UK PM May avoids London wipeout in local elections

[webfact]

UK PM May avoids London wipeout in local elections

By William James

 

Britain's Prime Minister Theresa May and her husband Philip leave after voting in local government elections in London, May 3, 2018. REUTERS/Hannah McKay

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Prime Minister Theresa May's Conservative Party avoided a wipeout in London local elections and eked out gains in Brexit-supporting regions elsewhere, early results on Friday showed, although her Labour opponents did gain ground in the capital.

 

The elections are viewed as a gauge of public support for May as she faces a possible revolt in parliament over her strategy for leaving the European Union.

 

Partial results showed May was likely to avoid the kind of widespread losses that would dramatically weaken her authority over Conservative lawmakers ahead of key tests of her plans to pull out of the EU customs union.

 

May's party held onto control of Wandsworth council - a low-tax Conservative stronghold since the time of former prime minister Margaret Thatcher. The council had been one of the socialist-led Labour Party's more ambitious targets in Thursday's vote.

 

Votes will decide more than 4,400 council seats, determining the makeup of 150 local government authorities who are responsible for the day-to-day provision of public services.

 

They do not affect seats in parliament, where May has only a slim working majority thanks to a deal with a smaller party.

 

The Conservatives also held the symbolic council of Westminster in the heart of London's political district, indicating that the final scale of losses in the capital would come in at the lower end of the predicted range.

 

Despite retaining overall control, the Conservatives lost individual seats in Westminster and Wandsworth.

 

Ruling parties typically suffer losses at local elections and polls ahead of the vote predicted a bad night in London for the Conservatives after eight years in power. May is also negotiating an exit from the EU that 60 percent of the capital rejected at the 2016 Brexit referendum.

 

Results elsewhere in London's 32 boroughs showed the forecast swing to Labour in the capital had materialised, although not strongly enough to inflict the heavy losses that would pose a serious headache for May.

 

UKIP COLLAPSE

Outside London, the Conservatives regained control of councils in the pro-Brexit regions of Peterborough and Basildon, largely at the expense of the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP).

 

UKIP has suffered leadership issues and struggled for a new purpose since achieving its primary political aim at the 2016 Brexit referendum when Britons decided to leave the EU.

 

But May's party lost control of the highly prized council in the Trafford area of the northern city of Manchester - its only foothold in an important Labour-dominated economic region where the Conservatives have spent years trying to win support.

 

The overall tally, due around 1900 GMT, will offer the most complete snapshot of public opinion since an election last year in which the Conservatives suffered unexpected losses, leaving May weakened and her party arguing openly about Brexit.

 

May will remain under pressure from rival Conservative factions: those who want to keep close ties with the EU by staying in the customs union, and others who say anything short of a clean break is a betrayal of the Brexit referendum result.

 

That issue is expected to come to a head with at least one vote on it in parliament next month.

 

(Reporting by William James; Editing by Paul Tait and Darren Schuettler)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-05-04

[dunroaming]

Yes May can thank her lucky stars for the results.  Fortunately UKIP was annihilated and most of those votes went to the Conservatives.  The much expected rise of Labour in and around London didn't materialise.  In reality after all the results are in there is little movement at all.  The Liberals took Kingston and Richmond and strengthened their presence but all in all we didn't learn much from the results.

[jayboy]

But perhaps the elections do end the peak of the Corbyn cult.

 

As Rod Liddle puts it:

 

"Perhaps we have now passed the point that my Conservative friends refer to as “peak Corbyn”, when the public has suddenly wised up to the fact that he’s not the messiah, just a sincerely stupid sock puppet for a fairly unpleasant coterie of affluent bourgeois Marxists and teenagers whose memory of the Soviet Union does not exist. Maybe."

 

 

And Rod elaborates on his theme.

 

"I’ve got to give up on cheese and biscuits as a supper option — no good comes of it. My father would eat a bowl of cornflakes just before bed and was never plagued by nightmares like that. But, then, he never experienced the reality of Diane Abbott — or the Momentum crowd, with their conspiracy theory paranoias, their epic delusions, their virulent anti-semitism, their thick-as-mince adolescent agitprop, their loathing of our country, their spite and their bullying of people who, unaccountably have different views from themselves."

Edited May 6, 2018 by jayboy

[stevenl]

Very good result for May at an election where historically the governing party loses.

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, jayboy said:

But perhaps the elections do end the peak of the Corbyn cult.

 

As Rod Liddle puts it:

 

"Perhaps we have now passed the point that my Conservative friends refer to as “peak Corbyn”, when the public has suddenly wised up to the fact that he’s not the messiah, just a sincerely stupid sock puppet for a fairly unpleasant coterie of affluent bourgeois Marxists and teenagers whose memory of the Soviet Union does not exist. Maybe."

 

 

And Rod elaborates on his theme.

 

"I’ve got to give up on cheese and biscuits as a supper option — no good comes of it. My father would eat a bowl of cornflakes just before bed and was never plagued by nightmares like that. But, then, he never experienced the reality of Diane Abbott — or the Momentum crowd, with their conspiracy theory paranoias, their epic delusions, their virulent anti-semitism, their thick-as-mince adolescent agitprop, their loathing of our country, their spite and their bullying of people who, unaccountably have different views from themselves."

Of course this is commentary as partisan as it comes. The reality is that the Tories are every bit as odious as the worst aspects of Labour, if not moreso. The only difference is that they cozy up to big business and the small pool of newspaper owners much more successfully.

 

In the interest of balance (and I have never voted Labour in my life) here is a very illuminating tweet about just how unpleasant so many Tories really are - yet we still elect them? It baffles me.

 

Matt Thomas (@Trickyjabs) tweeted at 10:13 PM on Mon, Mar 26, 2018:
1. Thread. Long list of Tory abuse, fraud, violence, racism, sexism, homophobia, sectarianism, child abuse, manslaughter and much, much more.Recent cases and historic examples that show how ingrained the problem is.
 

[jayboy]

47 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Of course this is commentary as partisan as it comes. The reality is that the Tories are every bit as odious as the worst aspects of Labour, if not moreso. The only difference is that they cozy up to big business and the small pool of newspaper owners much more successfully.

 

In the interest of balance (and I have never voted Labour in my life) here is a very illuminating tweet about just how unpleasant so many Tories really are - yet we still elect them? It baffles me.

 

Matt Thomas (@Trickyjabs) tweeted at 10:13 PM on Mon, Mar 26, 2018:
1. Thread. Long list of Tory abuse, fraud, violence, racism, sexism, homophobia, sectarianism, child abuse, manslaughter and much, much more.Recent cases and historic examples that show how ingrained the problem is.
 

At some level you must be aware how feeble and unconvincing your attempt at deflection is - with a link to someone's ranting who is clearly obsessive or deranged.It would be quite possible to draw up a list of oddballs and <deleted> from any political group.However it's not the point, as a ten year old might have grasped.

 

Generally I would agree however all things being equal a Labour Party committed to prosperity and social justice is more appealing than the Tories (as they now present themselves)  - that is the party of David Lammy, Yvette Cooper, Hilary Benn, Chaka Ummuna, Angela Rayner, Alan Johnson etc and before that the party of Gaitskell,Bevan and Attlee.But the present disgusting leadership headed by the appallingly inadequate Cobyn and surrounded by Jew haters, Marxists and public school Stalinists is very different matter.

[RuamRudy]

13 minutes ago, jayboy said:

At some level you must be aware how feeble and unconvincing your attempt at deflection is - with a link to someone's ranting who is clearly obsessive or deranged.It would be quite possible to draw up a list of oddballs and <deleted> from any political group.However it's not the point, as a ten year old might have grasped.

 

Generally I would agree however all things being equal a Labour Party committed to prosperity and social justice is more appealing than the Tories (as they now present themselves)  - that is the party of David Lammy, Yvette Cooper, Hilary Benn, Chaka Ummuna, Angela Rayner, Alan Johnson etc and before that the party of Gaitskell,Bevan and Attlee.But the present disgusting leadership headed by the appallingly inadequate Cobyn and surrounded by Jew haters, Marxists and public school Stalinists is very different matter.

Writing a post dripping with sarcarsm doesn't automatically convey superiority or right-ness.

 

The funny thing is, Liddle's comments were exactly what you ascribed to the twitter post to which I linked - he was ranting, whereas the post I linked to had very little in the way of commentary and consisted of merely a (very) long list of facts which more than dispel your suggestion that it is only Labour that has an issue with undesirable elements.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, hyku1147 said:

Unity and autonomy are vital components of a national identity.  

BS. Tribal identity maybe. National? No, dangerous nonsense.

[jayboy]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

Writing a post dripping with sarcarsm doesn't automatically convey superiority or right-ness.

 

The funny thing is, Liddle's comments were exactly what you ascribed to the twitter post to which I linked - he was ranting, whereas the post I linked to had very little in the way of commentary and consisted of merely a (very) long list of facts which more than dispel your suggestion that it is only Labour that has an issue with undesirable elements.

Of course LIddle was "ranting" in a way - but in an amusing and perceptive way unlike the mixture of turgidity and insane obsession you linked to.

 

I can't see anything that was sarcastic in my post.I can see however very clearly that you avoid addressing the issue of the cancer in the Labour Party leadership.To say other parties also have "undesirable elements" is a lame cop out.

[Grouse]

The fact is that The Tories SHOULD be doing much worse than they are. This is down to the fact that everyone knows that Labour are unelectable under Corbyn and Co.

 

Good to see the Lib Dems getting 16%. I think they have been punished enough for the student fees fiasco and should be king maker as long as we have FPTP system

 

See the latest Dateline London on this issue; David Aaronovitch  is excellent.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Grouse

[RuamRudy]

Just now, jayboy said:

Of course LIddle was "ranting" in a way - but in an amusing and perceptive way unlike the mixture of turgidity and insane obsession you linked to.

 

I can't see anything that was sarcastic in my post.I can see however very clearly that you avoid addressing the issue of the cancer in the Labour Party leadership.To say other parties also have "undesirable elements" is a lame cop out.

 

As the majority of the press has the Tories in their pockets, there will never be an even playing field. Therefore the abhorrent facts that exist about the Tories will continue to be suppressed while anti-semitism is indelibly linked to Labour on an almost daily basis in the UK MSM, and therefore in the minds of the many.

 

What is reported in the press is no different to the list on that tweet, except so little of the Tories's nastier side ever reaches the news - I would be happier if our general outrage was as vocal against both parties because they both deserve it.

 

To point the finger at Labour while wilfully ignoring the Tory cases is the lamest of cop outs.

[jayboy]

 
As the majority of the press has the Tories in their pockets, there will never be an even playing field. Therefore the abhorrent facts that exist about the Tories will continue to be suppressed while anti-semitism is indelibly linked to Labour on an almost daily basis in the UK MSM, and therefore in the minds of the many.
 
What is reported in the press is no different to the list on that tweet, except so little of the Tories's nastier side ever reaches the news - I would be happier if our general outrage was as vocal against both parties because they both deserve it.
 
To point the finger at Labour while wilfully ignoring the Tory cases is the lamest of cop outs.

And I thought Rod Liddle’s expression “thick as mince” was over the top hyperbole?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, jayboy said:

 

 

And I thought Rod Liddle’s expression “thick as mince” was over the top hyperbole?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

Surely you have something more substantial than sarcasm or insults to offer? If not, then have a nice day.

[jayboy]

 
Surely you have something more substantial than sarcasm or insults to offer? If not, then have a nice day.

No I don’t because you repeat your gormless comments, ignore points you don’t like and seem unwilling to recognise the cancer of a once decent Labour leadership.Just pathetic bleating that others are just as bad - with evidence garnered from deranged Twitter obsessive.


So if not thick as mince then profoundly dishonest.You choose.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[RuamRudy]

14 minutes ago, jayboy said:

 

 

 

 

No I don’t because you repeat your gormless comments, ignore points you don’t like and seem unwilling to recognise the cancer of a once decent Labour leadership.Just pathetic bleating that others are just as bad - with evidence garnered from deranged Twitter obsessive.


So if not thick as mince then profoundly dishonest.You choose.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

I provided you with a link to a researched and proven list of facts which you initially tried to claim was a rant; now you are trying to decry the collator of those facts as a deranged obsessive - because he created a list? In the interests of fairness, should that label also not similarly be ascribed to the journalists who daily dredge up similar stories about Corbyn et al?

 

That said, I believe that if you read my posts again, you won't find any example of me defending Corbyn or denying any of the allegations made against Labour. So where, then, does the suggestion of dishonesty come in?

[jayboy]

41 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I provided you with a link to a researched and proven list of facts which you initially tried to claim was a rant; now you are trying to decry the collator of those facts as a deranged obsessive - because he created a list? In the interests of fairness, should that label also not similarly be ascribed to the journalists who daily dredge up similar stories about Corbyn et al?

 

That said, I believe that if you read my posts again, you won't find any example of me defending Corbyn or denying any of the allegations made against Labour. So where, then, does the suggestion of dishonesty come in?

If you cannot see the difference from the ridiculous cobbled together hit list you provided and the current scandal of anti Semitism in the Labour Party (which you revealingly attribute to "dredging up" stories), there is really nothing I can say further.

 

I did not accuse you of dishonesty, merely having pointed out it was but one of the options to explain your foolish posts.If it is stupidity or blind prejudice, so be it.

 

I do however agree with you there's no point in continuing this discussion.You have made your position clear.

[nauseus]

3 hours ago, hyku1147 said:

na·tion·al i·den·ti·ty

noun

noun: national identity; plural noun: national identities

1. a sense of a nation as a cohesive whole, as represented by distinctive traditions, culture, and language.

   "his country's lack of an explicit national identity"

 

You are referring to Tribalism.

He was once chief of the Oomiegoolies. . 

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, hyku1147 said:

na·tion·al i·den·ti·ty

noun

noun: national identity; plural noun: national identities

1. a sense of a nation as a cohesive whole, as represented by distinctive traditions, culture, and language.

   "his country's lack of an explicit national identity"

 

You are referring to Tribalism.

I disagree, Great Britain is almost defined by diversity. Various British "tribes" pool a certain amount of sovereignty and share some but not all traditions, mores and customs. This has been so for centuries, millennia even. We have all sorts in our tent but we do integrate at some but not all levels.

 

BTW, Muslims do not fit comfortably in our tent.

 

So, "national identity" is not quite correct. Let me think what  would be a better term ?

 

National peculiarity?

 

I think more things divide us than unite us in a way that differentiates us from others.

 

Humour, talking about the weather, pubs, supporting under dogs, sense of fair play, tolerance to an extent, superiority, snobbery, quiet desperation?

Edited May 6, 2018 by Grouse

[Grouse]

23 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I disagree, Great Britain is almost defined by diversity. Various British "tribes" pool a certain amount of sovereignty and share some but not all traditions, mores and customs. This has been so for centuries, millennia even. We have all sorts in our tent but we do integrate at some but not all levels.

 

BTW, Muslims do not fit comfortably in our tent.

 

So, "national identity" is not quite correct. Let me think what  would be a better term ?

This is good piece

https://placebrandobserver.com/theory/national-identity-imagined-communites/

 

And this is good discussion

 

Edited May 6, 2018 by Grouse

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I disagree, Great Britain is almost defined by diversity. Various British "tribes" pool a certain amount of sovereignty and share some but not all traditions, mores and customs. This has been so for centuries, millennia even. We have all sorts in our tent but we do integrate at some but not all levels.

 

BTW, Muslims do not fit comfortably in our tent.

 

So, "national identity" is not quite correct. Let me think what  would be a better term ?

 

National peculiarity?

 

I think more things divide us than unite us in a way that differentiates us from others.

 

Humour, talking about the weather, pubs, supporting under dogs, sense of fair play, tolerance to an extent, superiority, snobbery, quiet desperation?

And I disagree with almost all of that. A British people emerged over hundreds of years out of several groups but until very recently this horrible

"diverse" word was never uttered to describe them, at least among themselves. This "British" character was shared by a majority of the English, Welsh, Scots and Irish (yes, north and south). These "tribes" had a lot more in common than they had differences and integration was almost complete. Whatever the fighting, jibing and banter between them. there was a common kinship. Now it seems that this kinship is diluted. I think that a "national identity" used to be easy to recognise but now that term seems to be a difficult one for many to define, And that is a shame.   

 

[Grouse]

19 minutes ago, nauseus said:

And I disagree with almost all of that. A British people emerged over hundreds of years out of several groups but until very recently this horrible

"diverse" word was never uttered to describe them, at least among themselves. This "British" character was shared by a majority of the English, Welsh, Scots and Irish (yes, north and south). These "tribes" had a lot more in common than they had differences and integration was almost complete. Whatever the fighting, jibing and banter between them. there was a common kinship. Now it seems that this kinship is diluted. I think that a "national identity" used to be easy to recognise but now that term seems to be a difficult one for many to define, And that is a shame.   

 

I accept that. But we didn't get along by being clones either. People from Glasgow, Newcastle, Sheffield, Cardiff, Chelsea and Penzance were/are radically different but have much more in common than we do with others from other continents. Like Australasia.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I accept that. But we didn't get along by being clones either. People from Glasgow, Newcastle, Sheffield, Cardiff, Chelsea and Penzance were/are radically different but have much more in common than we do with others from other continents. Like Australasia.

I shall be visiting some of these "diverse" areas again later in the month and June and get a better update! 

[JAG]

5 hours ago, nauseus said:

He was once chief of the Oomiegoolies. . 

I thought that the "Oomiegoolies" were a species of birds from Africa, with very short legs and abnormally large testicles?

I seem to recall that they got their names from the anguished cries they emitted on landing...

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, JAG said:

I thought that the "Oomiegoolies" were a species of birds from Africa, with very short legs and abnormally large testicles?

I seem to recall that they got their names from the anguished cries they emitted on landing...

Well, grouse is a bird, innit?