Afternoon all ... Turnout was 67% last time - some pollsters are showing it could be 75% (Techne were 68%).
Hello Stodge.
Turnout in 2017 was 69%. The last YouGov of the campaign had 67% saying they were 10 out of 10 absolutely certain to vote, or had already voted by post. A month and a bit before polling day this figure was 63%.
Turnout in 2019 was 67%. The last YouGov of the campaign had 68% saying they were 10 out of 10, absolutely certain to vote, or had already voted by post. A month and a bit before polling day this figure was 60%.
In the latest YouGov poll for this election, a month and a bit before polling day, 56% say that they are 10 out of 10, absolutely certain to vote.
Looks to me like it's certain that turnout will be down on GE2019. And it's not out of the question that the record low turnout in 2001 is threatened.
Interesting election fact. In all 10 elections since 1980 CON have never ended up with a total number of seats beginning with a '2'. We have won 7 elections in that period getting a '3' and lost 3 more getting a '1'!
Not sure it will end up beginning with a '2' this time either!
On thread, one additional point regarding the likely LD seat total.
Currently on GB wide polling, the LDs are at around 9%. There are 632 parliamentary seats up for grabs excluding NI. Winning 9% of those would give the LDs 57 seats - that is, the purest result possible in PR terms.
In "The case for the attack" Pip speculates that in their optimistic scenario, the LDs would pick up an extra 50 seats. That would take them to 58 - i.e. FPTP would deliver them a higher share of seats than they would get under PR.
It is surely highly improbable that the LD vote might become so efficiently geographically distributed that the disadvantages of FPTP to small parties now completely disappear in their case. To achieve that on 9% of the vote, they would have to lose their deposit in nearly all of the seats that they don't win. It just doesn't ring true.
There's a history of the Lib Dems putting on vote share during an election campaign due to receiving more publicity that is implicit in the optimistic scenario for them. Up to 12-14% or so.
This is rather stymied by the Lib Dem's current status as the fourth largest party at Westminster, rather than the third, as had been the case in the past. That is why winning more seats than the SNP is so important to the Lib Dems, and why Davey has resorted to some attention-seeking slapstick stunts.
It's worth repeating - although this is a national election, it's not being fought everywhere. My guess is Labour are working 250 seats - most of those Conservative held in 2019 but with a little work in some areas where they face issues over Gaza. The Conservatives are probably fighting 200 seats as a defensive campaign - they've probably written off the marginals and are back in the second and third layer of seats (those where Labour or the LDs require a 10-15% swing to take).
The LDs are working 50 seats I would imagine - those they hold plus the obvious targets and some with a strong Council base to build for next time. The Greens are fighting maybe 10 seats, Reform 3-5.
The ground war requires people and there just aren't the people any more so the election is fought on social media and tv - I remember for instance in 1992 the Conservatives spent half their advertising budget in the last 3-4 days.
In a safe Labour seat like East Ham, we might see one Labour leaflet - Stephen Timms will be in the High Street on the Saturday before Polling Day. We'll get nothing from anyone else. The Labour activists will be sent to places like Chingford or Hornchurch & Upminster while the Conservatives will also be there and in Romford. That's where the GE will be fought in my part of the world.
The Greens will fight Stratford & Bow and the Newham Independents will work West Ham & Beckton and we have three local by elections on July 4th - none of them in East Ham.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Interesting election fact. In all 10 elections since 1980 CON have never ended up with a total number of seats beginning with a '2'. We have won 7 elections in that period getting a '3' and lost 3 more getting a '1'!
Not sure it will end up beginning with a '2' this time either!
There's an obvious joke to make there, but I'm not doing it!
A last ditch idea for Rishi. A free daily lottery. £1,000.000 to the winner.
Cost £352,000,000. Everyone likes a gamble. Loads of millionaires. Cost less than Rwanda.
I have always been of the view that divvying up all the cost of government promotion of electoral registration and turnout promotion, and using it to fund a lottery where one name per constituency comes out of the hat and that person wins 1/650th of the pot - but if that person didn't vote their share gets redistributed among the other 649, etc etc - would be more effective and more fun.
The Economist floated the idea that for every pound in income tax you paid, you get a lottery ticket. If you win, you get back your tax for the year.
No limit on how much excess tax you pay.
For some rates of winning, they got a social scientist and an economist to work out that it would increase tax take considerably - far more than the payouts.
VAT receipt lotteries have been successful in several places in stopping small traders from ducking VAT.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Social media is about talking to your fan club and getting their approval, not talking to or understanding another point of view. And it rewards the former and not the latter.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
The Guardian having a history of that:
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
I’ve had liberal-left Americans try and denounce me in foreign parts for our Brexit vote. Like it has anything to do with them?!
Common denominator is sneering liberal lefties, not “being British” or “being American”
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
The Guardian having a history of that:
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
Given that Bush Sr won Ohio by nearly 120,000 votes and even if he had lost Ohio he would still have won the election 275-263 the loss of 1600 votes seems rather inconsequential.
A couple of US polls now largely or completely since the verdict. One has Biden 2% ahead, one Trump 2% ahead. So, basically, no evidence of any change.
So we have gone from 66 to 124 in a day. What price a Tory majority after all?
In May 2021 (so, a midterm poll), Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus predicted a Tory majority of 122.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
So we have gone from 66 to 124 in a day. What price a Tory majority after all?
In May 2021 (so, a midterm poll), Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus predicted a Tory majority of 122.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
How long until the next Tory poll lead?
I'd go for about 3 years? Past the midpoint of the next Parliament, anyway.
On more important matters, we have the Derby at Epsom this afternoon over the iconic mile and a half.
I won't bore you with more analysis so my idea of the each way value is DANCING GEMINI and I got on at 10s (was 25s earlier in the week and I'm kicking myself about that).
This year's Derby feels to me a tricky one to find a route through. Possibly long prices worth an e/w look. (Like 2022).
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
The Guardian having a history of that:
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
Given that Bush Sr won Ohio by nearly 120,000 votes and even if he had lost Ohio he would still have won the election 275-263 the loss of 1600 votes seems rather inconsequential.
Sure, the chances of an election being decided by a few hundred votes somewhere, let alone anyone being able to predict which few hundred votes, is extremely low.
But it does highlight that telling someone who to vote for tends to have the opposite effect to what was wanted.
On more important matters, we have the Derby at Epsom this afternoon over the iconic mile and a half.
I won't bore you with more analysis so my idea of the each way value is DANCING GEMINI and I got on at 10s (was 25s earlier in the week and I'm kicking myself about that).
Main thrust of around 22-30ish seems logical as well. I'll be very surprised if they hit 40.
I'm also confident they'll win no seats in Wales, where they always used to have a few 'bankers.'
The extent to which the Lib Dems are likely to become almost a solely Southern/Scottish party is remarkable. We'll see on election night but they could win even 40-50 seats with only a handful outside those areas.
Is there any chance of someone running us a detailed betting thread on Scottish constituencies sometime?
Gtg, but thank you again for this thread. It’s very helpful.
I plan to do so once the SOPNs are confirmed as I want to see how many Greens and Alba candidates are standing and where.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
MAGA snowflakes can give it out but can't take it.
A couple of US polls now largely or completely since the verdict. One has Biden 2% ahead, one Trump 2% ahead. So, basically, no evidence of any change.
Provisional view (as still early days): if Biden is looking for a hail Mary, this wasn't it.
No it certainly isn't. There is an alternative rationality going on. The conviction proves that Trump is needed as POTUS to drain the corupt swamp.
The nearest thing to a thoughtful Trumpian I have heard recently was on R4 Today this morning. Was a big cheese in the Trump team; left his side after the insurrection events of 6th January. Would prefer that someone else got the nomination, but if it's Trump, Trump gets his vote for POTUS in 2024 over any Democrat whatsoever.
SFAICS his was the voice of the ultra liberal Trump wing, denying his infallible perfection to the extent he wouldn't work for him any more. Scary.
Hello again. For labour it may be a 2019 election win. They could get What the Tories managed under Johnson. Or, will it be for Labour what Blair managed in 1997? I cannot see them bettering that under Starmer no matter how sick the country is of the Tories. As for the Tories 200 seats max unless the do not knows are sabotaging the polls along with the shy tories plus people who say they will vote for one party and vote for another. Looking forward to hear what other peoples opinions are!.
So we have gone from 66 to 124 in a day. What price a Tory majority after all?
In May 2021 (so, a midterm poll), Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus predicted a Tory majority of 122.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
How long until the next Tory poll lead?
I'd go for about 3 years? Past the midpoint of the next Parliament, anyway.
Variation on the old "how many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb?" joke. (Answer, in case anyone hasn't heard it is "one, but the lightbulb has to want to change.")
Labour, if they have any sense, will be doing unpopular stuff 2024-6. There will be votes up for grabs, but I'm not sure that the blue team will be in any position to grab them. More likely, they will have done the political party equivalent of joining a questionable commune to be truly be themselves.
So when do the Conservatives decide they'd rather compromise with the public than keep on losing?
I had no idea there was an actual war between transnistria and Moldova. But there was from 1990-1992. Mainly fought - brilliantly (if you love layers of history) - at the Bendery Fortress first built by Suleiman the Magnfiicent, then endlessly swapped between various empires - Ottoman, austrohungarian, Swedish. Polish, Russian Tsarist, Soviet, Nazi - a Moldovan walnut and honey millefeulle of military history
I also had the best borscht of my life in a commie theme restaurant where you spooned your sour cream over your beet soup under a Bakelite radio embosssed with the face of Stalin and just now as we left transistria we got thoroughly examined by Putin’s Russian troops; who mass on this border quite menacingly
Superb. That’s proper travel
Pah! You've not done real travel till you've hiked around Woodstock market square when the farmers' market is on and Labour have a campaign stall. You need to be more adventurous.
Moldova is brilliant if you want that sense of “fuck I’m the only tourist here and probably only the third this year”. In some places you could be the only tourist they’ve ever had - or so I am told. Ie down in the south or the “wild north”
I love that feeling so Moldava rocks - for me. But it’s not for everyone
I confess I enjoy your travelblog snippets from places I will never visit for various practical reasons.
I had no idea there was an actual war between transnistria and Moldova. But there was from 1990-1992. Mainly fought - brilliantly (if you love layers of history) - at the Bendery Fortress first built by Suleiman the Magnfiicent, then endlessly swapped between various empires - Ottoman, austrohungarian, Swedish. Polish, Russian Tsarist, Soviet, Nazi - a Moldovan walnut and honey millefeulle of military history
I also had the best borscht of my life in a commie theme restaurant where you spooned your sour cream over your beet soup under a Bakelite radio embosssed with the face of Stalin and just now as we left transistria we got thoroughly examined by Putin’s Russian troops; who mass on this border quite menacingly
Superb. That’s proper travel
Pah! You've not done real travel till you've hiked around Woodstock market square when the farmers' market is on and Labour have a campaign stall. You need to be more adventurous.
Moldova is brilliant if you want that sense of “fuck I’m the only tourist here and probably only the third this year”. In some places you could be the only tourist they’ve ever had - or so I am told. Ie down in the south or the “wild north”
I love that feeling so Moldava rocks - for me. But it’s not for everyone
I confess I enjoy your travelblog snippets from places I will never visit for various practical reasons.
Confess? They're one of the Site's joys,along with Stodge's lapidary analyses and Sunil's salutations at each succesive poll.
A couple of US polls now largely or completely since the verdict. One has Biden 2% ahead, one Trump 2% ahead. So, basically, no evidence of any change.
Provisional view (as still early days): if Biden is looking for a hail Mary, this wasn't it.
This should worry Dems:
The Chicago Business Barometer, also known as the Chicago PMI, fell to 35.4 in May from 37.9 in April. It is the lowest level since the pandemic in May 2020.
The reading was well below expectations. Economists polled by the Wall Street Journal forecast a 40.8 reading.
This is the sixth consecutive reading in contraction territory.
The index is produced by the ISM-Chicago with MNI. It is released to subscribers three minutes before its release to the public at 9:45 am Eastern.
It is one of the last of the regional manufacturing indices before the key national ISM manufacturing survey for May is released Monday.
Other regional Fed manufacturing surveys for May have shown some improvement, economists said.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
Bryant isn't always right, but this thread about levelling up is spot on. Can Labour do significantly better, though ? (They probably can't do worse.)
Few policies have made me so angry as the Tories’ ‘levelling up’. 🧵 They turned it into a competition between local authorities who wasted millions on developing plans that were going nowhere. They doled out taxpayers’ cash to the constituencies of their favourite MPs... https://x.com/RhonddaBryant/status/1796798439650472044
...of election bribes to a bunch of Tory constituencies. The policy is wrong, morally and economically. Gove says it’s like an unfinished cathedral. It’s much worse than that.
A far better principle would be ‘from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs’.
No, it would not.
Would you care to explain why it is wrong?
Because what's the point of having the ability if the benefits are taken from you?
A slice of your pie is given to someone with no pie. You still have plenty to fill your plate. And in many cases, still way more than enough.
We aren't advocating 99% income tax rates.
But isn't that what that quote implies? I live with my parents. I don't have a mortgage. Take that principle to it's logical conclusion and my tax rate should be through the roof.
Well no. You may not have major outgoings at present, but you may be saving up for a deposit on your own home, for example.
Ability to pay is gauged on a macro rather than micro level. Hence you end up with highly paid people claiming that they are virtually on the bread line, due to their lifestyle choices.
"Lifestyle choices" like needing to pay rent or mortgages?
"Lifestyle choices" like bringing up children?
One of the biggest differences in living expenses is simply if you're paying for the roof over your head or not. If you live rent or mortgage free then costs are completely different to if you need to spend a grand or more a month on rent/mortgage.
Earning £500 a month extra doesn't make up for spending £1000 a month extra.
No. Lifestyle choices like driving a flash car. Wearing high fashion and a bling watch. Taking expensive holidays. And yes, paying for private education. All discretionary spend.
The proportion of people who do that is utterly miniscule as a proportion of people claiming that they are virtually on the breadline.
Though again, housing is a far bigger issue than that. "Expensive holidays" or watches etc for most families are at most a couple of grand, not £12k. Paying for expensive holidays is far more affordable if you aren't paying for your house.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
The Guardian having a history of that:
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
A significant sub-group of Americans did similar in our part of the world with often fatal consequences between 1969 and 1997. They’ll cope with this lady.
Oh I am sure they will cope, just as they coped with the Guardian urging its readers to write to Americans and urge them not to vote for Trump in 2016 but it does absolutely nothing for our reputation.
The Guardian having a history of that:
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
Given that Bush Sr won Ohio by nearly 120,000 votes and even if he had lost Ohio he would still have won the election 275-263 the loss of 1600 votes seems rather inconsequential.
Sure, the chances of an election being decided by a few hundred votes somewhere, let alone anyone being able to predict which few hundred votes, is extremely low.
But it does highlight that telling someone who to vote for tends to have the opposite effect to what was wanted.
The Clark County, Ohio story doesn't stand up statistically.
Clark County registered a modest swing against Democrats in 2004, contrary to the rest of Ohio. But Ohio's results were driven by big cities and college towns, which delivered outsized swings. Clark County is a more mixed urban-rural area in in Southwestern Ohio, and among its seven neighbouring counties, five counties had even larger swings in favour of Bush, whereas two counties had larger swings in favour of Kerry - one of which contained the larger city of Dayton, OH.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
So we have gone from 66 to 124 in a day. What price a Tory majority after all?
In May 2021 (so, a midterm poll), Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus predicted a Tory majority of 122.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
How long until the next Tory poll lead?
I'd go for about 3 years? Past the midpoint of the next Parliament, anyway.
Spring 2025, assuming that’s when the SR falls. Then final position means they won’t be able to hide from unpopular stuff, and Starmer is no Blair.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
That’s an ancient Russian dream.
There are modern patriotic Russian songs that talk about reconquering Jerusalem.
Here’s a recap of some of Trump’s notable comments about “felons” and “criminals” – and a look at how the convict himself has actually been treated...</>
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
That’s an ancient Russian dream.
With every day that passes and the daft Ukraine war progresses and Putin isn't shot by space cannon into space... every day I like the Russians a little less.
I hope that the Russian dream has no future, and I increasingly hope that Russia has no future too. Back to Muscovy! The Mongol hoards would be fine too.
So we have gone from 66 to 124 in a day. What price a Tory majority after all?
In May 2021 (so, a midterm poll), Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus predicted a Tory majority of 122.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
How long until the next Tory poll lead?
I'd go for about 3 years? Past the midpoint of the next Parliament, anyway.
Spring 2025, assuming that’s when the SR falls. Then final position means they won’t be able to hide from unpopular stuff, and Starmer is no Blair.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
That’s an ancient Russian dream.
With every day that passes and the daft Ukraine war progresses and Putin isn't shot by space cannon into space... every day I like the Russians a little less.
I hope that the Russian dream has no future, and I increasingly hope that Russia has no future too. Back to Muscovy! The Mongol hoards would be fine too.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
That’s an ancient Russian dream.
With every day that passes and the daft Ukraine war progresses and Putin isn't shot by space cannon into space... every day I like the Russians a little less.
I hope that the Russian dream has no future, and I increasingly hope that Russia has no future too. Back to Muscovy! The Mongol hoards would be fine too.
Make Mongolia Great Again?
Probably not horsemen this time around though as their main export.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
Main thThey rust of around 22-30ish seems logical as well. I'll be very surprised if they hit 40.
I'm also confident they'll win no seats in Wales, where they always used to have a few 'bankers.'
The extent to which the Lib Dems are likely to become almost a solely Southern/Scottish party is remarkable. We'll see on election night but they could win even 40-50 seats with only a handful outside those areas.
A tribute to the Union,
I do expect the Lib Dems to have a goodish night in the North West, Hazel Grove seems nailed on, then add in Southport and Cheadle.
It's Wales that's the different country when it comes to Lib Dems. No idea why they're so unpopular there.
They were very popular in the past, especially in local government, but it looks as if Wales will not only have any Lib Dems but also Conservative mps, which is extraordinary when Wales Labour have a terrible record on the NHS and education and governance in general
Yet people keep voting for them. Maybe part of your surprise is that you're constantly dipping into hostile, partisan, and selective sources?
I think they vote as much out of habit as anything else. A bit like John Buchan's acid comment on the Highlands: 'The people here are the most stubborn reactionaries on the face of the globe, but they've been voting Radical since the days of John Knox.'
Granted, many people are habitual voters. But then again, we've seen in this thread how some parties have had dramatic changes in fortune directly in response to widespread public opinion of failure or betrayal. The Lib Dem's lost two thirds of their vote in Wales in a single election. Wales's Labour vote has persisted, though. Part of that must be that perceptions of failure are not as commonplace in the wider Welsh population as Big_G would imagine. Or, at a pinch, that people don't believe that changing to another party will address such putative failures. What seems obvious to Big_G is far from obvious to many other people. And that might or might not be because Big_G sees more clearly.
The second option is more plausible.
I would also add I think the actual Welsh vote for the Libs dwindled away over decades. Indeed, the fact they held on to their strength until the 1960s suggests habit as much as anything. By the finish, many of their voters (in my experience at least) were English incomers.
It would be nice to see Labour suffer such a collapse but having successfully predicted 23 of the last 0 Labour failures in Wales I will not hold my breath.
Andrew RT Davies, leader of the Welsh conservatives is hopeless and I agree about the second option
Who could forgot this bon not from the now banned @YBarddCwsc
Ships bearing Ivory, apes, and peacocks are yours.
Apart from we don't have any in Wales.
So you're getting slate, Andrew 'RT' Davies and red kites instead.
Surprise to me, UKIP still exist and they have elected a new leader Lois Perry taking over from Neil Hamilton.
Lois Perry: 77.4% Bill Etheridge: 20.9% Anne-Marie Waters: withdrew
I would love to know what the turnout was, my guess is less than 300 members.
They have an alliance with the English Democrats under the Patriots Alliance banner when there's joint candidates and "... will be standing in key areas where we believe we can make a stand or effect the election result."
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
But I hear what you say!
I was just making a rye observation.
Do you imagine grain or other themed jokes might ever overtake fish? Cod I'd like to know wheat the future looks like.
77 seats for the Tories is complete rubbish. No way. Lets be realistic.
Why is it rubbish? Not saying it's going to happen, the fieldwork is in some points already 12 days old and it's over a month to the actual election day but what's your evidence for a different view.
Here we like contrary views because that's where the value is. Always betting with the received wisdom doesn't lead to profits.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
But I hear what you say!
I was just making a rye observation.
Do you imagine grain or other themed jokes might ever overtake fish? Cod I'd like to know wheat the future looks like.
I'll be amaized if they do. It would make PB corny.
77 seats for the Tories is complete rubbish. No way. Lets be realistic.
Curious why you think it is so unlikely? Labour have recorded 20%+ swings in by-elections and local elections also fit with polling showing the Tories almost 20% down. They got 165 seats in 1997 when 13% behind. If they do lose by 20% why can't they fall below 100?
I'm not saying they will, but it's hardly implausible.
77 seats for the Tories is complete rubbish. No way. Lets be realistic.
Curious why you think it is so unlikely? Labour have recorded 20%+ swings in by-elections and local elections also fit with polling showing the Tories almost 20% down. They got 165 seats in 1997 when 13% behind. If they do lose by 20% why can't they fall below 100?
I'm not saying they will, but it's hardly implausible.
It's not implausible, I just don't think it will happen. It smells like a fishy result to me.
77 seats for the Tories is complete rubbish. No way. Lets be realistic.
Curious why you think it is so unlikely? Labour have recorded 20%+ swings in by-elections and local elections also fit with polling showing the Tories almost 20% down. They got 165 seats in 1997 when 13% behind. If they do lose by 20% why can't they fall below 100?
I'm not saying they will, but it's hardly implausible.
For me it is the fact the vote is likely to be stickier in core seats. The locals showed there are still areas that will reliably return Tory candidates. Yes the GE might throw the “we need a change” factor into the mix but I personally feel that there must be at least 100 seats out there where the opposition parties are nowhere and will find it hard to leapfrog when push comes to shove. I suspect, as I said last night, that the Tories will hit at least 150 and probably a bit more than that. But I am open to revising my estimations downwards slightly if we keep getting these indicators in 4 or so weeks’ time.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
But I hear what you say!
I was just making a rye observation.
Do you imagine grain or other themed jokes might ever overtake fish? Cod I'd like to know wheat the future looks like.
I'll be amaized if they do. It would make PB corny.
So long as they are spelt correctly, Pedantic Betting and all that.
Europe’s highest suspended Tibetan bridge. Dog refused to walk it and had to be carried over.
I am all in favour of the daily photo limit, but I would happily allow @IanB2 unlimited posting of 'dog for scale' photos. Who's with me?
I think this is the best idea on PB since GeorgeIV_therightful suggested sliced bread in 1842. Admittedly there were some good posts by WinnyChurch in the early 1940s that might compete.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
Implausible. So the 200 tory seats in countryside seats will all go to the Lib Dems or Labour?What is palusible in these areas alone I believe they will retain 140 seats. Time will tell. These polls may repeat the 2015 election forcast which was totally incorrect.
Here’s a recap of some of Trump’s notable comments about “felons” and “criminals” – and a look at how the convict himself has actually been treated...</>
I like presidential candidates who aren't convicted fraudsters.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
Steve Bray, MAGA, Just Stop Oil, ExR, SWP, Gaza, EDL, BLM, antifa..
The Western world is not blessed with rational and influential political protestors.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
Is she a Yankee expert?
I was trying to think how this reads across.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
NOT in Bourbon County, Kentucky.
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
But I hear what you say!
I was just making a rye observation.
Do you imagine grain or other themed jokes might ever overtake fish? Cod I'd like to know wheat the future looks like.
I'll be amaized if they do. It would make PB corny.
So long as they are spelt correctly, Pedantic Betting and all that.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
Possibly, but when will lefties learn that high handedly telling people how ghastly they are is counter productive?
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
Possibly, but when will lefties learn that high handedly telling people how ghastly they are is counter productive?
I dunno. People said the same about BLM in mid-2020, and Biden did okay.
Vaguely related to the topic: After the LibDem leader (Paddy Ashdown, if I recall correctly) met George W. Bush, he said that Bush didn't seem much like the picture he had gotten from your media.
That strikes me as a powerful criticism of the Guardian, the BBC, and their ideological allies.
And, the feeling that American leaders, especially Republicans, are rarely treated fairly by foreign media is one of the many, many reasons for the rise of Trump.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
Possibly, but when will lefties learn that high handedly telling people how ghastly they are is counter productive?
I don't think lefties, of whom I am proud to be one, have a monopoly on being high-handed with people with whom they disagree. Personally, I try not to be, but then I'm a Left-Liberal; my opponent is as honourable as I am and may, just possibly, be right.
Stunningly rude in my book. Imagine going to a different country and having the audacity to tell people there that they are "disgusting" because of what they believe. I have absolutely no time for Trumpsters but that is just embarrassing. No wonder her husband wanted her out of there.
I think it's great! She must have thought she's landed in Hartlepool.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Roger: wrong about everything. All the time.
She does seem a bit rude, but pales in comparison to those MAGA asshats.
These stunts show he is only in it for attention. And it doesn't paint him in a positive light.
I used to know what the LDs stood for. But now? Not a clue.
They are ruining Oxfordshire and with people like Moran in senior positions, they are just seen locally as opportunistic bandwagon jumpers.
They are not putting forward a positive agenda. They don't deserve to succeed.
I don’t understand why they are not full on “reverse Ukip”, and campaigning draped in the EU flag. Plenty of young votes in that, and as we can see from some media commentary, some people will happily choose to believe that almost anything was caused by Brexit.
On thread, one additional point regarding the likely LD seat total.
Currently on GB wide polling, the LDs are at around 9%. There are 632 parliamentary seats up for grabs excluding NI. Winning 9% of those would give the LDs 57 seats - that is, the purest result possible in PR terms.
In "The case for the attack" Pip speculates that in their optimistic scenario, the LDs would pick up an extra 50 seats. That would take them to 58 - i.e. FPTP would deliver them a higher share of seats than they would get under PR.
It is surely highly improbable that the LD vote might become so efficiently geographically distributed that the disadvantages of FPTP to small parties now completely disappear in their case. To achieve that on 9% of the vote, they would have to lose their deposit in nearly all of the seats that they don't win. It just doesn't ring true.
I am a notable LD seat sceptic, but Scotland demonstrates that it is entirely possible in an FPTP to have a vote share that efficient.
In 2017, the LDs won just 6.5% of the Scottish vote. And they won 4 seats, which - if my maths are right - is about 7%.
So it is entirely possible for a party's vote to become extremely efficiently distributed.
I also suspect that the LDs will do slightly better than 9% in the polls, for two reasons: (1) turnout is not going to be as high as people expect, and (2) they LDs will get some tactical votes on the day. Lower turnout is a benefit to the LDs, and is simply a function of education levels: LD voters tend to be better educated; and turnout for better educated groups is much more likely to match certainty to vote than for other demographics.
I also suspect that - as has happened in I think every election bar one since 1979 - that the LDs will gain some share during the campaign. I don't think it'll be a massive increase, but they are getting headlines and they are getting leaflets out, and they are reminding people they exist. This is like a reverse of 2019: then the LDs were flying high on Brexit confusion, and then people were reminded that it was a Corbyn/Johnson choice. This time, everyone has forgotten the LDs exist, and Starmer simply doesn't look that threatening to centrists.
In 2019, I forecast 12-14% and 12 to 14 seats. I was in the range for votes, but slightly high on seats.
This time, I would forecast a similar vote share, but 25-30 seats. Simply: if the Conservative vote halves, and (outside Scotland and Sheffield Hallam) the LDs are only ever in competition with the Conservatives, then it would be staggering if they did not pick up a reasonable number of seats.
Vaguely related to the topic: After the LibDem leader (Paddy Ashdown, if I recall correctly) met George W. Bush, he said that Bush didn't seem much like the picture he had gotten from your media.
That strikes me as a powerful criticism of the Guardian, the BBC, and their ideological allies.
And, the feeling that American leaders, especially Republicans, are rarely treated fairly by foreign media is one of the many, many reasons for the rise of Trump.
Oh yes, W Bush was a thoughtful guy. His words - "Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions" - are ones which really should be heeded today by ...well... everyone.
If he hadn't attacked Iraq, it's highly likely he would have gone down as a successful President. But he did invade Iraq. And he (and the Federal Reserve) also allowed the housing market and mortgage markets to get enormously overlevered.
I doubt there are many people on here who would bet that the Tories would get less than 150 seats.
At the start of the campaign I was expecting a swing back to 160-180, but time is going on and if there is any movement it's away from the Tories, there's same modest signs of Ref moving a little towards Con but more movement from Con towards Lab. I've got some money on a seat that the MRP says will stay Tory but I think will go LD (at 11/4) and some money on Con seats < 100 at 3/1. I would take an even bet with you on Con seats < 150 but right now you can go and get 12/5 on Con seats 150-199 and you can even bet on the upside with Con seats 200-249 at 8/1
Vaguely related to the topic: After the LibDem leader (Paddy Ashdown, if I recall correctly) met George W. Bush, he said that Bush didn't seem much like the picture he had gotten from your media.
That strikes me as a powerful criticism of the Guardian, the BBC, and their ideological allies.
And, the feeling that American leaders, especially Republicans, are rarely treated fairly by foreign media is one of the many, many reasons for the rise of Trump.
In fairness, Bush Jnr was (wrongly) portrayed as an idiot by US media too. It was a combination of his intentional folksiness concealing his intelligence and his verbal gaffes.
Vaguely related to the topic: After the LibDem leader (Paddy Ashdown, if I recall correctly) met George W. Bush, he said that Bush didn't seem much like the picture he had gotten from your media.
That strikes me as a powerful criticism of the Guardian, the BBC, and their ideological allies.
And, the feeling that American leaders, especially Republicans, are rarely treated fairly by foreign media is one of the many, many reasons for the rise of Trump.
Oh yes, W Bush was a thoughtful guy. His words - "Too often we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions" - are ones which really should be heeded today by ...well... everyone.
If he hadn't attacked Iraq, it's highly likely he would have gone down as a successful President. But he did invade Iraq. And he (and the Federal Reserve) also allowed the housing market and mortgage markets to get enormously overlevered.
George W Bush quote about Vladimir Putin
“I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy, I was able to get a sense of his soul.”
Comments
Turnout in 2017 was 69%. The last YouGov of the campaign had 67% saying they were 10 out of 10 absolutely certain to vote, or had already voted by post. A month and a bit before polling day this figure was 63%.
Turnout in 2019 was 67%. The last YouGov of the campaign had 68% saying they were 10 out of 10, absolutely certain to vote, or had already voted by post. A month and a bit before polling day this figure was 60%.
In the latest YouGov poll for this election, a month and a bit before polling day, 56% say that they are 10 out of 10, absolutely certain to vote.
Looks to me like it's certain that turnout will be down on GE2019. And it's not out of the question that the record low turnout in 2001 is threatened.
Not sure it will end up beginning with a '2' this time either!
The LDs are working 50 seats I would imagine - those they hold plus the obvious targets and some with a strong Council base to build for next time. The Greens are fighting maybe 10 seats, Reform 3-5.
The ground war requires people and there just aren't the people any more so the election is fought on social media and tv - I remember for instance in 1992 the Conservatives spent half their advertising budget in the last 3-4 days.
In a safe Labour seat like East Ham, we might see one Labour leaflet - Stephen Timms will be in the High Street on the Saturday before Polling Day. We'll get nothing from anyone else. The Labour activists will be sent to places like Chingford or Hornchurch & Upminster while the Conservatives will also be there and in Romford. That's where the GE will be fought in my part of the world.
The Greens will fight Stratford & Bow and the Newham Independents will work West Ham & Beckton and we have three local by elections on July 4th - none of them in East Ham.
Who knew?
https://moldova.travel/en/orheiul-vechi/
https://x.com/bnhwalker/status/1796904573677805626?s=61
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/india-election-exit-polls-show-modi-winning-with-large-majority/ar-BB1nrDmY?ocid=BingNewsSerp
They should call it anti-social media.
Both sides seem quite unpleasant
Was it "the Guardian wot swung it" is the somewhat tongue-in-cheek question for analysts following George Bush's presidential election victory.
Specifically, was the "Guardian Effect" to blame for the pro-Bush swing in one Ohio county?
In the run up to the US presidential election, the left-wing paper identified the area as a vote-swingers hotspot.
Under Operation Clark County, it began a letter-writing campaign which aimed to give people outside the US a say in the election.
The project set up its readers as pen pals with American voters, to press home the international ramifications of a vote for Republican George Bush or Democrat John Kerry.
But in Clark County itself, there was a swing away from the Democrat.
In 2000, Democrat presidential candidate Al Gore won the county by 1% - or about 324 votes - this time President George Bush won 51%, with a 1600-vote county-wide swing in his favour.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/3981823.stm
Common denominator is sneering liberal lefties, not “being British” or “being American”
https://www.realclearpolling.com/latest-polls/election
Provisional view (as still early days): if Biden is looking for a hail Mary, this wasn't it.
People may have said something about Starmer being a dud, and Boris Johnson remaining Prime Minister for all the 2020s. Nameless, unidentified, people.
How long until the next Tory poll lead?
But it does highlight that telling someone who to vote for tends to have the opposite effect to what was wanted.
The nearest thing to a thoughtful Trumpian I have heard recently was on R4 Today this morning. Was a big cheese in the Trump team; left his side after the insurrection events of 6th January. Would prefer that someone else got the nomination, but if it's Trump, Trump gets his vote for POTUS in 2024 over any Democrat whatsoever.
SFAICS his was the voice of the ultra liberal Trump wing, denying his infallible perfection to the extent he wouldn't work for him any more. Scary.
Labour, if they have any sense, will be doing unpopular stuff 2024-6. There will be votes up for grabs, but I'm not sure that the blue team will be in any position to grab them. More likely, they will have done the political party equivalent of joining a questionable commune to be truly be themselves.
So when do the Conservatives decide they'd rather compromise with the public than keep on losing?
Place wouldn't be the same without them.
The Chicago Business Barometer, also known as the Chicago PMI, fell to 35.4 in May from 37.9 in April. It is the lowest level since the pandemic in May 2020.
The reading was well below expectations. Economists polled by the Wall Street Journal forecast a 40.8 reading.
This is the sixth consecutive reading in contraction territory.
The index is produced by the ISM-Chicago with MNI. It is released to subscribers three minutes before its release to the public at 9:45 am Eastern.
It is one of the last of the regional manufacturing indices before the key national ISM manufacturing survey for May is released Monday.
Other regional Fed manufacturing surveys for May have shown some improvement, economists said.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chicago-business-activity-index-weakens-to-lowest-level-in-four-years-9d41c6fc
Biden really doesn't need factory closures in the Mid West.
Sometimes it's not a bad thing to hold a mirror up to people. 12.5 million views!
If it causes a few in the US pause for thought she'll have done the world a favour.
Back once again on the geopolitics, Moldova is required for Putin's pipe dream of reconquering and christianising Constantinople. It obviously sounds demented, but if he can make it to Odessa he's only 2-3 wars away...
Though again, housing is a far bigger issue than that. "Expensive holidays" or watches etc for most families are at most a couple of grand, not £12k. Paying for expensive holidays is far more affordable if you aren't paying for your house.
I mean, a Bourbon expert sounds like some kind of Professor on the French Revolution.
Clark County registered a modest swing against Democrats in 2004, contrary to the rest of Ohio. But Ohio's results were driven by big cities and college towns, which delivered outsized swings. Clark County is a more mixed urban-rural area in in Southwestern Ohio, and among its seven neighbouring counties, five counties had even larger swings in favour of Bush, whereas two counties had larger swings in favour of Kerry - one of which contained the larger city of Dayton, OH.
All assuming vaguely competent Tory leader.
Donald Trump had lots of negative opinions about felons. Now he is one.
From roughing up suspects to revoking bail, the 34-count felon has suggested harsh treatment for his fellow criminals
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/jun/01/donald-trump-crime-punishment
Here’s a recap of some of Trump’s notable comments about “felons” and “criminals” – and a look at how the convict himself has actually been treated...</>
I hope that the Russian dream has no future, and I increasingly hope that Russia has no future too. Back to Muscovy! The Mongol hoards would be fine too.
Westminster Voting Intention:
LAB: 46% (+4)
CON: 19% (-3)
REF: 12% (+2)
LDM: 10% (-1)
Seat Projection (MRP):
LAB: 493 (+41)
CON: 72 (-8)
LDM: 39 (-14)
SNP: 22 (-18)
Labour majority of 336 (+82).
via @FindoutnowUK / @ElectCalculus, 20-27 May
(Changes with 12 Feb)
Anyway your horizons re: House of Bourbon appear somewhat limited, seeing as how the "royal" Bourbons date back to 13th century, and are today the ruling dynasty of Spain's constitutional monarchy.
But I hear what you say!
Lois Perry: 77.4%
Bill Etheridge: 20.9%
Anne-Marie Waters: withdrew
I would love to know what the turnout was, my guess is less than 300 members.
They have an alliance with the English Democrats under the Patriots Alliance banner when there's joint candidates and "... will be standing in key areas where we believe we can make a stand or effect the election result."
Here we like contrary views because that's where the value is. Always betting with the received wisdom doesn't lead to profits.
I'm not saying they will, but it's hardly implausible.
New w/ @HansNichols
Some potential bad signs for Trump in new @MorningConsult poll post-verdict
49% of Ind.'s and 15% of R's said Trump should end his campaign
54% of registered voters "strongly" or "somewhat" approve of the verdict
https://x.com/AlexThomp/status/1796928482133320102
The Western world is not blessed with rational and influential political protestors.
Everyone says "Aidan O'Brien, genius".
No-one says "Aidan O'Brien, how shit must he be to have lost the Guineas with that horse".
These stunts show he is only in it for attention. And it doesn't paint him in a positive light.
I used to know what the LDs stood for. But now? Not a clue.
They are ruining Oxfordshire and with people like Moran in senior positions, they are just seen locally as opportunistic bandwagon jumpers.
They are not putting forward a positive agenda. They don't deserve to succeed.
That strikes me as a powerful criticism of the Guardian, the BBC, and their ideological allies.
And, the feeling that American leaders, especially Republicans, are rarely treated fairly by foreign media is one of the many, many reasons for the rise of Trump.
Personally, I try not to be, but then I'm a Left-Liberal; my opponent is as honourable as I am and may, just possibly, be right.
Also, I've seen quite a few posts from the sharper posters indicating they're punting on Con <150.
In 2017, the LDs won just 6.5% of the Scottish vote. And they won 4 seats, which - if my maths are right - is about 7%.
So it is entirely possible for a party's vote to become extremely efficiently distributed.
I also suspect that the LDs will do slightly better than 9% in the polls, for two reasons: (1) turnout is not going to be as high as people expect, and (2) they LDs will get some tactical votes on the day. Lower turnout is a benefit to the LDs, and is simply a function of education levels: LD voters tend to be better educated; and turnout for better educated groups is much more likely to match certainty to vote than for other demographics.
I also suspect that - as has happened in I think every election bar one since 1979 - that the LDs will gain some share during the campaign. I don't think it'll be a massive increase, but they are getting headlines and they are getting leaflets out, and they are reminding people they exist. This is like a reverse of 2019: then the LDs were flying high on Brexit confusion, and then people were reminded that it was a Corbyn/Johnson choice. This time, everyone has forgotten the LDs exist, and Starmer simply doesn't look that threatening to centrists.
In 2019, I forecast 12-14% and 12 to 14 seats. I was in the range for votes, but slightly high on seats.
This time, I would forecast a similar vote share, but 25-30 seats. Simply: if the Conservative vote halves, and (outside Scotland and Sheffield Hallam) the LDs are only ever in competition with the Conservatives, then it would be staggering if they did not pick up a reasonable number of seats.
If he hadn't attacked Iraq, it's highly likely he would have gone down as a successful President. But he did invade Iraq. And he (and the Federal Reserve) also allowed the housing market and mortgage markets to get enormously overlevered.