Tag Archives: Labour

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

Brexit, Party Politics, Uncategorized

A Few Thoughts About the EU and Local Elections To Be Held in May 2019

38 Comments

The Brexit mess, so spectacularly mishandled by Theresa May and the idiotic careerists around her, may save UKIP from immediate collapse as a party, inasmuch as many British voters will want to punish the Conservative Party one way or the other. There may be in general a “perfect storm” for the Conservative Party, pressured on two fronts by both the Leave and Remain sides.

There will soon be elections for the European Parliament, on 23 May 2019. Recent opinion polling seems to be saying that Labour will have a landslide: initial voting intentions show Labour on 37.8% (up from 24.4% in 2016); Conservatives at 23.1% (unchanged), Brexit Party (Nigel Farage’s new party) 10%, LibDem 8%, UKIP 7.5%, Change UK (the recent Lab/Con defector MPs’ vehicle) around 4%, among others.

One has to be cautious in assuming that the above opinion poll reflects the likely outcome. The same poll seems to indicate that, after discussion, many pro-EU voters prefer Change UK (which would hit Labour and LibDem levels), while anti-EU voters may prefer either UKIP or Brexit Party.

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

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1112942/european-elections-voting-intentions-uk-conservative-labour-brexit-party

Before the EU elections (in which the UK may not participate at all if the UK leaves the UK before 23 May), there will be local elections, on 2 May 2019. The indications are that, in those elections, Labour may also sweep the poll, with Labour benefiting not only from the “pendulum” or “see-saw” effect of elections in a system using FPTP voting, but also from abstentions by usual Con voters (or by their voting for Brexit Party or UKIP).

As far as the local elections are concerned, Labour starts the campaign with several advantages. The decade of spending cuts has finally impacted even the most true-blue Conservative areas. Labour has a army of local activists, thanks to its membership surge under Corbyn. It also has funds from the same source.

The Conservatives have few local activists now and most are beyond retirement age. The party looks tired. The Brexit mess can only be laid at the door of Theresa May and her Cabinet. The Cons will be lucky to avoid a wipeout in the areas voting for local councillors on 2 May.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/apr/11/conservative-mps-may-boycott-european-election-campaign

There are also strategic factors. The Conservative Party claims 124,000 members, which seems high (average 200 members per constituency). Most are elderly. Few are active. The median age for Conservative voters has also risen, to 52. Recent polling has shown that only 16% of voters under 35 support the Cons, and only 4% of those under 25 do so.

In respect of the local elections, I see them as a straight fight between Labour and Conservative, overall. Labour is obviously in a good position in every respect.

In respect of the EU elections (in England and Wales), Labour may start in pole position, but there is a long way to go. Pro-EU voters may vote Labour, LibDem, Change UK or even Conservative. Anti-EU voters may vote Brexit Party, UKIP, or possibly either Lab or Con. Hard to say. Many voters may just try to hit out at the Conservatives any way they can. The obvious way to hit at the Conservative Party government is to vote Labour, assuming that hitting out trumps Brexit issues.

I can see that, while the Jewish/Zionist attack on Corbyn-Labour has made a dent in Lab’s popularity over 3-4 years, the voters are now tired of the whole Labour “anti-Semitism” whining, not least because Labour is now suspending members who speak out against the Zionist prominence in the UK. People have real issues with which to contend. It is a mistake to think that Twitter is the same as the UK public, especially now that Twitter has purged so many dissident voices (including mine). Jews and their “useful idiots” have colonized Twitter, to an extent.

The Leave/Brexit vote will be split between UKIP and Brexit Party, weakening both. All the same, these EU elections are all about (in the UK) protest voting.

Whichever way one looks at it, Labour looks like doing very well at the local elections and fairly well at the EU elections.

Update, 14 April 2019

Some msm outlets are now predicting a solid Labour win in the expected General Election too

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6919951/Jeremy-Corbyn-win-general-election-Conservatives-face-losing-60-seats-Brexit.html

Update, April 15 2019

Despite having no policies beyond the UK leaving (really leaving) the EU, Brexit Party is already running at anywhere up to 15% in opinion polling for the EU elections of 23 May 2019.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6921149/Nigel-Farages-Brexit-Party-set-drain-Tory-candidates-EU-elections-month.html

It is reported that up to 56% of those who voted Leave in the 2016 EU Referendum will vote either Brexit Party or UKIP in any General Election held this year. It is unclear whether Brexit Party would contest a general election, but if not, its votes would presumably go to UKIP. So about 50% of about 52% = about 26% of votes. That might not be enough to win any seats (certainly not, if split two ways), but it would cripple the Conservatives.

Update, 17 April 2019

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-theresa-may-european-parliament-elections-a8873056.html

Update, 18 April 2019

Update, 18 April 2019

Brexit Party, thanks to star turn Farage, is now at almost 30% in polling re. the EU elections. UKIP cannot seem to get much beyond 8%-9%. Still, that does mean that the Cons, in particular, will crash. They are polling now below 15% re. EU elections.

As far as the UK local elections are concerned, Brexit Party is taken out of the equation (contesting no seats) and UKIP is not contesting very many seats. That must favour Labour.

Update 21 April 2019

From the Daily Mail:

“If there is any overall winner from the meltdown in British politics, it will be Jeremy Corbyn – leader of what has become by any normal standards an extremist party.

As a historian of political ideas and movements, I have studied the rise and fall of parties and ideologies in Britain and Europe. 

Today we are witnessing a meltdown in British politics with no historical precedent. Both main parties are shedding their traditional supporters at an astonishing rate.

According to a ComRes poll published last week, not much more than half (53 per cent) of 2017 Conservative voters intend to vote Conservative at the next General Election.”

[John Gray, Daily Mail]

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

Update, 24 April 2019

The mad jamboree which passes for UK democracy in 2019 continues apace. Ann Widdecombe, one of the worst Home Secretaries ever, is going to be a Brexit Party candidate (for the EU Parliament seat of South West England). She says that she will still vote Conservative in the local elections. Having just looked up her details, it seems that she is 71. I thought that she was at least 80.

The tweet below captures the mood:

At least Ann Widdecombe is an animal-lover, especially cat-lover…

Update, 27 April 2019

Britain Elects organization has just today tweeted as below:

As can be seen, and with less than 28 days to go before polling (assuming that the UK takes part in the EU elections), Brexit Party is neck and neck with Labour and has the momentum. The Conservatives are rapidly becoming also-rans as far as the EU elections are concerned. It looks as though those voters who want to cast an anti-EU/Leave/Brexit vote are going with Brexit Party, leaving UKIP to flounder around near the bottom of the poll. All or almost all UKIP votes are going to Brexit Party. Most Eurosceptic former Conservative voters are also going to Brexit Party. This is going to be interesting.

Meanwhile, in less than 5 days, there are the local elections. There, the results may also be dramatic, but not to the same extent: Brexit Party not standing, UKIP not standing for most council seats (and at present has only 101 councillors out of a possible 20,712); only about a third of council seats being contested this year. Also, in many parts of the South of England, there is little “democratic choice”, with most candidates posted being Conservative, the Labour and LibDem parties not contesting all seats.

Update, 1 May 2019

8,804 local council and other seats are in contest tomorrow, 2 May 2019. The Conservatives are contesting 96% of those seats. Labour will be contesting the majority of them. The LibDems are contesting some. UKIP have 18 candidates standing. Brexit Party is not contesting these elections:

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

As far as the EU elections of 23 May are concerned, the latest polls show an irresistible rise for Brexit Party, which is running somewhere around 33% now; the corollary is UKIP on only about 4%, not helped by the bizarre behaviour of UKIP’s MEP candidate “Sargon of Akkad” (Carl Benjamin), the “alt-Right” vlogger standing for the South West England constituency.

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).

Update, 11 May 2019

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/11/poll-surge-for-farage-panic-conservatives-and-labour

Brexit, Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

Brexit Blues

12 Comments

CtnA-SlXEAQNZuu

I am writing this on 21 March 2019, so only 8 days before the supposed exit of the UK from the European Union (which, as I write, has now apparently been deferred for 2 months; the EU would not even give Theresa May the 3 months for which she begged).

The completely unexpected (by the System) EU Referendum result of 2016 has had the System scrabbling over how to keep the UK in practice signed up to the NWO/ZOG [New World Order/Zionist Occupation Government] agenda, in which the EU is key. All of the “solutions” and “alternatives” EXCEPT real Brexit (aka “No Deal Brexit”) are part of this scrabble. The preferred NWO/ZOG idea will be to “choose” between two or three non-alternatives, probably sanctified by a pseudo-“democratic” plebiscite or “People’s Referendum”, thus presenting the coup as a popular “choice”.

Already today, the msm noise is about “a million people sign petition to stay in EU!”, without pointing out that (even assuming that the names on that petition are genuine), that is only 1 million out of about 65 million in the UK! Over 17 million bothered to get out to vote to Leave the EU, and that was enough to win the Referendum, which was supposed to decide the issue on a simple majority vote.

Britain should have left the EU on time (and still can) without this vulgarly-called “deal” nonsense. Once out, Britain could (still can) come to mutually-convenient customs arrangements with the EU bloc. Something would sooner or later, probably sooner, be agreed. Maybe something not too different from now, but we would control our borders and our laws.

The general public have been subjected to Remain “Project Fear” propaganda for about 3 years now, since before the Referendum even happened. Much has been proven to have been false, but some has been (looked at superficially) vindicated, in that a few business investment decisions have been deferred or UK plans halted. Not a shock. Business hates uncertainty. The cause for much of the drop-off in investment can be blamed not on Brexit itself, but on the uncertainty which an inept government has caused.

Now it seems that there is every chance that Brexit will be deferred for months, possibly for years, or that Theresa May’s pathetic “deal” will lead to a “Brexit in Name Only” (“Brino”), which would leave the UK actually worse off than it is at present!

At the same time, it is now said that, even if immigration from the EU is slowed, the UK must expect an increase in immigration from places such as India! As I have blogged in the past couple of years, Brexit is and means more than Brexit. The Leave vote was a protest against, yes, the EU and its control over Britain, and, yes, also against EU low-wage immigration, but very much also against globalization, against non-European immigration etc, and in favour of heritage, identity, our culture and history. In fact, the EU immigration most people opposed was not so much Polish tradesmen and French bankers, but Roma Gypsy thieves and scavengers from Central and Eastern Europe, as well as drunken thugs from parts of the Baltic and elsewhere. That, and the sheer numbers involved, which stretch UK infrastructure to breaking-point.

The complete ineptitude of the Theresa May government has led to Britain losing face very badly. May and her ministers (idiots like Boris Johnson, at first pro-EU Remain and now pretending for reasons of personal careerism to be pro-Leave) have been comprehensively outplayed by the EU Commission and the main EU political figureheads. Theresa May has lost all credibility, but with her loss of face has gone the government’s credibility (what little it had) and that of Britain as a whole.

In any event, it can be seen that, particularly focussing on Brexit, very few people think that this government has been anything other than incompetent; few seem to think highly of Labour either. That casts the politics and party politics of the next couple of years into the hazard.

As far as the basically Leave-supporting ~50% of the population is concerned, that bloc knows that it has (as I predicted) been betrayed one way or the other. In terms of what they might do to protest, probably nine-tenths of those people can be written off as pub blowhards, leaving about 5% of the UK population as seriously disenchanted with the System (though only a tiny proportion even of that group will be awake enough to see “ZOG” as the enemy). That 5% of the UK population, perhaps three million, are the important ones. They are the potential core of any new social-national movement, they are the ones who could, if the stars are in favour, overcome the System and create a national wave which can sweep away the rubbish. We must look to those few million, and perhaps at first to only 1% or 2% of them, 30,000-60,000 people, to be the vanguard of a new society.

The period between now and 2022 will be the best time that has existed since the 1930s for social nationalism, not only in the UK but across Europe.

Notes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6834651/Petition-demanding-MPs-CANCEL-Brexit-avoid-No-Deal-soars-1MILLION-names.html

Below, sinister NWO/ZOG mouthpiece James Naughtie weighs in with typical BBC bias…

https://order-order.com/2019/03/22/erg-slam-bbc-presenters-outrageous-claim-front-national/

though not without criticism…

Update, 27 March 2019

Expenses cheat, Jewish lobby doormat and pro-Israel manipulator Margaret Beckett MP speaks in the Commons in favour of a “confirmatory” referendum to prove that the stitched-up non-Brexit has been “approved” by the “people” (the fear-stampeded, tired-out, brainwashed people…). She is a thief and a fraud and a total traitor. Put her on trial.

https://twitter.com/JTE1985/status/1110945619600920576

So let’s see: Oliver Letwin MP, a Jew, used to work for Rothschilds; he is now pushing the government agenda around Brexit or fake Brexit. Macron, posing as President of France, pro-Jew, pro-Israel, and surrounded by Jew businessmen, used to work for Rothschilds. John Bercow MP, Speaker of the House of Commons, anti-Brexit, is a Jew too. What does all this mean? How hard can it be??

Party Politics, Uncategorized

Is There Movement On The Labour Front?

Leave a comment

My attention is caught by a Daily Mail report, which claims that “allies of” Tom Watson MP are confident that Corbyn will “be forced to” step down as Labour leader, after which Watson would face John McDonnell in a leadership contest which Watson would win. Watson would then take Labour back to its “Centrist” Blair-Brown supposed heyday (Watson preferring Brown to Blair, perhaps), after which the voters of Britain would cast their votes for the reborn “moderate” Labour Party and sweep Watson into Downing Street.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6790909/Labour-heavyweight-sizes-rival-leadership-thinks-Jeremy-Corbyn-finished.html

Where does one start, in unravelling such nonsense? I suppose, with the fact that Corbyn, having become leader of the Labour Party by some kind of miracle (speaking objectively and meaning a series of events not easily explicable in terms of materialistically-influenced logic), then was challenged and again won very convincingly.

It is necessary at this point to understand that the opposition to Corbyn has come, from the start, almost entirely from the Jewish or Jewish-Zionist element both within and outside Labour, from Jews and from persons who, while not all Jewish or part-Jewish, are completely under the control of that Jewish-Zionist lobby. A few examples? Sex-pest depressive John Woodcock MP (who left Labour once an inquiry was announced into his personal behaviour; ethnic status not entirely certain), Wes Streeting MP, Ruth Smeeth MP (Jewish, former employee of the Israeli lobby and propaganda organization called BICOM; “confidential contact” of the US Embassy in London —“source” according to Wikileaks), Rachel Reeves MP (ethnic status not completely certain), Angela Smith MP (now not in Labour), Joan Ryan MP (not now in Labour), Margaret Hodge MP (Jewish), Luciana Berger MP (Jewish, a poisonous Zionist; not now in Labour), fathead Chuka Umunna MP (half-Nigerian; not now in Labour), Jess Phillips (ethnic status not entirely certain), Liz Kendall MP (ethnic status not entirely certain) etc.

There are many others in the anti-Corbyn cabal. Most if not all of the MPs in that group belong (or did while members of the Labour Party) to Labour Friends of Israel.

The Labour “anti-Semitism” storm is entirely the creation of a “claque”, an organized body of cheerers and booers, mostly of Jewish and/or Zionist origins and connections. It is being pushed constantly by the Zionist-permeated “British” mass media. The aim is to get Corbyn to resign. That is the only way in which Corbyn can now be unseated.

This weekend, Watson was on the “controlled” mass media, eg the Andrew Marr Show, pushing the Zionist line:

Marr himself is of course completely signed-up to the “System” and to the “multikulti” society. Ecce the great “liberal”…

DMunAFrXUAAFG0P

The Zionists used to control both main System parties. They have, since 2015, lost full control of one. They wish to get that control back. However, their fallback position would be to make Labour seem (or be) “unelectable”. In that event, the misnamed Conservatives would succeed electorally and so continue to form the government (which would be fine in the view of the Zionists: only about 5% of Jews now vote Labour).

Moving to the Daily Mail hypothesis: why should Corbyn step down? No-one can force that. The aim seems to be what is now termed “gaslighting” of Corbyn, to destroy his confidence and increase a sense of powerlessness. I think, though, that Corbyn’s enemies are underestimating his resilience.

Corbyn may be no intellectual, nor a particularly good speaker (though there are plenty of worse ones in the Commons), but he has resilience in spades, and the hide of a rhinoceros (he has had to have had that, over the past 4 years). He probably does feel like Julius Caesar in the Ides of March, with so many Labour MPs who hate him and plot against him surrounding him (including his own Deputy, Watson, whom Corbyn has no power to remove). I doubt, however, that Corbyn will step down while there is a chance that he might become Prime Minister. Don’t forget that Corbyn put himself up for Labour leader when no-one in the msm, no-one in the Westminster bubble, no TV or radio talking head “expert” thought that he had a chance.

Let us see what would happen if Corbyn were to step down: surely McDonnell would beat Watson? After all, Corbyn has so far beaten all “moderate” opponents easily:

  • In 2015, Corbyn won with a vote of 59.5%, beating Andy Burnham (19%), Yvette Cooper (17%) and Liz Kendall (4.5%);
  • In 2016, Corbyn beat Owen Smith MP 61.8%-38.2%, others having dropped out in ignominy (Smith is now so obscure that I have seen nothing of him in the msm since he was sacked from the Shadow Cabinet two years ago);

Were the contest to be a straight McDonnell/Watson one, I have little doubt that McDonnell would win. The Corbyn loyalists who are now the bulk of the membership would see to that. The Daily Mail suggests, surely risibly, that thick-as-two-short-planks Angela Rayner might contest and win such election. If she did, that would finish Labour almost as effectively as would the anointing of Diane Abbott! (Married name “Rayner”; unsure what her position is re. Jewish-Zionist lobby).

I myself come to this as an uninvolved though (as some would say) not entirely disinterested observer. I have never been a Labour member, supporter or voter. My main interest in Corbyn and Corbyn-Labour is in its having become a fairly strong anti-Zionist caucus, though terribly weakened by the cognitive dissonance of having to believe that those suffering under Jews/Zionists in the Middle East are right to fight them but, at the same time, (brainwashed into) believing that those exploited by Zionists in Europe (or who refuse to allow Zionists to control them or to destroy the European ethno-cultural stock) must not fight them (certainly not literally) because that would be “antisemitic“!

I also see Corbyn-Labour as one stepping-stone to a social-national movement not far down the line.

McDonnell and Corbyn both give lip-service to the “holocaust” narrative, play along with all that farrago of fakery and contrived emotionalism etc. They do not seem to see (may be too stupid to see) that such lip-service opens the door to Zionism. Witness the way in which Corbyn has been forced to start expelling loyal Labour members and supporters because they are judged (initially by the online Jewish-Zionist claque/cabal) to have tweeted or said something “anti-Semitic”! Labour also adopted the Zionist-drafted “international definition” of “anti-Semitism” (only in fact “adopted” by about 35 states out of 200). Why? Weakmindedness? Laziness? Was it the work of Zionist agents in Labour?

At any rate, the damage has been done and the “claque” (led by the malicious “CAA” cabal) is already crowing online. Corbyn should have felt his own power and just told the Zionists (“international definition”, “holocaust” nonsense and all) to get lost. He did not do that and now the evil pack is again baying for his blood…

The situation is not beyond repair. If Corbyn wins out, then good, the political situation will develop and the so-called “Overton Window” will have moved. If Corbyn loses and especially if Watson or someone under his sway becomes Labour leader, then that could be good in another way, by disgusting Corbyn’s most committed supporters and by rendering Labour even less “electable” than it now is (perhaps so opening up the political waterfront generally).

After all, “moderate” (hardy ha ha) ZOG/NWO tool Gordon Brown lost a general election, as did Ed Miliband. Corbyn so far may have “lost” one general election, but that 2017 “loss” has weakened the Conservatives greatly.

Do Watson’s supporters really think that he could lead the Labour Party to victory? I suspect that that is not the priority for “those behind the curtain”. “They” want rid of Corbyn and a pro-Israel leader installed. Whether Labour does well electorally is of little or no interest to them.

Notes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6790909/Labour-heavyweight-sizes-rival-leadership-thinks-Jeremy-Corbyn-finished.html

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Woodcock_(politician)

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

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

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

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

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

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-party-conference-rules-deselection-momentum-nec-leadership-contest-jeremy-corbyn-a8550661.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election

below: Chris Williamson MP doing exactly the wrong thing! Giving in to the Jew-Zionist lobby instead of speaking out clearly against it! Thick dork! Does he really think that he buys any credit from the Jews? They will still hate him whatever he says! If only Labour MPs had the guts to “just say no” to “them”!

Update, 14 March 2019

and here, below, we have the result of not coming out clearly and decisively against the Jew-Zionists! Labour is now far behind the misnamed “Conservatives”…and all because Corbyn, McDonnell and (eg) Chris Williamson are incapable of really hitting the Jew-Zionist lobby hard! You have to be clear and decisive! Also, Corbyn should bin the blacks and browns in the Shadow Cabinet and start again (he will not do that, though, and seems oblivious to the fact that most voters do not want Diane Abbott, Dawn Butler and other deadheads ruling them)

Update, 8 April 2023

Plenty of water has passed under the bridge. The General Election of December 2019 was lost. The Conservative vote (percentage) scarcely increased, but the Labour percentage vote collapsed (though still at a higher level than it was in both 2010 and 2015: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Corbyn#2019_general_election_and_resignation.

Corbyn resigned. He was not removed. Starmer was then elected by (in the end) 56% of votes cast: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Labour_Party_leadership_election_(UK); https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Labour_Party_leadership_election_(UK)#Results.

At time of writing, the ineptitude of the Rishi Sunak “Conservative”-label government has led to Labour being high in the opinion polls, about 50% to 25%.

Campaign Against AntiSemitism, Conservative Friends of Israel, elections, free speech, historical, historical revisionism, Jewish lobby in UK, Labour Friends of Israel, MPs, Party Politics, Uncategorized

If Corbyn Does Not Fight Back, “They” Will Bury Him

7 Comments

Those who read my blog regularly will know that I am far from being an unalloyed fan of Jeremy Corbyn. I think him wooden and not a genuine political thinker, someone who is stuck somewhere between the crypto-Communism of the Michael Foot era and the ideological madness of the contemporary self-described “Left” (I myself never use terms such as “Right”, “Left” as useful descriptors), the crazies who have rushed in to fill the vacuum left by the collapse of old-style socialism in and after 1989.

dfbzlnnwaaal3ei

dwkvd5wx4aievjf

C2YKf15WEAEfSBW

c4jxgm2ukae7tt_

BtMDQSRCAAAFUmb.jpg large

CzBDRDVWgAA_rt3

You get the idea.

Corbyn is, in short, a bit of a joke. I have blogged about him, and what I call Corbyn-Labour, in the recent past. He and his party are also in favour of, or not opposed to, mass immigration and the “multikulti” society.

ClVU6MSWgAAmfK6

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/30/a-few-more-thoughts-about-corbyn-labour-and-their-prospects/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/11/01/corbyn-is-set-for-no-10/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/19/corbyn-and-the-jew-zionist-claque/

I have little time for Corbyn as a political leader, as such. His poor intellectual level and Lego-brick level of understanding of society and international politics and geopolitics give little confidence.

On the other hand, there is or was something not entirely unpleasantly familiar about Corbyn. As I have blogged and (before I was expelled from Twitter) tweeted about him, he is a recognizable 20th century English type: the bearded “socialist” from the provinces (in Corbyn’s case, transplanted aged about 22 to London), wearing his Lenin cap, reading the Morning Star, Tribune and the Guardian, protesting against 1980s South African apartheid or Israeli West Bank settlements etc, supporting Castro-Cuba, “revolutionary” 1980s Nicaragua, “socialist” Venezuela etc.

Corbyn’s type, with variations, could be observed from around the time of the First World War, and up to the present day, in its “natural surroundings”: the Durham Miners’ Gala, the Tolpuddle Martyrs annual event, the conferences of the Labour Party and TUC, local constituency Labour parties, CND marches, steam rallies, heritage railways, allotments. So much of a “type” is Corbyn that he could easily be imagined included in a series of “English types” in the Edwardian cartoon tradition, complete with outsize head and a little descriptive caption.

Corbyn’s elevation to the Labour leadership was, as I have also blogged, little short of miraculous. Since 2015, Corbyn has also managed to fight off repeated Jew-Zionist attempts to unseat him. What do “they” want? They want Corbyn gone so that Jew-Zionists, lobbyists and placemen can once again control Labour. “They” already control the misnamed “Conservative” Party and have done since at least the end of the Thatcher era; until Corbyn’s accession, “they” controlled Labour too. They want that control back.

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/03/their-last-throw-of-the-dice/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/01/to-topple-a-king/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/09/03/give-them-an-inch-and-they-take-a-mile/

We have seen recently how some of Corbyn’s enemies in the Commons started to capitulate and leave the Parliamentary Labour Party, committing political hara-kiri

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/19/the-independent-group-of-mps/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/18/cabal-of-7-zionist-mps-leave-the-labour-party-good-riddance/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/31/the-rift-in-the-labour-party-deepens/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/20/why-i-hope-that-labour-splits/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/08/28/labour-the-jews-and-the-british-resistance/

At the same time, however, Corbyn-Labour has made the mistake of trying to conciliate, making concessions to the Jew-Zionist element. It did that before, when it surrendered to “them” over the so-called “international” “definition” of “antisemitism” (in fact, adopted by fewer than 40 states out of about 200). Now Corbyn-Labour has given in on Chris Williamson MP and has suspended him.

Chris Williamson MP occasionally (maybe two or three times only) retweeted my tweets when I still had a Twitter account. However, when the Jew-Zionists noticed that fact, they criticized him for it, after which he stopped retweeting me and may have (I forget) blocked my account. Weak. It showed weakness in relation to the Jews. I have not forgotten that.

Now Corbyn, John McDonnell and some of their closest allies (as well as swathes of “useful idiots”) in Labour labour under the same cognitive dissonance problem: Corbyn and many of his supporters see what the Jewish-Zionist lobby is trying to do, want to fight against it, but at the same time tie their own hands behind their collective back by saying that they oppose “antisemitism” and are only against Israeli depredations and behaviour rather than being in any way hostile to Jew-Zionist lobby activity in the UK (or France etc).

Corbyn and most of Labour also go along with the largely-debunked “holocaust” narrative as well. It all just plays into the hands of the Zionist lobby, which controls or near-controls many Labour MPs. Yes, some have left (Luciana Berger, Joan Ryan, Angela Smith, Ian Austin, Chuka Fathead) and their political careers are finished. However, there are many like them still in place and reporting back: Stella Creasy is just one example. Mary Creagh, Rachel Reeves and Liz Kendall also come to mind, inter alia, as do the outright Jewish Zionists such as Margaret Hodge.

Since Chris Williamson was suspended, the whole Jewish “claque” on Twitter and in the Press (in fact, in the msm generally) has gone mad again about Corbyn, “anti-Semitism” in Labour etc. It’s odd: we are told constantly that there is no “Jewish lobby”, and that individual Jews tweet or scribble purely as individuals, yet when something like this crops up, they all go the same way instantly, like a shoal of fish.

Corbyn-Labour, for all its flaws, is the only game in town right now for striking against the enemies of our British and European future. It can pave the way for social-nationalism down the road.

This is a crisis for Corbyn and his allies. They must either fight back against the encroaching, whining, pleading, manipulating and angrily-demanding Zionist lobby, or be “cribbed, cabined and confined”, imprisoned in a Zionist-constructed box made out of “antisemitism” allegations, “holocaust” fakery and a raft of trickster-drafted “definitions”, “regulations” and inhibition of free speech. Just say no!

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Creagh#Policy_positions_since_2015

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves#Policy_stances

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Hodge#Early_life

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Hodge#Antisemitism_allegations

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Friends_of_Israel#Members_of_LFI

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

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/08/13/encounter-with-two-labour-ladies/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6762703/Jeremy-Corbyns-party-chief-threatens-Momentums-John-Lansman-key-ally.html

Update, 3 March 2019

Here we see the Jewish anti-Corbyn “claque-storm” in its “tweetstorm” mode, exemplified by this tweet, in which a Jewish woman wants the Labour Party to either disenfranchise its Sheffield Hallam branch (by putting it into “special measures”, i.e. ruling it from London), or to remove (or remove the rights of) the 40 members who voted for a statement (only 1 person voted against). You see the problem: the 40 English people count for less than the one Jewish or pro-Jewish one…If Labour did that across the country, it would be left without active members, the footsoldiers that win elections.

Another one approves the tweet of the first:

Update, 8 November 2019

A good typical example of how, if you give “them” an inch, (((they))) take a mile: the Jew-Zionist lobby gets what it wants re. Chris Williamson, but then whines or blusters about how it is too little too late. Their next demand will soon be uttered…

All Europe needs to awaken to the menace.

Update, 17 February 2020

When I wrote the above article, I thought that 30 or 35 states had “adopted” the “IHRA” definition of “antisemitism”. In fact, and as I now know, the true figure is only about 15, out of 200 states.

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_Antisemitism#Criticism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_Antisemitism#Original_drafter

Party Politics, Uncategorized

The Newport West By-Election

9 Comments

On 4 April 2019, a by-election will be held at Newport West, the former seat of Labour MP Paul Flynn, who died recently.

Paul Flynn was generally well-regarded, except by the Jew-Zionists, who deplored his principled opposition to Israel and to, in 2013, (the then) H.M. Ambassador to Israel appointed despite being a Jew and admitted Zionist (and so perhaps having dual or conflicted loyalties: see Notes, below). Flynn retweeted my tweets once or twice, I think, when I still had a Twitter account, but also criticized me once. Well, de mortuis nihil nisi bonum, so we’ll say no more of that.

Newport West

The constituency was created in 1983. It was won that year by the Conservatives, who received 38% of votes cast (Labour 36.6%, Liberal Party 24.2%, and Plaid Cymru 1.2%). That result turned out to be anomalous, in that Paul Flynn won for Labour in 1987 and held the seat until his recent death.

This is a Lab-Con marginal. The Liberal Democrats peaked in 2005 at 17.9% (third place), plateaued at a similar figure in 2010, slumped to 3.9% in 2015 (fifth place) and collapsed further (to 2.2%, again fifth-placed) in 2017.

Plaid Cymru is irrelevant here, peaking at 7.2% in 2001 but usually found at or near the bottom of the poll at under 2% (and sometimes under 1%).

UKIP peaked here in 2015 at 15.2% (third) and again achieved a third place in 2017, but on a miserable 2.5%.

Other candidates have stood occasionally over the years (Green, Referendum Party, BNP and Independents), but are not even marginally significant (BNP 3% in 2010, beating UKIP).

As to the only significant contenders, Labour and Conservative, Labour’s vote peaked in 1997 at 60.5%; its lowest ebb (apart from 1983) was in 2015 (41.2%). So much for the “personal vote”. After Corbyn replaced Miliband as Labour Leader, Labour’s vote increased, in 2017, to 52.3%.

The Conservative Party vote stood lowest in 1997 (24.4%) and highest in 1987 (40.1%). Its 2017 vote, at 39.3%, was the Con best since 1987, though the Con vote has held up above 30% (perhaps surprisingly so) since 2010.

Opinion

There are several reasons to think that the Labour vote will sink back: a new and untested candidate, the death of a fairly popular longstanding MP, Labour’s perceived pro-mass-immigration stance. Also, the fact that Labour is sending out mixed messages about Brexit in a constituency which voted Leave more heavily than the UK average (nearly 54%). The “Corbyn factor” seems, so far, to have been a positive rather than a negative.

If I were putting money on this, I should probably still back Labour to win, though the Conservative candidate may do well and might just do it. As to the others, they can probably all easily be written off. The interesting side-bet will be how high or low UKIP scores. My guess? Under 5%, anyway (if UKIP stands at all; if not, the Con candidate will be boosted, probably).

Notes

The 2016 EU Referendum results were not directly voted for or collated by constituency, and in Wales the vote was arranged by reference to local authority boundaries, in this case designated as “Newport”, not “Newport West”. I have taken the Leave vote relating to Newport West as standing at or about 54%, but other estimates have it as about 56%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2016_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum#List_of_constituency_results

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newport_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/analysis/102182/analysis-brexit-set-dominate-newport-west

https://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/17465965.newport-west-by-election-to-be-held-on-april-4-following-death-of-paul-flynn/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Flynn_(politician)

Afterthought, 1 March 2019

Candidates have not yet declared. It is unknown whether any candidates of a broadly “nationalist” character will stand. UKIP is a possible but not inevitable contender. What would be significant would be anyone standing for the “Independent Group” of MPs. That group is not yet registered as a party (and may never be); until it is, it cannot put up candidates under “Independent Group”, but only as “Independent”. Having said that, if a candidate were to be endorsed on TV etc by the rebel MPs as the candidate, in effect, of the Group, then that would have an effect. It would split the Labour vote and almost certainly let in the Conservative candidate, though it is just on the fringe of possibility that, in a 3-way split of main candidates, the (in effect) IG candidate might just win. Hard to see it happening but not totally impossible.

My guess is that the “Independent Group” will not put up a quasi-IG candidate, because

  • voters would not know what his/her policy views might be (except pro-EU Remain, which is the minority view in Newport West);
  • there would be little time in which to select a candidate and, because of the disorganized way in which IG has been established (step up, Chuka Umunna…), there are no selection procedures in place;
  • any IG candidate (in all but name) would be likely to go down in flames, so this is a battle that the IG MPs will probably sidestep.

Update, 4 March 2019

The candidature listing is still open. So far, 6 candidates have declared: Conservative, Labour, Plaid Cymru, Green, and two wild cards, “Renew” and “Abolish the Welsh Assembly”. The obvious non-declarers, so far, are the LibDems, UKIP and anyone adherent to the “Independent Group”. However, as stated, there is still time in which to declare.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-47414610

Update, 6 March 2019

Update, 9 March 2019

The candidate list is now complete:

  • Labour – Ruth Jones
  • Conservatives – Matthew Evans
  • UKIP – Neil Hamilton
  • Plaid Cymru – Jonathan Clark
  • Welsh Liberal Democrats – Ryan Jones
  • Green Party – Amelia Womack
  • Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party – Richard Suchorzewski
  • Renew – June Davies
  • SDP – Ian McLean
  • The For Britain Movement – Hugh Nicklin
  • Democrats and Veterans Party – Phillip Taylor

I see no reason to alter my view of the contest as expressed in the blog.

Update, 30 March 2019

I was just considering to what extent, if any, the meltdown of the House of Commons over and around Brexit will affect this by-election. The obvious protest vote would be for UKIP, which as noted above only scored 2.5% in 2017, though it managed 15.2% at its 2015 peak. Both were 3rd places. To win, UKIP has to beat both main System parties. On paper, that is near-impossible, but we are in interesting times.

Update, 2 April 2019

Update, 5 April 2019

The result was that Labour won with nearly 40% of the vote, but less than 38% of those eligible could be bothered to vote. Labour’s candidate was thus endorsed by only about 15% of those eligible.

The Conservatives came a fairly but not very close second. UKIP came third (again). “For Britain Movement” got less than 1% and came right at the bottom of the list of 11 candidates.

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

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

The “Independent Group” of MPs

12 Comments

The seven ex-Labour defectors now have a website:

https://www.theindependent.group/

Their chosen identity is the bland “The Independent Group”. Note, “group”, not party. When the SDP was formed in 1981, it quickly adopted a firm identity which everyone in the UK understood. It was a political party, with a  firm policy position.

These Jewish and pro-Jewish-Zionist whiners are not a party, even on the face of their own now-public identity. They are just a group of Jewish and/or pro-Zionist MPs, all facing retirement or deselection, and whose main gripe is “anti-Semitism” in the Corbyn-led Labour Party. None of them, at their launch yesterday, actually tried to put forward any thoughts about what is wrong in Britain, let alone what might improve the country. The Jew Zionist Mike Gapes MP was the most honest, talking purely about his hatred for so-called “Anti-Semitism”. As noted, his tribal interest was at least not concealed by some faked concern about the British people.

The mass media are agog at the thought of what might happen in some game of fantasy politics where numbers of disaffected MPs from the traditional “three main parties” all coalesce in a House of Commons bloc to thwart the plans of Corbyn and (if she has any plans) Theresa May. For example, see here below (the tweeter is that little Indian who sometimes presents Channel 4 News):

Corbyn Labour supporters, however, were swift to seize on the group’s weak points:

https://twitter.com/Nornenland/status/1097859948179017728

The above tweets are a selection of the more polite ones criticizing the new not-a-party.

Meanwhile, Chuka Umunna has now broached the “elephant in the room” question, saying that he “hopes” that a new party could be formed “by the end of the year”. Hopes? Could? Imagine Adolf, back in 1919, “hoping” that a new party “could” or might be formed “by the end of the year”! That’s Chuka for you, as seen in the Labour leadership contest: a half-Nigerian fathead, irresolute, shallow, lacking will and force.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/19/chuka-umunna-hopes-new-party-will-be-created-by-end-of-year?CMP=share_btn_tw

Questions about the initial funding of the “Independent Group” of 7 Jewish and/or Zionist MPs are building now. A Labour MP has suggested that the funding may have come (directly or indirectly) from Israel:

It is interesting that the company which owns this “Independent Group” is based in the secretive offshore jurisdiction of Panama, long a favourite of rich Jews connected with Israel and/or MOSSAD. “Robert Maxwell” for one.

My thoughts so far

As ever, the msm Westminster Bubblers are getting it wrong. Polls have been produced to show that the public would be “more likely to vote for” the Independent Group MPs than Labour. Really? What would those poor sheep be voting for? There is no point in asking the “Independent Group”, for their own website is as innocent of policy (even in the broadest of broad brush terms) as were the brief statements made by the seven defectors at yesterday’s launch (media event). Their published statement of intent could have been produced by almost any political party, tendency, or even religion.

My own view is that, yes, most UK voters, certainly most English and Welsh voters are thoroughly sick of pseudo-democratic politics in the UK, they do want a new direction and would be willing to embrace a new party, but that party is not this party.

In fact, of course, the Independent Group is not (yet) a party anyway. It is not (yet) registered as such with the Electoral Commission, does not say that it is going to become a political party, and, as noted already, not only has no policy, but has not even any locus standi in the sense of where it stands, beyond a vague and implied “Centrism”.

If further Labour defections happen (rumours abound about 20-30 MPs, with a few wild msm assertions that 100 might go) then the new party (if it becomes a party) might have traction in the short term. I still doubt that any “centrist” party could get anywhere in the medium term (i.e. beyond 2022), let alone have any greater durability.

What strikes me but does not shock me is the sheer ineptitude of the defectors: they had three years in which to get this together, to recruit more cohorts, to organize things. Needless to say, I am not surprised to see that fathead Chuka was unable to organize anything more than an evening in one of the expensive and decadent nightclubs which he is said to patronize.

What a difference it would have made, had yesterday’s launch announced that a new party had been founded or was about to be registered, and if the Independent Group had actually managed to organize a decent website (to digress: my own website, http://ianrmillard.com/,  is amateur, yes, because I did it myself as best I could, and spent almost nothing on it; one expects something more professional from a group of individuals with plenty of money, wealthy Jewish backers, and who are hoping to soon form a major party). Above all, it would have made a huge difference had the defectors been able to say yesterday: “We are 100 [or even 30] Labour MPs who have now left Labour, are forming a new party, and invite applications for membership and candidature.” The new party would then have been in a position to recruit members and candidates for office.

Any new party [even if] based on the “7 defectors”, and which fields hundreds of candidates in a general election, would have to be taken seriously, though the experience of both the 1980s SDP and, more recently, UKIP shows that even a party capable of fielding hundreds of candidates might well end up with no MPs under the FPTP system.

As it is, we have 7 MPs who seem to be wanting mainly to make Jewish-Zionist propaganda against Corbyn-Labour, and who now have no party, no obvious policy, and no way yet of building a party organization in a situation where there might be a general election this year. Such an election would wipe out the defector cabal at once. No question.

It is interesting to note that even long-time anti-Corbyn plotters such as pro-Zionists Liz Kendall MP and John Woodcock MP, the sex-pest depressive, have not pledged allegiance so far. In Woodcock’s case, he might have been warned off as just too toxic, but Liz Kendall must have other reasons, maybe the wish not to risk that easy lucrative job as MP, with the £75,000 salary, the huge expenses, the opportunities for “nice little earners” on the side etc. Not to mention, down the line, the possibility of getting a nice little fake “peerage”, and so £300+ per day taxfree for merely turning up and signing a register!

I should imagine that there was jubilation at Corbyn HQ yesterday. They may even have popped open a few bottles of vintage Soviet “champagne”. The hard core of opposition to Corbyn has just committed hara-kiri.

Interesting: the “Independent Group” launched yesterday, 18 February 2019. Today, as I have been writing and looking at Twitter, I noticed that, as I thought and wrote, there were 38 tweets under hashtag #IndependentGroup in a period of one hour. Over an hour later, another 35. Twitter is not the world, or even the UK, but the low interest shown tells me much. The “Independent Group” now has over 80,000 followers on Twitter, but Twitter followers are not members, donors or even necessarily going to vote for the new party (if it ever emerges).

My guess is that this new non-party is going to fail. If there is no general election this year and if the Independent Group can recruit at least another couple of dozen MPs and a small army of candidates and foot-soldiers, then it might just about have a run in it. I doubt even that, though.

Notes

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6718385/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Chuka-Umunna-Labour-rebels-just-favour.html?ito=amp_twitter_share-top

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/18/cabal-of-7-zionist-mps-leave-the-labour-party-good-riddance/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/14/will-both-main-parties-of-the-system-split-will-new-parties-emerge/

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/up-to-three-tories-could-join-new-independent-group-of-mps-a4070431.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1550592814

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

19 February 2019. Latest polling:

An earlier Survation poll seemed to indicate that people would prefer to vote for the “Independent Group” as compared to Labour, but a Sky poll now puts “support” for the IG at only 10%. Admittedly, not bad for a party which is not yet a party and which has no policies! All the same, in itself, that only puts IG firmly in “UKIP” territory, i.e. “good also-ran”…UKIP still had no MPs after its 2015 General Election peak of about 12%.

It will be noted that the percentages add up to 87%, meaning, I suppose that 13% are “Don’t Know”. It seems, and assuming (I am skeptical) that IG can organize itself as a party before the next general election, that there will be a crowded field: Con and Lab jostling for position with IG, LibDems, UKIP and Greens, as well as smaller parties and the usual independents. IG will have to have at least some broad policies before it tries to contest elections, though. Oh…and a leader…

Update, 19 February 2019

Joan Ryan MP has now also joined the “Independent Group”. Though not Jewish (nor even part- or crypto-), she is or until today was a member, like the other members of IG, of Labour Friends of Israel, chairing the Zionist organization in 2015.

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

Joan Ryan is or has been a noted expenses blodger and seems to be excessively fond of money. Perhaps that explains her…affiliations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Ryan#Expenses_controversies

That brings the MP bloc of IG to 8.

Thousands of tweets attacking Joan Ryan this evening. One that caught my eye:

That one really made me “laugh out loud” in the now-superseded Twitter/text phrase!

In fact, Enfield North is a Lab-Con marginal seat, so if Joan Ryan contests it (as an IG candidate rather than as simply “Independent”) at a general election, there is every chance that a Conservative will win the seat. In the recent past, Nick de Bois, who was one of the better MPs on the Conservative side, held the seat (2010-2015)

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

20 February 2019

The debate continues…

Another thought…

The fact that the absurd, leaderless, policy-free “Independent Group” is now already running at 14% in the opinion polls tells me that the British people are getting desperate for change, perhaps any change. Social nationalism is now in with a real chance.

Another tweet from today, attacking fathead Chuka and his combination of hypocrisy and stupidity (Chuka’s tweet is from two and a half years ago, when he was still being puffed by the msm as a “senior” Labour MP…):

https://twitter.com/GaryHerringto12/status/1098256026804146176

Update, 20 February 2019, evening

Complete doormat for Israel and the Jewish lobby, Ian Austin MP, has just announced that he too is joining the IG “not-a-party”!

Seems that he is not considered to be any great loss!

https://twitter.com/tswaddington/status/1098365037998206976

Correction, 22 February 2019

Seems now that Ian Austin MP is in fact not joining the “Independent Group”, though he is leaving Labour with immediate effect. He is not stepping down as MP for Dudley North and is not expected to repay any of his inflated expenses.

As to Austin leaving Labour, it means that he has probably committed political suicide, like most of the defectors from Con and Lab in the past week.

More Twitter comment…

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

In other blog posts, I have criticized Aaron Bastani, Ash Sarkar etc, but Bastani is surely right in tweeting that “The space for a successful far-right party in the UK is massive.” The label “far-right” I disparage, of course, but in essence I agree with him. The difference is that he opposes it, I support it!

24 February 2019

Turns out that a Jew property developer and former Blair-Labour donor, with £100M+ capital, is donating to the “Independent Group”:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/23/one-labours-biggest-private-backers-has-donated-independent/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Garrard_(property_developer)

Here is a good example of a Westminster bubbler unable (perhaps) to distinguish between people noticing a news item and the same people supporting a political group, or the same people actually voting for a new political party a year or three in the future…Those in and around the Westminster bubble are probably often rather well-paid, but are they worth their salt?

Update, 7 March 2019

Fathead Chuka doormatting to the Jews in the hope of mass media and financial support (and if some of that goes his way, he will not complain…)

 

Update, 29 March 2019

Fathead Chuka announces that the Independent Group is now a registered party: “Change UK”. Not “The Independent Party”? That would have sounded odd, but then the USA had the “Tea Party”. Anyway,  “Change” it is. Loose change? Small change? Am I being unkind?

Many tweeters noting that “Change UK” might = “CUK”! Ha ha! Others just underwhelmed…

Update, 1 June 2023

As I predicted in this and other blog posts, “Change UK” sank without trace: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_UK.

“The Independent Group for Change, also known as Change UK, was a British centrist, pro-European Union political party, founded in February 2019 and dissolved ten months later, shortly after all its MPs lost their seats in the 2019 general election.”

[Wikipedia].

Update, 18 October 2023

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

Nowhere, as I predicted:

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_UK#2019_general_election_and_deregistration

MPs, Party Politics, Uncategorized

Cabal of 7 Zionist MPs Leaves the Labour Party— Good Riddance

18 Comments

Today, seven Jewish, Zionist or pro-Zionist MPs left the Labour Party, though so far all are remaining as MPs in order to hang on to their pay and expenses (one, Angela Smith MP, also “employs” her own husband on her Parliamentary expenses, at a salary of about £50,000).

I have only recently blogged about the possibility that something like this might happen:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/02/14/will-both-main-parties-of-the-system-split-will-new-parties-emerge/

Thoughts

I was wrong about Luciana Berger being unlikely to leave Labour. She has resigned from Labour (though not as MP), alongside useless creature Chuka Umunna, Angela Smith, Ann Coffey, Chris Leslie, Mike Gapes and Gavin Shuker. Out of the seven, two or three Jewish, two or three maybe part or “crypto”. The others anyway doormats for Zionism.

A few points:

  • Mike Gapes MP, a Zionist Jew (who blocked me on Twitter without my ever having tweeted to him);
  • Chuka Umunna MP (see the link above) and: “In August 2018, The Guardian reported that “Umunna and fellow Labour MP Chris Leslie, are widely believed to be laying the groundwork for the creation of a new [political] party although both have denied this.”[68] In October 2018, it was announced that Umunna would serve as the chairman of a new centrist think tank called Progressive Centre UK. It was revealed that he would be earning £65,000 a year for his work on the advisory board” [Wikipedia]; and “Umunna is associated with the Labour Friends of Israel; along with Liam Byrne, he made an official visit to Israel in October 2012 as part of the LFI’s UK-Israel Economic Dialogue group” [Wikipedia];
  • Angela Smith MP: pro-Zionist, very very interested in money (an expenses cheat)…“[Angela Smith] is one of 98 MPs who voted unsuccessfully to keep their expense details secret in 2007. She defended her vote on the grounds that it would help member-constituent confidentiality, and to help prevent the private addresses of MP’s being readily available to the public.[18]In 2009, Smith was one of the MPs whose expenses were highlighted by The Daily Telegraph during the Parliamentary expenses scandal, as she had submitted expenses claims for four beds for a one bedroom flat in London.[19]Smith employs her husband as her Senior Parliamentary Assistant on a salary up to £40,000 [now £50,000].[20] The practice of MPs employing family members has been criticised by some sections of the media on the lines that it promotes nepotism.[21][22] Although MPs who were first elected in 2017 have been banned from employing family members, the restriction is not retrospective – meaning that Smith’s employment of her husband is lawful.” [Wikipedia];
  • Gavin Shuker MP, a pro-Zionist of Jewish or part-Jewish origins, though he was also apparently a “pastor” of some small Christian sect in Luton at one time;
  • Ann Coffey MP: pro-Zionist. “During the expenses scandal of 2009 it was revealed that Anne Coffey claimed £1000 per month for the interest on the mortgage of her London home and £160 per month for a cleaner.[8][9] In addition to her salary of £60,000 in 2007 she claimed £150,000 for staff salaries and office costs plus reimbursable expenses” [Wikipedia];
  • Luciana Berger MP: prominent Zionist Jewess;
  • Chris Leslie MP: careerist Blair-Brown drone and pro-Zionist.

Thoughts about the effect of the resignations:

The seven MPs were almost all living on borrowed time. Luciana Berger faced a (withdrawn) vote of no-confidence only recently. Mike Gapes is 66 (only 4 years older than me, but he looks about 20 years older). Ann Coffey is 72. The others were facing possible deselection. Chris Leslie, a typical bland careerist, obviously saw that his career in Parliament had ground to a halt, with no possibility of ministerial preferment even if Labour can form some sort of ramshackle government.

This is a Zionist group mass media event rather than a Labour “split”. Labour still has 241 MPs. The 7 departees will all lose their seats at the next general election, if they even stand for election. They have not formed a party, not as yet anyway, and, as I blogged previously, would have no chance of success if they did.

Further Thoughts

It really would be great if the Zionists and doormats for Zionism, at least on the Labour side, were to be deselected or otherwise removed. Yvette Cooper would be my favourite to go. That virtue-signalling, moneygrasping, expenses-blodging hypocrite, who wants to swamp the UK even more than it has already been swamped by immigrants of all kinds, including the (fake) “refugees” who seem to be her obsession. She and her husband, ex-MP and moneygrubbing “anti-fascist”, pro-Israel drone Ed Balls, live far from the consequences of mass immigration and their own actions, in the luxury bought by their business activities and the money they have squeezed out of their years in Parliament: salaries, “expenses” (including fraudulent or near-fraudulent claims), “consultancies” etc.

“In May 2009, it was revealed that together with her husband Ed Balls they changed the designation of their second home three times in a 24-month period. Following a referral to the parliamentary sleaze watchdog, they were exonerated by John Lyon, the Standards Commissioner. He said that they had paid capital gains tax on their homes and were not motivated by profit.[16] Cooper and Balls bought a four-bedroom house in Stoke Newington, North London, and registered this as their second home (rather than their home in Castleford, West Yorkshire); this qualified them for up to £44,000 a year to subsidise a reported £438,000 mortgage under the Commons Additional Costs Allowance, of which they claimed £24,400.[17] An investigation in MPs’ expenses by Sir Thomas Legg found that Cooper and her husband had both received overpayments of £1,363 in relation to their mortgage. He ordered them to repay the money.” [Wikipedia] (A real Parliamentary whitewash!).

In a Twitter Tiggernut nutshell (she replying to disgraced Jew Zionist lawyer Mark Lewis, who now resides in his beloved Israel but who, like so many Jews there, cannot resist interfering in UK affairs…):

https://twitter.com/TiggernutJadie/status/1097466029838663680

Now look! (see below): so it’s my fault that the 7 defectors defected?!

Update, 19 February 2019

The seven ex-Labour defectors now have a website:

https://www.theindependent.group/

Their chosen identity is the bland The Independent Group. Note, “group”, not party. When the SDP was formed in 1981, it quickly adopted a firm identity which everyone in the UK understood. It was a political party, with a firm policy position.

These Jewish and pro-Jewish-Zionist whiners are not a party, even on the face of their own now-public identity. They are just a group of MPs, all facing retirement or deselection, and whose main gripe is “anti-Semitism” in the Corbyn-led Labour Party. None of them actually tried to put forward any thoughts about what is wrong in Britain, let alone what might improve the country. The Jew Zionist Mike Gapes was the most honest, talking purely about his hatred for so-called “Anti-Semitism”. As noted, his tribal interest was at least not concealed by some faked concern about the British people.

More Twitter comment…

Update, 8 April 2019

The defectors grew to 11 in the end, 3 being “Conservatives” Heidi Allen, Sarah Wollaston and Anna (hic, gurgle) Soubry. This group called itself Change UK and is fighting seats in the EU elections (23 May 2019) and (when called) the next UK general election. So far, the new party has not done well, despite favourable news (puffing) in the msm, some of whom have joined Change UK (eg Gavin Esler, the Jewish journalist who once presented BBC Dateline London).

See below: massive Brexit Party rally in Peterborough; same day, tiny Change UK meeting “starring” Anna Soubry MP.

https://twitter.com/M0TFO/status/1126107461138747393

 

Party Politics, society, Uncategorized

Tactical Voting, the Only Way Around the First-Past-The-Post Electoral System (but it may be pointless anyway)

1 Comment

The UK has, famously or infamously, a First Past The Post [FPTP] electoral system. Winner takes all. There was some logic supporting such a system in, say, the 1950s, when over 90% of the electorate of the UK voted Conservative, Labour or Liberal, and in fact almost entirely for the first two. In the 1950 General Election, nearly 97% of those who voted voted for the “three main parties”. At that time, the FPTP system provided stability and a certainty of result in most general elections. Indeed, most UK adults were actually members of those parties. Even as late as 1983, 65% of UK adults belonged to a political party, mostly the “big three” and in fact mostly the “big two”. That contrasts with somewhere between 0.5% and 1.5% now, in 2019.

The figures are not entirely what they seem, of course: millions were inducted into the Labour Party by default, via their trade union membership (itself then compulsory in many industries and occupations); the Conservative Party was also packed by people who joined at least partly because they wanted to belong to Conservative clubs, i.e. social clubs (with bars). Labour also had social clubs: as it might be, the Toytown Working Man’s Club or Labour Club. Millions also belonged to the Young Conservatives (a mainly social organization and, unofficially, dating forum).

The above reflected the relative homogeneity of the UK population at the time. That homogeneity and cohesion has been shattered by social and demographic changes. We see now that FPTP voting does not reflect even the votes cast, let alone wider opinion. The chart below, for example, shows the votes cast in the South East of England, vis a vis Westminster seats won, in the 2015 General Election. Even that chart does not tell the full story, leaving out the views of those who had to compromise because there was no party which reflected their true views standing in the particular constituency: they therefore voted for the nearest party to them, ideologically, or just refused to vote (33.6% of those eligible to vote did not vote! I wonder what kind of party might capture that more-than-a-third of eligible voters?)

C3l1gk9XAAMHAwF

Also, we see that the way in which constituencies are sliced-up is a fairly arbitrary one:

c64bh5xw0aiwygy

The Boundary Commissions for the four UK countries delineate the constituency boundaries in such a way as to preserve a notional “balance”, a completely outdated one, based on that 1950s paradigm. So we see that some constituencies are “safe” Conservative or Labour and that a few are or were in the past Liberal Democrat/Liberal . A minority of seats are designed to be “marginal”, whether Con-Lab, Con-LibDem, LibDem-Lab.

The result of the above system is that, at time of writing, 80% of voters do not think that any party speaks for their views or for them.

To put it another way, there is a battle between anger and apathy.

Obviously, there should be a more responsive electoral system, based on one of the proportional voting systems already in use in many countries. However, FPTP is still the voting system in use in the UK for Westminster elections. That being so, tactical voting is the only way in which the ordinary voter can influence the result.

Take a fairly random example, Chesterfield, the constituency of Tony Benn for many years. Chesterfield, first contested in the 1880s, has been regarded as a safe Labour seat for most of that time. The Conservatives won it only once, in 1931, when the Liberals, who had won the seat several times previously, declined to stand. The Liberal Democrats won in 2001 and 2005, after the retirement of Tony Benn. Labour won again in 2010, 2015 and 2017.

The point here is that Labour has in most Chesterfield elections won, when it has won, because the anti-Labour vote was split, usually between Liberal Democrat and Conservative, in the past between Liberal and Conservative, and once only (2015) among LibDem, Conservative and UKIP (which attained a strong 3rd place).

Tactical voting could, at times, in fact quite often, have prevented Labour from winning Chesterfield. The same is true in many Lab or Con seats across the country.

The sting in the tail is that, yes, the voter can vote tactically, but all that does, usually, is to replace one System dummy with another, and one label with another. In a situation where 80% of voters think that no System party represents them or speaks for them, that is cold comfort.

duf13vmw0aejrdm

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesterfield_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Election_results

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1950_United_Kingdom_general_election