Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 17:10:41 on Sat, 5 Nov 2016, Recliner
remarked:

But his chances of becoming an MP are low (Labour only had 12.3%
of the vote last time)

"Slim to none" is a more realistic description.

However, prospective MPs have to "earn their wings" contesting
impossible seats, before being offered a safe seat some years later.

Yes, and by standing, he'll split the pro-Remain vote, thus pretty much
guaranteeing that Zac keeps his seat; otherwise the LDs might have had a
chance of winning the seat back.

Well, I was wrong. The LD won, and Wolmar lost his deposit. He obviously
had no chance of winning, but 1515 votes (4%) was a derisory result. He
should stick to writing railway books and articles.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 17:10:41 on Sat, 5 Nov 2016, Recliner
remarked:

But his chances of becoming an MP are low (Labour only had 12.3%
of the vote last time)

"Slim to none" is a more realistic description.

However, prospective MPs have to "earn their wings" contesting
impossible seats, before being offered a safe seat some years later.

Yes, and by standing, he'll split the pro-Remain vote, thus pretty much
guaranteeing that Zac keeps his seat; otherwise the LDs might have had a
chance of winning the seat back.

Well, I was wrong. The LD won, and Wolmar lost his deposit. He obviously
had no chance of winning, but 1515 votes (4%) was a derisory result. He
should stick to writing railway books and articles.


I think that's a tad unfair

I doubt that the vote was only 1500 *because* Wolmar was the candidate.

Even if some "popular" (locally at least) Labourite was standing it would
have been the same result for them.

And if Wolmar wants a crack at a winnable seat he has to serve time running
the losing ones first - Even Maggie had to do that

tim

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:10:58 -0000, tim... wrote:

And if Wolmar wants a crack at a winnable seat he has to serve time running
the losing ones first - Even Maggie had to do that

Which seats did Sarah Olney contest before winning this one?

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 02:26:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 17:10:41 on Sat, 5 Nov 2016, Recliner
remarked:

But his chances of becoming an MP are low (Labour only had 12.3%
of the vote last time)

"Slim to none" is a more realistic description.

However, prospective MPs have to "earn their wings" contesting
impossible seats, before being offered a safe seat some years later.

Yes, and by standing, he'll split the pro-Remain vote, thus pretty much
guaranteeing that Zac keeps his seat; otherwise the LDs might have had a
chance of winning the seat back.

Well, I was wrong. The LD won, and Wolmar lost his deposit. He obviously
had no chance of winning, but 1515 votes (4%) was a derisory result. He
should stick to writing railway books and articles.

Zac lost by 4%. Will be interesting to see if any Remoaners start a grassroots
campaign on Twitter to call for a re-run "because its too close" and "what about
the 45%"? I mean they will won't they because they believe in democracy
regardless of the result, not because they're a bunch of mealy mouthed stinking
hypcrites who only like democracy when they get their own way and are utterly
full of it?

--
Spud

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 11:27:55 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

On Fri, 2 Dec 2016 02:26:12 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message
-septe
mber.org, at 17:10:41 on Sat, 5 Nov 2016, Recliner
remarked:

But his chances of becoming an MP are low (Labour only had 12.3%
of the vote last time)

"Slim to none" is a more realistic description.

However, prospective MPs have to "earn their wings" contesting
impossible seats, before being offered a safe seat some years later.

Yes, and by standing, he'll split the pro-Remain vote, thus pretty much
guaranteeing that Zac keeps his seat; otherwise the LDs might have had a
chance of winning the seat back.

Well, I was wrong. The LD won, and Wolmar lost his deposit. He obviously
had no chance of winning, but 1515 votes (4%) was a derisory result. He
should stick to writing railway books and articles.

Zac lost by 4%. Will be interesting to see if any Remoaners start a grassroots
campaign on Twitter to call for a re-run "because its too close" and "what about
the 45%"? I mean they will won't they because they believe in democracy
regardless of the result, not because they're a bunch of mealy mouthed stinking
hypcrites who only like democracy when they get their own way and are utterly
full of it?

Obviously, those who voted Lib Dem were lied to so the by-election must be rerun G

I have not read any of this thread but I received an alert from usenet that this is now the longest ever thread on UK transport London! Congratulations to all who took part.

Offramp wrote:
I have not read any of this thread but I received an alert from usenet
that this is now the longest ever thread on UK transport London!
Congratulations to all who took part.


Wow! I started it, but wonder when Mr Wolmar was last mentioned in it?
Maybe the thread will run beyond the unsuccessful end of his campaign.

Who is Wolmar? Is she European?