Obviously the fact that this was a snap election which took everyone by surprise will have contributed to the relative lack of material emanating from the various parties. Leaflets take a while to produce, and then another while to distribute. But to engage on a forum such as this takes minutes and in a tight marginal I consider it odd that all parties would appear to have eschewed the opportunity to do so, notwithstanding its limited reach.In Hounslow the Labour Party, as we know and have seen over here on occasions, quite brazenly adopts the attitude that "we can do what we like, we'll win anyway", an approach which lost them control of the council in 2006, but to which they have since returned with a vengeance. In the absence of any serious opposition my guess is that Labour will be safe with this approach for the next local elections in 2018. But it is certainly not one that Ruth can afford to take at this general election.To be fair, she clearly understands this. I know Labour have been out on the doorsteps in a really big way, calling for help both on local activists and on some people being brought in from outside areas. But it also, as you say, means placing some clear blue water between Ruth's efforts and the needlessly confrontational ways of the local party which have upset so many potential allies. All indications are that she is not prepared to do this. It has cost her votes in this household, and I know that in the area affected by Church Street it has cost her others. Relying on an assumption that people who want to be rid of the Tories will have to vote Labour regardless is a tricky business in a constituency with a majority of 465. I, for one, do not respond well to blackmail. I will feel genuinely sad if Ruth loses this seat. However, the culture of undisguised contempt for local people which seems to permeate the local party is one which really needs to be exorcised out of them, for their own long-term benefit just as much as for anyone else's.
Phil Andrews ● 3000d