So how did the party of women do?

Why's that? PoW will need to be bold if they're going to have any major impact - why wouldn't they want to bring recognisable people who agree with their core message onboard? Or are you saying the likes of Cherry wouldn't touch them because they're lacking credibility somehow?

Nobody had really heard of UKIP or took them seriously until they got Kilroy, and then suddenly they got loads of coverage. PoW need their own Kilroy. If not Cherry, who?

"So the POW is a retaliation to WEP?"

No, of course not. The rest of your speculation is therefore irrelevant.

I was pointing out that others have been bemoaning the failure of WEP whilst trashing POW, which begs comparison of origins, attitudes to sex vs gender, honesty and electoral outcomes.

If it's true What's wrong with that

Wouldn't surprise me. It's no secret the LGB-Alliance was set up specifically in retaliation to Stonewall.

Point them out to KJK then. She's not on mumsnet.

I'm not a POW candidate.

?? How on earth does that quote relate to WEP??

I'm not sure the use you think armchair criticism from someone not part of POW is? I'd say it's doubly hard to criticise someone's tactics when you don't actually know what they were, and can only see some of what's gone on from the outside.

I mean, I'm sure I could think of some nasty things to say about Tom Daley's diving, but since I'm not a diver, or privy to any knowledge about Tom Daley and his training, it would come across as ridiculous

This is where I got the idea that POW was some sort of retaliation to WEP - out of the mouth of a POW candidate @OldCrone

What tactical mistakes?

It's not about pointing or laughing. It's about a genuine desire to point out the massive tactical mistakes in the hope that the same mistakes aren't repeated

I'm sorry this reads like some sort of teenage fantasy.

I don't get this either - do we point and laugh at people who come last in Marathons, or the people who don't get a job that was advertised? How is it helpful or progressive (or kind) to do so?

Just because someone doesn't do something how you would, doesn't mean it's wrong.

Is this the same attitude I've seen in the name board where unless you're naming your child something utterly conventional the "they'll be bullied at school for it" people pop up? Presumably because they bullied some kid with an unusual name themselves.

The UK culture is one where we don't hammer down the nail that's poking out, we don't mind people getting up and doing stuff, and normally we positively encourage the underdog - so why is everyone being so snippy about KJK?

I can only think it's because she does get under their skin, and frankly, if you're the sniffy type who only wants things done your way or not at all, you need a bit of that kind of irritation.

Wow this is news. So the POW is a retaliation to WEP? Why hasn't this been said before?

Probably because it's something you just made up.

I don't get this thing about pointing and laughing. In my constituency the LibDem got just over 400 votes (similar to some of the POW candidates) and lost their deposit. Does that make the LibDems a laughing stock, or just that candidate? They never do well here, and sometimes don't even bother to stand. The candidates always seem very young, and I think the party just puts them up for a no-hoper seat for the experience.

I'd never laugh at a candidate for actually having the courage to get up there and stand. What sort of person does, and why should their childish behaviour matter to anyone?

A number of prominent GC politicians were ousted in this election - not least Joanna Cherry and Miriam Cates. Experienced hands like theirs would be an asset to PoW if they could be brought on board. OK right now they're losers, but times change and having seasoned operators on board could only be a good thing for the party. Imagine how much more coverage PoW would get with Cherry at the helm.

There's a joke at Kellie-Jay Keen/POW's expense on BBC's Breaking The News episode from yesterday at 5min 30sec.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m00210zn?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

Not sure where I said I was pointing and laughing at their share of the vote @OldCrone . It's undeniable that other people have been. Why would anyone want to give their opponents that kind of ammunition?

This is depressing. We now have a huge battle on our hands. JKJ did just fine and even if you think she didn't just let it go. This infighting will sink us. Eyes on the prize for heavens sake.

An insightful article by political journalist Tim Shipman in the Times about Sunak and the Tory party's chaotic election campaign - including several paragraphs pointing out that the party wasn't ready for an election called at such short notice:

"What has not previously emerged is that senior figures in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) agreed with Levido and told Sunak, in writing, that they were not ready to fight an election".

So the Tories weren't ready but a tiny party started a year ago are expected to be fully up and running ? As ever, women are judged to different standards. Sad to see it on a feminist board but logic and insight often seem to be sadly lacking on threads involving KJK.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/38650fc4-8311-4cc9-8a5d-894c48c7815b?shareToken=52117e08305ba4a505c5a77e9002f621

Why does everyone keep on going on about 4 months? It just makes you look unreliable and even maybe dishonest. This party was planned for well over a year, it was just officially 4 months

I wouldn't bother to criticise the WEP @OldCrone , I think they're a lost cause. I had hopes for POW, despite the chaos

Wow this is news. So the POW is a retaliation to WEP? Why hasn't this been said before? I saw it said again and again that the POW was to highlight the crazy of the Greens and Labour etc, I've never heard it was to go up against the WEP.
I think that's a great idea, actually.
So why didn't KJK stand in a constituency that had a WEP candidate? Were all 4 of those consituencies covered? Then, again, when she had to change (from the dubious decision in Brighton) why didn't she choose a WEP constituency?
Also what on earth does this have to do with working class/middle class?? I'm working class but I'm also strategic - it's not even a tiny bit connected. And lastly, I can't quite get over how idiotic it is for people to presume everyone who comments on here is sitting around doing nothing; there are clearly lots of well informed people here

The Big Lie - how the WEP was always about gender rather than sex www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4058470-the-big-lie-how-the-wep-was-always-about-gender-rather-than-sex

@OldCrone

POW knocked the duplicitously named "Women's Equality Party" off the map. WEP has been going for 9 years, has "celebrity" founders, big donations from a Google employee (to make sure his "trans daughter" has a leg-up into UK politics) and what did they achieve?

I didn't know that about the donations. WEP would have done better to reject the donations and been a party for women. I think they lost a lot of support when they decided that men could be women.

Be better prepared - it feels like they were caught on the back foot this time round. It's a new party so teething issues are fair enough, but it might've been worth just sitting this one out rather than giving people the opportunity to point and laugh at their paltry vote share. That's left them with a credibility hole that they'll need to plug.

Did you also point and laugh at the Women's Equality Party's paltry vote share? 9 years, loads of funding, loads of help from the media, and couldn't even do as well as a party with no money which has only existed for 4 months which the media did their best to ignore.