, violent and useless ethnic groups, flooding in almost without restraint. Police stations have been closed and sold, prisons are in a appalling state, people are imprisoned for saying anything against the Jews, but given small fines for bad crimes of violence. Then there are the squeezes, over a decade, on incomes.

The appalling muddle over Brexit has crystallized such feelings about this government’s sheer incompetence.

About half the chairmen of local Conservative parties have said that they will be voting Brexit Party in the EU elections. The Conservative Party is a party which is folding. The leader has no credibility, Cabinet members have neither loyalty nor discipline, its MPs are also without discipline, and it seems that donations have dried up.

“A damning Survation poll of 781 Tory councillors today found 76% want the Prime Minister to resign – with 43% saying she must go immediately” and “One councillor questioned in the study said: “The Conservative Party is dead. It will take a strong leader to dredge it out of the mud.””

[Daily Mirror]

The Daily Mail has a similar story:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6943297/Devastating-poll-shows-40-Tory-councillors-Nigel-Farages-new-party.html

“I am embarrassed to be a member at the moment. This will be a case study of (predictable) incompetence which has made our country and party a laughing stock around the world.” and “I will not vote Conservative nationally again. I have been a lifetime supporter and a Conservative councillor for 33 years.”

[Daily Mail]

It was the early symptom of the membership demographic problem (aka “an ancient membership…”), from 2010, that led to the Conservative Party trying to plug the door-knocking gap by bussing in hordes of young Con activists and/or employees via the disastrous Mark Clarke tour, because many constituency associations had almost literally no-one willing to canvass voters, mostly because, while some constituency associations had 200 or even 300 members, all of them were either infirm or far beyond retirement age.

More generally, it can be seen that there is a move to radical and even revolutionary politics. MSM scribblers are starting to take notice:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6943195/The-political-centre-disappearing-grave-danger-lies-ahead-says-JOHN-GRAY.html

To listen to strong “Brexiteers”, one would imagine that Brexit is the only issue. Poorly-educated and perhaps not very intelligent msm scribblers, such as Susie Boniface, the so-called “Fleet Street Fox” (a Remain partisan), make the same mistake in reverse. Susie Boniface writes that the voters of Newport West, in the recent by-election, voted for a Remain-supporting (Labour) MP despite the fact that the area (not the exact area) voted Leave in 2016. She infers from that that voters have changed their mind on EU membership. No, they simply wanted a MP who (supposedly) believes in public services, decent pay and fair benefits for those that need them. Is it so hard to understand such things? Maybe if you are a London-based scribbler making a few hundred thousand a year and writing to an agenda…

We can see, looking ahead, that people are turning away from the System parties because the needs of the British people are simply not being met on any of the issues raised above. For the moment, those for whom Brexit is all-important have the safety-valves of UKIP and Brexit Party; on other issues, for many, Corbyn-Labour will fill the gap, for a while. In the end, though, only real social nationalism can offer a future for the real British people. 2022 may be the decisive year.

Note on Voting Percentages

The “glorious uncertainty” of British politics (oddly-drawn constituencies, FPTP voting etc) makes popular vote percentages of less importance than would be the case in a system of even passing fairness.

As can be seen from the linked charts, below, the Conservatives under Theresa May got a higher popular vote percentage (42.3%) in 2017 than the party had managed since Margaret Thatcher in 1983 (42,4%), yet only 317 MPs (currently 312) as against Mrs. Thatcher’s 376! In 2015, under David Cameron-Levita, the Conservatives got a popular vote of 36.9%, yet ended with 330 MPs!  That’s the British system of voting— ridiculous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Commons_of_the_United_Kingdom#Current_composition

General Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susie_Boniface#Personal_life

Update, 22 April 2019

recent msm comment:

Note that the percentages shown below relate to the views of Conservative councillors, and not those of rank and file members (or ordinary voters):

Labour has problems as well…; but it is a measure of how angry and frustrated voters are that not even the prospect of Diane Abbott (here seen drinking a canned alcoholic mojito on the Underground/Overground) as Home Secretary is (much) denting Labour’s poll rating now!

Meanwhile…

https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/1115664510306672641

 

https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/1117507705810321408

https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/1118575863073837062

The racially and culturally inferior are allowed to flood into the UK and the rest of Europe, and in the UK are tolerated, given housing, given food money and more if they start breeding. Meanwhile, for the British, life becomes harsher daily:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/21/stephen-smith-liverpool-seriously-ill-emaciated-man-denied-benefits-dwp-dies