Analysis Announcement Breaking News

Johnson survives no-confidence vote – but does worse than May, who was gone months later

Boris Johnson has survived tonight’s no-confidence vote by Conservative MPs – but more than 41% voted against him, meaning that Johnson has lost the support of a huge percentage of his back-bench MPs.

The result, 211-148, was considerably worse in percentage and straight numerical terms than his predecessor Theresa May achieved in her own no-confidence vote – and she was gone mere months later. Johnson’s percentages were also worse than those managed by John Major and Margaret Thatcher, too – both of whom were soon history.

Despite the obvious, Johnson’s mouthpieces have tried to claim that he won ‘handsomely’. If there was a functioning opposition with an actual opposition leader, ‘Bozo’ would already be toast.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. This is a bad outcome for the Tories.
    I’m quite happy for Boris to remain in office right up-to the point when the Tories lose at the next GE.

    1. Carrie Antoinette
      Now what was the last thought that passed through the minds of the Aristocracy as their heads fell into the bread baskets
      If you were going to Bake a revolution what are the ingredients
      We are pretty close with the Internal report, Red Tories working for worst Conservative government since 1979 as opposed to the best Socialist government since 1945
      Orf with their heads

      1. @Doug

        It’s not the first time. Ever noticed how Kinnock became a millionaire a few months after quitting the leadership? Ever wondered why the Kinnock family got all those rewards?

        …the Kinnock’s multi-million-pound earnings from EU allowances, wages and pension entitlements over a 15-year period. Their salaries and perks included: A total of £775,000 in wages for Mrs Kinnock and £1.85m for her husband, adding up to £2,625,000; Allowances for Mrs Kinnock’s staff and office costs of £2.9m; A £64,564 “entertainment allowance” for Lord Kinnock; A total of five publicly-funded pensions, worth £4.4m, allowing them to retire on £183,000 a year; A housing allowance that allowed them both to claim accommodation costs even though, as a married couple, they lived in the same house in the Belgian capital between 1995 and 2004…

        The table is tilted, the game is rigged.

      2. NVLA
        Remember Kinnock junior and his wife after 2017 GE
        That was Comedy Gold
        Ohhhhhhhh fuck, was what they were thinking

  2. If he were capable of acknowledging his own frailties a classicist like Johnson would recognize this as the ultimate in Pyrrhic victories – he survives to fight another day but is now so badly weakened as to make a lame duck look the picture of health and strength.

    1. Yeah, sweating away on Brazillian beaches and a little island in the sun. Plotting away in the saunas. Sickening, revolting stuff. “Beppo, drive me to Southside, my dearest honey”.

  3. ‘Big Dog Down.
    Big Dog Out.
    As Lightweight Labour offers nothing but crumbs.
    Some Tory Rotten Apples circle about.’
    Hope Corbyn stands as an Independent then we have a list of 620 of his Independents but don’t stand against the 30 or so Left Labour MPs.
    We could still have the last laugh and make history!

    1. You can dream all you like but I doubt that Corbyn will even stand at the next general election. Why would he take the risk?

      1. You appear to have an obsession about Jeremy Corbyn. You never miss a chance to insult him. Do you have a personal grudge? Did he step on your toes? Please don’t tell us that there are any principles involved. Never once in months of comments have you suggested that you believe in anything political. Just month after month of sniping at someone who would only feel sorry for you if he knew what you were saying about him.

      2. bevin – Perhaps you are the one with the obsession, I was simply responding to Bazza’s comment.

  4. Well at least it stops a unknown psychopath from taking office whilst the biggist nutter from Surrey realises that hes once again waiting for a bloody miracle to get into drowning street by default.I never would have believed that the labour party could produce so many phycopaths in one bunch of misfits ever to enter parliament.Lets hope that they go no further because the country needs a change from Tory rule.

  5. “Starmer says voters now face choice between united Labour and divided Tory party.” – Guardian

    He can’t stop lying can he?

    Wakefield, where all 16 members of the executive decided to resign en masse, in protest at candidate imposition from London, they were all united, I guess , but not in the way he meant it? Does he think the membership would re-elect him, knowing what they know now; would they fall for his 10 pledges again he reckons? And does he think the SCG would vote full confidence in him were he in similar PLP difficulties? Hmm?

    As for Johnson, he only got just over half of the party’s MPs to back him in the 2019 leadership contest, he was always a controversial pick and never universally popular with Tory MPs even when he was Foreign Secretary. Theresa May repeatedly couldn’t get her Brexit deal through the HoC with the extension date ticking down – so quite different.

    You have to go back to John Major in 1995, he defeated a leadership challenge and stayed until 1997 for the GE. He lost that election but Starmer’s Labour pose nowhere near the threat Blair’s Labour did back then.

    Starmer-led Labour only got 35%, against the Tories’ 30% in the recent Locals . Abysmal stuff, after 12 years of Tory misrule and nonstop Partygate headlines and no hostile media coverage for Labour. This is the truth,however much the Guardian, and Starmer fans like SteveH want to spin it differently, New Labour 2.0 aren’t doing well enough.

    1. Andy – I guess we’ll see who has been proved right when the results are in after the next GE.

      1. The fact the viciously anti-Corbyn & anti-left establishment media want him out and Starmer in, tells you all you need to know about Starmer.

        There was a crooked man, and he walked a crooked mile.

    2. I would love to know where this “United Labour Party” is hiding.
      On the current showing, it would be reasonable to think that with a typical Labour right manifesto, the levels of enthusiasm in the electorate could possibly plumb new depths of disinterest.
      The Labour strategy of targeting the “wrong” voters, and trying to appeal to disgruntled Tory supporters will be on very thin ice if Johnson is replaced by someone reasonably presentable.
      Starmer will then be faced with a media onslaught he is not capable of dealing with.

      1. Ludus, True enough but who would that be? Truss, Patel, Sunak?

      2. In the 19GE the working class (C2DE) vote for Johnson’s Tories was 15% higher than it was for Corbyn’s Labour

  6. Good point Andy Labour in nintey seven was a labour party not a Tory tribute act and a divided one at that whatever the guardian says when the evidence is for all to see.A Labour leader bought and paid for with over a quarter of a million members gone and the labour party effectively bankrupt.Divided Two partys both Torys and one still in waiting for a proper police investigation into his partytime antics in Durham.

    1. Joseph okeefe

      Despite the already evident Blairite agenda eg.scrapping Clause IV, Labour did have positive policies in 1997, policies worth voting for – mainly due to Blair inheriting John Smith’s legacy policies: HoL reform, European Convention on Human Rights incorporation + Social chapter ; Scottish and Welsh devolution; a Freedom of information Bill was promised(though that came later in 2001 iirc). Even a possible referendum on changing the voting system was in the manifesto, though upon winning the PLP changed its mind having won a landslide.

      Reeves and Starmer have a few fiscal tweaks and vague promises that SteveH pretends is full programme for govt. Reeves actually attacked Sunak’s windfall tax and other proposals demanding to know where’s the money coming from ?. Reeve’s is attacking from the right! Most of the shad cab are right-wingers who’d reject 1997’s manifesto as too radical.

      1. I don’t recall ever claiming that Labour has a full program of policies yet, Why would we when we are still 2yrs away from a general election.

      2. SteveH

        Starmer has been leader for over two years and nobody has a clue why he’s in politics, or why he wants power. And the GE is likely next year, year 4 of a govt, is quite normal. The fact Johnson can’t be challenged again for one year from this day, under their rules, increases the likelihood of an election next May.

        Starmer has abandoned all his leadership winning pledges and removed the whip from his predecessor, as you know and we’re expected to act like that is perfectly normal behaviour?

        To deliberately trick so many LP members, members who reluctantly put their trust in him, over RLB, only because of those pledges. There is something lacking in him and it’s called a conscience.

      3. Andy I was a councillor on starmers patch in Surrey and was motivated by Smith who was typical labour…ie social democrat or confused socialist.But be in no doubt that we had a bellyfull of the conservative and unionist party.We stood behind Blair who was a strong leader but sadly a Tory and after falling for the “Bush bullshit” became a enabler for the US war machine.I actually spoke to Blair twice at leas before he became leader and although far more a gentlemen than the oaf Brown
        ,I had the opinion that he was being dazzsled by the glitterati and would soon fall into the Westminster desease…..I was suprised near the end of my labour days to see him morph into a very sick man who would have benefited from phyciatric help.We must be in no doubt though that this knight from Surrey is far more dangerous than Blair who for all is faults came to the labour party by the usual channels with a push from Cherie who has always been the boss.and the labour connection.

    2. Reply to Joseph O Keefe
      Labour in 1997 under Blair wasn’t a “Labour party.” It was “new labour” a right of centre party which abandoned traditional labour values and sneered at people like me calling us cloth cap socialists. It didn’t take most of us very long to see Tony Blair for the money grubbing hard right warmonger he was (and still is), so please stop trying to rewrite history.

      1. Smartboy

        That’s true. There were already signs back then 1994-1997, but centrism and ‘New Labour’ were seen as a fresh political experiment and people were absolutely so very sick of Major’s Tories. Blair cleverly used John Prescott to keep most of the left on side, and he had left-wingers in key positions , like Robin Cook. For unlike Starmer, Blair was smart enough to know he couldn’t win without the left + union supporters. Try to find Blair’s 1996 conference speech attacking the Tories, it was George Galloway type stuff really punchy. Blair was a supreme actor back then, whereas Starmer is an empty suit and can’t even ‘fake it till he makes it’ to No.10.

        Nobody could’ve known the turn to the right New Labour would take when in power… They lost millions of votes in each election and only barely hung on in 2005’s GE because the Tories picked the dreadful Michael Howard to lead them. Though don’t expect the Blairite revisionists to acknowledge that New Labour quickly became unpopular. And Corbyn was the first leader, in 2017 GE, to show real popular support again, like 1997’s.

      2. Andy – A short lived popularity that come the 19GE had simply evaporated.

      3. Typical of you smarmyboy ,and what makes you a expert on internal labour and what was going on inside the labour party.We got rid of the Torys after twenty miserable years and saved the labour party from political obscurity and pushed millions into the NHS and slowed down the inevitably of a lottery society…You would disagree with me on anything because you cant help being a Keyboard warrior and mr crocodile tears whilst supporting the Starmer labour party.with your subs.
        ..Many of us worked night and day and worked our shoe leather as activist dedicated to the working class and a decent society..I really find it difficult to believe your silly childish tantrums .as I left the Blair years behind and the fundamental political reasons behind me by walking away from a council seat in Surrey.that had always been conservative before I took the seat in a rock solid Tory town.You may have a personal grudge but I think it is you re.writing history .by criticising me for being true to my beliefs in a fair and just society.Now get back to your trans lobby bunker smartboy you arrogant twit…!

      4. Yes Andy We were stupid back then to think that a self serving hypocrite and war monger like Tony Blair could ever be a genuine Labour Leader. The purpose of my post was to point this out to Joseph O’Keefe who refers to new Labour as “real labour not a Tory Tribute act” in his 12.11 am post.
        He goes on in a later post to claim he was motivated by the late John Smith to be a Labour councillor.
        John Smith served as shadow chancellor under the ultra right wing Kinnock and although he adopted a softly softly approach ( as opposed to Kinnock’s gung-ho methods)to “reform” in the party he managed ,during his short tenure, to limit the power of the Trade Union movement within it. Therefore it seems likely had would have continued on this road if he had lived longer. Not much to motivate a socialist there.

      5. Reply to Joseph O Keefe at 6.38am
        Clearly you are unable to contest the validity of my post – that new labour was not a “real” Labour party and that Tony Blair was /is a moneygrubbing warmonger- so you have responded (as you always do when you can’t win the argument) with name calling and personal insults. What puzzles me is why a self proclaimed socialist would bother to defend New Labour?

    3. Joseph – Where did you pluck your 250k figure from. Jeremy lost 20% (95,420) of the membership between Nov17 and Nov19.
      As for your claimed diversity of opinion in the Tory party, have you forgotten how many MPs Boris got rid of for having the timerity to disagree with him.

      1. *yawns*

        Again with the lost. Starting with 150k to leaving a legacy of 430k IS NOT a loss, you complete fucking DOLT.

        Still trying to insult people’s far superior intelligence that keef has the same amount of members now that Corbyn had in December 2019.

        And then making out that the reason keef wants work for fuck all staffers iis ‘because Corbyn spending was ‘x”… rather than the truth that keef spunked money on those what plotted, and the consequent haemorrhaging of income from membership from those he harassed and those who detest the greasy, torier-than-tory slimeball.

        The more you keep insulting my (and others’) intelligence, the more I’m gonna tell you what o think of you; so you either desist with your fucking incessant bullshit and consequent whining, or continue and accept the consequences of your pathetic, infantile bollocks.

        Your choice, retard.

      2. Toffee – Yet more flatulence from you. I’ve quoted the membership figures from Labour Party election returns and the NEC’s latest monthly report, do you have any credible evidence that supports your contrary ‘assertions’?

    4. I do find it odd that the media haven’t used Starmer and Red Legs’ misconceptions about issues to assist blowjob during his time of woe, unless…

      1. Steven, unless they want Starmer to win. Stick to being a kierboard warrior.

      2. Wobbly – “unless they want Starmer to win.”

        Surely that would be a good thing, wouldn’t it?
        I want to see a Labour government in power, don’t you?
        Labour being in perpetual opposition isn’t going to help anyone apart from the rich and powerful, is it?
        Corbyn’s Labour chose to hide from the press instead of getting out there to consolidate the advances we made in 2017 and look where that got him and the party, the worst defeat since god knows when.

  7. If you exclude the “payroll vote” of ministers, PPSs etc. (160 people), Bojo managed to get just 25% of the backbenchers (51 v 148)

    1. Dave

      They keep saying that . But it was a private vote, i.e. his most loyal ministers could’ve secretly betrayed him had they so wished.

      The fact is, the Tory party has a lot more independent minded MPs than Labour party does. Labour’s right has stifled dissent and purged the left even more than the Tory party has with its various factions.

      Johnson was put there by a faction – as a Brexiter – and they tolerated him pushing through a hard Brexit. Labour MPs wouldn’t similarly tolerate a left-wing leader.

      The sad truth is, the Tory party is more open to diversity of opinion among its MPs than the parliamentary Labour party is.

      1. Have you forgotten how many MPs Boris got rid of for having the timerity to disagree with him.

      2. SteveH

        No, I haven’t forgotten. But they were critical days and decisions for the Tory party. Those MPs chose to vote against their own govt knew the consequences.

        If only Corbyn had been half as ruthless, he’d have had rid of Streetings, Hodges, Manns, Austins et al making his life hell far earlier, plus introduced ‘open selection’ to enable CLPs to remove the other RW careerists and time servers hogging seats. They would’ve been out by fair democratic means, with no argument.

        Even without those Tories they removed the whip from, their party is still more diverse in allowing different opinions than Starmer’s edict issuing outfit is. Imagine Johnson telling his MPs they, as elected representatives, aren’t allowed to ever question NATO’s role. It’s dictatorial.

  8. Has wee prick forgotten what keef did to an MP who had the temerity to OPPOSE the government, but instead chose to vote against a single-line whip to ABSTAIN (again).

    Keefs’ ABSTAINED on more votes than Corbyn WON against a (slightly) more competent government than this current one.

    If the rags were to put in some ”dark horse’ ministerial type, one at least regarded (in the Westminster bubble) as semi-competent (little tommy twopencetwat, for example) keefs’ had it.

    Small wonder wee gobshite wants Boris to remain in post.

    PS. I await the inevitable torpor of: but what about liz truss? – well I did mention someone regarded as at least semi-competent, but even that monumental thicko’s only too capable of holding her own against the serial abstentionist and dullard.

  9. This was slipped out on the day Johnson is in trouble from Byline Times. Coincidence that it was lost in the reporting and commenting of the Tories confidnce vote? No I don’t think so, but that’s a side issue.

    The journalist Max Colbert has been working with Paul-Olivier Dehay, a lead investigator on the Cambride Analyical scandal and the new team he set up The Eyeballs EN, to investigate and expose what’s behind the Labour data breach. As Colbert says, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

  10. Latin America News – Lopez Obrador, President of Mexico, has announced that he will not attend the “Summit of the Americas” because of “the policy of exclusion and of not respecting the sovereignty of differing countries”. Now, in diplomatic language, that is a very firm statement.

  11. Looks like Ben Timberley is getting too close to some very revealing information.

    1. Without intending to ‘Godwin’Their definition of ‘regional directors’ is uncannily similar to the job description of the nazi Gauleiters

      So sue me.

  12. The difference between Blair and the current leader of
    the opposition is that there was at least a toleration of
    left wing MPs like Corbyn. I dont recall anyone being
    threatened in the same way as left wing MPs are
    now threatened – for example over criticising NATO.

    Further back – oldies like me remember Wilson who
    was not thin-skinned over criticism and had an answer
    without being pre-prepared with some anodyne pap.
    Maybe the difference was that Wilson had brains –
    even if you disagreed with him on some issues .?

    1. HolbyFanMw

      That lack of tolerance and Starmer’s authoritarian style of leadership, the narrow-mindedness , is also really bad for democracy and new ideas/ political thinking in the UK. It’s an admission by Labour’s right-wing that they know they can’t win any internal debate, so they’ll have to try to close democratic debate down. Remember Evans’ words, “Representative democracy should as far as possible be abolished in the Party”.

      Such an approach may make sense for the army, but it’s outrageous trying to run a political party like that.

      Alan Johnson, an obnoxious Blairite if ever there was one – a man who was himself parachuted into a safe seat that he had no connection to, uses language when talking about the left that if you applied to any other group in society, would be classed as holding extremely bigoted views. He presents the left as some sort of mortal danger to society that has to be resisted like a deadly virus or an invading army. Similarly, Tom Watson called the left variously :a rabble, dogs,Trots, thugs; cranks, anti-Semites..The left are the only group in society for which ‘othering’ and abusive discrimination is not only permitted in the media, but encouraged.

      The Tory party has its factions, but I don’t remember one group resorting to caricatures and abusive and exaggerated apocalyptic threats. When these Blairites paint the majority wing of their own party i.e. socialists, as thugs and extremists, who represent a mortal danger to society, how is that supposed to encourage people to vote Labour?

      1. Remember Tebbit, the Monday Club, League of empire loyalists. Nasty, ignorant although highly briefed by Oxbridge and the LSE, vicious bastards.

    2. Holby fan its strange you mention Harold Wilson as I first saw him and shook his hand along with hundreds of other supporters in Rawtenstall Rossendale lanc in the sixtys.
      .He was what I would call the first media savy mp and he later became PM in the labour years ….but although a different man to Tony Blair I always thought that they were similar in working the media .
      I did notice that Harolds accent became more localised.when speaking to a working class audience This was the days of the big beasts of the labour party and the left wing firebrands its a shame that they have gone now because in the labour party this plant starmer could never have got away with his and his misfits behaviour. Harold Wilson was the first modern politician and whether thats a good thing I don’t really know.although I am sure that the labour party would never have sunk as low as this under Harold Wilson who like many in the labour party had respect for traditional working class people and the power of the unions.and recognised the working class unlike todays mps and little helpers..Although I am angry with the labour party I occasionally slip into a little bit of useless nostalgia for the real labour party.

  13. Yes Joseph – I saw Wilson giving speeches
    several times before he became PM and he
    impressed all who saw him.

    Each time was to a young University audience
    and he was ready with a quick answer even to
    hecklers. Even with Blair I cannot remember
    hecklers being tolerated! Remember the
    elderly man being man-handled from a
    meeting – I think he was a holocaust survivor?

    Enough nostalgia ..

    To Andy – you are spot on about failure of
    democracy ..

    Its not just failure of democracy either – its
    failure of human progress for
    ANY subject benefits from discussion and
    argument. Science and Technology in
    particular progress by means of the concept
    of “standing on Giants Soldiers” where good
    ideas are examined and pulled apart ..

    PS The excerpt from (I think?) Not the
    Andrew Marr Show” featuring Ben Timberley
    is now blacked out .. I cannot watch that
    program – is there a YouTube version? I
    think I’ve asked this before – sorry! Am
    happy to watch it all ..

    1. HolbyFanMw

      Can you imagine the media’s new so-called Labour ‘Big Beast’ Wes Streeting debating a real Big Beast like Tony Benn?

      He’d make Wes look like a very small creature indeed. That ever smirking, empty-headed gobshite Jess Phillips likewise, she was on BBC 2 politics show today.

      I can’t stand Starmer or his frontbench. It’s worse than the Tories for me, insomuch as, you expect crap from the Tories, Starmer’s Labour keep surprising with how dreadful they are. I fully supported then too under Corbyn, solely because of him and a few around him.

  14. Yes the link to NTAMS still works – but is now
    back up-thread.

    Yes what they are doing is disgraceful –
    however in some ways they appear to be
    repeating the same tune with the exception
    that they are – er – “a bit confused” as to
    what the law is.

    But oh the irony .. as they themselves
    point out.

    What does anger me is that the mandarins
    are now comparing Johnson with Corbyn.

  15. There is evidence(emails) floating around on Twitter, the veracity of which I am not certain of (?) that seems to indicate, with some alleging it – that Skwawkbox critic Paul Mason (he called it Crankbox) is acting like some sort of covert intelligence operative; akin to a Spycop, collecting information on the left and left-wing groups and left-wing MPs and seeking to discredit left-wing figures and organisations.

    If they are verified, it’s outrageous that such a person is trying to become an MP. If verified he’s deceived everyone.

    1. Mason has tweeted in the last few hours and he blamed the email hack-and-leak on… wait for it… the Russians!!! Even though he claims it’s still being investigated?

      Predictable much?

      Anyways, I guess this seems to confirm the leaks are genuine tho, wow!

      1. SteveH

        Inaccurate in what sense?

        Why would someone generate such a diagram that shows the relationships between individuals and groups? It looks sinister. And taken together with the email talking about deplatforming and denying revenue, appears doubly sinister.

        Surprised Novara aren’t picking up on it tbh. as they are mentioned as is Corbyn and Sultana and Jess Barnard. someone joked below that Owen Jones will be furious he didn’t make the list of ‘dangerous’ lefties lol.

        I can’t verify any of it as I stated. It’s as it is. but the fact Mason seems to be confirming he’s been alerted to unauthorised access to his secure email account, suggests that the stuff could well be genuine.

      2. Andy – “Inaccurate in what sense”

        Is there more than one?

      3. SteveH

        Is there more than one?

        No idea? But if whoever it is who gained email account access chose to take the whole lot, there may be much more damning stuff. Just those two together look highly damaging. Mason got into a spat with Aaron Maté’s investigative outfit : The Grayzone, Mason was accused of taking a pro-war position over Ukraine and trying to dress it up as pro-peace.

        Mason wrote a piece in the guardian arguing we should simply “bury the paranoia and move on” (Stella Rimington should stop fuelling paranoid fantasies about Jeremy Corbyn, G2, 17 October). Arguing spying on protest groups and politicians had ceased. Easy for him to argue, I guess?

      4. Mason? Oh my goodness. After he’d experienced Andrew Pierce repeatedly wiping the floor with him, he surely can’t be expecting anyone to take him seriously.

      5. Andy – Did Mason really get into a spat with Aaron Maté? If so, then then just goes to show what a fool he is. Maté is meticulous, clear sighted and articulate. He has testified to UN committees and his insights have been well received. Maté would tie him in knots.

      6. Whoops. That’s what comes of being long in the tooth and trying to watch the football and comment on Skwawkbox at the same time. It was the useless Maguire (not the footballing one) who was regularly bested by Pierce, not the useless Mason. Peas from the same pod though.
        Did anyone else think that Kane was offside for the penalty?

      7. goldbach
        Yes to Kane being offside
        But then again I was born in Scotland, so every Englishman is offside the moment they walk on the pitch

  16. Just seen Paul Masons “net” – beyond
    belief and asking for parody!

    However I do not “do” twitter and
    keep getting cut off at an interesting
    point of discussion…

  17. If I was in Wakefield I would vote for Chris Jones from The Northern Independence Party.
    He’s from a Wakefield mining family and wants the public ownership of energy and local buses.
    And Lightweight Right Wing Labour can’t even commit to this!
    Perhaps as someone once said Right Wing Labour “Promotes camera obscura ideology when we need to turn the camera the right way up.”

      1. J.L. Partners
        NEW: J.L. Partners poll of 501 Wakefield adults in @thesundaytimes
        Lab: 48% (+8 on 2019)
        Con: 28% (-19)
        Green: 8% (new)
        Lib Dem: 7% (+3)
        Reform: 3% (-3)

  18. Whoo-kin-hoo.

    That’s despite keef – NOT because of him. No glory in retaking a seat that should never have been lost.

    And the reason it was lost is because it was 66% leave. Keefs’ shithousery seen to that, so it’s rather pathetic to bang the keef drum now that brexit is done and keef sold you gullible morons out the second he shithoused his way to the leadership.

    Fancy being conned not just once, but TWICE, by smarmer? 🤦

    Fancy being conned TWICE by smarmer AND STILL cheerleading for him? 🤡

    As you do.

    What’s the polls for Tiverton looking like? Seems to me that both keef & the libtards are gonna repeat their chesham show, there.

    Which will demonstrate that keefs’ made ZERO progress if he can’t take a seat where his party has been the main opposition to the rags.

    And especially if/when he loses second place there…And then of course, theres the possibility he could lose his deposit – just like chesham. (And you’d STILL call that progress)

    …Which will make your constant prattling on aboutvtusc & deposits look pretty fucking dumb ( just like everything else you pipe up about)

    As I said. No glory in retaking a seat that was always labour until keef & fatberg et al sold the nation out.

    despite keef – NOT because of him. ..

    *Awaits one of the many ‘stock replies* to be wheeled out 😴*

    1. I’d never heard of J L Partners. Seems like it is an organisation created by a fellow who was a senior adviser to Theresa May (probably after Johnson’s coup). The plusses and minuses in the data that has been quoted don’t add up. 3% has gone missing. Mind you, they couldn’t ever get the numbers to add up when he worked for May.

      1. If you check the source data then you’ll probably find the 3% that you say is missing from the abbreviated twitter report.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: