Tag Archives: Reform UK

Diary Blog, 30 November 2022, with analysis of current opinion polling

Morning music

[“The Fuhrer as friend of animals“]
[“At the end stands Victory“]

On this day a year ago

Freak news

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11483477/Non-binary-nuclear-waste-guru-pictured-LGBTQ-conference-weekend-stole-2k-luggage.html?ico=related-replace.

Biden’s non-binary nuclear waste guru who stole a woman’s suitcase from a baggage carousel was pictured the same weekend in Minnesota attending an LGBTQ student activism conference.   

Sam Brinton, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Office of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition, was photographed wearing a black evening gown with two of the event’s coordinators.”

[Daily Mail]

The USA is even more mad than the UK.

Oh, wait a minute…next up, Eddie Izzard as an MP (?)…

The continuing storm around “Jack Monroe”, the “Bootstrap Cook”

Very hard-hitting tweets, but maybe required reading for some sadly misled people in public services, charities etc, who are still apparently unaware of the storm around “Jack Monroe”, the “Bootstrap Cook”, which gained strength in July/August 2022 and has scarcely abated.

I think that some people in executive positions at charities etc, mentally bought into the whole “Bootstrap Cook” thing many years ago, and do not want to see how it has now become a very tarnished “story”.

I myself attempted an assessment on 30 September 2022: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2022/09/30/diary-blog-30-september-2022-including-an-assessment-of-jack-monroe-aka-the-bootstrap-cook/.

Having now seen more material over the past two months, I think that that assessment was more than fair. Perhaps I was too lenient.

This is not a matter which concerns only “Jack Monroe” and the many people who are alleged to have been cheated by her. This is a matter of considerable public interest and concern.

People have to have reasonable confidence that, when they donate money to a cause, or transfer the same, in order —or partly in order— to receive goods and/or services, that they are not being lied to, bamboozled, treated as “mugs”, and cheated out of money.

One of those allegedly cheated by “Jack Monroe” is a lady (not known to me other than via her tweets) called (I believe) Heather Booth (“@frugally_minded” on Twitter), who says that she donated monies on the Patreon website to “Jack Monroe”, but received neither the goods promised nor the refund(s) later demanded.

That lady, who with her disabled husband is now in a terrible financial situation, has not only not been refunded by “Jack Monroe” but also has had to contend with online trolls since the behaviour of “Jack Monroe” has become known online. Whether “Jack Monroe” herself was involved in that, I have no idea.

Please find the details of the lady’s crowdfunder here: https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/heather-booth-3?utm_term=Gde7678Nq.

As to the overall “Jack Monroe”/”Bootstrap Cook” situation, it seems to me that the responsible regulatory officers (eg for fundraising and/or trading standards) should investigate it. There may well be a need also for the police to investigate whether any offences around alleged fraud have been committed.

Other tweets seen

Looks as though some Jew Twitter-trolls from North London may be about to experience the beginning of the end…

More tweets

Now the idiots in the Westminster monkeyhouse are also sending more arms, hundreds of millions of pounds-worth more, to the Kiev regime. Both evil and stupid.

See also: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2017/07/09/the-slide-of-the-english-bar-and-uk-society-continues-and-accelerates/

More tweets seen

How is it that some unknown Canadian hero has not yet done what is evidently necessary?

Please refer to previous comment, mutatis mutandis.

Conservative Party

Indicates, as much as any poll can, 18-24 months before a general election, that it may be that the Conservative Party will lose badly but not catastrophically.

It was only weeks ago that the Con Party was on 20%; now 30%. Labour Party has slipped back slightly, and LibDems have slightly improved, to 10%.

Of course, under a proportional representation system, that might give the LibDems 65 MPs, whereas of course, under FPTP voting, 10% gives between 0-20, maybe more MPs, depending on how many votes are concentrated wherever. UKIP got 12% of the vote in 2015 and only 1 MP (a previously-elected Con Party MP) instead of the 78 that might have been expected under a pure PR system.

Despite much noise from Farage, it is clear that, so far, Reform UK is not breaking through. That may be partly because Farage himself is a busted flush, having stabbed his own Brexit Party supporters and candidates in the back during the 2019 General Election. Also, in my view, because the new-ish “Reform UK” is playing the same sort of pseudo-“libertarian” and Brexit tune as did Brexit Party and UKIP before.

The national mood has moved. People want public services that work, not the right to try to become low-tax “entrepreneurs”. What most white British (especially English) people want, but unconsciously, is a form of social-nationalism suited to UK conditions. There is, however, no party even approximating to that.

Looking at that opinion poll, it may be that people are now seriously starting to assess Labour, which is aping most “Conservative” policies and, as someone once parodied Starmer, “we approve of workhouses but they must be run in a fairer way, and more efficiently.”

Rachel Reeves has, over the years, repeatedly said that she would be even harder on the unemployed, sick, and disabled than have been the Con Party governments. She is also a member of Labour Friends of Israel, like Starmer and all his Shadow Cabinet.

On immigration, Labour would allow in even more blacks and browns.

On free speech, Labour would be even more restrictive (hardly surprising, bearing in mind the powerfully poisonous influence of the Jewish lobby on Labour now).

All that, however, does not let Sunak and Con Party off the hook. Many previously Con voters are likely to see the present government as a shambolic mess, and therefore to abstain, or to vote LibDem. That may not result in many (or any) new LibDem MPs, but may have an effect in some Con constituencies.

Likewise, the Reform UK candidates are probably not going to become MPs but may well take votes away from Con Party in marginal constituencies.

It is clear to many that the Government is rubbish, but that the Opposition is also rubbish.

The Conservative Party has never scored as low as 30% in any general election. The closest was in 1997 (30.7%), which resulted in 165 Con MPs (in a slightly larger Commons— 659).

A few percentage points makes a big difference at this level. In 2001, the Con vote was 31.7%, and MPs elected numbered 166, just one more than in 1997, but in 2005 the 32.4% vote-share resulted in 198 Con MPs (in a 646-member House of Commons).

In 2010, David Cameron-Levita’s Con Party achieved only 36.1%, but had elected 306 MPs (out of 650).

The oddity of British elections is shown by the fact that, in 2017, Theresa May’s Con Party achieved 42.3%, yet only had elected 317 Con MPs (out of 650). The devil is very much in the detail.

In 2019, Boris Johnson’s Con Party received a 43.6% vote, not much more than in 2017, but the number of Con MPs jumped to 365.

All the same, once the percentage vote goes below about 35%, the number of MPs elected starts to plummet; below 30% would probably mean fewer than 150 Conservative Party MPs, below 25% a near wipeout.

At 30%, then, the Conservative Party is still just about in the game.

Late tweets

Ludicrously overpaid and completely stupid, uneducated, uncultured, TV drones, applauding NWO/ZOG puppets such as Jacinda Ardern.

I still await that one Canadian who will…

Late music

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Lilburn]
[South Island, New Zealand]

Diary Blog, 17 December 2021, including analysis of the North Shropshire by-election result

North Shropshire by-election result

None of the other 9 candidates exceeded 1%. UKIP and Reclaim managed 1%; of the remaining 7, only the Monster Raving Loony scored as high as 0.3%.

The start of today’s blog post is written not long after the declaration at North Shropshire, which came around 0415 hrs.

The hour or so of TV news broadcast I have just seen was notable for the superiority of the Sky News coverage over that of the BBC (which I saw briefly before turning over). The Sky presenters were urbane, humorous, and effective, whereas the BBC presenter was a beardless youth who interviewed some BBC talking head who himself seemed odd, oddly alert (and fast-talking, though saying little of interest) at nearly four o’clock in the morning.

As to the result itself, this is “seismic” (as I predicted it would be if the result turned out to be a LibDem win, which I also, though tentatively, predicted); seismic not only for the Conservative Party but for Labour as well.

“Boris” and his pack of clowns are having to learn again the lesson of the French Revolution: you cannot say “let them eat cake” while you guzzle foie gras.

The Conservative Party is making the same mistake in England that the Labour Party made in Scotland, that of saying “where will they [the previously-loyal voters] go?…where can they go?” Labour thought that most Scottish voters would pretty much have to stick with Labour, because they had no alternative. Well, we know how that worked out. It worked for a long time, many decades in fact, but in the end those voters got sick of being taken for granted, and at things not improving for them. Result— Scottish Labour now has 1 MP out of 59 Scottish MPs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Labour#House_of_Commons.

It is always dangerous to assume that people have no alternative. The Conservative Party has thought that, in respect of southern and/or rural English constituencies, for many years. There is no credible social-national party in England, though. The LibDems have always been the “dustbin” alternative. UKIP nearly broke through but was defeated by the FPTP semi-rigged electoral system, and the same was true a decade ago of the BNP (who also had the embedded Jew-Zionist element in the msm working against them).

People in North Shropshire did not vote for the LibDem candidate, as such, but against the “Conservative” one. Big difference.

CCHQ will no doubt refer to the relatively low turnout (46.3%, as against 67.9% in 2019) but part of that low turnout (I think much of that) can be attributed to formerly Conservative voters abstaining, unwilling to vote for the Conservative Party but also refusing to vote LibDem or Labour.

This by-election could go down in history, though it is unlikely to signal the start of (another) LibDem “revival”. Having said that, there are many constituencies where few would vote Labour but many might at least consider a LibDem. Add to that tactical voting by people who would really prefer a Labour MP, and it might add up to something significant.

The Liberal Party scored 31.6% (second place) in 1983; the LibDems’ best result was 25.3% in 1992. The 2021 by-election candidate, who scored only 10% a mere 2 years ago in 2019) has now received 47.2% of votes cast! Voting against (the clown’s candidate), not for the LibDem as such.

So what about the Conservative Party candidate? 31.6%. Well below even the 40.2% of 1997. This was a shout of anger against stupid “Boris” and his pack of clowns. The actual candidate was, in my view, poor: not fully English, and another “Conservative” lawyer (barrister), who was at one time an Army doctor. I am probably biased, but having met a few, I never trust a doctor who becomes a barrister (or a politician, thinking of David Owen, Hastings Banda, Papa Doc Duvalier, “Che” Guevara, Radovan Karadzic etc).

Having said all that, this was not a Neil Shastri-Hurst disaster but a “Boris” and general Conservative Party disaster.

Now, to Labour. Since North Shropshire was re-dedicated in 1983, and until the by-election, Labour has failed to come in second only four times, and only once (2010) since 1992.

It is all very well to talk about tactical voting, or Labour supporters “lending their votes” to the LibDem in order to beat the Con candidate. Yes; no argument on that, but is that the whole story? The 9.7% scored in the by-election was the lowest Labour vote ever in North Shropshire. Even in 1983, at the height of Thatcherism, and when Labour suffered its crushing national defeat under Michael Foot [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_United_Kingdom_general_election], it still scored 14.7% (third place) in North Shropshire.

The conclusion must be that, while many formerly Labour votes went tactically (or otherwise) to the LibDem, many Labour voters just voted with their feet, if such be the bon mot, and stayed home. Labour scored 22.1% in 2019, and 31.1% in 2017 (both under Corbyn) in the constituency.

If this by-election result is bad for Boris-idiot, it is arguably at least as great a blow for Labour’s Jewish-lobby leadership under Keir Starmer. The problem is not just the “Israel first” aspect of Labour’s present leadership, but also the way in which the supposed “Opposition” keeps propping up “Boris” over various matters, such as the Online Harms Bill and, of more immediate political importance, the Covid/Omicron “panicdemic” “rules” and “laws”.

No-one really can have expected Labour to win the by-election, but to fall below 10% is a straw in the wind that (in my view) is significant.

The other parties that stood? Well, the Greens are perennial 5% (or below) candidates, except in Brighton Pavilion, so nothing of interest there. As for the new Farage pop-up, “Reform UK”, it only got a 3.7% vote. I think that people mostly see through Farage now, either as “controlled opposition” or simply as a moneygrasping “slithey tove” who (like “Boris”) just cannot be trusted.

The various small-c “conservative” “nationalist” parties, i.e. UKIP, Reform UK, Reclaim Party, Heritage, and Freedom Alliance, together scored only around 6%, far less than even my low expectations (I had thought 10%, and maybe, as protest, as much as 20%).

A final thought. Brexit is dead as an issue, politically. It has been very badly mishandled (with “Boris” in nominal charge, how could it not have been?), but we are out and we are staying out.

Tweets seen

Only 4 hours?! Talk about sisu! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisu.

It is amazing what even one determined person can do.

One person can achieve plenty, in principle; a group can achieve so much more, if congruent. Look at how Adolf Hitler was only the 7th actual member (there were other supporters) of the DAP which became the NSDAP, and how he managed to lead those few to go from seven men in a cellar to the pinnacle of supreme power in Germany, despite frenzied and violent Jewish and other opposition. It took him 14 years, but he made it.

Morning music

More tweets seen

I think that (as someone unattached to any System party) I can be considered objective. I agree with Williamson inasmuch as the North Shropshire demonstrates (as I have blogged in the past) that Labour’s problem lies not in its leader(s) but in Labour itself. The fact is (as blogged previously) that Labour is now irrelevant, and if it were not for the UK’s FPTP voting system, would by now have all but disappeared.

Look at North Shropshire. In the general elections from 1997, through 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015, 2017, 2019, and now the 2021 by-election, Labour scored 36%, 35.2%, 25.9%, 18.1%, 19.9%, 31.1%, 22.1%, and now 9.7%.

The elections Labour have fought in North Shropshire since 1997 show an uneven pattern, but more of a decline than a rise. Since and including 2010, only once better than 22.1%, and that was 31.1% in 2017, the first general election Labour fought under Corbyn.

The present Government and the present Labour Opposition are symbiotically chained together, and their policies are in practice very similar.

Starmer is a puppet, or monkey-on-a-stick.

Luke Akehurst is a leading (though apparently non-Jew) pro-Zionist who will now do what he can to defend the “Israel first” “Labour” front bench, and Starmer most of all. Dan Hodges is, of course, correct in saying the very same as I have done (earlier in today’s blog).

Israel’s “monkey-on-a-stick” Sajid Javid (well, one of them…) lauds the ludicrously-misnamed “SAGE” committee, with its 2 years of “millions will die” propaganda and perennially-wrong forecasting. What’s really behind it all? NWO/ZOG and the planned biosecurity police state, the Great Reset etc.

Look at how inflation is rising in the UK. Over 5%, which is twice the rate it was only a couple of years ago. That is what happens when you waste money in huge amounts (as with the “Test and Trace” nonsense), or “give money away” in huge amounts (as with the “furlough” programme and the rest). The currency cannot be diluted for long without real-world effects.

Also, look at how the msm are conditioning the public to accept a far more rapid rise in the age at which people can expect to receive a State pension.

Stealth “taxation” by another name.

The same applies to the “holocaust” narrative…

Is there not one German who can do what is necessary?

More music

More tweets seen

He’s an idiot. People in the future will wonder how a clown like that ever had the possibility of becoming Prime Minister, even a prime minister of a country that seems to be in terminal socio-economic and socio-political decline.

What is extraordinary about that interview is that the Clown seems to be obsessed by “Covid” and especially “Omicron”.

The Clown makes the right noises about how what the public are interested in is government doing things for them, but does not seem to accept that his government has failed precisely in that!

The cross-Channel migration-invasion continues, the facemask nonsense interferes with tens of millions of people daily (and creates massive pollution), the roads are unmended, the railways unimproved, the social care sector is being stretched and near-ruined (and certainly not “fixed” as promised), the NHS is scarcely operating except as a “panicdemic” service…the list just goes on.

The Clown’s only hope is to keep the fear propaganda going re. “Covid”, despite the fact that only about one in a thousand UK people has actually died “with” it (not of it) (and as far as actual English/British —“white”— people are concerned, it is not even one in a thousand. Maybe one in fifteen hundred. Serious but not existential. The real figures may be even less sensational.

Yes, that really came out for a moment or two. The Clown is a rather sinister clown, or would be, had he autocratic power.

This is when an old-style heavyweight political bruiser like Andrew Neil can come into his own, but the Clown has usually refused to be tackled by him. Pity. As for Sam Coates, one wonders whether he would have been quite so forthright before it became obvious that the Clown is on the way out. Perhaps, perhaps not.

[the Clown at his ancestral Wailing Wall in Jerusalem; be careful what you wish for! I do not know whether the Black Hat is an Israeli guide or whether perhaps a distant member of Johnson’s own family]

People are sometimes seen writing in newspapers that Johnson wants to leave, to start penning rubbish newspaper columns again (and getting £250,000 a year for it, like he did before, when, inter alia, the Barclay Brothers were paying via the Daily Telegraph), and writing the sort of memoirs that attract million-pound advances and royalties. I think not. Johnson is a moneygrubber, true, but his primary motivation is to hold power, though not because he wants to do anything with it (and in any case he has no real ideas, and no real capabilities). He wants to hold power just for the sake of it, and to be centre of (favourable) attention.

I do not blame Johnson alone. I blame the msm for puffing this useless barrel of lies and self-promotion as “Prime Minister in waiting” for 20 years. I suppose that his part-Jew origins (and pro-Israel attitude) helped him there.

I also blame the elderly Conservative Party members who elected him as leader of that party. I blame also the MPs who initially nominated and voted for him. Finally, I blame the ingrained political stupidity of the British, especially English, voters, who allowed themselves to be conned by a really not very plausible con-man.

Late tweets

Simon Case CVO (born 27 December 1978) is a British civil servant who currently serves as Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service since 9 September 2020, succeeding Sir Mark Sedwill.” [Wikipedia].

Is he at least part-((( )))? I do not know. If anyone has more information, by all means send it.

Incidentally, I noticed in a news report that 10, Downing Street displayed a 9-branched Jewish candlestick in its window recently, during the recent Jewish religious holiday. Is that a new custom? I had not heard of it previously.

At least the Roman Army only tested poisons on the badly-wounded…

We become more “enriched” and “blessed” daily…I wonder what that pair are? Brain surgeons? Civil engineers? Small boat navigators? Hardy ha ha…

In “the old days”, there was a severe disconnect between what the Soviet mass media pumped out and the reality experienced by most of the 290 million Soviet citizens. I never thought that it would happen here, but look at the BBC, Sky, ITN now!

According to UK msm, we are in the grip of a huge pandemic, which can only be ameliorated by wearing facemask muzzles, being “vaccinated” by experimental “vaccines” and almost weekly (soon) “boosters”, and by shutting down much of the country.

We are also told that either there is no mass immigration problem, or that the invasion is something that we should welcome, and that the invaders will “enrich” us and benefit us.

We are also told that there is a huge “terror” threat, mostly from “the far right”, meaning social-nationalists (white people, often of school age)…

The reality is of course quite different. At some point, the msm drones will have to be held accountable for their lies and their evil retailing of NWO/ZOG propaganda.

Late music

[Shishkin, Forest before Storm]

Diary Blog, 27 November 2021

Morning music

Tweets seen

The LibDems have been washed-up since they “enabled” the misnamed “Conservative” Party, under part-Jews David Cameron-Levita and George Osborne, to impose wrongheaded austerity on the poorer two-thirds of the British people.

As for Reform UK, a pathetic “controlled opposition” vehicle, but a straw which may be clutched at by many in the absence of a real social-national party; the lineal successor to Brexit Party and UKIP.

Green Party upswing is another “grasp at straws” sign of voter desperation or frustration.

Saturday quiz

Image

Well, this week brings another victory for me over political journalist John Rentoul; I scored 7/10 as against his 4/10. I did not know the answers to questions 5, 6 and 7.

More tweets seen

System politicians and msm talking heads (and the medical establishment) are still pushing the “it’s an existential threat to humanity” narrative, and that is all you will hear and see on the BBC, Sky, ITN etc. They have painted themselves into a corner with their panic, lies, and obfuscations.

We are Chinese, if you please! We are Chinese if you don’t please!...”

The mask zealots are truly insane and/or brainwashed. I had to argue, briefly, with a cheeky Ch… I mean Chinese… student in Waitrose in mid-2020. Told the interfering little alien to get lost.

No…

(((They))) truly are “the simulacrum of the human“…

Telling…The people do not want either main System party “leader” as Prime Minister. The people really want social-nationalism, but they themselves do not even know it, because the repression on free speech, and the lies of the ZOG/NWO msm, have them completely confused.

On that modelling, Labour would need support from both the SNP and the LibDems to form even a working minority government; the Conservative Party would in theory be able to govern with SNP support. However, the price of that would be, at the least, another Scottish Independence referendum.

Writing as advocatus diabolus, I suppose that the Conservative Party could buy the SNP by offering actual Independence without a referendum, but that might cause a political explosion north of the border, where about half of the Scottish voters are opposed to, or at least not in favour of, “independence” (independence from the UK/England, but not necesssarily from the international finance system, NWO/ZOG, NATO etc…).

Still, continuing in the cynical vein, and as I have blogged before, if Scotland were “independent” (from the UK), that would pretty much kill off Labour as a party of (“rump UK” or England/Wales) government. Once you take out the 48 SNP MPs and the one Labour MP from the Commons, as well as the 4 LibDems and 6 Conservatives, it becomes clear that Labour would never be able to form even a minority government, unless there were some kind of “peaceful revolution” in England. On the above modelling, Con 289, Lab 264, LibDem 7. (plus other parties).

From (just over) a year ago

Happened to see my blog post from 14 November last year. It has worn quite well. I notice that —no fault of mine— there is a slight Groundhog Day feel about it… https://ianrobertmillard.org/2020/11/14/diary-blog-14-november-2020/.

I may make a more exact “year ago” posting a feature on the blog. Here is my offering from exactly a year ago: https://ianrobertmillard.org/2020/11/27/diary-blog-27-november-2020/.

Afternoon music

[Levitan: Above Eternal Peace]

The Chase Celebrity Special

Saw an old (not sure how old) “celebrity” version of The Chase quiz show. Featured Jewish-Zionist zealot Rachel Riley, who seemed to be pretty ignorant, though not much worse than the others. She even got a very simple maths question wrong (actually not wrong, because she failed to answer). Ghastly former MP, Edwina Currie, was the only one to be knocked out before the end. Surprisingly, though, the remaining three won £66,000 for charity, so that was nice, anyway.

Those who watch TV quiz shows will know that the “celebrity” shows are invariably cringeworthy, and lead one to speculate why hugely well-paid celebrity faces are often so hugely ignorant. I have seen few such “celebrities” acquit themselves well. One of the few who did was studiedly foppish interior designer Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurence_Llewelyn-Bowen]. I think that that was also on The Chase.

Keir Starmer

Heard part of an interview with Keir Starmer, conducted by Nick Robinson. Starmer’s first point, even before it was explored further by Robinson, was how he had done everything he could to stop “anti-Semitism” in Labour (I think that his pleasant phrase was “tear out“…).

Seems that Starmer’s only real interest is in bringing aid and comfort to the Jews, despite the fact that they are numerically few (250,000-300,000), and so relatively insignificant in electoral terms.

Starmer admitted that, at home, his family does celebrate Jewish customary holidays. Sadly, Nick Robinson was too polite to ask whether Starmer, on such occasions, wears the little skullcap (“yarmulka“) which I believe (rightly or not) is de rigueur.

Nick Robinson is himself at least half-Jewish: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Robinson_(journalist).

On radio (the interview was also shown on TV), Robinson’s intro mentioned the problem Starmer has with seeming credible to the public were he to appear, as Prime Minister, on the step of 10, Downing Street. I am scarcely favourable to Starmer but, surely, after Boris-idiot, almost anyone would be credible, or at least not seem worse?

Late tweets

I may listen later.

This is now descending into total madness (again). A “variant” of a virus that kills about 1 in every 1,000 in the UK (and 1 out of 4,000 in the world), and this stupid yet evil Cabinet of clowns is apparently going to mandate the facemask nonsense again! We are pretty much at war now, not with “Covid” but with this evil Con regime, its equally evil fake “Labour” supposed opposition, and with a transnational conspiracy with several (to use Biblical language) heads and/or horns.

So the police shut down mild heckling of “antifa”-type “useful idiots”? Reminds me of the Trafalgar Square disgrace which continued for years in the 1980s, with amplified yelling 24/7 outside the South African Embassy, while the police, on political orders, allowed it and in fact facilitated it.

System conspiracy.

Birmingham men“?! Hardy ha ha…

Good grief! The gall and madness surprises even me! A consultant cardiologist is “fact-checked” by some bimbo with a “degree” in…wait for it… magazine journalism!

Kristalltag Wien! Jetzt!

Late music

Hartlepool By-Election 2021— preliminary look

A by-election is to be held on 6 May 2021 at Hartlepool. The by-election is being seen as a barometer measuring support for the Labour Party, as well as that for the Conservative Party government. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9438925/Keir-Starmer-course-humiliating-defeat-Hartlepool-election.html.

The by-election is seen as an important one, and that fact has already resulted in Wikipedia giving it a dedicated article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Hartlepool_by-election.

Polling seems to show that this is essentially a straight fight between Con and Lab:

A poll - commissioned by the Communication Workers Union (CWU) and conducted over the phone - suggests North Yorkshire farmer Ms Mortimer will walk away with a 20 percentage point increase on the votes won by the Tories in December 2019. Pictured: The predicted split in votes

There are likely to be at least 10 candidates in all, possibly 11 or 12.

Hartlepool has been held by the Labour Party since its creation in 1974. The Labour vote peaked, perhaps surprisingly, when Peter Mandelson was the candidate in 1997. Over 60%. The lowest trough was in 2015, when Labour scored 35.6% (UKIP second with 28%). Labour recovered to 52.5% in 2017, but crashed back to 37.7% in 2019.

The Conservative Party vote peaked early, in the first election of 1974 (45.7%). The Con trough was in 2001 (20.9%).

Brexit Party, represented by its deputy leader, Richard Tice, might have succeeded in 2019 had Nigel Farage not stabbed his own party in the back in order to help the Conservatives win the General Election. Even so, Tice managed a 25.8% third placing, not far behind the Conservative candidate. Reform Party is the forlorn reincarnation of Brexit Party, but already seems doomed. Even Farage, its “leader” until recently, has jumped ship.

Hartlepool vote share graph.png

Labour’s national problems have been intensified in Hartlepool by its candidates of recent years. Mike Hill, the MP since 2017, stepped down because he was facing sex pest allegations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hill_(British_politician). A pretty dull Labour Party drone, who worked in trade unions and public libraries before becoming an MP.

Now Labour is facing further problems, this time with its new candidate, Paul Williams [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Williams_(Labour_politician)], an NHS medic: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56460823, though it can probably be said that the story (about old tweets by Williams) is overblown.

Official portrait of Dr Paul Williams crop 2.jpg
[Paul Williams, Labour Party candidate at the 2021 Hartlepool by-election]

Williams is obviously a careerist, and was the MP for Stockton South 2015-2017, when he lost to the Conservative candidate. He has also tried to become a Police and Crime Commissioner.

On paper, Williams looks like a solid candidate, with a solid background in healthcare as a GP etc, but is said to have been not very liked when MP for Stockton South. He is pro-EU in a very anti-EU part of the UK.

Labour’s national profile at present is not encouraging. The Jewish lobby managed, after a four-year struggle, to bin Jeremy Corbyn, replacing him with Keir Starmer, married to a woman who is a Jewish lawyer, and whose children are being brought up as Jewish.

Starmer is doing no better than Corbyn did in gaining public trust or popularity.

The Conservative candidate is Jill Mortimer, a farmer from North Yorkshire: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-hartlepool-candidate-admits-doesnt-23821830. She looks like a pain in the neck but, as she says in that Mirror report, a place like Hartlepool might benefit from an active MP.

An interesting intervener is Northern Independence Party [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Independence_Party], which is disliked by the Jew claque on Twitter— a good sign. Its candidate is Thelma Walker, who was a Labour MP from 2015-2017: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelma_Walker. Her candidature may stop Labour from winning, in what looks like being a fairly close contest.

I do not feel inclined to call the result, as yet, though obviously Labour is on the back foot. If the Conservative Party wins, it will not be because there is sudden enthusiasm for it, or for Boris-idiot, but because Labour is sliding to oblivion. If Labour loses, Hartlepool may go down in British political history as the beginning of the end for the Labour Party.

Update, 9 May 2021

Well, in the end, the Conservative Party candidate won easily: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartlepool_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2020s.

Out of over 70,000 eligible voters, fewer than 30,000 turned out to vote. Official turnout was 42.7%. Of those (nearly) 30,000, only about 8,500 voted for the Labour Party candidate. 8,500 out of a possible 70,000…

The beginning of the end for the Labour Party.

Update, 13 July 2025

Well, since 2021, much water under the bridge. At the 2024 General Election, Labour recaptured the seat with 46.2% of the vote. The former MP, Jill Mortimer, sank with the rest of the Sunak Con Party, and came third, with a vote-share of only 21.9%. Reform UK came second, with 24.5% (about the same as the Brexit Party vote in 2019).

The present MP is one Jonathan Brash, an almost invisible former schoolteacher. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Brash. I imagine that Reform UK might unseat him in 2028-2029. We shall see.

As for the 2021 by-election candidates, the Labour candidate, Paul Williams, returned to work as a doctor in the NHS, and the Conservative Party candidate and then MP, Jill Mortimer, seems now to have returned to her farm and B&B business in North Yorkshire.

Labour Is The Party of…? Labour Is The Party For…?

The most recent opinion polls [see below] must make sobering reading for Keir Starmer and his colleagues.

Now, we all know how flawed opinion polls are, how they only broadly reflect public opinion, how they cannot be exactly aligned to the likely outcome of British general elections because of the First Past The Post [FPTP] elctoral system and because of the way that boundaries are drawn:

c64bh5xw0aiwygy

Yes, all that is true. However, no party supported by 1% of the electorate in an  opinion poll has ever gone on to get 50% of the popular vote; likewise, no party has ever been valued at 50% of the popular vote, but then crashed to 1% at election time. A leas, as ar as I know. The opinion polls are not that inaccurate. I suppose that the nearest to such a situation was in 2019, when, at one point, Brexit Party was estimated to have a popular support in the region of 25%, but crashed to 2% in the actual election.

Having said the above, the 25%+ scored in the opinion polls by Brexit Party was well ahead of the actual election result. The polls taken nearer to polling day were fairly accurate, all putting Farage’s instant “party” at under 5%.

In other words, looking at the most recent opinion polls, Labour is now in really serious trouble. Some of the Jews who wanted rid of Corbyn are now half-heartedly praising Keir Starmer, as are msm scribblers, saying that there is now a real Opposition (etc). Well, Keir Starmer is married to a Jewish woman, and his children are being brought up in a Jewish milieu. The “support” for Starmer from “them” is therefore unsurprising.

To continue the theme, we all know that “a week is a long time in British politics”, as Harold Wilson said in the 1960s. All one can say is that, at present, in May 2020, Labour is on the ropes. Somewhere around 30% to 33%. Its 2019 General Election result was 32.1% of the popular vote. My conclusion? Getting rid of Corbyn has not helped Labour as a party at all. Not that the Jews as a group care. They, as a group, vote “Conservative” anyway. Only about 5% of Jews vote Labour these days. Their only interest is that Corbyn has gone and that, along with that, the Jewish-Zionist element has regained control of Labour.

Clinton once said that he could (and did) reduce “welfare” benefits to the bare bones because the poorer part of American society will still vote Democrat. As he said, “where else will they go?“. Until they did (go). First to the Republicans under George W. Bush, then to Obama, the, er, Great White Hope (or whatever), and then, in desperation, to Donald Trump (under Republican banner).

Look at the UK. NWO/ZOG political superstar Tony Blair and his advisers said, of what some call the UK “white working class”, “where can they go?“. Well, now we know (so far). The Scots working classes left first, favouring the faux-“nationalist” SNP.

Back in 1997, Scottish Labour held or won 56 out of the then 72 Scottish seats at Westminster. Vote-share 45.6%. Since the 2019 General Election, Scottish Labour has had 1 seat at Westminster (out of 59) on a vote-share of 18.6%. For the first time since 1918, Scottish Labour is only the 4th party in Scotland, in terms of seats. 1959-2015, it was always the 1st party. It slipped to 2nd in 2015, 3rd in 2017 and 4th in 2019.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Labour#UK_general_elections

True, Scottish Labour still received a vote-share of 18.6% in 2019, but that counts for little in FPTP voting. That share was, in any case, the lowest Labour vote in Scotland since 1910.

The SNP supremacy since 2015 means that Labour, as a UK national party, has effectively no chance of a majority at Westminster, and that the best it can hope for is an arrangement with the SNP, which after all, is a kind of social-democratic party. That’s assuming that Labour in England and in Wales can improve its position. Any such uplift in Labour fortunes is very doubtful.

In 2019, as I predicted, former Labour voters voted with their feet. Look at the very cleverly-conceived graphic below:

GeneralElection2019

As can be seen, almost as many former Labour voters abstained as voted for all the other parties put together.

The anti-Corbyn element in Labour and the msm (basically a Jewish claque) said that Corbyn was the reason voters were unwilling to vote Labour. That was partly true, though mainly because the Judenpresse had been hitting at him for 4 years. There were other factors, some connected with Corbyn, some not.

The deadhead MPs in Labour were (and remain) part of the problem: Diane Abbott, Fiona Onasanya (now an “unperson”, expelled from Labour and imprisoned), Kate Osamor, Dawn Butler etc. I blogged about a few of them:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/21/deadhead-mps-an-occasional-series-the-fiona-onasanya-story/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2018/12/02/troop-cartload-barrel-or-family/

That black/brown group was very much tied-in with Corbyn who, notoriously, had had, as a young man, a fling with Diane Abbott:

DLoVt8oXUAA5KMb

As a matter of fact, the Labour performance under Corbyn, in popular-vote terms, was better than under both Miliband and Brown. The seats gained or retained by Labour in 2019 were far fewer, though; in 2017, Corbyn did better than his two predecessors in terms of seats too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)#UK_general_elections

Under Keir Starmer, the Shadow Cabinet is full of Labour Friends of Israel members, Corbyn and his cronies have gone and Labour is now rising in the polls and looking more credible every day that passes. Oh, no…wait. Belay the last couple of points…

In fact, Labour is in every way stagnant. Stagnant in the polls. Almost invisible in the news. Supporting pretty much everything the Boris-idiot “Conservative” joke-government is doing re. Coronavirus, and only mildly criticizing bits and pieces. Pathetic.

The problem Labour has is firstly ideological, in that socialism in the old sense died in and around 1989. In the early 1990s, Labour finally admitted to itself that it had stopped being “socialist”. It became “social-democratic” and then, under Blair, outright finance-capitalist with “socialist” and “social-democratic” fig leaves.

Now, Labour is just a label, which loudmouth Friends of Israel MP, Jess Phillips, said (with her customary grace) is “just a f****** rose

VOTE LABOUR - ROSE FLAG 25mm 1" Pin Badge SUPPORT JEREMY CORBYN ...

What does a symbol mean? If nothing, then the party whose symbol it is, is nothing.

We have seen that the Scottish “working classes” etc have largely deserted Labour. In fact, now that Corbyn is gone, it may be that Labour’s 18.6% vote in 2019 will become closer to 10% or lower whenever the next general election is held.

We have also seen that the English “working classes” have been deserting Labour. That is especially the case in the North and Midlands, the so-called “red wall” of the past. The scandal of the Muslim Pakistani rape gangs killed Labour for many, as Labour’s Common Purpose placemen and women in politics, local government, the police and (inevitably) social services ignored the widespread abuse of white English girls by (mainly) Pakistanis.

Likewise on the wider immigration point. The “Conservatives” have been hopeless on mass immigration (aka “migration-invasion”) and basically just “talk a good game”, but Labour actually and deliberately encouraged the migration invasion, in order to destroy Britain’s race and culture. That fact was leaked by Labour insiders. The Jews Phil Woolas and Barbara Roche were behind much of it. They became so toxic that neither was able to find other seats for which to stand.

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

The cartoonists picked up on it, both at the time and then later, when Corbyn was leader:

ctgqcfywiaa6yvr

161214-MATT-web_3139193a

The UK electoral system, as it applies in England at least, is binary. At present, the two parties supposedly opposed to each other are not in equal positions. The Conservative Party, having fluked a large majority, is in government for the moment, and probably until 2024, certainly until 2022. The Labour Party has become a total irrelevance.

As I have previously blogged (and, before the Jews had me expelled from Twitter, tweeted), Labour is now the party of the public service employees, of the blacks and other ethnic minorities (except the Jews) and of the mostly urban, maybe young or young-ish supporters of failed “multiculturalism” and pseudo-socialism. About 25% of the population. There are some old Labour loyalists around, too. In toto, maybe 30% of the population. Which is where Labour is in the polls. I cannot see Labour getting much beyond that now. Keir Starmer may be without scandal (as far as we know) but he is as dull as ditchwater. New ideas for society? None.

When you take away old-style socialism, when the old Labour communities in the industrial heartland of England no longer exist, when Labour no longer represents Britain’s history, race and culture, what is left? Nothing.

The same or similar, mutatis mutandis, could be said about the Conservative Party, up to a point, but the misnamed “Conservatives” still have a southern England voting bloc which, though ageing and fraying, is still there.

To return to those words of Clinton and Blair, “where will they go?”. Well, not to Labour (from other parties). To apathy, but only so long as doing nothing is less painful than doing something.

Labour’s slow death has left the Conservative Party in the ascendant. When that star starts to fall, Labour will not benefit. A new party might.

iwantoffthisride

Update, 19 January 2026:

6 years have passed. I was more-or-less right about Labour not getting beyond 30% electorally.

Thanks to the vagaries of the UK’s electoral system, and the collapse of support for the Conservative Party (after the disastrous rule by “Boris”-idiot, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak), Labour was elected in 2024, and with a misleadingly huge Commons majority, but on a percentage vote of only 33.7%. In rough terms, 4 out of every 12 votes. Put another way, only 4 out of every 20 eligible voters’ votes. 8 out of every 20 did not bother to vote.

As I also predicted might happen, a new party did arise to capture public discontent, but it was a fake “nationalist” one —Reform UK— rather than a real social-national party.

Also, my prediction of 2020 or 2021 that Starmer, to my slight surprise, was proving to be “utterly clueless“, has also come to pass. As a result, and as of today’s date, his popularity stands at 18%, his unpopularity at 75% (Sunak’s lowest point was the same), with only 7% undecided. Labour support in the opinion polls is around 18% as well.

Deadhead MPs, An Occasional Series: The Karen Bradley Story

Karen Bradley is the Conservative Party MP for Staffordshire Moorlands, and has been since the constituency boundaries were changed for the 2010 General Election, making the seat a safe seat for the Conservatives. Her share of the vote increased from 45.2% in 2010 to 58.1% in 2017.

Unlike most MPs, Karen Bradley represents an area not far from where she was born. She went to a comprehensive school and then to Imperial College, where she graduated in Mathematics (B.Sc.).

There is little information about Karen Bradley’s family or parents. Her origins seem modest, at any rate.

Karen Bradley worked in tax for Deloitte and KPMG, for a total of 16 years; she also worked for 3 years as a consultant in the same field, but gave up and rejoined KPMG. I think that we can be sure that Karen Bradley does know about how to calculate tax.

Karen Bradley is married (husband’s occupation unknown to me); they have two children.

Upon election as MP in 2010, Karen Bradley joined the House of Commons Work and Pensions Select Committee (MPs on such committees get more pay). At least she would understand the tax questions.

There is no record that I have seen of her criticizing or even questioning the cruel system of “welfare” (social security) put in place by Iain Dunce Duncan Smith, the Jew “lord” Freud etc after 2010. On the contrary, she has always voted to make the poor (if unemployed, sick or disabled, at least) poorer.

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24725/karen_bradley/staffordshire_moorlands/votes#welfare

What a bitch.

The Germans have a saying: “put a beggar on a horse and he rides it to death”.

Karen Bradley became a Government Whip in 2012, a traditional home for mediocre MPs.

Karen Bradley was appointed junior minister at the Home Office in 2014 and then, in the turmoil following the 2015 General Election and the subsequent election of Theresa May as Conservative Party leader, she was appointed Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.

It may be that Theresa May wanted to appoint women to senior posts.

MPs, like generals, need luck in their careers. I doubt that many, in 2010, would have predicted that Karen Bradley would go from not even being an MP in early 2010 to being a member of the Cabinet only six years later. She certainly had luck; however, the luck ran out:

During the cabinet reshuffle in 2018, Bradley was appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland after the resignation of James Brokenshire due to ill health. Matt Hancock replaced her as Culture Secretary. In July 2018 she came under criticism in the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee for failing to take action on British government discrimination against former soldiers and police. Andrew Murrison challenged her on her account of what she had done, and she said she would write to him. Sylvia Hermon commented: “I wait and wait for letters.”[12]

[Wikipedia]

In September 2018 she was criticised for admitting in an interview for House magazine, a weekly publication for the Houses of Parliament, that she had not understood Northern Irish politics before being appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. “I didn’t understand things like when elections are fought, for example, in Northern Ireland – people who are nationalists don’t vote for unionist parties and vice versa,” she said.

[Wikipedia]

The newspapers were soon full of views about Karen Bradley, the vast majority very critical, using words such as “shamefully ignorant,”, “a slow learner”, “should resign”, “should not be in job” etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/12/karen-bradleys-shameful-ignorance-about-northern-ireland

Karen Bradley did not even understand that Northern Irish voters mostly vote on sectarian lines! Hopeless…

Attracting widespread and sustained criticism, Karen Bradley united the political classes in their belief that she was inept, ineffectual, gaffe-prone and completely out of her depth,” said Deirdre Heenan, professor of Social Policy at Ulster University.” [BBC]

Media appearances by Mrs Bradley became infrequent and brief.” [BBC]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-49085076

In the end, though, Karen Bradley’s loyalty to Theresa May and the Conservative Party (she has almost always voted with her party) saved her until Theresa May was replaced by Boris Johnson, who sacked her at once:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-49103711

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/karen-bradley-sacked-as-northern-ireland-secretary-by-boris-johnson-38343488.html

It is not hard to be Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. Lazy half-Jew chancer Ed Vaizey blagged it for years. Karen Bradley did the same. It became clear, though, when she was appointed to Northern Ireland, that she had received at least one promotion too many. She was out of her depth in Cabinet. She had to go.

What now for Karen Bradley?

I was unsure as to whether Karen Bradley was enough of a deadhead to make it into the hallowed halls of my Deadhead MPs series. She might have been assessed as merely mediocre. However, her performance at the Northern Ireland Office has sealed her fate and provided her entry ticket to this blog series.

I imagine that we have seen the end of Karen Bradley as a member of the Government, whether under Boris Johnson or anyone else. However, she has a safe seat in the Staffordshire Moorlands, seems to be popular there and so will no doubt continue to be, as a constituency MP, merely mediocre most of the time, rather than a deadhead.

Notes

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

https://www.karenbradley.co.uk/

Update, 10 January 2025

Karen Bradley became almost invisible after she was sacked from Cabinet in 2019. A wise tactic, because it saved her from having her evident unsuitability for office being again underlined.

Having said that, Karen Bradley actually increased her vote share in 2019, to 64.5% (Labour 26.9%).

At the 2024 General Election, Karen Bradley’s vote share fell to 35.4% (Labour 32.6%, Reform 23.2%).

Next time? Hard to say. The Conservative Party is now in the trough of despair, but so is the Labour Party. Reform, though, is booming, and it may well be that, next time around, Reform will take votes from both Lab and Con, and thus put Mrs. Bradley out of a job. Open question.

The LibDems Elect A Leader

Introduction

I suppose that I should write a brief piece about the LibDems, now that they have elected a new leader. Somehow an underwhelming topic. First of all, the new leader.

Background

Jo Swinson MP was born in Scotland in 1980, went to a local state school and then to the LSE, graduating, it seems, aged only 20, and with a degree in management. She then worked briefly for a small enterprise in Yorkshire before becoming marketing manager with public relations duties for a local radio station in Hull, called Viking Radio.

Elected as MP in 2005 [LibDem, East Dunbartonshire], she was PPS to Nick Clegg, then a PUS, then a junior minister, all during the time of the “Con Coalition” of 2010-2015.

Jo Swinson voted for all or almost all of the Con Coalition policies, and has endorsed both zero hours contracts and “flexible working”. I am not a LibDem, but I have to say that Jo Swinson is really rather far from the LibDem traditional stance on such matters. She comes across as almost “libertarian” as far as worker rights are concerned.

The other candidate, Ed Davey, is not far from Jo Swinson, ideologically, though I should say that Davey was the more intelligent candidate of the two, so it makes sense for the LibDems to go for the less-intelligent and less-educated Jo Swinson…Davey was also the more experienced candidate, being about 15 years older and having been in Parliament for longer (since 1997, compared to Swinson’s 2005); Davey was also the only one to have served in the Cabinet.

Both Swinson and Davey lost their seats in 2015 (Davey to a Conservative, Swinson to the SNP), but were re-elected in the same constituencies in 2017. Both are “doing rather well” financially outside politics too: Davey is director or consultant to a number of companies, while Jo Swinson’s husband, Duncan Hames, an accountant (and also a LibDem MP from 2010 until 2015), now works for Transparency International, a well-funded NGO.

The LibDems’ situation and chances

2010 was surely the high point of LibDemmery. 57 MPs (out of 650) and a share in government: the Con Coalition. In 2005, under the egregious Charles Kennedy, the LibDems had won 62 seats out of 646, but were not in government.

The LibDems got 23% of the popular vote in 2010, but only about 9% of the MPs.

I believe that the LibDems could have demanded electoral reform from the Conservatives. They did not. They sold their chance for a few ministerial places, for official cars, red boxes, rank and flummery. In return they (Ed Davey and Jo Swinson among them) voted for every misconceived “Conservative” measure: the appalling regime of hounding of and cruelty to the poor disabled, sick and unemployed; the whole nonsense of “austerity”, which left the UK economy almost alone in advanced states in being mired in recession and/or low growth for years; the near-destruction of the armed services as an active and effective global force. For all that and more, for being doormats for the Conservatives, the LibDems were punished by the electorate.

In 2015, the LibDem vote slumped to 7.9% (8 MPs), then slumped again in 2017, to 7.4% (but, by the vagaries of the British electoral system, the LibDems ended up with 12 MPs).

In the 2019 UK European elections, the LibDems came second. I blogged about them then:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/29/eu-elections-2019-in-review-the-libdems/

but they failed fairly miserably at the Peterborough by-election a week or so later:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/07/peterborough-by-election-post-poll-analysis-and-thoughts/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/06/08/a-few-peterborough-afterthoughts-about-the-libdems/

I do not think that I have a lot to add to what I then wrote. My view is that there is and will be no “LibDem surge”, but what there might be is a LibDem gain from the decline of both of the other main System parties, as well as an electoral benefit arising from the Brexit Party surge —if it happens— in the South of England, mainly, where the LibDems are not infrequently in 2nd or close 3rd place.

If the Conservative Party is hit badly in the South, its voters split between Con and BP, the main beneficiary is likely to be not the Brexit Party, and not Labour (in most cases) but the LibDems. In those circumstances (and “Change UK” having died shortly after birth), it is not now impossible to imagine the LibDems again having a bloc of 50 MPs, something that I admit I thought, until very recently, would be impossible. The LibDems may not deserve it, but might in any event get it. In fact, thinking of —inter alia— Boris Johnson, that might just be the epitaph of our present age.

Notes

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

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democrats_(UK)#General_elections

Update, 12 December 2022

We now know that there was the 2019 General Election only 5 months after I wrote the above assessment. At that election, my initial judgment, rather than my later speculation, was vindicated: the LibDem vote increased from 7.4% to 11.55%, but the FPTP system resulted in the LibDems losing 1 MP. That MP was Jo Swinson, who exited political life, having led her party for less than 5 months (144 days).

After the departure of Jo Swinson, Ed Davey was elected leader.

The LibDems had 12 MPs after the 2017 General Election, which reduced to 11 after the 2019 General Election. However, since then the LibDems have had three by-election successes, taking their number to 14.

Update, 3 February 2026

Having seen the blog post get quite a few hits in the past days and weeks, time for an update.

Jo Swinson has disappeared in into well-deserved obscurity, and is now described on Wikipedia as a Scottish former politician: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo_Swinson#Later_career.

As for the LibDems, under Ed Davey they achieved their best results, in terms of seats, at GE 2024— 72 MPs. That despite the fact that their result in terms of vote-share was historically low, only 12.2%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Democrats_(UK)#General_elections.

Ed Davey has become notorious for clowning around at fetes, rallies, conferences etc.

Having said that, and despite the LibDems having become near-irrelevant in policy terms, present opinion polling has them on or around 11%-15%, and surviving the coming likely massive cull of System party MPs. The polls seem to indicate that the slide of the Conservative Party (mainly) means that, as “dustbin” alternative, the LibDems might keep about 50-70 MPs, mostly in the southern half of the UK, at the likely GE 2029 or GE 2028, whichever. That might put them into the unaccustomed position of being the third or even second-largest bloc of MPs in the Commons, if Reform UK sweeps the board.

After a 2019 General Election, What?

I just read a typically unsatisfying yet not completely uninteresting article in the New Statesman [below].

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/07/boris-johnson-all-roads-likely-lead-general-election

The conclusion of that article is that Boris Johnson will be forced to a general election before very long. Unlike msm talking heads, we have no need to say “whoever is the next Prime Minister”: the system is broken, the 100,000 elderly people actually given a vote love “Boris”, and so we, the other 65 million, are having imposed upon us the least honest, least competent, least loyal, least decent, least worthy, least genuinely British Prime Minister in living memory, perhaps ever.

The crunch is coming, but Boris Johnson has never kept to any “pledge” or promise, whether political or personal, so will not be bound by his “Leave EU by 31 October 2019” one either, in my view.

As I have blogged previously, Boris Johnson likes to be presented as a strong maverick character, whereas in fact he is actually rather weak: weak in logic, weak in general knowledge, weak in resolve, weak in ethical standards, weak politically.

Philip Hammond puts it more diplomatically: ” “He is actually a more complex personality than it sometimes seems,” Hammond said of Johnson in his interview. “He is a mainstream conservative on all topics except Brexit. I very much regret his attitude to Brexit. His own story, which is multicultural, multinational and liberal, speaks for itself.” [The Guardian].

Hammond’s words of course are two-edged and allude to Johnson’s part-Jew, part-Muslim, born-in-USA (and brought up largely in USA and Belgium) background, as well as his loose and indeed louche morality.

I may be overthinking this, because I do not see Boris Johnson as a determined —or indeed any sort of— planner (except in terms of trying to become Prime Minister for the past 20+ years), but I wonder whether Johnson foresaw that the Commons would block fulfilment of his “Brexit on WTO terms by 31 October” so-called “pledge”? After all, it would hardly require clairvoyance. The House of Commons has a large Remain majority.

If Boris Johnson “pledges” to leave on WTO terms on 31 October 2019 and if that is then blocked by the Remain majority in the Commons, Johnson can then sigh loudly in public and say “I did my best, but have been stabbed in the back by all those pro-EU MPs…”, thus absolving him from blame for not “delivering Brexit” (the EU will very likely grant further “extensons” etc…). Johnson can then present himself as the Tribune of the People, fighting the corrupt Remain MPs. A hero to fools…

From Johnson’s point of view, perfect. No need to actually negotiate with people who are more intelligent, more knowledgeable, better prepared than Johnson himself ever is, no need to put in much effort and, finally, also parking tanks on the lawn of Farage and Brexit Party (that less certain, though).

What if it goes wrong for Boris-Idiot and there is a no-confidence vote? I am wondering whether the prospect of this stupid clown as Prime Minister, even leaving aside Brexit, might not be enough to make some Conservative Party MPs abstain in a no-confidence vote. I would not bet against it.

If Labour put forward a no-confidence vote, and if that succeeds, it might not mean an immediate general election. The Conservatives can put forward another, less obviously clownish MP as their prime ministerial choice. If all the Conservatives and all the DUP support that person, then that freezes out Corbyn and Labour for a while.

What if there is a general election? If Brexit Party put up a fairly full slate of candidates in England, and if at least some form of Brexit has not happened by then, there might well be an explosion of rage from the half of the country (more than half) that voted Leave in 2016. That explosion might well not spare the Conservatives who have so badly handled the Brexit negotiations for the past 3 years. After all, that inept performance calls to mind the other stupidities of the past decade.

Scotland seems likely to vote at least 40% SNP in a general election, creating (maintaining) a bloc of about 40-50 Westminster MPs. As for England and Wales, if you take out the blacks and browns (etc), and you take out London (and Gibraltar, which has no votes in Westminster elections), the Leave vote was around 70%. What does this mean?

First of all, Brexit is not the only issue. The socio-economic problems of the country play more to Labour’s advantage. What is letting down Labour electorally now is that it is seen to be largely the party of the blacks and browns, the immigrants and their offspring, as well as public service workers, and those reliant on State benefits. I speak in broad-brush terms of course.

The people who are voting Labour now and might vote Labour in any 2019 general election are concentrated in quite few seats, about 200-250, but some polls are saying that only 40% of 2017 Labour voters will vote Labour if there is a general election this year. Translating that into seats is not easy, but it could mean a substantial reduction from the position now.

The above is however affected by the effect Brexit Party might have on the Conservative vote, bearing in mind that, as with Labour, as high as 60% of 2017 Conservative voters say that they will not be voting Con next time.

If Brexit Party puts up candidates all over England and Wales, and scores at least 15% nationwide, the present 312 Conservative seats will reduce to about 250 and possibly fewer. Most will fall to the LibDems or Labour, but no doubt Brexit Party could win a few too. If Brexit Party can score 20%+ nationwide, then there might be only 150 Conservative MPs left.

We are in minority, possibly coalition, territory. Either

  • Labour + SNP or
  • Labour + LibDems; or
  • Conservative + Brexit Party or
  • Conservative + LibDems

One intriguing fact is that Boris Johnson is apparently marginally more popular with Brexit Party members than he is with Conservative Party members.

My guess today (in this volatile climate, one alters perceptions almost daily) is that it is a race between Labour’s vote (especially in the North) collapsing and the Conservative vote collapsing in much of the country, and weakened further by the existence of Brexit Party (even if Brexit Party itself scarcely wins a seat).

I cannot see Boris-Idiot lasting for long as Prime Minister— he is completely unsuited for such a position; but having said that, the country has already gone half-mad…

Postscript

I had scarcely published the above when, about an hour after that, the Guardian published the report below:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/19/brussels-to-offer-boris-johnson-extension-on-no-deal-brexit

“Brussels to offer Boris Johnson extension”… Quelle surprise…

There is also this now:

 

Update, 10 April 2021

Nearly two years later from when I wrote the above blog post, we look back at the December 2019 General Election and see that most of the analysis was correct. What made the prediction of Conservative Party electoral collapse misfire was the event few —if any— predicted, meaning that Nigel Farage, snake oil salesman, stabbed his own party in the back, and withdrawing from active participation the majority of Brexit Party candidates, all of whom had actually paid for their own deposits (and more)!

All or almost all Conservative Party candidates were given a clear run by Brexit Party. Brexit Party candidates in some formerly Labour seats where the Conservative Party was always unlikely to win, were allowed to stand, as in Hartlepool, where the Brexit Party 2-i-c, Richard Tice, came a very close third and, had the party not been killed by its own leader, might have pulled off an historic coup in a seat Labour-held since it was created. Farage’s actions destroyed Brexit Party credibility during the campaign.

The net result was that, with most intended Brexit Party votes going to Conservative candidates, the Con Party achieved a huge 80-seat overall majority. Many Conservative candidates, especially in the North, won by fewer than 2,000 votes. Had Brexit Party put up more than a token fight, the Conservative Party might well not have achieved a majority at all.

As for Nigel Farage, after his treachery in 2019, he had the gall to wind up Brexit Party (literally, since it was set up as a private company) and start yet another party, Reform Party or Reform UK, which he then abandoned when offered a great deal of money in business. An out and out, controlled-opposition, con-man.

The Sliding Labour Party– What Next?

Some months ago I blogged about what I saw as the emerging political vacuum in England and Wales. My overall view now is the same but more so.

The 2015 General Election would have broken the mould of British politics had it been carried out under conditions other than the absurd First Past The Post system, more suited to the UK of the 1920s than that of the early 21st Century. The distribution of votes in Southern England illustrates this well enough, where the Conservative Party got about half the votes but won about 95% of the Westminster seats (a similar ration to that of the SNP in Scotland).

The UKIP insurgents famously won nearly 4 million votes UK-wide (mostly in England), some 12% of the vote, yet won no seat except that of Douglas Carswell, who is really a Conservative and was previously elected as one.

It can be asserted as simple fact that, in almost any given English seat, most of the voters do not get the MP or party that they want and for which they voted. Moreover, even the typical 30%-50% received by the winning candidate often reflects more the candidates that most voters did not want: voters vote tactically in the absence of a true choice being available.

FPTP has distorted British politics, giving the incumbent party in any given seat a great advantage and –far more– giving the main System parties as a whole a like electoral advantage and an anchor against sliding into ruination. All the same, when the forces become unstoppable, that slide does happen. It happened to the Liberal Party during and after the 1920s (replaced by Labour) and it happened to Scottish Labour after 2010. This illustrates it well:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party#UK_General_Elections

Founded in 1934, the SNP often scored less than 1% of the vote in Scotland and had to wait until 1970 to get a single MP elected. Even in 2010, the SNP only got 19.9% of the Scottish vote and 6 MPs (out of 59). Then the tipping-point was reached and in 2015, its vote swelled to 50% and suddenly the SNP had (a typically-disproportionate FPTP result) 56 MPs (out of 59). Labour in Scotland was ruined and now (2017) is only the third party in the polls there (after the Conservatives!) and has only about 15% voter support.

Moving to Labour overall, we see that this is a party that has been living “off its hump” for a long time. It even managed to jettison almost every remnant of “socialism” in its policies and yet win elections under Tony Blair (via appealing to otherwise Conservative or Liberal Democrat voters in the South and Midlands). Labour, in effect, “sold its patrimony for a mess of pottage”. When one asks oneself “what does Labour stand for?”, nothing coherent comes to mind: a confusion of old history, trade unions, strike banners, post-1945 nationalization, 1960s-1970s managerial technocracy, that old humbug Michael Foot in his donkey jacket at the Cenotaph, then, from the mid-1990s, the mirage of Blairism (New World Order pro-Americanism meets the Israel Lobby meets managerial “socialism” meets Common Purpose careerism).

It is often said that Labour is now split into Corbynists and Blairites. Another fault line (closely following the first) might be said to be the pro-Israel lobby bloc and the generally anti-Zionist bloc (though most in both still feel the need to pay lip-service to the “holocaust” narrative and its faked history, non-existent “gas chambers”, the now-derided “six million” etc).

In fact, Labour is now not even two parties but three:

  • the remnant of the old trade union-oriented Labour Party, based around traditional and unthinkingly Labour communities, mostly in the North;
  • the Blairite-Brownite pro-Israel bloc, consisting largely of MPs and their staffs, together with careerists in other parts of the country. These are those who want “to win elections” by promising pie in the sky: socialism to socialists, aspiration to the voters of the suburbs, “diversity” to the ethnic minorities and the rainbow loonies, profits and low taxes to the Jewish Zionist potential donors;
  • the Corbyn  camp, which relates to a partly-imaginary Labour history from the 1930s through to the 1980s: “no pasaran!” Communist (and some syndicalist) propaganda from the Spanish Civil War; an airbrushed “anti-Nazi” and “anti-fascist” Second World War narrative; the conflicts of the 1970s such as that in Chile or those in parts of Central America; the Miners’ Strike of the 1980s (seen mainly through a London lens though). This is largely a bloc based around London, around the half-mad pseudo-socialist local council enclaves that became notorious in the 1980s: Islington, Camden, Haringey, Lambeth. It is the dominant bloc now and is supported by at least half of the ordinary Labour Party members and supporters.

Naturally, there is overlap here and there within that tripartite split. However, what has fallen away is not only consensus among the Labour members and activists, but more, the voters. Most Labour voters now are in that first group and are only voting Labour out of traditional allegiance. When you look at, say, Stoke Central, where the by-election is about to take place, you see that voting Labour, not in 1945 but in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015 has not given the people anything. Unemployment high, immigration high, large numbers of ethnic minority voters (Labour’s most reliable pawns now); little hope. Why would people in Stoke Central vote Labour? The answer seems to be that they see little choice (those that will actually vote, being probably a minority of those eligible).

In Stoke Central, the only alternative to Labour is UKIP, which is not the sort of social-national party likely to rise to power. In fact, UKIP is not social-nationalist at all, though some of its supporters are. The fact that UKIP is even being entertained (and may yet win the Stoke Central seat) is mainly a sign of Labour’s decline and not UKIP’s strength.

The industrial proletariat has gone, almost entirely. The trade unions are just a feeble bureaucratic, rainbow-coalition, “anti-racist”, Common Purpose-contaminated joke. The people who are suffering under fake “austerity” (the effect of #NWO/#ZOG globalism) and who belong to the burgeoning “precariat” (unemployed, underemployed, disabled, 50+, zero-hours-exploited, minimum-wage-exploited) are not now Labour voters but non-voters, sometime UKIP voters, potential social-nationalist voters. The Labour MPs are now mainly careerists, pro-Israel drones and “what’s-in-it-for-me?” bastards. Stoke Central MP Tristram Hunt abandoned his seat and constituents because, as he said, “the offer [from the Victoria and Albert Museum] was too good to refuse.” £250,000 a year. That was his price.

When a social nationalist movement of the new type emerges, as it must, it will start to scoop up the poor, or poor and angry and frustrated, masses. Labour will then disappear. Already it seems likely that Labour will only get between 100-200 seats in the 2020 Parliament, whether numbers are reduced from 650 to 600 or not. Labour policies– pro mass immigration, “welcoming” “refugees” (not of course to the MPs’ homes and neighbourhoods but to those of the former Labour voters), pro the EU octopus etc, simply have no appeal to those left behind by a conspiratorial globalism and multiculturalism.

As yet, a suitable party does not exist. When it does exist, Labour, already weakened, will fall to dust.

Update, 24 August 2025

Well, scroll on 8.5 years and here we are. The 2017 Stoke Central by-election was won by Labour (from UKIP and Con), and the seat retained by Labour at the 2017 General Election, but lost to the Conservatives in 2019, only for Labour to win the seat back in 2024: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2020s.

In the bigger picture, of course, the Cons under Boris-idiot won in 2017, and won bigger in 2019, only to lose to Starmer-Labour in 2024, since which time Reform UK has arisen to prominence and, indeed, dominance. We now await events.