Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Just 46% of GE2019 CON voters still support the party – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,162
edited April 2023 in General
imageJust 46% of GE2019 CON voters still support the party – politicalbetting.com

It was last January that we last did an analysis like the one above on what YouGov is finding when it asks GE2019 Tory voters what they would do now.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    edited April 2023
    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 732

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019.

    Around 7 million ‘loyal’ voters each, I make it.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    Evening all :)

    Delving into YouGov a little further, it's actually 28% when you include the Won't Votes (7%) and the Refused (1%).

    Of the total, 29% are either DKs (16%) or Won't Vote (13%) so that's a big chunk of voters but turnout of around 70% these days isn't unusual so perhaps the DKs will become WVs.

    As an aside, Redfield & Wilton have 53% of the 2019 Conservative vote staying loyal, 15% going to Labour and 17% in the DK column and 3% Won't Vote.

  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.

    46% of 2019 Tories is about 6.4m; 68% of Lab is about 6.9m.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496
    NeilVW said:

    FPT

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    Steady on. One step at a time. United British and Irish Isles by 2200; liberal democratic governments worldwide by 2300; No nation states 2400.

    A busy evening. 😉
    Yes, and I forgot Gardeners World at 2100 after the snooker.

  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Ghedebrav said:

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.

    46% of 2019 Tories is about 6.4m; 68% of Lab is about 6.9m.
    But ultimately it doesn't tell us *that* much - the Tory vote tends to be more efficient and of course it depends how swaps to whom and also what the DKs actually end up doing.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401
    Get the above.
    However. 10% of Tory voters intending to vote Labour is quite a bit of a lot. (There are a few on here).
    Dunno how many Labour are intending to vote Tory?
    But it will be a much smaller proportion of a smaller amount.
  • Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Not YouGov and most of the other online pollsters have your profile, so in December 2019 they asked respondents how they voted,
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,424
    edited April 2023

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Ultimately the Government is rubbish and so's the opposition. They're currently engaged in a poo-throwing contest to see who emerges slightly less covered in the stuff come election day. It's ripe for a credible third party; sadly there isn't one.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    dixiedean said:

    Get the above.
    However. 10% of Tory voters intending to vote Labour is quite a bit of a lot. (There are a few on here).
    Dunno how many Labour are intending to vote Tory?
    But it will be a much smaller proportion of a smaller amount.

    *Where* those ten per cent are is crucial though.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,247
    Fpt @IanB2
    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    LOCAL BY ELECTION TRACKING:

    Ahead of next week's LEs, I've brought to date my by election tracker, calculating an average of defended NEV plus swing across the elections
    I
    In January, on a small sample, Labour led by 41-21, with a 37-25 result over that last quarter.

    Between Feb-Apr, the have been 33 by-elections, including 21 with a substantively
    equivalent candidate list (West Lancashire is also included as one data point).

    The updated implied NEV for the last 3 months of elections is:

    LAB 31.5 (33.2 if you only count equivalent elections)
    CON 29.2 (29.3)

    I expect Labour to outperform a 4 point lead in LE2023, but my central expectation is only about a 36 / 29 NEV, and I'd be perfectly pleased with 10 points plus.

    In other words and with 2019 as the baseline, and a fairly stable Con/LD battlefield I'm only expecting slight Con losses.

    I expect GE markets to shift a little more towards Con accordingly next week, but to me the outlook won't be much changed, as I think this is still a delayed Sunak honeymoon.

    Omnisis has a swing of 7.5% from Conservative to Labour among LE voters which suggests more than "slight" Conservative losses - I don't know what you mean by "slight" greater or less than 250 seats ?

    I expect LDs to be fairly unchanged with losses to Labour offset by gains from Conservatives and Independents.
    Interesting, because although I’m no longer a LibDem member, I’m still tapped into a lot of personal and online communications, and they seem remarkably positive and optimistic. Either they’re going to be disappointed or the received wisdom is wrong…?
    When and why did you give up? Had the impression you were an activist
  • The road I’m walking on now is called Route du Purgatoire
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    dixiedean said:

    Get the above.
    However. 10% of Tory voters intending to vote Labour is quite a bit of a lot. (There are a few on here).
    Dunno how many Labour are intending to vote Tory?
    But it will be a much smaller proportion of a smaller amount.

    A very small number indeed. So small I can name them. BJO.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,860
    edited April 2023

    The road I’m walking on now is called Route du Purgatoire

    Pity the regular walk postie, then? That one will be left for those with no seniority.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    Andy_JS said:

    Lichfield is one of the most interesting small cathedrals in the country, but I wonder how many PBers have visited it?

    I've been to Lichfield Trent Valley station.
  • FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.
  • So I'm betting on Southampton, Dirty Leeds, and Forest to be relegated.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,860

    FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.

    Silly you for telling them the truth.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,164

    FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.

    Always assuming you haven't been fibbing...
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 732
    @Pro_Rata asked, FPT..

    Out of interest on the Omnisis local polling, what is the start point for the 7.5% swing, LE19 or the GE?

    LE19 actual vote count, rather than NEV.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401

    So I'm betting on Southampton, Dirty Leeds, and Forest to be relegated.

    2 out of three ain't bad.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,626
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    A single caliphate?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
  • dixiedean said:

    So I'm betting on Southampton, Dirty Leeds, and Forest to be relegated.

    2 out of three ain't bad.
    Everton are safe.

    One of my most profitable bets ever was on Everton 4 - Man Utd 4 in 2012/Man City winning the titles.

    I foresee Everton beating City in a few weeks time, so tempted to do a double on Everton to avoid relegation/Arsenal to win the title.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,247

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    Someone who says all polls are dubious likes none of the numbers
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    Fpt @IanB2

    IanB2 said:

    stodge said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    LOCAL BY ELECTION TRACKING:

    Ahead of next week's LEs, I've brought to date my by election tracker, calculating an average of defended NEV plus swing across the elections
    I
    In January, on a small sample, Labour led by 41-21, with a 37-25 result over that last quarter.

    Between Feb-Apr, the have been 33 by-elections, including 21 with a substantively
    equivalent candidate list (West Lancashire is also included as one data point).

    The updated implied NEV for the last 3 months of elections is:

    LAB 31.5 (33.2 if you only count equivalent elections)
    CON 29.2 (29.3)

    I expect Labour to outperform a 4 point lead in LE2023, but my central expectation is only about a 36 / 29 NEV, and I'd be perfectly pleased with 10 points plus.

    In other words and with 2019 as the baseline, and a fairly stable Con/LD battlefield I'm only expecting slight Con losses.

    I expect GE markets to shift a little more towards Con accordingly next week, but to me the outlook won't be much changed, as I think this is still a delayed Sunak honeymoon.

    Omnisis has a swing of 7.5% from Conservative to Labour among LE voters which suggests more than "slight" Conservative losses - I don't know what you mean by "slight" greater or less than 250 seats ?

    I expect LDs to be fairly unchanged with losses to Labour offset by gains from Conservatives and Independents.
    Interesting, because although I’m no longer a LibDem member, I’m still tapped into a lot of personal and online communications, and they seem remarkably positive and optimistic. Either they’re going to be disappointed or the received wisdom is wrong…?
    When and why did you give up? Had the impression you were an activist
    I thought he was too. Dropping like flies on here. I'm going the other way. Increased my subs to Labour and planning to offer my services for the GE campaign. If I get a doorstepping slot, great, but I'm just as happy to lick envelopes.
  • felix said:

    FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.

    Always assuming you haven't been fibbing...
    I like pollsters, they give me money to buy shoes.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,424

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,052
    Common sense and experience suggests some large chunk of the “don’t knows” will come back to him. If anything this would tend to suggest that from his perspective he ought to stick with things like Rwanda in and around the sensible government stuff, much though I hate the policy.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    Shades of Jen Bush.

    DeSantis Has Raised a Staggering $110 Million — Doubling Trump's War Chest
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1651997108319268884
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    A single caliphate?
    One World, William, One World. Like Bono said.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    dixiedean said:

    So I'm betting on Southampton, Dirty Leeds, and Forest to be relegated.

    2 out of three ain't bad.
    Everton are safe.

    One of my most profitable bets ever was on Everton 4 - Man Utd 4 in 2012/Man City winning the titles.

    I foresee Everton beating City in a few weeks time, so tempted to do a double on Everton to avoid relegation/Arsenal to win the title.
    No need for porn when I can find my fantasies on here.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    New special relationship ?

    Yoon becomes 1st S. Korean to receive briefings at Pentagon, DARPA
    https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=349983

    Washington agrees to lessen burden on Korean firms investing in US
    https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=350008

    US Senate passes resolution recognizing importance of US-Korea alliance
    https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=349967


  • Ghedebrav said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.

    46% of 2019 Tories is about 6.4m; 68% of Lab is about 6.9m.
    But ultimately it doesn't tell us *that* much - the Tory vote tends to be more efficient and of course it depends how swaps to whom and also what the DKs actually end up doing.
    But is the Tory vote still efficient? There is lots of rural England where the Tory vote was say 55% in 1983 but now 65% in 2019. Piling up votes where not needed.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,631
    edited April 2023
    Expectations management?

    As the Conservatives face the miserable prospect of losing hundreds of seats in next week’s local elections, Rishi Sunak has resorted to the surest motivational method: appealing to cabinet ministers’ desire to best their colleagues.

    The prime minister and Greg Hands, the Conservative Party chairman, have challenged ministers to complete at least three days of campaigning in key areas. A league table has been set up and at cabinet last week Sunak congratulated Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, for being in pole position.

    The outlook for the Conservatives is undeniably bleak, with Hands highlighting independent claims that the Tories could lose as many as 1,000 councillors. In the game of expectation management anything less than that will be claimed as a relative success — but nobody at campaign headquarters (CCHQ) expects results to be good...

    ...No 10 believes that progress is being made. Earlier this year, allies of Boris Johnson were openly talking about mounting a coup if the local election results were bad enough. Such talk dissipated after Sunak succeeded in getting through his Brexit deal, with just 22 Tory rebels, and announced plans for the mass detention of all migrants who arrive in Britain on small boats.

    The Conservatives’ metric for success in these elections will be how the results extrapolate to national vote share. In national polls Labour retain a healthy 15-point lead, albeit that has fallen from a consistent lead of around 20 points earlier this year. The Tories hope the local election results will show that Labour’s national lead is smaller than expected.

    Sunak can also take solace from the fact that he and Starmer are consistently neck-and-neck on who voters think would make the best prime minister. He believes that if he can continue to right the ship in the wake of Liz Truss’s disastrous premiership, his personal poll ratings will translate to the national polls and he can win the next election.

    The view in Downing Street is that Labour have peaked too soon and that by the end of the year their lead in the polls will be reduced to less than ten points. “They’ve been in easy mode for far too long,” a senior Conservative said. “We made it easy for them. But now they’ve got a fight on their hands and are having to raise their game.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/conservatives-battle-to-prevent-big-losses-in-2023-local-elections-tz8dh9tt0
  • SandraMcSandraMc Posts: 694
    Tonight I made the Rick Stein Sea Bream recipe as recommended by Casino Royale IIRC,using Sea Bass. I made a few other changes;
    I wasn't sure about adding chicken stock so I used Dashi as recommended by Leon (good tip).
    I used 3 red peppers instead of:4 as I had a problem fitting everything into my dish;
    I wimped out over the garlic and added 3 sliced cloves instead of 8. Next time I'll probably take it up to 5.
    Also, I'd probably cut down slightly on the potatoes and increase the tomatoes.
    Otherwise a great recipe which all the family enjoyed.



  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 732
    dixiedean said:

    Get the above.
    However. 10% of Tory voters intending to vote Labour is quite a bit of a lot. (There are a few on here).
    Dunno how many Labour are intending to vote Tory?
    But it will be a much smaller proportion of a smaller amount.

    YouGov have the figure at 2% of the 2019 LAB vote.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,401

    Ghedebrav said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.

    46% of 2019 Tories is about 6.4m; 68% of Lab is about 6.9m.
    But ultimately it doesn't tell us *that* much - the Tory vote tends to be more efficient and of course it depends how swaps to whom and also what the DKs actually end up doing.
    But is the Tory vote still efficient? There is lots of rural England where the Tory vote was say 55% in 1983 but now 65% in 2019. Piling up votes where not needed.
    The Tory vote will have difficulty becoming more efficient.
    The Labour vote was way more efficient than the Tories up to 2015.
    So it isn't set in stone.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275
    edited April 2023
    I think the story of the night will be the Lib Dems doing very well in the so called Blue Wall areas.

    Labour doing okay but nothing exceptional. The Tories seem to be playing the expectations game and calling it a good night if they lose less than a 1,000 seats .

    Additional interest is how much tactical voting happens .

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,555
    nico679 said:

    I think the story of the night will be the Lib Dems doing very well in the so called Blue Wall areas.

    Labour doing okay but nothing exceptional. The Tories seem to be playing the expectations game and calling it a good night if they lose less than a 1,000 seats .

    Additional interest is how much tactical voting happens .

    The LDs won't do nearly as well in the Blue Wall with Sunak and Hunt in charge compared to how they would have done with Truss or Johnson running things.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,076
    Assuming a simple linear distribution between 18 and 80, the 5 years between elections will also result in 8% voting age population turnover that can't be captured by these polls. Of course there is turnover as people get older they historically become more Tory leaning, but last election was striking in quite how skewed voting was by age.
  • jamesdoylejamesdoyle Posts: 790
    Nigelb said:

    Shades of Jen Bush.

    DeSantis Has Raised a Staggering $110 Million — Doubling Trump's War Chest
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1651997108319268884

    Won't mean a thing if nobody likes him. And nobody likes him. The more he did in Florida, the more his polling numbers drop.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    Ghedebrav said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    First like Rishi

    The problem is 68% of Labour loyalists from 2019 is 68% of very few voters. Compare and contrast this to 46% of lots of Tory voters in 2019. I also think we can add all of Reform and most of DK to Rishi's column.

    46% of 2019 Tories is about 6.4m; 68% of Lab is about 6.9m.
    But ultimately it doesn't tell us *that* much - the Tory vote tends to be more efficient and of course it depends how swaps to whom and also what the DKs actually end up doing.
    But is the Tory vote still efficient? There is lots of rural England where the Tory vote was say 55% in 1983 but now 65% in 2019. Piling up votes where not needed.
    Well, they got 56% of MPs on 44% of the popular vote. Labour got 31% of MPs on 32% of vote. Neither hit the extremes of efficiency that the LDs and SNP do, but there's still a significant advantage for the Tories on those numbers.
  • NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 732

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    That’s quite a depressing summary. I’ve taken off Friday so I can watch the results through the night…
  • Well.

    Andrew Strauss has left his roles as strategic adviser to the England and Wales Cricket Board and chair of the performance cricket committee only three weeks after the changes to the structure of domestic cricket he recommended in last year’s high performance review were declared “dead in the water” by Richard Gould, the governing body’s chief executive.

    The announcement came on the day it emerged that the men’s Hundred could be abandoned in favour of a new Twenty20 competition, with the ECB said to be concerned the new format has failed to catch on internationally and was not as appealing to the cream of international talent as the widely played alternative.

    Both Gould and the ECB chair, Richard Thompson, were prominent critics of the Hundred while working together at Surrey, which was the only county not to vote for the creation of the new tournament, before they moved to Lord’s last year. Gould had said before taking his new role in October that the county’s “preference was for a two-division T20”, and that is indeed one of the options now back under discussion.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/apr/28/strauss-exits-ecb-with-new-t20-format-on-table-and-hundred-on-the-rack
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,133
    edited April 2023
    It's all going to be incredible. Every step of it to reward NeilVW's faith and commitment in staying up. Greens to sweep the South Coast, Labour to take over Tunbridge Wells, and the Natural Law Party to take over all the military training areas around Aldershot.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,587
    Who was it here who tipped Si Jiahui in the snooker? He's almost into the final, up 12-5 in the semis.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931
    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    I think the story of the night will be the Lib Dems doing very well in the so called Blue Wall areas.

    Labour doing okay but nothing exceptional. The Tories seem to be playing the expectations game and calling it a good night if they lose less than a 1,000 seats .

    Additional interest is how much tactical voting happens .

    The LDs won't do nearly as well in the Blue Wall with Sunak and Hunt in charge compared to how they would have done with Truss or Johnson running things.
    There won’t be as many anybody but Sunak voters as there were anybody but Johnson or anybody but Truss voters, although there will still be plenty of anybody but the Tories voters.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Fatal statistic to be so low. Needs an epic recovery.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,424
    SandraMc said:

    Tonight I made the Rick Stein Sea Bream recipe as recommended by Casino Royale IIRC,using Sea Bass. I made a few other changes;
    I wasn't sure about adding chicken stock so I used Dashi as recommended by Leon (good tip).
    I used 3 red peppers instead of:4 as I had a problem fitting everything into my dish;
    I wimped out over the garlic and added 3 sliced cloves instead of 8. Next time I'll probably take it up to 5.
    Also, I'd probably cut down slightly on the potatoes and increase the tomatoes.
    Otherwise a great recipe which all the family enjoyed.



    Glad you enjoyed it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070

    Expectations management?

    As the Conservatives face the miserable prospect of losing hundreds of seats in next week’s local elections, Rishi Sunak has resorted to the surest motivational method: appealing to cabinet ministers’ desire to best their colleagues.

    The prime minister and Greg Hands, the Conservative Party chairman, have challenged ministers to complete at least three days of campaigning in key areas. A league table has been set up and at cabinet last week Sunak congratulated Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, for being in pole position.

    The outlook for the Conservatives is undeniably bleak, with Hands highlighting independent claims that the Tories could lose as many as 1,000 councillors. In the game of expectation management anything less than that will be claimed as a relative success — but nobody at campaign headquarters (CCHQ) expects results to be good...

    ...No 10 believes that progress is being made. Earlier this year, allies of Boris Johnson were openly talking about mounting a coup if the local election results were bad enough. Such talk dissipated after Sunak succeeded in getting through his Brexit deal, with just 22 Tory rebels, and announced plans for the mass detention of all migrants who arrive in Britain on small boats.

    The Conservatives’ metric for success in these elections will be how the results extrapolate to national vote share. In national polls Labour retain a healthy 15-point lead, albeit that has fallen from a consistent lead of around 20 points earlier this year. The Tories hope the local election results will show that Labour’s national lead is smaller than expected.

    Sunak can also take solace from the fact that he and Starmer are consistently neck-and-neck on who voters think would make the best prime minister. He believes that if he can continue to right the ship in the wake of Liz Truss’s disastrous premiership, his personal poll ratings will translate to the national polls and he can win the next election.

    The view in Downing Street is that Labour have peaked too soon and that by the end of the year their lead in the polls will be reduced to less than ten points. “They’ve been in easy mode for far too long,” a senior Conservative said. “We made it easy for them. But now they’ve got a fight on their hands and are having to raise their game.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/conservatives-battle-to-prevent-big-losses-in-2023-local-elections-tz8dh9tt0

    Who gives a toss about cabinet ministers campaigning for local elections ?
    Bizarre.

    Can’t they just get on with their jobs ?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,424

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    Spot on
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,424
    kinabalu said:

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
    Don't fail to forget that there's a lot of Conservative vote out there in the country that is driven by those who want a block a Labour government, just as it is the other way round.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070

    Nigelb said:

    Shades of Jen Bush.

    DeSantis Has Raised a Staggering $110 Million — Doubling Trump's War Chest
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1651997108319268884

    Won't mean a thing if nobody likes him. And nobody likes him. The more he did in Florida, the more his polling numbers drop.
    I hadn’t realised he was one of the JAGs at Guantanamo when the three inmates managed to ‘suicide’ after binding their hands and fee, stuff rags down their own throats, and then hang themselves simultaneously in three different cells.

    I really don’t like him.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Fatal statistic to be so low.

    felix said:

    FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.

    Always assuming you haven't been fibbing...
    I like pollsters, they give me money to buy shoes.
    £40?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,424
    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,351
    FWIW, Omnisis have Lab 37%, Con 26%, LD 17% in the locals.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,078
    Andy_JS said:

    nico679 said:

    I think the story of the night will be the Lib Dems doing very well in the so called Blue Wall areas.

    Labour doing okay but nothing exceptional. The Tories seem to be playing the expectations game and calling it a good night if they lose less than a 1,000 seats .

    Additional interest is how much tactical voting happens .

    The LDs won't do nearly as well in the Blue Wall with Sunak and Hunt in charge compared to how they would have done with Truss or Johnson running things.
    There are still going to do well. The Blue Wall is absolutely furious with the Shit in the Rivers and the NHS mess. There will be some really surprising results.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,253

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    A single caliphate?
    Pure anarchy, probably, with implausible manually activated superchargers.

    https://youtu.be/s4RHOrtxIis

    My vision for One World Government is set out here

    https://youtu.be/XEECxN5P1nw
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,626

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    A single caliphate?
    Pure anarchy, probably, with implausible manually activated superchargers.

    https://youtu.be/s4RHOrtxIis

    My vision for One World Government is set out here

    https://youtu.be/XEECxN5P1nw
    This is mine:

    https://youtu.be/lgwfMF5kSJ0
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,357

    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.

    Your efforts to repair Britain's finances are, I hope, greatly appreciated by everyone here.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    Spot on
    Maybe. Generally with local elections it's never as bad as you fear or as good as you hope.True, in 1995, at this round the Conservatives lost 2,000 seats in a single night and it wasn't easy for them to find much positive from that but in normal circumstances it's never that bad.

    Indeed, 2019 is the classic example of a set of local elections which had no similarity with the GE just seven months later. One could argue 2017 was true - a marvellous set of local results didn't translate into an election landslide of Theresa May just a few weeks later.

    It's more the effect within rather than outside parties which matters especially in terms of future elections.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    Sean_F said:

    FWIW, Omnisis have Lab 37%, Con 26%, LD 17% in the locals.

    Which would be a 7.5% from Conservative to Labour from the 2019 elections.
  • My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,253

    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Taz said:

    Cookie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    mickydroy said:

    People are forgetting just how far behind Labour starts from.

    I couldn't agree more.

    I know things aren't equal and all the rest of it, but if Labour took 80 seats (80!) from the Conservatives, then assuming no other changes, Labour would still be second in term of seats (282 v 285).

    Tribalism, Swingback, Natural Party of Government, Incumbancy Bias, Better the Devil you know....
    Call it what you want.

    Labour have a moutain to climb to get a majority. Only Blair has won that many seats from the last GE.
    To even be the largest party they need 82 gains (and 82 losses to the Conservatives). That's a big ask. It's been done, and its certainly a more realistic target but its still a big ask.
    I have been saying this for ages, Starmer has a mountain to climb, clawing some seats back in Scotland could be crucial, even then I wouldn't be backing a Labour overall majority
    I'm genuinely puzzled why Starmer seems to be going out of his way to alienate progressives (for want of a better word) who could make the difference in so many marginals.

    The kerfuffle about PR this week was one example. Starmer's spokesman didn't need to say he has "a long-standing view against proportional representation" - literally no one is going to switch their vote from Con to Lab because Starmer is strongly against PR. Just a non-commital "we have a lot of work to do recovering from 15 years of Tory rule and the voting system isn't an immediate priority" would have been fine. But no, he has to take the small-C conservative line. It happens every time.

    As it stands I'm going to be in a Lab/Con stretch marginal after the boundary changes. As such, I should be a target voter for Labour. Right now I'm planning to waste my vote on the LibDems.
    Effectively a vote for the Tories. Bravo.
    Yes. Exactly that. Because my interests are better served by a Lab+LibDem coalition than a Lab majority.

    If Starmer doesn't like that sort of tactical voting, he could, I dunno... endorse PR?
    But in your seat it's a straight Lab-Tory fight, so actually you are enhancing your chances of getting a Tory MP – hardly a 'tactical' vote, rather the opposite in fact. Duh!
    Let me try and explain it in words of no more than three syllables.

    I'm concerned with who forms the government, not who my MP is.

    Right now it looks like there are two plausible outcomes: a Lab majority, or a Lab+others coalition.

    A Lab majority, according to Starmer, means continued hard Brexit, no chance of PR, and so on.

    Therefore I will be casting my vote (a) to maximise the chance of a coalition (shit, four syllables, sorry) and (b) so that I don't feel dirty after putting my cross in the box.
    You are casting your vote to increase Tory representation in the House of Commons, and thus increase their chances of retaining power.

    Yes, I get it. I understand how FPP works.
    Labour: "If you don't vote for us, you're a Tory."

    Right, ok, that's a sucky system. We should change it.

    Labour: "We will not countenance changing the system."

    Sigh.
    Where is the demand to change the electoral system coming from ?

    Vocal twitter accounts and so-called progressive alliance fanatics don't really make a mass movement or overwhelming demand.
    Biggest supporters of PR in order:

    1 Liberal Democrats
    2 Nigel Farage and RefUK
    3 Caroline Lucas and the Green Party.

    That does not a majority make
    Parties supporting PR:
    All parties who would see their representation go up with PR.

    Parties opposing PR:
    All parties who would see the representation go down with PR.
    To be fair to the SNP, the SNP support PR at Westminster, even though they would see their representation plummet as a result.

    If the SNP were true to the cause of independence they would not care about how Westminster elected it’s members and follow an abstentionist path like SF.
    It's the difference between considering yourself as illegitimately occupied vs in a union you wish to leave. They are both valid drivers of independence sentiment. The first is a bit of a harder feeling and is more likely to embrace violence. The SNP are in the second softer camp. Which is preferable imo.
    Yes but the disingenuous (and historically inaccurate) claim by many of them (particularly the less educated more stupid ones)that they are a "colony" erodes their credibility. Assuming they ever had any. Ireland and the Irish people had a genuine grievance, rather than the fake manufactured ones of weirdo Scottish nationalists
    Well I don't share your visceral opposition to Sindy, you know that. Perfectly respectable cause imo.
    A perfectly acceptable cause were it not for the fact that rather than being driven by a genuine sense of historical grievance like Ireland, it is driven by a racist hatred of "The English". And little more than that.
    But what drives unionism though? What's the basis for it. Three hundred or so years of the act of union? What else overrides independence for Scotland (and Wales, if they choose it). Forget the how, if its economically feasible or not. Just focus on why, or why not.
    Simply being pro-UK with a sense that the breaking up of Britain is not a terribly positive thing.
    What drives Unionism? For belief that E,W and S should be one country (British Unionism) and that RoI and NI should be one country (Irish Unionism) all you have to do is look at a map and believe in common sense.

    For British and Irish Isles Unionism (we'll get there some century or other) you look at two maps, The British Isles and New Zealand, and keep believing in common sense.
    If we're going super long term I'd say common sense steers to no nation states.
    A single caliphate?
    Pure anarchy, probably, with implausible manually activated superchargers.

    https://youtu.be/s4RHOrtxIis

    My vision for One World Government is set out here

    https://youtu.be/XEECxN5P1nw
    This is mine:

    https://youtu.be/lgwfMF5kSJ0
    Why not both?

    General Bison with a Queen backing track…..
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    An absolutely reasonable analysis 👍
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,351
    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:

    FWIW, Omnisis have Lab 37%, Con 26%, LD 17% in the locals.

    Which would be a 7.5% from Conservative to Labour from the 2019 elections.
    The parties were level in 2019.

    That would be Labour +9%, Con -2%, LD -2%. I make it a 5.5% swing.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    edited April 2023
    kle4 said:

    Fatal statistic to be so low.

    felix said:

    FWIW - YouGov know how I have voted in every election from 2001 onwards.

    Always assuming you haven't been fibbing...
    I like pollsters, they give me money to buy shoes.
    £40?
    You gov don't send me anything been stuck under 30 quid since covid..
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,224

    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.

    Your efforts to repair Britain's finances are, I hope, greatly appreciated by everyone here.
    Not just CR. I’ve saved the government nearly £200 by not teaching yesterday or Tuesday. I’m expecting a thank you note from Jeremy *unt to drop through my letterbox any day now.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Shades of Jen Bush.

    DeSantis Has Raised a Staggering $110 Million — Doubling Trump's War Chest
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1651997108319268884

    Won't mean a thing if nobody likes him. And nobody likes him. The more he did in Florida, the more his polling numbers drop.
    I hadn’t realised he was one of the JAGs at Guantanamo when the three inmates managed to ‘suicide’ after binding their hands and fee, stuff rags down their own throats, and then hang themselves simultaneously in three different cells.

    I really don’t like him.
    Wow, I didn’t know that. A piece of work, that guy.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486

    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.

    Steel yourself CR - are Labour going to reduce your taxes?

    I was thinking about you the other night, not in a weird way, was looking for something to listen and fall asleep to on BBC sounds and they have a reading of the Casino Royale Book. I thought it would be perfect, thought I knew it from watching the film, 2 episodes of 70 mins each and I will be asleep after 20 mins approx. Drifting off thinking nothing then a line “bond lit his 70th cigarette of the day” and was suddenly “wow” and awake - 2 hours later still wide awake very happy to have listened to the original book - no gadgets just a good story.

    So that’s the last time I hope I’m kept awake by Casino Royale but your questioning of politically might just do it.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,723
    maxh said:

    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.

    Your efforts to repair Britain's finances are, I hope, greatly appreciated by everyone here.
    Not just CR. I’ve saved the government nearly £200 by not teaching yesterday or Tuesday. I’m expecting a thank you note from Jeremy *unt to drop through my letterbox any day now.
    Perhaps he will return the favour and call you similarly. It would not be unjust.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070

    Well.

    Andrew Strauss has left his roles as strategic adviser to the England and Wales Cricket Board and chair of the performance cricket committee only three weeks after the changes to the structure of domestic cricket he recommended in last year’s high performance review were declared “dead in the water” by Richard Gould, the governing body’s chief executive.

    The announcement came on the day it emerged that the men’s Hundred could be abandoned in favour of a new Twenty20 competition, with the ECB said to be concerned the new format has failed to catch on internationally and was not as appealing to the cream of international talent as the widely played alternative.

    Both Gould and the ECB chair, Richard Thompson, were prominent critics of the Hundred while working together at Surrey, which was the only county not to vote for the creation of the new tournament, before they moved to Lord’s last year. Gould had said before taking his new role in October that the county’s “preference was for a two-division T20”, and that is indeed one of the options now back under discussion.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/apr/28/strauss-exits-ecb-with-new-t20-format-on-table-and-hundred-on-the-rack

    With his recent administrative record, I’m surprised he’s not in the cabinet.
  • Local elections 2023: Red wall set to abandon Conservatives, projection suggests

    The exclusive YouGov study for Sky News predicts big gains for Labour, while the Lib Dems could romp home in so-called "Blue wall" seats.


    Labour will perform strongest in the Midlands and north of England next week, according to an exclusive new local election projection for Sky News, which suggests the "Red wall" is starting to abandon the Conservatives.

    The Tories are also likely to struggle in key bellwether seats elsewhere in England - although the pollster did not expect quite so many Labour gains in key general election battlegrounds further south.

    The performance of Conservative councils in the "Blue wall" is also likely to prompt concern among party chiefs, where the Liberal Democrat advances look likely to end years of Conservative control of key councils - with Ed Davey's party on course to make potential gains themselves.

    YouGov is projecting the likely result and voting patterns in 18 key battleground councils for the local elections on 4 May, reflecting different types of electoral fights in different parts of the country.

    It projects that Labour could be on course for major success in Swindon - a long standing major battleground between the two main parties.

    Currently controlled by the Conservatives, the pollster now says it is leaning towards Labour and there will be significant gains to be made for the party in the area.


    https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-red-wall-may-start-to-abandon-tories-projection-shows-12868536
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,247

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
    Would have made a decent Roman legionary.
  • jamesdoylejamesdoyle Posts: 790
    Ghedebrav said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Shades of Jen Bush.

    DeSantis Has Raised a Staggering $110 Million — Doubling Trump's War Chest
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1651997108319268884

    Won't mean a thing if nobody likes him. And nobody likes him. The more he did in Florida, the more his polling numbers drop.
    I hadn’t realised he was one of the JAGs at Guantanamo when the three inmates managed to ‘suicide’ after binding their hands and fee, stuff rags down their own throats, and then hang themselves simultaneously in three different cells.

    I really don’t like him.
    Wow, I didn’t know that. A piece of work, that guy.
    It's all a bit hazy, but DeSantis appears to have been the one who provided the legal justification for force feeding hunger strikers. Repulsive
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,498

    Local elections 2023: Red wall set to abandon Conservatives, projection suggests

    The exclusive YouGov study for Sky News predicts big gains for Labour, while the Lib Dems could romp home in so-called "Blue wall" seats.


    Labour will perform strongest in the Midlands and north of England next week, according to an exclusive new local election projection for Sky News, which suggests the "Red wall" is starting to abandon the Conservatives.

    The Tories are also likely to struggle in key bellwether seats elsewhere in England - although the pollster did not expect quite so many Labour gains in key general election battlegrounds further south.

    The performance of Conservative councils in the "Blue wall" is also likely to prompt concern among party chiefs, where the Liberal Democrat advances look likely to end years of Conservative control of key councils - with Ed Davey's party on course to make potential gains themselves.

    YouGov is projecting the likely result and voting patterns in 18 key battleground councils for the local elections on 4 May, reflecting different types of electoral fights in different parts of the country.

    It projects that Labour could be on course for major success in Swindon - a long standing major battleground between the two main parties.

    Currently controlled by the Conservatives, the pollster now says it is leaning towards Labour and there will be significant gains to be made for the party in the area.


    https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-red-wall-may-start-to-abandon-tories-projection-shows-12868536

    Swindon is one of HY’s bellweather watch places. I think last year Labour even LOST traditional seats in Swindon, so I would take this “Major success” only when it actually happens I think.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    Nigelb said:

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
    Would have made a decent Roman legionary.
    Only if he then spent 2 hours building a fort for the night…
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,454
    I’m going to be voting Labour in the most Tory ward of Newcastle because why the fuck not
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,785
    NeilVW said:

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    That’s quite a depressing summary. I’ve taken off Friday so I can watch the results through the night…
    I think I remember that about 3/4 of the wards aren't counting until the Friday anyway - so might be a quiet night of projection/speculation.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,498
    Sean_F said:

    stodge said:

    Sean_F said:

    FWIW, Omnisis have Lab 37%, Con 26%, LD 17% in the locals.

    Which would be a 7.5% from Conservative to Labour from the 2019 elections.
    The parties were level in 2019.

    That would be Labour +9%, Con -2%, LD -2%. I make it a 5.5% swing.
    There are two figures at play in locals though isn’t there. The actual vote figures on the day. And the adjusted because what is and not having elections to project a national vote. My understanding is the national adjusted one would have Labour a bit higher than votes on the day, and Conservatives lower.

    Please correct me if I got any of this wrong.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,498

    I’m going to be voting Labour in the most Tory ward of Newcastle because why the fuck not

    Are you taking your PB avatar as your ID?

    I think the Tories have released it in a leaflet, all PB avatars are accepted ID.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134

    kinabalu said:

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
    There was no guarantee that he would have made as much progress as he did. I remember the gleeful comments about his lack of a honeymoon bounce.

    Maybe he will make further inroads into Labour's lead, maybe he won't, but he's shown an ability to change the political weather while Starmer still seems to be failing to seal the deal with wavering voters.

    Given how severely most people's living standards have been affected by inflation it's kinda miraculous that Sunak has made any progress at all. As a lefty I'm seriously worried.
    Well by low hanging fruit I mean Con inclined voters utterly horrified by the Truss debacle. He didn't need to do much to get them back. I reckon half that peak Labour lead was soft and what we basically have now is the half that isn't. This 10 pts or so will really take some shifting. Credit to Sunak for bringing the Cons back into contention but I'll be unpleasantly surprised if the Labour lead doesn't solidify at a level that's more than enough to win the GE. So I'm not worried. Except of course I am. I'm shitting bricks because I've grown used to Tories winning elections. Those 20 pt leads were much more to my taste.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839
    boulay said:

    Just got my paycheque for this month.

    Now nearly £200 lower due to the new 45p rate kicking in.

    I must confess it's testing my resolve.

    Steel yourself CR - are Labour going to reduce your taxes?
    No, but neither will the Tories. There may be temporary bribes promised in the run-up to elections, but the overall trend of income taxation is only ever going in one direction.

    There are two choices going forward about where Governments of all flavours are going to get the ever-increasing skip loads of bank notes needed to pay for the care of the decrepit elderly and the morbidly obese: tax the fuck out of incomes, or tax the fuck out of property. No prizes for guessing where they are going to go: the same place they always go.

    Fiscal drag will see even median wage earners become higher rate taxpayers eventually, because freezing the relevant thresholds indefinitely is the easiest way for the state to pay for pensions and healthcare without having to resort to raiding the asset wealth of the grey vote. A cross-party consensus programme of treating working taxpayers like frogs being slowly boiled in a cauldron of water is inevitable: crank taxation of earned incomes up gradually, in line with the rising care burden, and rely on people who aren't in possession of overpriced houses, share portfolios and fat pensions not noticing how impoverished they are becoming. Or simply resigning themselves miserably to the inevitable.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990

    Nigelb said:

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
    Would have made a decent Roman legionary.
    Only if he then spent 2 hours building a fort for the night…
    Did you see, researchers found 3 'new' Roman camps in the desert using Google Earth
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
    There was no guarantee that he would have made as much progress as he did. I remember the gleeful comments about his lack of a honeymoon bounce.

    Maybe he will make further inroads into Labour's lead, maybe he won't, but he's shown an ability to change the political weather while Starmer still seems to be failing to seal the deal with wavering voters.

    Given how severely most people's living standards have been affected by inflation it's kinda miraculous that Sunak has made any progress at all. As a lefty I'm seriously worried.
    Well by low hanging fruit I mean Con inclined voters utterly horrified by the Truss debacle. He didn't need to do much to get them back. I reckon half that peak Labour lead was soft and what we basically have now is the half that isn't. This 10 pts or so will really take some shifting. Credit to Sunak for bringing the Cons back into contention but I'll be unpleasantly surprised if the Labour lead doesn't solidify at a level that's more than enough to win the GE. So I'm not worried. Except of course I am. I'm shitting bricks because I've grown used to Tories winning elections. Those 20 pt leads were much more to my taste.
    I expect LAB to be around 5% to 7% ahead on an adjusted national vote basis in the local elections.

    Not enough to be sure of a GE win next year although of course LAB are ahead and are rightly current GE favourites.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    Scott_xP said:

    Nigelb said:

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
    Would have made a decent Roman legionary.
    Only if he then spent 2 hours building a fort for the night…
    Did you see, researchers found 3 'new' Roman camps in the desert using Google Earth
    Had not - sounds interesting, thanks.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
    There was no guarantee that he would have made as much progress as he did. I remember the gleeful comments about his lack of a honeymoon bounce.

    Maybe he will make further inroads into Labour's lead, maybe he won't, but he's shown an ability to change the political weather while Starmer still seems to be failing to seal the deal with wavering voters.

    Given how severely most people's living standards have been affected by inflation it's kinda miraculous that Sunak has made any progress at all. As a lefty I'm seriously worried.
    Well by low hanging fruit I mean Con inclined voters utterly horrified by the Truss debacle. He didn't need to do much to get them back. I reckon half that peak Labour lead was soft and what we basically have now is the half that isn't. This 10 pts or so will really take some shifting. Credit to Sunak for bringing the Cons back into contention but I'll be unpleasantly surprised if the Labour lead doesn't solidify at a level that's more than enough to win the GE. So I'm not worried. Except of course I am. I'm shitting bricks because I've grown used to Tories winning elections. Those 20 pt leads were much more to my taste.
    Time for our occasional reminder that Theresa May was 20pts ahead of Jeremy Corbyn less than a month before the 2017 GE, and look what happened to her.

    Polls are a snapshot of a particular moment in time, and typically a moment when voters aren't actually giving any thought to who they really want to form the next Government. The entire exercise has all the predictive value of a tarot reading.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,498

    My prediction, for what it's worth, is that all the major parties will end up a bit disappointed at the local elections. Labour will gain seats, but not as many as they'd hope for. Conservatives will lose seats, though not as many as their worst fears. And the Lib Dems will make a bit of progress, but not enough. All in all, I'm expecting a pretty dull night with fairly low turnout. And I don't think the results, given the turnout, will tell us very much about the prospects for GE 24.

    An absolutely reasonable analysis 👍
    Um. Yeah.

    theres a key bit from last year, lots of red wall counted in the night, they like doing that up there, and the results for Labour were mixed, so as everyone started watching the Lab v Tory battle, it made the morning headline “Labour disappoints in mid term locals” as the psephologists currently more distinguished and influential than me (though the outdated gents don’t utilise tits in the way I do) declared it nowhere near good enough to win the next general election. However London, the south and wales got round to counting next morning, Labour done great there, and Lib Dem’s actually one the election slaughtering Tory’s in blue wall, and it was a horrible locals for Tory’s worse than experts predicted, yet still the initial headline lingered until the country had tuned out from wanting to know official verdict of what happened.

    Blue mirage?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931

    My last six days’ walk, and the view after 145 miles



    30+ miles on Monday is properly impressive
    All that walking practice as a postie has been worthwhile.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,498

    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Itsa poll....... tomorrow a poll will say something else..... People misremember who they voted for. Dubious stats imho.

    Generally the more people say a poll is dubious is in direct proportion to them not liking the numbers
    It's bollocks though.

    How do you think Sunak has climbed from 23-24% to 30-31% over the last 4 months? Black magic?
    He has plucked the low hanging fruit. The hard part is still to come. He has to convert lots of the remaining DKs AND keep the populist Right voters onboard.
    There was no guarantee that he would have made as much progress as he did. I remember the gleeful comments about his lack of a honeymoon bounce.

    Maybe he will make further inroads into Labour's lead, maybe he won't, but he's shown an ability to change the political weather while Starmer still seems to be failing to seal the deal with wavering voters.

    Given how severely most people's living standards have been affected by inflation it's kinda miraculous that Sunak has made any progress at all. As a lefty I'm seriously worried.
    Well by low hanging fruit I mean Con inclined voters utterly horrified by the Truss debacle. He didn't need to do much to get them back. I reckon half that peak Labour lead was soft and what we basically have now is the half that isn't. This 10 pts or so will really take some shifting. Credit to Sunak for bringing the Cons back into contention but I'll be unpleasantly surprised if the Labour lead doesn't solidify at a level that's more than enough to win the GE. So I'm not worried. Except of course I am. I'm shitting bricks because I've grown used to Tories winning elections. Those 20 pt leads were much more to my taste.
    I expect LAB to be around 5% to 7% ahead on an adjusted national vote basis in the local elections.

    Not enough to be sure of a GE win next year although of course LAB are ahead and are rightly current GE favourites.
    I expect it to be double figures.

    That’s mainly because The main eye opener could be how low the Tory share is for failing to get their vote out in this current cost of living crisis, and Truss and Boris so recent in memory. As low as 23%.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647
    NeilVW said:

    dixiedean said:

    Get the above.
    However. 10% of Tory voters intending to vote Labour is quite a bit of a lot. (There are a few on here).
    Dunno how many Labour are intending to vote Tory?
    But it will be a much smaller proportion of a smaller amount.

    YouGov have the figure at 2% of the 2019 LAB vote.
    BJO presumably...
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931

    I’m going to be voting Labour in the most Tory ward of Newcastle because why the fuck not

    Go (s) forth and multiply!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,070
    NC state supreme court just reversed itself to rule that gerrymandering is none if their business to worry about.

    How easy is it for NC Republicans to gerrymander Dems into oblivion? The current court-drawn map (left) split 7D-7R in 2022. I drew a hypothetical 11R-3D map (right) in about seven minutes.
    https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1652023337982279712

    Reminder that it’s close to a 50/50 state politically.
This discussion has been closed.