Lettuce Liz then Tetchy Rish! and the battle to replace him

[Stan Hullis]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682246139687362560

Good

 

[EpsomWolf]

Tories campaign against ULEZ in Uxbridge, a cleaner air policy that they have pushed on to all cities and hold their seat by 495 votes. Two faced cunts. Won’t work in the next General Election.

Don’t underestimate how damaging this ULEZ expansion is for Labour.

It’s become a vicious fight to the death and Starmer is looking very cowardly indeed. With such a divisive issue you can’t try and keep both camps sweet and you’d’ve thought he’d have learned from Corbyn and Brexit.

The ULEZ expansion is still too localised to overwhelm Labour nationally but Khan is doing some serious damage and Starmer is looking very wet too.

It’s not a good look at all.

 

[Tredman]

What should he do?

 

[EpsomWolf]

I’d like him to say what he thinks and pin his colours to a mast.

He’s between a rock and a hard place but fudging the issue makes him look weak, and as a leader who has that accusation hanging over him it doesn’t do him or Labour any favours.

 

[sycophantia]

Yeah it's not a good look in a cost of living crisis that those who can least afford it will be the worst impacted. Older 'polluting vehicles' have only a tiny effect of the overall problem and they'll mostly be gone in 10 years.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

Our glorious leader reflects on a bad night and vows to double down on what he is doing now. Twat.

 

[Tredman]

I’d like him to say what he thinks and pin his colours to a mast.

He’s between a rock and a hard place but fudging the issue makes him look weak, and as a leader who has that accusation hanging over him it doesn’t do him or Labour any favours.

Not sure what the answer is other than to be pragmatic - older cars harm children, it's a fact, they need to be discouraged in densely urban areas. Not sure whether Uxbridge counts as dense urban but the constituents there are not painting themselves in a good light - first they give us Boris and now they vote on a single issue.

 

[Del Woppio]

If those that voted green or libdem would've voted Labour, then the tories would be out of Uxbridge.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

If those that voted green or libdem would've voted Labour, then the tories would be out of Uxbridge.

Maybe Labour should make a progressive alliance with such parties?

 

[EpsomWolf]

Not sure what the answer is other than to be pragmatic - older cars harm children, it's a fact, they need to be discouraged in densely urban areas. Not sure whether Uxbridge counts as dense urban but the constituents there are not painting themselves in a good light - first they give us Boris and now they vote on a single issue.

Yes, but I don’t think the electorate overall is as nuanced as we’d like them to be.

The specific arguments around older cars harming children (or global warming, or…) have been debated and by and large won, but it’s peoples pockets where the votes are won and lost.

The kickback against Ulez is very interesting to watch and Labour have to be careful as they are associated with this expansion. With the roll-out of electric and further punitive measures people are hurting. If the perception is it’s a ‘lefty’ thing and it’s coming your way soon then no well-worn debates about dirty diesels will counteract that.

I agree with the intentions but very much like Just Stop Oil, annoyingly it’s playing into the Tories hands.

 

[pr0sl0]

I think it's overblown (for now). Vast, vast majority of people who have it as a deciding issue wouldn't vote Labour even in the current situation, and for those who are swing voters it's more a reflection of the specifics of London. Small but passionate anti-LTN movement has globbed onto ULEZ expansion as its new cause, social media is full of scaremongering, and local media like the Evening Standard have been going HARD on the end-of-the-world predictions. Clear majorities support ULEZ (and LTNs, for that matter) across Greater London, but there are wealthier pockets on the outer edges, where it bleeds into the stockbroker belt, where the panic has had more resonance and where Labour usually struggle anyway. I'm taking it the Tories narrowly edging it as down to a combination of wealthy older voters who drive everywhere worried that their 2015 Range Rover is going to be expropriated by Angela Rayner + a general antipathy to Sadiq Khan, whose policies tend to (rightly) prioritise issues in the inner boroughs (and who, for some people, has the temerity to be Muslim - including a lot of Hindu voters up in NW London who have swung behind the Tories very strongly over the last decade after the party made a concerted effort to appeal to them, including vocal support for Modi).

In a general I think it falls - turnout will be higher and the general anti-Tory tide will overwhelm these local issues. That said, it does represent a really clear warning for the next decade: we have to do a lot of climate stuff very, very quickly, but Labour's already retreating on it. If the inconveniences and challenges don't come with good messaging or effective compensation, there are going to be anti-ULEZ-like groups popping up in every town and city, and when they're that ubiquitous they will swing generals.

 

[Tredman]

I think it's overblown (for now). Vast, vast majority of people who have it as a deciding issue wouldn't vote Labour even in the current situation, and for those who are swing voters it's more a reflection of the specifics of London. Small but passionate anti-LTN movement has globbed onto ULEZ expansion as its new cause, social media is full of scaremongering, and local media like the Evening Standard have been going HARD on the end-of-the-world predictions. Clear majorities support ULEZ (and LTNs, for that matter) across Greater London, but there are wealthier pockets on the outer edges, where it bleeds into the stockbroker belt, where the panic has had more resonance and where Labour usually struggle anyway. I'm taking it the Tories narrowly edging it as down to a combination of wealthy older voters who drive everywhere worried that their 2015 Range Rover is going to be expropriated by Angela Rayner + a general antipathy to Sadiq Khan, whose policies tend to (rightly) prioritise issues in the inner boroughs (and who, for some people, has the temerity to be Muslim - including a lot of Hindu voters up in NW London who have swung behind the Tories very strongly over the last decade after the party made a concerted effort to appeal to them, including vocal support for Modi).

In a general I think it falls - turnout will be higher and the general anti-Tory tide will overwhelm these local issues. That said, it does represent a really clear warning for the next decade: we have to do a lot of climate stuff very, very quickly, but Labour's already retreating on it. If the inconveniences and challenges don't come with good messaging or effective compensation, there are going to be anti-ULEZ-like groups popping up in every town and city, and when they're that ubiquitous they will swing generals.

Spot on

 

[Tredman]

Listening to LBC and an Uxbridge resident trying to say its because the Tory candidate supported their view on HS2. HS2 which is decided by the Tory government.

 

[Paddingtonwolf]

If those that voted green or libdem would've voted Labour, then the tories would be out of Uxbridge.

Or indeed the stupid cunts who put a cross next to Fox, L.

I would concede they would be less likely to vote Labour though!

 

[darlowolf64]

If those that voted green or libdem would've voted Labour, then the tories would be out of Uxbridge.

Yep, frustrating. Loads of Green and Labour tactically voted for Lib Den in Somerton but they didn't vote tactically in Uxbridge. People need to get on board with ABT in the GE.

Tories going on about "oh look, Labour finished 5th in Somerton, the voters are making a point" but ignoring the winner who even thanked the Red and Green switch voters who voted for her to remove the tories

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

Yep, frustrating. Loads of Green and Labour tactically voted for Lib Den in Somerton but they didn't vote tactically in Uxbridge. People need to get on board with ABT in the GE.

Labour need to buy into that too.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

AAV's view.

Yesterday Labour should have won the by-election in Boris Johnson's former constituency of Uxbridge and South Ruislip, but they fell short by a few hundred votes.

Gloating Tories cited public opposition to expansion of the ULEZ (Ultra Low Emissions Zone) as the decisive factor, but that's obviously not the full story.

Of course Labour's clueless leadership mindlessly adopted the framing of their political opponents, with figures like Angela Rayner and Steve Reed offloading blame for the by-election defeat onto Labour's London Mayor Sadiq Khan.

Yes, ULEZ expansion played a role in the by-election after the Tory candidate deliberately tried to turn the vote into an imaginary referendum on the policy, but you'd be a fool to think it was the only factor, especially since the ULEZ charges only actually apply to commercial vehicles and the oldest, most polluting private cars.

How about the fact that Labour has spent the last three years insulting, abusing, purging, and betraying their own activist base?

Could a few dozen more activists and canvassers on the ground have convinced a few hundred of the 54% who didn't even bother to vote to back Labour instead?

How about the way the London Region rode roughshod over the local constituency party to select the candidate and run the campaign?

Did that play a role in Labour only achieving a six point improvement in vote share over what local lad Ali Milani achieved against the actual Prime Minister back in 2019?

How about Keir Starmer's recent U-turn on supporting much-needed electoral reform to make votes fairer and more proportional?

In the end the number of people who protest voted for the pro-PR Lib-Dems and Greens far exceeded the few hundred votes Labour needed to turn the by-election in their favour.

And what about Keir Starmer spending the days before the by-election bragging that Labour wouldn't repeal the grotesque Tory two-child policy that's driven a million British kids into poverty, purely to appeal to the kind of economically illiterate fiscal conservative who hasn't had enough of austerity ruination yet?

Could Starmer's callous and infuriating child-starving austerity rhetoric have kept just a few hundred potential Labour voters away from the polls?

Of course Starmer and his goons aren't going to admit that they've made any mistakes, because that would require humility and self-reflection.

But in their desperation to scratch around for someone else to blame, they've decided to follow the Tory attack line that the fault lies squarely with their party colleague, the Labour Mayor of London!

The stupidity on display is absolutely astonishing.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Many moons ago he was worth reading. That's the ravings of an absolute crank.

 

[Elephant Pyjamas]

His language is strong, the points he makes (the 2 child standpoint, the electoral reform, blaming Khan) are fair.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It's Tory territory, you aren't going to win them all.

This was at least equally as important:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682336341122592768

You can't take him seriously when he writes like that, it's why the likes of Richard Littlejohn just come across terribly, only from the other side.