(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Do you think Davey might be in a spot of bother in Kingston?
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Do you think Davey might be in a spot of bother in Kingston?
Personally, I think the Conservatives are 60% to take Kingston, Davey 40% to hold on.
Similarly close will be Hornsey and Wood Green, which is very close between Labour and the LibDems, with the latter being almost exactly equal in votes in the council elections this year. (I suspect Lynne Featherstone will hang on, and that Ed Davey will not.)
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Do you think Davey might be in a spot of bother in Kingston?
Not based on the local results this year .
With the local results in Kingston and Richmond going against the LDs are you saying that won't really make a difference to the LD MPs in that area ?
A sensible thread by TSE destroyed by inane comments from many who have little knowledge of politics and even less of the Lib Dems
Yes on PB everyone knows that losing all credibilty, your deposits at 50% of by elections and throwing away your principles is a postive for the Lib Dems
Where as winning a national election and seeing your vote share increase almost 600% is bad news for UKIP
It is highly likely that UKIP outpolls the LibDems in 2015, and has perhaps one MP against the Yellow Peril's 30 odd.
After being an utter tit on This Week's election coverage, Chris Bryant excelling himself again - he seems to think the number of MPs who died in WW2 was a political 'scoring' by the Tories...reflects more on him surely???
This was their tweet:
Con. History Group@ConHistGrp·1 hr MT @DanKellyEsq: it appears that of the 24 MPs killed in action in WWII, 21 were Conservatives.
The number was 21, 22, or 23 depending on source.
If we take the 23 figure, it was 20 Tories, 2 Libs and one Ulster Unionist.
Not all were killed in action, one was a suicide, another a train crash, another a victim of a passenger vessel torpedoing. But the deaths could be deemed as "on active service".
Those definitely "killed in action", or died of wounds, amount to eleven. Ten Tories and one Liberal.
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
I think Sutton and Cheam will be held... Portsmouth South will not be...
Other losses (IMHO) Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
My last outstanding bet with a PBer is with Isam about the Lib Dems beating UKIP in their share of the vote. Thought it was a no brainer at the time but I am a bit twitchy now.
I suspect that the Lib Dems will (as usual) be a bootstrap operation with most of the effort coming locally from their councillor base (much diminished) and volunteers. That makes focussing on 30 seats pretty unrealistic. Are those in NE Fife really going to conclude this is hopeless and pop up to Inverness to help Danny? Not a chance.
The Lib Dem campaign will therefore have greater similarities to the Somme than Rorkes' Drift. Everyone will fight for their own bit of trench and go over the top into the machine guns. God help them because Lib Dem HQ won't.
Their local election vote (NEV) has declined every year this parliament.
I'd hazard a guess at Eastbourne, which I think will be tougher ask for the Tories than some of the seats requiring a bigger swing.
don't fancy their chances:
Euro elections 2014 Eastbourne:
UKIP: 9,516 Tory 7,007 Libs 4,073
Eastbourne is another place like South Somerset where a large chunk of their lower middle class/working class voters have decamped to UKIP.
The Libs still control the council in Eastbourne, and did that at a time when their polling wasn't very different from the current level, so they still have excellent local infrastructure and councillors to call on.
I suspect they'll hang on there, but may well be wrong.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Do you think Davey might be in a spot of bother in Kingston?
Not based on the local results this year .
With the local results in Kingston and Richmond going against the LDs are you saying that won't really make a difference to the LD MPs in that area ?
In Kingston/Surbiton Lib Dems did still win a plurality of the votes and councillors ( 19 LD 16 Con 2 Lab ) In Twickenham they fell slightly short .but Cable had a massive personal vote in 2010 . The Lib Dems led by 2,000 votes only in the 2010 locals but his majority was 12,000 / Davey also had a personal vote but rather smaller of around 2,500
The success of Rorkes Drift required the Zulus to be willing to charge into withering rifle fire and to impale themselves on the redcoat bayonets. Perhaps your film analogy should be Scott of the Antarctic... a small party lost in a trek into the cold wilderness, with one of its members being coerced into making a pointless gesture in a fruitless attempt at survival.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Do you think Davey might be in a spot of bother in Kingston?
Not based on the local results this year .
With the local results in Kingston and Richmond going against the LDs are you saying that won't really make a difference to the LD MPs in that area ?
In Kingston/Surbiton Lib Dems did still win a plurality of the votes and councillors ( 19 LD 16 Con 2 Lab ) In Twickenham they fell slightly short .but Cable had a massive personal vote in 2010 . The Lib Dems led by 2,000 votes only in the 2010 locals but his majority was 12,000 / Davey also had a personal vote but rather smaller of around 2,500
I just wonder whether. Vince's personal star has waned ...
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
I think Sutton and Cheam will be held... Portsmouth South will not be...
Other losses (IMHO) Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
Cheadle, no knowledge, so no view,
The Elections in Wales blog said on current numbers, Ceredigion would be the LDs only welsh seat in their Wales-only poll analysis.
After being an utter tit on This Week's election coverage, Chris Bryant excelling himself again - he seems to think the number of MPs who died in WW2 was a political 'scoring' by the Tories...reflects more on him surely???
This was their tweet:
Con. History Group@ConHistGrp·1 hr MT @DanKellyEsq: it appears that of the 24 MPs killed in action in WWII, 21 were Conservatives.
The number was 21, 22, or 23 depending on source.
If we take the 23 figure, it was 20 Tories, 2 Libs and one Ulster Unionist.
Not all were killed in action, one was a suicide, another a train crash, another a victim of a passenger vessel torpedoing. But the deaths could be deemed as "on active service".
Those definitely "killed in action", or died of wounds, amount to eleven. Ten Tories and one Liberal.
I'm guessing the reason there were no Labour casualties was a combination of:-
i) there were 2 and a half times as many Tory MPs as Labour.
ii) many Tory MPs had come from senior military backgrounds, and returned to front line positions in the conflict.
iii) the 1930s PLP seems to be disproportionately elderly, ex-miners and trade unionists, etc, beyond the call up age.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Speak for yourself , only idiots are talking about losing 2/3rds of their vote . In 1979 the Sun did a "poll" and said the Liberals would win one seat Orkney/Shetlands
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
I suspect the Libs will actually end up on 12-14% at the GE - which is what the NEV for the locals would suggest, and is actually slightly below current ICM polling,
Therefore it's more a case of them losing 40-50% of their vote rather than two-thirds. And don't forget - in 1997 they lost a substantial share of their vote and more than doubled their MPs.
TSE has got stars in his eyes if he thinks that the miserable L/Dem leaders would behave like Chard and Bromhead at Rorke’s Drift. I cant see them having the balls, stamina and strategy and bring their party members with them, to hold off the UKIP hoards.
Nope; Clegg reminds me of another military officer, full of arrogance and bravado that led his force to disaster and annihilation: Major General George Armstrong Custer. The GE 2015 will be Cleggs battle of the Little Bighorn. All that will remain after May 2015 will be remnants of a once proud Liberal Party.
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
I think Sutton and Cheam will be held... Portsmouth South will not be...
Other losses (IMHO) Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
Cheadle, no knowledge, so no view,
The Elections in Wales blog said on current numbers, Ceredigion would be the LDs only welsh seat in their Wales-only poll analysis.
I think they may stage a surprise in Montgomery: the anti-Lembit vote was quite significant
Agree, but I think Labour will pick up Bradford East and Cardiff Central and Bristol West and Yardley on present polling and the rest will be close battles between the Tories and LDs, but the Tories will have hopes of taking most if not all of them
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Speak for yourself , only idiots are tlking about losing 2/3rds of their vote .
Idiots and opinion polls, 24% divided by 3 is 8%, the latest yougov has them even lower.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Speak for yourself , only idiots are tlking about losing 2/3rds of their vote .
Idiots and opinion polls, 24% divided by 3 is 8%, the latest yougov has them even lower.
If you want I'll give you 5-1 on the LibDems having 8% or less at the GE (ex-NI).
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
I suspect the Libs will actually end up on 12-14% at the GE - which is what the NEV for the locals would suggest, and is actually slightly below current ICM polling,
Therefore it's more a case of them losing 40-50% of their vote rather than two-thirds. And don't forget - in 1997 they lost a substantial share of their vote and more than doubled their MPs.
They lost only 1% and they won lots of seats because the Tories lost 11% plus tactical voting. On the voting share, 2015 might be different since they are in government and get plenty of coverage by the media, before people didn't give them notice till the campaign began.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
I suspect the Libs will actually end up on 12-14% at the GE - which is what the NEV for the locals would suggest, and is actually slightly below current ICM polling,
Therefore it's more a case of them losing 40-50% of their vote rather than two-thirds. And don't forget - in 1997 they lost a substantial share of their vote and more than doubled their MPs.
They lost only 1% and they won lots of seats because the Tories lost 11% plus tactical voting. On the voting share, 2015 might be different since they are in government and get plenty of coverage by the media, before people didn't give them notice till the campaign began.
Yes, quite possible also.
I must admit, I'm mostly basing my views on the results in the locals, which would seem to suggest that they'll end up with 12-14% and about 25-30 seats.
The success of Rorkes Drift required the Zulus to be willing to charge into withering rifle fire and to impale themselves on the redcoat bayonets. Perhaps your film analogy should be Scott of the Antarctic... a small party lost in a trek into the cold wilderness, with one of its members being coerced into making a pointless gesture in a fruitless attempt at survival.
The Zulus lost plenty to rifle fire, but it still came down to hand to hand fighting, as most reached the British lines. Why they lost is a bit of a mystery. Occasionally, the weaker side wins.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
I suspect the Libs will actually end up on 12-14% at the GE - which is what the NEV for the locals would suggest, and is actually slightly below current ICM polling,
Therefore it's more a case of them losing 40-50% of their vote rather than two-thirds. And don't forget - in 1997 they lost a substantial share of their vote and more than doubled their MPs.
They lost only 1% and they won lots of seats because the Tories lost 11% plus tactical voting. On the voting share, 2015 might be different since they are in government and get plenty of coverage by the media, before people didn't give them notice till the campaign began.
Yes, quite possible also.
I must admit, I'm mostly basing my views on the results in the locals, which would seem to suggest that they'll end up with 12-14% and about 25-30 seats.
I agree with the seat numbers, but the polls might be correct about the voting share as they have flatlined since 2010 and are even further declining since the beginning of the year.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
Sure, Liberals did great in the 1950's, they even managed to get elected in seats, though only 6.
The success of Rorkes Drift required the Zulus to be willing to charge into withering rifle fire and to impale themselves on the redcoat bayonets. Perhaps your film analogy should be Scott of the Antarctic... a small party lost in a trek into the cold wilderness, with one of its members being coerced into making a pointless gesture in a fruitless attempt at survival.
The Zulus lost plenty to rifle fire, but it still came down to hand to hand fighting, as most reached the British lines. Why they lost is a bit of a mystery. Occasionally, the weaker side wins.
The rate of fire and the infantry numbers in relation with the length of the battlefront decided it.
In Sutton Tom. Brake is a nailed on win in. Carshalton and Wallington but the. Sutton and Cheam side is more difficult to call. You can still get Burstow at even money if you fancy it..
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
I think Sutton and Cheam will be held... Portsmouth South will not be...
Other losses (IMHO) Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
Cheadle, no knowledge, so no view,
The Elections in Wales blog said on current numbers, Ceredigion would be the LDs only welsh seat in their Wales-only poll analysis.
I think they may stage a surprise in Montgomery: the anti-Lembit vote was quite significant
The Conservatives also gained Montgomery in the Welsh elections in 2011.
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
Isn't the LibDem MP standing down in Hazel Grove ?
If so it's likely to be more at risk than Cheadle where incumbancy will remain.
The success of Rorkes Drift required the Zulus to be willing to charge into withering rifle fire and to impale themselves on the redcoat bayonets. Perhaps your film analogy should be Scott of the Antarctic... a small party lost in a trek into the cold wilderness, with one of its members being coerced into making a pointless gesture in a fruitless attempt at survival.
They weren't lost. "Coerced" is right, though.
The things they had most of (other than Scott's idiotic geological samples) were morphine and cocaine. It is to be hoped Oates dosed himself with one or both before leaving the tent.
A sensible thread by TSE destroyed by inane comments from many who have little knowledge of politics and even less of the Lib Dems
Yes on PB everyone knows that losing all credibilty, your deposits at 50% of by elections and throwing away your principles is a postive for the Lib Dems
Where as winning a national election and seeing your vote share increase almost 600% is bad news for UKIP
It is highly likely that UKIP outpolls the LibDems in 2015, and has perhaps one MP against the Yellow Peril's 30 odd.
Well thats the system, but I dont feel too sad about the party I supports growing at such speed.
I am pleased that almost anywhere I go in England (outside London) there are lots of people that feel the same as I do
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Speak for yourself , only idiots are tlking about losing 2/3rds of their vote .
Idiots and opinion polls, 24% divided by 3 is 8%, the latest yougov has them even lower.
If you want I'll give you 5-1 on the LibDems having 8% or less at the GE (ex-NI).
I'll offer you 2-1 on 10% or less.
Did you send that £20? If not I will have a tenner on each
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Speak for yourself , only idiots are tlking about losing 2/3rds of their vote .
Idiots and opinion polls, 24% divided by 3 is 8%, the latest yougov has them even lower.
If you want I'll give you 5-1 on the LibDems having 8% or less at the GE (ex-NI).
I'll offer you 2-1 on 10% or less.
Did you send that £20? If not I will have a tenner on each
I haven't and you've just made my life a little easier :-)
Is anybody giving serious thought to why the LD vote has shrunk? Was it ever really there in the first place? In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all? Their main aim was to be in a coalition, so how is it that their poll share have fallen? How have they made an apparent failure of govt, while the Tory vote has broadly held up? We have seen the black inheritance left by labour, why cannot the libdems use that as the redoubt into defend themselves?
Are we to really believe that many people who voted for libdems have directly switched to ukip?
Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP? Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
I haven't and you've just made my life a little easier :-)
Thanks
As an aside, I think the 2-1 might be a reasonable bet. The sub 8%, though, looks a real stretch.
To put in context. In 2010, the LibDems got roughly the same percentage in the locals as in the generals, but twice what they got in the Euros.
The Libs got, what, 7% in the UK (ex-NI) in the Euros and 13% (National Equivalent Vote share) in the locals. Now, these were favourable seats for the Libs, so I suspect 13% may slightly over-state them (I say favourable because they are seats where Lib vote fell less than national levels). However to get sub 8% would require losing 40% or so of their local share in a year. That seems very unlikely. Frankly, if you think they'll get sub 8% then I can't see them on more than 3 or 4 seats in 2015.
Is anybody giving serious thought to why the LD vote has shrunk? Was it ever really there in the first place? In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all? Their main aim was to be in a coalition, so how is it that their poll share have fallen? How have they made an apparent failure of govt, while the Tory vote has broadly held up? We have seen the black inheritance left by labour, why cannot the libdems use that as the redoubt into defend themselves?
Are we to really believe that many people who voted for libdems have directly switched to ukip?
Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP? Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
There are a few core LDs I think, perhaps 5-10%, given many of the things they do have as key issues, like unabashed pro-EU feeling and electoral reform, are not things most people care about. I imagine they hoped enough of the protest votes they received would stick with them through the decades of slow build and expand that base, but instead it has evaporated and the base shrinking back, if it ever expanded,. because they proved they really are centrish and not pure left by being willing to work with Tories.
Yes kle4... electoral reform is probably a LD issue.
What I meant was the core things that they care about, like electoral reform, remain only cared about by a small amount of the public, possibly showing that despite getting up to 24% in 2010, their base never expanded beyond the small group of people who cared about those issues.
Yes Speedy... Re 'The Drift', the natal native contingent ran away leaving the original line over extended and they were thus forced to abandon the hospital.
I'm fortunate that I have a copy of the rare original La Seconde guerre mondiale by Raymonde Cartier and I remember the details of how the battle was lost, again because the loser didn't care about the details, the brits didn't properly blow up the bridge, the battleships had sailed away leaving the straits unguarded, the indian troops where afraid to venture into the jungle part of the island which was again termed impenetrable and the Japanese simply landed on that bit unnoticed with the use of rubber boots.
If we take the LibDem leadership assumptions - that they need to stick with Clegg and the Coalition until the election - then their tactical decision to focus relentlessly makes sense, though arguably they'd have been better off in Newark not standing at all than losing over three quarters of their vote. There were only two applicants for the candidacy.
Anecdotally, quite a lot of people commenting on the Newark result in canvassing today, so it did get noticed. It didn't seem to be affecting anyone's voting intentions, which were much as usual: a lot of Lib->Lab switching. some KIP from both sides, and not much else.
The most interesting train journey I've done this year so far was from Bangkok to Nam Tok Sai Yok Noi, going over the "Bridge Over The River Kwai". The actual times involved didn't match up with what was scheduled, I ought to say:
Is anybody giving serious thought to why the LD vote has shrunk? Was it ever really there in the first place? In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all? Their main aim was to be in a coalition, so how is it that their poll share have fallen? How have they made an apparent failure of govt, while the Tory vote has broadly held up? We have seen the black inheritance left by labour, why cannot the libdems use that as the redoubt into defend themselves?
Are we to really believe that many people who voted for libdems have directly switched to ukip?
Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP? Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
There are a few core LDs I think, perhaps 5-10%, given many of the things they do have as key issues, like unabashed pro-EU feeling and electoral reform, are not things most people care about. I imagine they hoped enough of the protest votes they received would stick with them through the decades of slow build and expand that base, but instead it has evaporated and the base shrinking back, if it ever expanded,. because they proved they really are centrish and not pure left by being willing to work with Tories.
The Liberal wing of the Lib Dems have always been free market/free trade/small state so are right wing on economics and business whilst being left wing on social and welfare issues.
However, it should be remembered that the Liberal Lord Beveridge in his 1942 Report which is the foundation of today's welfare state recommended that National Insurance contributions should pay for benefits. It was 1945 Labour government under Atlee who decided to pay most of the welfare costs from general taxation.
There are of course some SDP supporters, like Cable, still left in the LibDems who are instinctively more interventionist than the Liberals. It is these ex socialists who stop left wing Conservatives moving to Lib Dems to replace the lost right wing Labour inclined supporters.
The LDs are almost certain to lose all their urban seats, with the possible exceptions of Hallam and Southwark, as left-wing LD voters switch en masse to Labour. However, while they will lose most of the seats they won from the Tories from 1997-2010, they should be able to hold 20-30 seats the won in 1987 and 1992 if they focus their resources on their heartlands in the South West and Celtic fringe. UKIP I think could actually pick up Thanet South where they have topped the poll at council and euro elections and if they run the high profile and Man of Kent Farage in a race without an incumbent. The Greens managed to do the same in Brighton when they ran the high profile Caroline Lucas in an area Greens had won council seats and a significant percentage of the vote
Twickenham, Bath, Leeds NW, Southport, Birmingham Yardley, Hazel Grove, Carshalton, look secure to me, along with Hallam and Southwark.
Brent Central, Manchester Withington, Redcar, Burnley, Solihull, are surely write-offs.
Sutton and Cheam, Kingston, Cheadle, Bradford East, Portsmouth South, Torbay, Eastbourne, Bristol West, Cardiff Central, Edinburgh West should all e pretty tight..
I think Sutton and Cheam will be held... Portsmouth South will not be...
Other losses (IMHO) Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
Cheadle, no knowledge, so no view,
The Elections in Wales blog said on current numbers, Ceredigion would be the LDs only welsh seat in their Wales-only poll analysis.
I think they may stage a surprise in Montgomery: the anti-Lembit vote was quite significant
The Conservatives also gained Montgomery in the Welsh elections in 2011.
Toríes are nailed on for Montgomery 2015, if Glynn Davies, local farmer, former AM stands again. Has a huge personal vote, let alone the Tory rural vote.
The LDs ought to have saved their deposit easily in Newark given their local strength in Southwell. I can only infer that most of their well-heeled supporters there voted for the Tories to stop Helmer.
For example, in last year's local CC elections the LDs polled 1,579 votes just in the Southwell & Caunton division, more than the 1,004 they polled on Thursday.
How things would have been for the LD if they never joint the tories in coalition? Perhaps we will never know as much as we don't know what would have happened if Gordon Brown had Ed Balls get rid of Blair sooner.
May's lost an anonymous SpAd; Gove has had to make a public apology. A draw at best. It will be interesting to see how (or if) it affects the "next leader" polling.
As well as Sharapova selfishly winning, my predictions for qualifying were as silly as a Lib Dem coup attempt. Still, I didn't tip anything, so no harm done (for F1).
Really surprised Rosberg nabbed pole. Button said the only positive he could take was starting in the clean (odd) side of the grid, which may mean a small chance of Hamilton slipping backwards off the line (that said, Rosberg's had worse starts this year). Great lap by Vettel to claim a surprise third, and it's a sign of Williams' performance leap that fourth and fifth is a bit disappointing.
The LDs ought to have saved their deposit easily in Newark given their local strength in Southwell. I can only infer that most of their well-heeled supporters there voted for the Tories to stop Helmer.
For example, in last year's local CC elections the LDs polled 1,579 votes just in the Southwell & Caunton division, more than the 1,004 they polled on Thursday.
As Danny Alexander said, must have been a tonne of tactical votes. Mind you going down to 2.6% for any reason where you previously had 20 must be disconcerting.
Is anybody giving serious thought to why the LD vote has shrunk? Was it ever really there in the first place? In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all? .......... Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP? Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
A significant part of the former Lib Dem vote were protest voters.
And therein lies the danger of the Zulu strategy: not so much the lost deposit but the risk of severe embarrassment that comes with such low scores. It's one thing finishing sixth (or eighth, as in Rotherham), but the moment the SDP was finished was when they finished behind the Monster Raving Loony Party. To be beaten by a genuine joke candidate is the sort of thing that it becomes very difficult to live down, especially if it's symptomatic of a barrenness of support across much of the country. It's notable that the local by-election that saw the Lib Dems beaten by the Elvis Bus Pass gets references in the national press. Were something similar to happen in a Westminster seat, those unsympathetic to the Lib Dems would happily draw it into the narrative at every opportunity.
I suppose the opposite of this would be UKIP getting an MEP elected in Scotland, their first elected representative of any kind there.
My favourite result of the past few weeks and hasn't the SNP's reaction been a treat.
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is anybody giving serious thought to why the LD vote has shrunk? Was it ever really there in the first place? In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all? .......... Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP? Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
A significant part of the former Lib Dem vote were protest voters.
Come to that how much of the Labour and Conservative vote is 'anti' the other one and how much is due to true belief in socialist or free market political views or policies?
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
"Rural school deemed 'too white' by Ofsted visits London to mix with ethnic pupils Payhembury Primary in Devon was criticised for not being multicultural So visit planned to a school in London where most pupils are from minorities Smallberry Green primary in Isleworth, West London, will host 29 pupils Parents have called the £35 trip 'patronising' - though others welcome it"
To answer the question, yes, they probably should. However, it's worth remembering that the only reasons that they were able to hold out were superior training, discipline and technology. But at what point does an army cease to be an army and become a bunch of isolated, if allied, individual units?
But if one is comparing the LDs to the British Army at the time of Rorke's Drift, the British Army was already a bunch of isolated units by the time the Zulus came over the Buffalo River - thanks to disastrous decisions by their command and their partial destruction at Isandhlwana (filmed in the later prequel Zulu Dawn, of course). The Rorke's Drift bunch were a remnant left to die by other British units and stragglers.
The Zulu training and discipline were not to be sneezed at, either: quite the opposite. The message I got from the book was that it was command decisions by the Zulu subordinate commanders that were the key mistake leading to their defeat - but a very close run thing. It was the outstanding initiative on a local level by Chard and Bromhead and their men, above all in preparing their position the moment they learnt the Zulus were coming, that saved their own bacon.
I can see that the LDs might survive in RD-like outposts like the Northern Isles, but the question is perhaps whether Mr Clegg is allowed to emulate Lord Chelmsford and come back to a final victory after such a defeat.
I'd agree with all that. I suppose the question is whether in effect the Lib Dems are *already* in Zulu mode, and if so, which outposts have they already abandoned? Do they intend to seriously defend all their current seats or are they only putting up token efforts in the most marginal ones where there are others nearby where local resource could be marshalled instead and the line held?
But as you say, Rorke's Drift was a close run thing and if we are to draw an analogy, I think you're right to point to the criticality of the middle command, which in the current case is the constituency-level resourcing and decision making.
The one big difference, of course, is that the Lib Dems are something of a sideshow to the main battle, which is between the Conservatives and Labour (one of several sideshows, it has to be said, with nationalists in Wales and Scotland, and other minor parties too). Maybe TSE should find something Lawrence of Arabia-ish to depict that aspect?
I nearly did a piece a while back saying if the Lib Dem replaced Clegg before the next, their leader needed to unite a variety of of different groups, a herculean task that Ibn Saud managed.
Who would be the Lib Dem Saud and who would be their T.E. Lawrence.
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Comments
Sit down and have a nice cup of tea.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/06/analysis-newark-ukip-is-feeling-the-effect-of-protest-votes
Similarly close will be Hornsey and Wood Green, which is very close between Labour and the LibDems, with the latter being almost exactly equal in votes in the council elections this year. (I suspect Lynne Featherstone will hang on, and that Ed Davey will not.)
If we take the 23 figure, it was 20 Tories, 2 Libs and one Ulster Unionist.
Not all were killed in action, one was a suicide, another a train crash, another a victim of a passenger vessel torpedoing. But the deaths could be deemed as "on active service".
Those definitely "killed in action", or died of wounds, amount to eleven. Ten Tories and one Liberal.
Euro elections 2014 Eastbourne:
UKIP: 9,516
Tory 7,007
Libs 4,073
Eastbourne is another place like South Somerset where a large chunk of their lower middle class/working class voters have decamped to UKIP.
Other losses (IMHO)
Torbay, Edinbrugh West, Bradford East, Cambridge
Bristol and Cardiff are real toughies to call. I suspect Eastbourne will be held because the Conservatives will lose as many to UKIP as the Libs
Cheadle, no knowledge, so no view,
2011: 16%
2012: 15%
2013: 13%
2014: 11%
I suspect they'll hang on there, but may well be wrong.
We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
In Twickenham they fell slightly short .but Cable had a massive personal vote in 2010 . The Lib Dems led by 2,000 votes only in the 2010 locals but his majority was 12,000 /
Davey also had a personal vote but rather smaller of around 2,500
Perhaps your film analogy should be Scott of the Antarctic... a small party lost in a trek into the cold wilderness, with one of its members being coerced into making a pointless gesture in a fruitless attempt at survival.
i) there were 2 and a half times as many Tory MPs as Labour.
ii) many Tory MPs had come from senior military backgrounds, and returned to front line positions in the conflict.
iii) the 1930s PLP seems to be disproportionately elderly, ex-miners and trade unionists, etc, beyond the call up age.
Therefore it's more a case of them losing 40-50% of their vote rather than two-thirds. And don't forget - in 1997 they lost a substantial share of their vote and more than doubled their MPs.
Nope; Clegg reminds me of another military officer, full of arrogance and bravado that led his force to disaster and annihilation: Major General George Armstrong Custer. The GE 2015 will be Cleggs battle of the Little Bighorn. All that will remain after May 2015 will be remnants of a once proud Liberal Party.
I'll offer you 2-1 on 10% or less.
On the voting share, 2015 might be different since they are in government and get plenty of coverage by the media, before people didn't give them notice till the campaign began.
I must admit, I'm mostly basing my views on the results in the locals, which would seem to suggest that they'll end up with 12-14% and about 25-30 seats.
You can still get Burstow at even money if you fancy it..
If so it's likely to be more at risk than Cheadle where incumbancy will remain.
The things they had most of (other than Scott's idiotic geological samples) were morphine and cocaine. It is to be hoped Oates dosed himself with one or both before leaving the tent.
h/t Ian Geldard
http://blog.independent.org/2014/06/05/taxpayers-are-shocked-to-discover-that-when-they-vote-for-government-services-they-have-to-pay-for-them/?utm_content=buffer9d7d9&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I am pleased that almost anywhere I go in England (outside London) there are lots of people that feel the same as I do
Thanks
In opposition how much was a protest vote and not seriously of a 'liberal' or LD persuasion at all?
Their main aim was to be in a coalition, so how is it that their poll share have fallen? How have they made an apparent failure of govt, while the Tory vote has broadly held up? We have seen the black inheritance left by labour, why cannot the libdems use that as the redoubt into defend themselves?
Are we to really believe that many people who voted for libdems have directly switched to ukip?
Never mind the theory that all the lost libdems made a switch to labour... surely the percentages do not match. Have some gone (back?) to the Tories as the Tories in their turn refused veer extreme right to chase after UKIP?
Perhaps there is really no such thing as a libdem persuasion to bind them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chillianwala
To put in context. In 2010, the LibDems got roughly the same percentage in the locals as in the generals, but twice what they got in the Euros.
The Libs got, what, 7% in the UK (ex-NI) in the Euros and 13% (National Equivalent Vote share) in the locals. Now, these were favourable seats for the Libs, so I suspect 13% may slightly over-state them (I say favourable because they are seats where Lib vote fell less than national levels). However to get sub 8% would require losing 40% or so of their local share in a year. That seems very unlikely. Frankly, if you think they'll get sub 8% then I can't see them on more than 3 or 4 seats in 2015.
WW2 and Vietnam is the pinnacle so far.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490
NOM 2.3
Lab 3.25
Con 3.7
Private John Mulholland, born in Westport, Ireland. He was a tailor by profession, and I still have his scissors, and his campaign medal.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13331381/John Mulholland 1825-99.BMP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Singapore
Perhaps in trying to create the picture I should have said stranded rather than lost. For me the analogy still works.
Anecdotally, quite a lot of people commenting on the Newark result in canvassing today, so it did get noticed. It didn't seem to be affecting anyone's voting intentions, which were much as usual: a lot of Lib->Lab switching. some KIP from both sides, and not much else.
http://www.seat61.com/Bridge-on-the-River-Kwai.htm
The Liberal wing of the Lib Dems have always been free market/free trade/small state so are right wing on economics and business whilst being left wing on social and welfare issues.
However, it should be remembered that the Liberal Lord Beveridge in his 1942 Report which is the foundation of today's welfare state recommended that National Insurance contributions should pay for benefits. It was 1945 Labour government under Atlee who decided to pay most of the welfare costs from general taxation.
There are of course some SDP supporters, like Cable, still left in the LibDems who are instinctively more interventionist than the Liberals. It is these ex socialists who stop left wing Conservatives moving to Lib Dems to replace the lost right wing Labour inclined supporters.
For example, in last year's local CC elections the LDs polled 1,579 votes just in the Southwell & Caunton division, more than the 1,004 they polled on Thursday.
http://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/election2013/division/southwell-and-caunton
Perhaps we will never know as much as we don't know what would have happened if Gordon Brown had Ed Balls get rid of Blair sooner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw-1wNozHVQ
As well as Sharapova selfishly winning, my predictions for qualifying were as silly as a Lib Dem coup attempt. Still, I didn't tip anything, so no harm done (for F1).
Really surprised Rosberg nabbed pole. Button said the only positive he could take was starting in the clean (odd) side of the grid, which may mean a small chance of Hamilton slipping backwards off the line (that said, Rosberg's had worse starts this year). Great lap by Vettel to claim a surprise third, and it's a sign of Williams' performance leap that fourth and fifth is a bit disappointing.
Hope Ashcroft does a Vote "why" on Newark !
My favourite result of the past few weeks and hasn't the SNP's reaction been a treat.
Going to give the markets a look, but will wait for them to develop if necessary. Very exciting qualifying, quite hard to forecast the race, however.
Two more Newarks, and that will be the Blues... (^_-)
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
- Vast majority in first half of the Parliament
- 6 by-elections in November 2012
- Very high proportion in Lab seats
Now her boss is doing Marr tomorrow there's no point in having Nicola Sturgeon on Sunday Politics. We'll talk Labour with Peter Hain instead
He thinks Lab may need a lead of 7% to get a majority.
http://labourmajority.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Majority-Rules1.pdf
Now that Supermodels of SHIELD has ended I'd quite like to watch another series (well... as well as Farscape and Battlestar Galactica).
Payhembury Primary in Devon was criticised for not being multicultural
So visit planned to a school in London where most pupils are from minorities
Smallberry Green primary in Isleworth, West London, will host 29 pupils
Parents have called the £35 trip 'patronising' - though others welcome it"
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2651108/Rural-school-deemed-white-Ofsted-visits-London-mix-ethnic-pupils.html
Who would be the Lib Dem Saud and who would be their T.E. Lawrence.
The show has finished now, but have you ever seen Fringe?