OT: "Terrible Shortages of Everything" on the way

[Cursitor Doom]

Which will, of course, be erroneously blamed on Brexit. When that happens, you can be a smart arse and put others right with a few pertinent facts:

[alan_m]

All the Chinese made crap in pound shops seems to be getting through without problems :)

[newshound]

Typical media clickbait hyperbole. The reality will just be some irritation and inconvenience.

Had to be amused by the Daily Mail describing Batley and Spen as a "wafer-thin" majority, at 51:49. In such contrast with the Decisive Brexit at 52:48.

[Andy Burns]

Did anyone notice any bad effect from the Evergiven blockage?

[newshound]

Lots of people, I am sure; but only the wholesalers would be able to tie it to Evergreen.

[Dave Plowman (News]

They were rather quiet about the Conservative share of the vote dropping.

[nightjar]

A global shortage of available shipping containers is down to Covid-19 and is explained well here:

However, we will also be experiencing shortages due to there not being enough LGV drivers and, as a lot of our lorry drivers came from Eastern Europe, Brexit is a significant factor in that.

[Cursitor Doom]

Did anyone notice that the losing side graciously accepted the outcome of the vote, though? Totally unlike what happened with Brexit.

[Andrew]

Shortages ?

Will that include lies, humbug and political connivance ?

[charles]

The losing side will get another chance at the next election - in 3 years time. Not quite the same with Brexit,

[Spike]

Did they mention that the Labour share dropped even further?

A once-in-a-generation referendum has that sort of effect, except in Scotland, apparently.

[Cursitor Doom]

The perfect outcome for the Conservatives. Not quite enough of an embarrasment to de-throne Starmer, so Labour go into the next GE with a lame duck leader.

Ah! The old double-standards again. Well spotted, Spike.

[Chris Hogg]

Labour vote down by 7.4%; Conservative vote down by 1.6%. Labour were lucky not to lose. Hardly a vote of confidence in Starmer or justification for his claim that 'Labour is back'.

[JNugent]

The winning candidate did not get 51% of the vote (or anywhere near that figure) at B&S.

The second-running candidate did not get 49% of the vote either. There were fourteen candidates.

In the 2016 Referendum, there were only two "candidates".

<checks result online>

At B&S, the first five scored:

13,296 0.38% Labour 12,973 0.37% Conservative 5,624 0.16% Workers' Party (Galloway) 1,254 0.04% Lib-Dem 816 0.02% Yorkshire

The total number of votes (including all nine other candidates) was 34,920.

Rounded to integers, Labour got 38% and the Conservatives got 37%.

That is indeed a smaller margin than the difference between the winners an the losers in the 2016 Referendum.

[JNugent]

Good point.

Even the Labour Party accepted Hartlepool without demur.

[newshound]

They said the margin. That is the gap between the first place and the second place; the turnout and other candidates are irrelevant. It is indeed smaller than the Brexit margin, but not by a huge amount. And the voters get another go soon.

[alan_m]

Wasn't in mainly garden furniture and BBQs?

[charles]

at least they won't go into the election with a Crypto-communist leader. That's why the Conservatives gained so amny seats.

>

[Tim Streater]

Leader? You cheapen the word. Jezza had no leadership qualities at all.

[Cursitor Doom]

"Soon" is subjective, though. I don't think 3 years will seem like 'soon' to a Tory voter who will have to endure a Labour MP in his/her constituency til the next GE. ;-)