Sky tv is interviewing a high official from the RMT about re nationalisation of the railways... asking ..." if he thinks its a good idea" .WTF....."Hey Mr Turkey, what do you think about Turkeys being banned at Christmas"...
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Even if Labour were well-organised, it's hard to see them coming back from such a colossal hammering any time soon. 18 years on from the Conservative wipeout in Scotland, they have managed to win one seat at every election - but not always the same one, of course! Labour might well be similar.
Short of a really major scandal, the only way I could see the SNP's stranglehold on Scottish politics being broken any time soon is if Scotland goes independent. In that scenario the question of independence/constitutional arrangement/best deal for Scotland stuff, which appears from the Midlands to be their strongest political card, goes by default.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
IDS on average polled slightly better than Hague, he shored up the right better, as did Howard, but both lost the centre. I would expect a similar story with Corbyn, he will shore up the left better than Ed Miliband and poll slightly better than the 30% Ed won in the general election. Corbyn is also helped by the fact the LDs are so weak and there is no SDP like Foot had to deal with. However Cameron, like Blair, will still win the centre and the election
Come on #HYUFD! You seem mesmerised by Corbyn, who has yet to get to the end of the month, while defending his Marxist waggon from all the Labour MPs aching to see him gone. And that includes some very important Shadow members.
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Sorry, I misinterpreted the question, I was referring to largest party.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
IDS on average polled slightly better than Hague, he shored up the right better, as did Howard, but both lost the centre. I would expect a similar story with Corbyn, he will shore up the left better than Ed Miliband and poll slightly better than the 30% Ed won in the general election. Corbyn is also helped by the fact the LDs are so weak and there is no SDP like Foot had to deal with. However Cameron, like Blair, will still win the centre and the election
David Cameron will have retired by 2020.
I would not be so sure, if Corbyn remains leader he may want to stay to ensure he keeps him out. Boris would have a similar appeal to Cameron anyway
Marginals poll? Seems familiar. We had rather a lot of those before May didn't we?
What were the results again?
The most accurate poll at the general election was the ComRes aggregrate marginal polling in the South West.
Foretold an absolute shellacking for the Lib Dems.
Funny things about that poll Andrew Hawkins had doubts about that poll.
The London, Welsh and Scottish polls were also pretty much spot on. Maybe regionalised polling is the way forward, being able to predict England as a whole may not be possible any more with multiple parties and local differences.
I would note that the final opinion polls overstated ND and understated SYRIZA last time around. However, it is notable that - in an echo of both Spain, France and the UK - the phone polls understimated the insurgent SYRIZA, and the internet polls overstated them.
(Interestingly: SYRIZA in Greece, Podemos in Spain, UKIP in the UK, and the FN in France were all understated by phone polls, and overstated by Internet ones.
I didn't look to see what type the final opinion polls were in Greece, but I suspect the same rules apply. If they are phone add 1 to SYRIZA and take 1 from ND, and vice versa if they are Internet.)
Sky tv is interviewing a high official from the RMT about re nationalisation of the railways... asking ..." if he thinks its a good idea" .WTF....."Hey Mr Turkey, what do you think about Turkeys being banned at Christmas"...
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
Why would the youth come out and vote for Syriza? They've been bitten by all the main Greek parties and now bitten and betrayed just as badly by their own champions, Syriza. I can only see more woes for that misgoverned country.
I agree. The point is that traditionally, the youth vote later in the day than older people. So if the older people have abstained by a larger number than the youth, who are expected to vote more heavily for Syriza than other parties, it would be good for Syriza. But overall, I think low turn out hurts them, hence my feeling it is good for New Democracy as largest party.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE 2. compromise on his beliefs in the interests of leading his party. This will lose him most of those votes he stands to gain in scenario 1, and most of the enthusiasm behind his election to the post. It is unlikely to win back all, or even the majority, of those he will lose in scenario 1, as few will believe that his actual beliefs have changed, and so there must still be some lingering suspicion that, if voted into office, his natural political proclivities will reassert themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
The polling is useful in identifying that Corbyn has certainly not got any significant bounce from being elected leader with a fractional swing to the Tories or Labour since the election depending on which poll you look at. In Scotland he does seem to be doing a little better than Ed Miliband though on today's yougov
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Even if Labour were well-organised, it's hard to see them coming back from such a colossal hammering any time soon. 18 years on from the Conservative wipeout in Scotland, they have managed to win one seat at every election - but not always the same one, of course! Labour might well be similar.
Short of a really major scandal, the only way I could see the SNP's stranglehold on Scottish politics being broken any time soon is if Scotland goes independent. In that scenario the question of independence/constitutional arrangement/best deal for Scotland stuff, which appears from the Midlands to be their strongest political card, goes by default.
ydoethur, very good and accurate post, nice to see someone on here knows a bit about Scottish politics.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
Ed would probably be Prime Minister now if he'd remembered he was supposed to be campaigning between 2010 and 2015, rather than expecting the keys to Number Ten to fall into his lap.
There is probably a lot in the fresh air theory. Others have drawn parallels with Scotland and in America, where Carson is ahead of Clinton in a couple of spots, and the three leading GOP contenders are all non-politicians.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
If Corbyn is replaced before 2020 the only likely replacement is Hilary Benn, Cooper has next to zero chance after coming third
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
The odds I mentioned were for:
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
Marginals poll? Seems familiar. We had rather a lot of those before May didn't we?
What were the results again?
The most accurate poll at the general election was the ComRes aggregrate marginal polling in the South West.
Foretold an absolute shellacking for the Lib Dems.
Funny things about that poll Andrew Hawkins had doubts about that poll.
The London, Welsh and Scottish polls were also pretty much spot on. Maybe regionalised polling is the way forward, being able to predict England as a whole may not be possible any more with multiple parties and local differences.
Not a bad shout. After all, the dynamic in Cannock is totally different from that in Bury, and both are very different indeed from Hereford although in theory they are all towns of similar size and economic importance with similar demographic profiles.
BR If he thinks it is a good idea to re nationalise the railways..akin to asking a thirsty man if he wants a drink .RMT cannot wait to get back on the public teat..
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE 2. compromise on his beliefs in the interests of leading his party. This will lose him most of those votes he stands to gain in scenario 1, and most of the enthusiasm behind his election to the post. It is unlikely to win back all, or even the majority, of those he will lose in scenario 1, as few will believe that his actual beliefs have changed, and so there must still be some lingering suspicion that, if voted into office, his natural political proclivities will reassert themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
If Corbyn is replaced before 2020 the only likely replacement is Hilary Benn, Cooper has next to zero chance after coming third
The Greeks have been ill served by all their political masters over the last 30-odd years.
However, the Greek people are likely to vote 4-to-1 for parties that back the troika and the bail outs. There has been no upswell in support for "anti-austerity" parties. I thought the Popular Front, which was backed by all the Left Wing SYRIZA MPs and led by the former energy minister, would be polling around 20% at this election. Instead it, and the Eurosceptic Independent Greeks, are scrabbling around trying to get over the 3% threshold.
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win. Sounds like you think that's value
'In theory, voting is compulsory in Greece, but the rule is not enforced.' (Guardian coverage) A bit like tax collecting.
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
The odds I mentioned were for:
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
From a purely statistical point of view, the 6.2 looks good value. But be ready to trade out in 6 minutes if the exit poll indicates a different result...
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
IDS on average polled slightly better than Hague, he shored up the right better, as did Howard, but both lost the centre. I would expect a similar story with Corbyn, he will shore up the left better than Ed Miliband and poll slightly better than the 30% Ed won in the general election. Corbyn is also helped by the fact the LDs are so weak and there is no SDP like Foot had to deal with. However Cameron, like Blair, will still win the centre and the election
David Cameron will have retired by 2020.
I would not be so sure, if Corbyn remains leader he may want to stay to ensure he keeps him out. Boris would have a similar appeal to Cameron anyway
Arguably, Boris is more like Corbyn than Cameron.
Edit: perhaps it might be better put as Boris is the Tory parallel to Corbyn: he'd effectively be running as an outsider.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
If Corbyn is replaced before 2020 the only likely replacement is Hilary Benn, Cooper has next to zero chance after coming third
I agree about Benn. But don't forget 2025.
If Labour lose again they will be looking for a fresher face, Chuka Umunna, Stella Creasey, Dan Jarvis etc
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
Yes.
The voters gave Ed a fair wind and decided decisively that :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister.
In contrast to Jezza I fear I must advise you that Ed is an electoral colossus and that these early moments of the Jezzbollah will be seen as the sunlit uplands and heady days of his leadership.
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
The odds I mentioned were for:
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
From a purely statistical point of view, the 6.2 looks good value. But be ready to trade out in 6 minutes if the exit poll indicates a different result...
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE 2. compromise on his beliefs in the interests of leading his party. This will lose him most of those votes he stands to gain in scenario 1, and most of the enthusiasm behind his election to the post. It is unlikely to win back all, or even the majority, of those he will lose in scenario 1, as few will believe that his actual beliefs have changed, and so there must still be some lingering suspicion that, if voted into office, his natural political proclivities will reassert themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
The odds I mentioned were for:
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
From a purely statistical point of view, the 6.2 looks good value. But be ready to trade out in 6 minutes if the exit poll indicates a different result...
Now at 9... has it leaked?
That would seem likely. But then again... New Hampshire 2008...
They are suggesting sub 50%. If the youth turn out in the last hour, that will be good for Syriza, presumably. If not, I think New Democracy will win largest party by a bigger margin than predicted.
ND are at 6.2 to win.
Sounds like you think that's value
Based on the poll? published earlier, any party would need about 38.6% for a majority.
Is win defined as "largest party" or "outright majority"?
The odds I mentioned were for:
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
From a purely statistical point of view, the 6.2 looks good value. But be ready to trade out in 6 minutes if the exit poll indicates a different result...
Now at 9... has it leaked?
That would seem likely. But then again... New Hampshire 2008...
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE 2. compromise on his beliefs in the interests of leading his party. This will lose him most of those votes he stands to gain in scenario 1, and most of the enthusiasm behind his election to the post. It is unlikely to win back all, or even the majority, of those he will lose in scenario 1, as few will believe that his actual beliefs have changed, and so there must still be some lingering suspicion that, if voted into office, his natural political proclivities will reassert themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE 2. compromise on his beliefs in the interests of leading his party. This will lose him most of those votes he stands to gain in scenario 1, and most of the enthusiasm behind his election to the post. It is unlikely to win back all, or even the majority, of those he will lose in scenario 1, as few will believe that his actual beliefs have changed, and so there must still be some lingering suspicion that, if voted into office, his natural political proclivities will reassert themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Most people realise they will wait for the right moment, very very few expect it to be set in stone or very soon. There is no coherent opposition. The nasty party , the liars party and the donkeys of Labour, it is a foregone conclusion.
The exit polls show SYRIZA getting 30-34 percent of the vote with New Democracy trailing at 28.5-32.5 percent.
Ultra-rightist Golden Dawn will be third getting 6.5-8 percent. Fourth place will be a fight between center-left PASOK-DIMAR and the Greek Communist Party (KKE) both getting 5.5.-7 percent of the vote. Center-left Potami come sixth getting 4-5.5 percent.
Independent Greeks (ANEL) seem to be getting in parliament with 3-4 percent. So do the Centrists Union at the same percentages (3-4) and almost secure a place in parliament. Finally, extreme-leftist Popular Unity looks like it is in last place with 2.5-3.5 percent.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
Roger dahling!
I've no idea what you're on - but can I have some?
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
I would have said at the moment that Javid remains the likeliest next leader - but let's not forget that Conservative leaders can often bob up suddenly from quite obscure positions. Cameron wasn't even in the Shadow Cabinet in 2004 and was three years into his time in Parliament, Major only joined the cabinet in 1987 and had only been in Parliament since 1979. Iain Duncan Smith, Hague and Thatcher were all mid-ranking figures before their election as leader, although for various reasons they all had a certain amount of name recognition. Heath, too, was mid-ranking apart from a brief spell as SCOTE, but as a former Chief Whip he was well known to wider the Parliamentary Party. Only Michael Howard, of recent years, has been an unambiguously senior and experienced figure to take over the leadership, in very unusual circumstances.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
I see the unionist wishful thinking well is at it again - the same sort of clutching at any straw poll which caused so much amusement during May's election.
Today's UK pollinbg sub samples for Scotland have the SNP at 49 (Comres), est 55 (Opinium) and 44 (YouGov). That would put the average exactly at the overwhelming support of the General Election!
What is of some interest is the more likely/less likely YouGov on Corbyn which for Scotland is 16 more 22 less - exactly the same as the UK average!
This rather puts paid to the Indy/Guardian poll of yesterday which on a poll of 70 or so people with a biased question ran headlines on the supposed attraction of Corvyn's poltics to Scotland!
BR If he thinks it is a good idea to re nationalise the railways..akin to asking a thirsty man if he wants a drink .RMT cannot wait to get back on the public teat..
Hasn't the rail subsidy gone up since privatisation? Is it still called the public teat when the cash goes to the private sector (or the state sector in other countries)?
themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Yes - which may be reflected in the recent decline in her 'good job' rating from Mesospheric to Stratospheric......but Mr Gravity is an unrelenting taskmaster.....
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
LOL sturgeon's running for the hills on Indyref2 all we can see is her arse.
BR If he thinks it is a good idea to re nationalise the railways..akin to asking a thirsty man if he wants a drink .RMT cannot wait to get back on the public teat..
Hasn't the rail subsidy gone up since privatisation? Is it still called the public teat when the cash goes to the private sector (or the state sector in other countries)?
IIRC there's been little change in the public subsidy, but it's changed forms since privatisation.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
Agree - with the triggers suitably fudged too - so for example 'Trident' - vote to renew might not be a trigger - but deployment of new boats could be.....
themselves. Again, I don't see how this results in him bettering Ed's showing at a GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Yes - which may be reflected in the recent decline in her 'good job' rating from Mesospheric to Stratospheric......but Mr Gravity is an unrelenting taskmaster.....
Indeed, if she pushes indyref 2 too hard she risks a rise in the vote for unionist parties, if she does not push it enough she risks losing votes to the Greens and Solidarity and the Scottish Independence Party
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Most people realise they will wait for the right moment, very very few expect it to be set in stone or very soon. There is no coherent opposition. The nasty party , the liars party and the donkeys of Labour, it is a foregone conclusion.
As I posted below there are different groupings wanting a different timetable
BR If he thinks it is a good idea to re nationalise the railways..akin to asking a thirsty man if he wants a drink .RMT cannot wait to get back on the public teat..
Hasn't the rail subsidy gone up since privatisation? Is it still called the public teat when the cash goes to the private sector (or the state sector in other countries)?
Yes, although part of the reason is that there is now a higher safety standard insisted on (which costs money) and also more money being put into tracks to address what one of the Bob Reids (Mark I, I think) called 'the crumbling edge of quality'. That was of course the aftermath of Hatfield and Potter's Bar when the reality of running railways on the cheap was shown up in truly tragic relief (it should have been before by things like Clapham and Severn Tunnel, but for some reason they didn't count).
The problem is that it is expensive to run the railways safely. It's one reason why so many medium-sized lines in this country were financially unsustainable - the insistence on platforms and top-quality signalling and good fences and so on. David St John Thomas (one half of David and Charles publishing) famously commented that if the railways had been less safe, thousands of lives would have been saved because rural branch lines could have stayed open and the carnage on Britain's roads mitigated. Tom Rolt said something similar in Red for Danger.
We have made the decision to have safe railways, and they are now as safe as they have ever been. But it also means they are expensive. We therefore are making a choice to pay to be safe, or the government is making it for us.
Of course there are other marginal costs to think of - reductions in pollution, noise, congestion and therefore journey times, better capital utilisation as the life of a DMU is long compared to that of a car or lorry. It's probably worth paying for them - but whether we have the balance right is another question.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to succeed.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
I see the unionist wishful thinking well is at it again - the same sort of clutching at any straw poll which caused so much amusement during May's election.
Today's UK pollinbg sub samples for Scotland have the SNP at 49 (Comres), est 55 (Opinium) and 44 (YouGov). That would put the average exactly at the overwhelming support of the General Election!
What is of some interest is the more likely/less likely YouGov on Corbyn which for Scotland is 16 more 22 less - exactly the same as the UK average!
This rather puts paid to the Indy/Guardian poll of yesterday which on a poll of 70 or so people with a biased question ran headlines on the supposed attraction of Corvyn's poltics to Scotland!
Comres had the Tories ahead in Wales, London and the North so can be discounted. Yougov had Labour ahead in London and the North and seems much more realistic, and the slight shift from SNP to Labour would seem to reflect the pre leadership election polling which showed Corbyn the most favoured candidate in Scotland. It was of course Yougov which also first identified the shift to Yes in indyref before also showing the swing back to No after the 'Vow'
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
I would have said at the moment that Javid remains the likeliest next leader - but let's not forget that Conservative leaders can often bob up suddenly from quite obscure positions. Cameron wasn't even in the Shadow Cabinet in 2004 and was three years into his time in Parliament, Major only joined the cabinet in 1987 and had only been in Parliament since 1979. Iain Duncan Smith, Hague and Thatcher were all mid-ranking figures before their election as leader, although for various reasons they all had a certain amount of name recognition. Heath, too, was mid-ranking apart from a brief spell as SCOTE, but as a former Chief Whip he was well known to wider the Parliamentary Party. Only Michael Howard, of recent years, has been an unambiguously senior and experienced figure to take over the leadership, in very unusual circumstances.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Both of the last 2 PM to go while in office have been replaced by their Chancellor of the Exchequers' So on that precedence Osborn has to be the man to beet.
But I suspect that how the Referendum plays out will be of big importance, it will be fresh in peoples minds and to a lot of Conservative grass roots, is of massive importance.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
LOL sturgeon's running for the hills on Indyref2 all we can see is her arse.
Comres had the Tories ahead in Wales, London and the North so can be discounted.
Very bad statistics there, HYUFD. Precisely how NASA missed the hole in the ozone layer for so long. Certainly, put a question mark over Comres result, but do not discount entirely.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fetid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
I would have said at the moment that Javid remains the likeliest next leader - but let's not forget that Conservative leaders can often bob up suddenly from quite obscure positions. Cameron wasn't even in the Shadow Cabinet in 2004 and was three years into his time in Parliament, Major only joined the cabinet in 1987 and had only been in Parliament since 1979. Iain Duncan Smith, Hague and Thatcher were all mid-ranking figures before their election as leader, although for various reasons they all had a certain amount of name recognition. Heath, too, was mid-ranking apart from a brief spell as SCOTE, but as a former Chief Whip he was well known to wider the Parliamentary Party. Only Michael Howard, of recent years, has been an unambiguously senior and experienced figure to take over the leadership, in very unusual circumstances.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Both of the last 2 PM to go while in office have been replaced by their Chancellor of the Exchequers' So on that precedence Osborn has to be the man to beet.
But I suspect that how the Referendum plays out will be of big importance, it will be fresh in peoples minds and to a lot of Conservative grass roots, is of massive importance.
Brown had been in office for a long time. Major had not. The chances of Lawson succeeding Thatcher, had he not resigned, would have remained minimal (quite apart from the fact that he did not wish to be Prime Minister and understood people would be reluctant to vote for him anyway).
Lawson did though have one of the great titles for his memoirs - The View from Number 11. That's got to be up there with Butler's The Art of the Possible and the grand-daddy of them all, Geoffrey Howe's Conflict of Loyalty. It's sad that clever titles have gone so far out of fashion that Blair thought the mind-numbingly twee A Journey was suitable for his memoirs.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Most people realise they will wait for the right moment, very very few expect it to be set in stone or very soon. There is no coherent opposition. The nasty party , the liars party and the donkeys of Labour, it is a foregone conclusion.
As I posted below there are different groupings wanting a different timetable
To win a majority under the re-inforced PR system, a party must* win
40.4% * (100%-E%) of the total votes, where
E% is the total percentage votes won by excluded parties which don't make the 3% threshold.
While the overall result (excluding the 50 bonus seats for the plurality winner) is proportional, the complicated allocation of seats to constituencies often means the number of local seats won by each party bears little relation to the local votes cast...
National seat totals are apportioned by Hare quota (of the total votes of parties which pass the threshold), plus largest remainders.
Constituency seats are first apportioned by Hare quota (total votes). Unfilled constituency seats are filled with those who have the largest remainders of Hare quotas, firstly examining the 3 and 2-member seats, then apportioning remaining seats by smallest national party first, to its largest Hare quota constituency remainder.
The 50 bonus seats are then distributed to the remaining unfilled seats in the constituencies.
Some odd features of the Greek electoral system.
There are eight FPTP seats, but the winner only gets the seat if it also crosses the 3% national threshold...
The lists are normally open, but I understand for this election they will be closed, due to the fact that the last election was less than 18 months ago.
*a majority could be won with fractionally less than this number, depending on how many parties are chasing how many remainder seats.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
Comres has the Tories ahead in London and the north and Wales so its subsamples are clearly rubbish (I was looking at the UK national picture where Labour has held steady with Comres but the Tories have risen more)
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
BR If he thinks it is a good idea to re nationalise the railways..akin to asking a thirsty man if he wants a drink .RMT cannot wait to get back on the public teat..
Hasn't the rail subsidy gone up since privatisation? Is it still called the public teat when the cash goes to the private sector (or the state sector in other countries)?
IIRC there's been little change in the public subsidy, but it's changed forms since privatisation.
OK so on further examination it has risen in absolute terms (about doubled) but fallen per passenger mile.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
Thanks for confirming that "once in a generation" was a lie.
Comres had the Tories ahead in Wales, London and the North so can be discounted.
Very bad statistics there, HYUFD. Precisely how NASA missed the hole in the ozone layer for so long. Certainly, put a question mark over Comres result, but do not discount entirely.
Nationally Comres would seem to be in the right ball park, regionally miles off
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
GE.
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
Corbyn may pick up a handful of seats in the Central Belt, but of course more immediately next years' Holyrood elections are under PR, not FPTP, so the increase in the unionist party's vote in today's poll is more significant there, especially if Sturgeon tries to push for indyref2 to be in the SNP's manifesto
It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Do tell!
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
It will be some holding guff and some triggers that they believe will merit another referendum, it will not be setting dates for the next one. That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
Thanks for confirming that "once in a generation" was a lie.
Can anyone hand on heart-who doesn't wish Labour ill-believe they would have been more electable with Ed than with Jeremy?
This poll doesn't surprise me at all. The old order has the putrid smell of decay and that's not just the Tories. Corbyn's starting to look like a breath of fresh air.
But surely the problem is that neither were really 'electable', i.e. men (both men) who were seen as possible PMs?
I think there is a case to be made that you are either electable or not. These two are not. It's only when people are vaguely plausible as PMs that the relative question of more or less electable comes into play. Yvette Cooper might have been electable, although not as electable as Cameron. I still think though that she might have a chance against Osborne in the unlikely event he ever becomes Tory leader and she comes out of retirement.
IDS on average polled slightly better than Hague, he shored up the right better, as did Howard, but both lost the centre. I would expect a similar story with Corbyn, he will shore up the left better than Ed Miliband and poll slightly better than the 30% Ed won in the general election. Corbyn is also helped by the fact the LDs are so weak and there is no SDP like Foot had to deal with. However Cameron, like Blair, will still win the centre and the election
David Cameron will have retired by 2020.
I would not be so sure, if Corbyn remains leader he may want to stay to ensure he keeps him out. Boris would have a similar appeal to Cameron anyway
Arguably, Boris is more like Corbyn than Cameron.
Edit: perhaps it might be better put as Boris is the Tory parallel to Corbyn: he'd effectively be running as an outsider.
Boris had the highest favourables and net favourables of any named politician, Tory or Labour, in today's national comres poll, Corbyn had a net negative of -18%
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
How about a wager...what odds are you tightfisted misanthropic orangeman offering?
I suppose we have to discount the Opinium sub sample as well showing SNP at c 55% in Scotland.
Basically what you mean is that it doesn't agree with your prejudices!
If you cite a poll as evidence then it should back up your argument not destroy it and there is no point in rubbishing Comres it after you had cited it!
re betting on next Conservative Leader. The members have never selected someone to be the PM it has always been the LOTO.
But then, the MPs themselves only selected a leader four times (or six if you count the abortive elections of 1989 and 1995) compared to the members' twice. As late as 1964, there had never been a contested leadership election for the Conservative leadership at any level - and Heath, Thatcher and Major between the served for over 30 years.
In 1846 there was no opposition to Bentinck, probably the nearest parallel to Corbyn for a party leadership, and every leader in the Commons from then until 1911 began their career as the nominee of a leader in the Lords (Granby, Disraeli, Northcote, Hicks Beach and Balfour). In 1911 there was due to be an election but two of the three candidates withdrew because they feared the Unionists would collapse if either of them lost to the other. In 1921 there was no opposition to Austen Chamberlain, in 1922 none to Bonar Law and in 1940 there was none to Churchill (as in 2003 there was none to Howard). Eden and Chamberlain were selected as the 'obvious' candidates; Baldwin and Macmillan by consensus among the cabinet; Home by a blatant stitch-up.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
Comres has the Tories ahead in London and the north and Wales so its subsamples are clearly rubbish (I was looking at the UK national picture where Labour has held steady with Comres but the Tories have risen more)
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
I see so you are the arbiter of what is correct and what is not and extrapolation of results is selective based on what you think is correct.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
The more I think about it, the more irrelevant I think polling is at this stage. Most people are turned off as they know there is no election for over 50 months. The main block currently thinking about politics is the Labour Selectorate.
Also, this is the first set of polls since Corbyn was elected, so they are not calibrated against anything meaningful.
Over time, we shall have more polls which will allow us to see if there is any trend. But I think whatever, the outlook is bleak for Corbyn. He has, as I see it, two scenarios:
1. maintain his original beliefs. This will lose him a good chunk of previous Labour voters and essentially preclude him from picking up votes in the centre. Labour will be reliant on gaining first time voters and stealing from the Greens. I can see no scenario where this leads to him beating Ed's performance at the next GE
You still peddling that merde, subsample was <100</p>
All the polling before the leadership election too showed Corbyn polled best in Scotland and London so the fact Labour has its largest lead in London in today's yougov and had an improved rating in Scotland is not that surprising
It means nothing though. Organisation in Scotland is dire , lots of infighting , they are going nowhere as a sub regional office. Same fate as the Tories and LibDems.
They will be struggling to get consolation list seats next year, it will be a whitewash, do you really think Sturgeon is stupid. It has been well trailed what will be in manifesto re the next referendum.
Sturgeon has to keep on board the nats who want a referendum now and the Scots as a whole who polls show do not want another one for at least 5 years, it is a difficult balancing act
Most people realise they will wait for the right moment, very very few expect it to be set in stone or very soon. There is no coherent opposition. The nasty party , the liars party and the donkeys of Labour, it is a foregone conclusion.
As I posted below there are different groupings wanting a different timetable
You are dreaming
Not all, clearly there is a difference of opinion between SNP members and voters who want another referendum now and Scots as a whole who do not want one for at least 5 years
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
Comres has the Tories ahead in London and the north and Wales so its subsamples are clearly rubbish (I was looking at the UK national picture where Labour has held steady with Comres but the Tories have risen more)
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
I see so you are the arbiter of what is correct and what is not and extrapolation of results is selective based on what you think is correct.
Subsambles are used toilet paper./
Well when Labour won London and Wales and the north comfortably in May and are at least level with their national voteshare then in today's polling please forgive me if I prefer yougov who reflect Labour still to be ahead in those areas, the Tories still ahead nationally, rather than Comres who seem to suggest the Tories are ahead in all
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
I suppose we have to discount the Opinium sub sample as well showing SNP at c 55% in Scotland.
Basically what you mean is that it doesn't agree with your prejudices!
If you cite a poll as evidence then it should back up your argument not destroy it and there is no point in rubbishing Comres it after you had cited it!
I have seen no Opinium subsamples or any links to them, Comres subsamples are clearly rubbish as I set out below, it was the Comres national polling I was talking about.
We can't really say without seeing the results in the closest Labour marginals. After all, in 2015, the Tories lost something like 11 marginals to Labour. But gained something like 10.
Did you not read my final paragraph?
It was 10 Lab gains from the Tories in E&W and 8 Lab losses to the Tories in E&W
Sorry, nope. Just went straight here on vanillaforums. (Shuts up and relurks)
No need to relurk!
I'm demob happy. One more thread to go and I hand back the keys to Mike.
It had better be the AV thread!
Alas no. Ran out of time.
Will be published eventually.
Hmmmm. Did it even exist? Or like the monster under the bed, was it invented to scare small PB children into behaving themselves?
There was an original piece written prior to the election that wasn't published (lucky for me) that said AV was the only way the Tories could win a majority in 2015 and Dave would regret campaigning against AV.
That's been substantially been re-written.
I did do an AV thread a few months ago. AV might stop Andy Burnham from winning the Labour leadership.
If the 2011 AV Referendum had gone the LDs' way, they would have benefited to the tune of ONE seat in 2015...
Interesting observation, if it's correct. But is it the point?
Yes it's exactly the point. Of course the LDs wanted to change the voting system to one which suited them more. Not for any other reason.
There are only two reasons driving the never-ending call for electoral "reform". Selfish self interest of those calling for it and (more importantly) to keep TSE in thread material.
The Tories only opposed it because the current system suits them more. Not for any other reason.
It is possible to not see the plurality system as the acme of electoral perfection, after all.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
Comres has the Tories ahead in London and the north and Wales so its subsamples are clearly rubbish (I was looking at the UK national picture where Labour has held steady with Comres but the Tories have risen more)
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
I see so you are the arbiter of what is correct and what is not and extrapolation of results is selective based on what you think is correct.
Subsambles are used toilet paper./
Well when Labour won London and Wales and the north comfortably in May and are at least level with their national voteshare then in today's polling please forgive me if I prefer yougov who reflect Labour still to be ahead in those areas, the Tories still ahead nationally, rather than Comres who seem to suggest the Tories are ahead in all
I'll forgive you, but choosing results you think are right in general terms is v bad news.
I bet you thought like many people that the polls were right in predicting a hung parliament... I knew something was very wrong with the polls but didn't know what. The polling companies still haven't decided what happened (AFAIK)
Playing around with subsamples is a fruitless exercise.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
S
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy with voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Brookie, you continue to be a source of continuing mirth to me today as you were in May (and er, you didn't 'vote'). View it as a compliment; don't be so crabby. Osborne isn't liked...did I ever say he was....and neither was Mrs T, but both are respected, and if the economy remains in reasonable shape, he will be Cameron's successor and thus PM. Straightforward really.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
S
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy with voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Brookie, you continue to be a source of continuing mirth to me today as you were in May (and er, you didn't 'vote'). View it as a compliment; don't be so crabby. Osborne isn't liked...did I ever say he was....and neither was Mrs T, but both are respected, and if the economy remains in reasonable shape, he will be Cameron's successor and thus PM. Straightforward really.
Mrs T was respected but Osborne isn't. And he won't take the reins as the Tories know he'll lose them the elction.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Why are you so angry all the time>?
It's the DUP with a shade of LibDemmery that makes him so curmudgeonly.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
S
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy with voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Brookie, you continue to be a source of continuing mirth to me today as you were in May (and er, you didn't 'vote'). View it as a compliment; don't be so crabby. Osborne isn't liked...did I ever say he was....and neither was Mrs T, but both are respected, and if the economy remains in reasonable shape, he will be Cameron's successor and thus PM. Straightforward really.
Mrs T was respected but Osborne isn't. And he won't take the reins as the Tories know he'll lose them the elction.
So cheer up it's a win all round :-)
C'mon...let's have a bet: it's the pb way! What odds?
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Why are you so angry all the time>?
I'm usually sat with a smile on my face as I post. :-)
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
snip
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
Not a chance. Cameron's successor will be from the present Cabinet - Major was Chancellor and had been briefly Foreign Secretary notwithstanding his meteoric rise. Javid only becomes a contender if Osborne's star wanes as a consequence of an economic relapse (which could easily happen in the next 3-4 years). But if all remains pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Why are you so angry all the time>?
It's the DUP with a shade of LibDemmery that makes him so curmudgeonly.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
Comres has the Tories ahead in London and the north and Wales so its subsamples are clearly rubbish (I was looking at the UK national picture where Labour has held steady with Comres but the Tories have risen more)
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
I see so you are the arbiter of what is correct and what is not and extrapolation of results is selective based on what you think is correct.
Subsambles are used toilet paper./
Well when Labour won London and Wales and the north comfortably in May and are at least level with their national voteshare then in today's polling please forgive me if I prefer yougov who reflect Labour still to be ahead in those areas, the Tories still ahead nationally, rather than Comres who seem to suggest the Tories are ahead in all
I'll forgive you, but choosing results you think are right in general terms is v bad news.
I bet you thought like many people that the polls were right in predicting a hung parliament... I knew something was very wrong with the polls but didn't know what. The polling companies still haven't decided what happened (AFAIK)
Playing around with subsamples is a fruitless exercise.
Yes, but given the evidence of the election I suspect yougov's subsamples to be closer to the truth. I did always think the Tories would be largest party, although I did not think they would get a majority I confess. I suggest we await further Scottish polls to see any trend, however clearly there has been movement in at least 1 poll today
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
S
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy with voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Brookie, you continue to be a source of continuing mirth to me today as you were in May (and er, you didn't 'vote'). View it as a compliment; don't be so crabby. Osborne isn't liked...did I ever say he was....and neither was Mrs T, but both are respected, and if the economy remains in reasonable shape, he will be Cameron's successor and thus PM. Straightforward really.
Mrs T was respected but Osborne isn't. And he won't take the reins as the Tories know he'll lose them the elction.
So cheer up it's a win all round :-)
C'mon...let's have a bet: it's the pb way! What odds?
really John are you getting so desperate you're resorting to the tim trap ?
I'll give you £ 25, proceeds to the site that he won't succeed Cameron as PM.
Brown had been in office for a long time. Major had not. The chances of Lawson succeeding Thatcher, had he not resigned, would have remained minimal (quite apart from the fact that he did not wish to be Prime Minister and understood people would be reluctant to vote for him anyway).
Lawson did though have one of the great titles for his memoirs - The View from Number 11. That's got to be up there with Butler's The Art of the Possible and the grand-daddy of them all, Geoffrey Howe's Conflict of Loyalty. It's sad that clever titles have gone so far out of fashion that Blair thought the mind-numbingly twee A Journey was suitable for his memoirs.
The View From Number 11 is a truly remarkable book. It's the only autobiography to focus on the actual job and the challenges faced, rather than on boring things like childhood... or relationships...
The bits on the miners strike, and on when OPEC tried to get Britain to join are particularly interesting.
Opinium gives both SNP total and total Scottish sample and therefore it is possible to estimate SNP share after allowing for don't knows etc which gives the c55% figure. It is not possible to work out the other parties since there is no Scottish breakdown for them. However if SNP are anything over 50 then it seems very unlikely that Opinium holds up your theory of Labour improvement in Scotland. There would be nothing left for the Tories which then would shoot down your second theory of Tory improvement!
I don't really rate any sub sample at all except averaging over a substantial period. My objection was to you citing a Comres poll which showed the opposite of what you were arguing and then elevating a single YouGov sub sample to a level which it simply cannot bear.
It is also reasonable to point out that the more likely/less likely question for YouGov gives no support whatsoever to the view that Corbyn is any more effective in Scotland. More likely that doubts questions over his credibility as a Prime Minister counteract whatever specific attraction his politics may have for Scotland.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot pretty calm, then the Chancellor must be overwhelming odds to suceed.
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Why are you so angry all the time>?
It's the DUP with a shade of LibDemmery that makes him so curmudgeonly.
I've never voted DUP, but the Tories seem to want to suck up to them, I wonder why ?
Lawson did though have one of the great titles for his memoirs - The View from Number 11. That's got to be up there with Butler's The Art of the Possible and the grand-daddy of them all, Geoffrey Howe's Conflict of Loyalty. It's sad that clever titles have gone so far out of fashion that Blair thought the mind-numbingly twee A Journey was suitable for his memoirs.
Will be interesting to see which one sues on that comment!
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
S
GOWNBPM
Poor Brookie, ought (albeit in your fervid malevolence) is not the equivalent of is (or indeed will be). I'll help with your return fare to Bogtrotter land.
Poor bogtrotter John several generations over here and you still can't decipher an acronym.
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Except (he says with characteristic modesty) I know my party infinitely better than you do. Oh, how we chuckled at your principled and futile abstention in May
LOL when you're living in one of the safest blue seats you already know an abstention means nothing, though in spoling my ballot I did get to tell your election agent how shit Osborne is. :-)
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
I expect he smiled indulgently and, like me, thought, OK there's another nutter. And moved on.
Except of course you haven't, or you wouldn't be bringing up how I voted.
And you're backing a guy with voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
Brookie, you continue to be a source of continuing mirth to me today as you were in May (and er, you didn't 'vote'). View it as a compliment; don't be so crabby. Osborne isn't liked...did I ever say he was....and neither was Mrs T, but both are respected, and if the economy remains in reasonable shape, he will be Cameron's successor and thus PM. Straightforward really.
So cheer up it's a win all round :-)
C'mon...let's have a bet: it's the pb way! What odds?
really John are you getting so desperate you're resorting to the tim trap ?
I'll give you £ 25, proceeds to the site that he won't succeed Cameron as PM.
I don't do desperation old soldier, but I do do the occasional wager here for fun. But if yours is a unilateral pledge to donate £25 to the site if George takes over, then I'm sure Mike will be appreciative.
Comments
Short of a really major scandal, the only way I could see the SNP's stranglehold on Scottish politics being broken any time soon is if Scotland goes independent. In that scenario the question of independence/constitutional arrangement/best deal for Scotland stuff, which appears from the Midlands to be their strongest political card, goes by default.
I would note that the final opinion polls overstated ND and understated SYRIZA last time around. However, it is notable that - in an echo of both Spain, France and the UK - the phone polls understimated the insurgent SYRIZA, and the internet polls overstated them.
(Interestingly: SYRIZA in Greece, Podemos in Spain, UKIP in the UK, and the FN in France were all understated by phone polls, and overstated by Internet ones.
I didn't look to see what type the final opinion polls were in Greece, but I suspect the same rules apply. If they are phone add 1 to SYRIZA and take 1 from ND, and vice versa if they are Internet.)
There is probably a lot in the fresh air theory. Others have drawn parallels with Scotland and in America, where Carson is ahead of Clinton in a couple of spots, and the three leading GOP contenders are all non-politicians.
"Which party will win the highest percentage of the vote in the 2015 Greek parliamentary election, scheduled for 20 September 2015?"
The Greeks have been ill served by all their political masters over the last 30-odd years.
However, the Greek people are likely to vote 4-to-1 for parties that back the troika and the bail outs. There has been no upswell in support for "anti-austerity" parties. I thought the Popular Front, which was backed by all the Left Wing SYRIZA MPs and led by the former energy minister, would be polling around 20% at this election. Instead it, and the Eurosceptic Independent Greeks, are scrabbling around trying to get over the 3% threshold.
Edit: perhaps it might be better put as Boris is the Tory parallel to Corbyn: he'd effectively be running as an outsider.
The voters gave Ed a fair wind and decided decisively that :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister.
In contrast to Jezza I fear I must advise you that Ed is an electoral colossus and that these early moments of the Jezzbollah will be seen as the sunlit uplands and heady days of his leadership.
Sorry Roger.
But then again... New Hampshire 2008...
"Just the facts ma'am" as they used to say in the cop shows.....
There is no coherent opposition. The nasty party , the liars party and the donkeys of Labour, it is a foregone conclusion.
Ultra-rightist Golden Dawn will be third getting 6.5-8 percent. Fourth place will be a fight between center-left PASOK-DIMAR and the Greek Communist Party (KKE) both getting 5.5.-7 percent of the vote. Center-left Potami come sixth getting 4-5.5 percent.
Independent Greeks (ANEL) seem to be getting in parliament with 3-4 percent. So do the Centrists Union at the same percentages (3-4) and almost secure a place in parliament. Finally, extreme-leftist Popular Unity looks like it is in last place with 2.5-3.5 percent.
- See more at: http://greece.greekreporter.com/2015/09/20/greek-elections-exit-poll-greeks-give-syriza-a-lead-over-new-democracy/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#sthash.KBrHWH70.dpuf
Roger dahling!
I've no idea what you're on - but can I have some?
Joking aside, I agree. Boris is somebody people know of, and find funny, and like to talk about. But I don't think many people really see him as somebody they want running the country. In a way the buffoonish exterior has been almost too successful.
I would have said at the moment that Javid remains the likeliest next leader - but let's not forget that Conservative leaders can often bob up suddenly from quite obscure positions. Cameron wasn't even in the Shadow Cabinet in 2004 and was three years into his time in Parliament, Major only joined the cabinet in 1987 and had only been in Parliament since 1979. Iain Duncan Smith, Hague and Thatcher were all mid-ranking figures before their election as leader, although for various reasons they all had a certain amount of name recognition. Heath, too, was mid-ranking apart from a brief spell as SCOTE, but as a former Chief Whip he was well known to wider the Parliamentary Party. Only Michael Howard, of recent years, has been an unambiguously senior and experienced figure to take over the leadership, in very unusual circumstances.
So it might be that the next Tory leader is a Minister of State or even a PPS at the moment. A lot will depend on when Cameron goes and whether any senior ministers resign over the European referendum, opening up positions for someone talented and ambitious to surge through the ranks as Major did in the dog days of Thatcher's government.
That will only happen when it looks a sure bet so likely to be next Tory victory.
I see the unionist wishful thinking well is at it again - the same sort of clutching at any straw poll which caused so much amusement during May's election.
Today's UK pollinbg sub samples for Scotland have the SNP at 49 (Comres), est 55 (Opinium) and 44 (YouGov). That would put the average exactly at the overwhelming support of the General Election!
What is of some interest is the more likely/less likely YouGov on Corbyn which for Scotland is 16 more 22 less - exactly the same as the UK average!
This rather puts paid to the Indy/Guardian poll of yesterday which on a poll of 70 or so people with a biased question ran headlines on the supposed attraction of Corvyn's poltics to Scotland!
barefaced cheeks if you ask me.
The problem is that it is expensive to run the railways safely. It's one reason why so many medium-sized lines in this country were financially unsustainable - the insistence on platforms and top-quality signalling and good fences and so on. David St John Thomas (one half of David and Charles publishing) famously commented that if the railways had been less safe, thousands of lives would have been saved because rural branch lines could have stayed open and the carnage on Britain's roads mitigated. Tom Rolt said something similar in Red for Danger.
We have made the decision to have safe railways, and they are now as safe as they have ever been. But it also means they are expensive. We therefore are making a choice to pay to be safe, or the government is making it for us.
Of course there are other marginal costs to think of - reductions in pollution, noise, congestion and therefore journey times, better capital utilisation as the life of a DMU is long compared to that of a car or lorry. It's probably worth paying for them - but whether we have the balance right is another question.
"All the polls show, certainly comres and yougov, is that Corbyn has boosted Labour a fraction, mainly in Scotland and London, but the Tories have been boosted even more, so the net result is little change"
Comres Scottish sub sample is SNP 49%, TORY 23% AND LAB 17%
HOW EXACTLY IS THAT A CORBYN BOOST?
MORE LIKE A EVEN BIGGER SLUMP THAN THE PREVIOUS SLUMP!
But I suspect that how the Referendum plays out will be of big importance, it will be fresh in peoples minds and to a lot of Conservative grass roots, is of massive importance.
Lawson did though have one of the great titles for his memoirs - The View from Number 11. That's got to be up there with Butler's The Art of the Possible and the grand-daddy of them all, Geoffrey Howe's Conflict of Loyalty. It's sad that clever titles have gone so far out of fashion that Blair thought the mind-numbingly twee A Journey was suitable for his memoirs.
To win a majority under the re-inforced PR system, a party must* win
40.4% * (100%-E%) of the total votes, where
E% is the total percentage votes won by excluded parties which don't make the 3% threshold.
While the overall result (excluding the 50 bonus seats for the plurality winner) is proportional, the complicated allocation of seats to constituencies often means the number of local
seats won by each party bears little relation to the local votes cast...
National seat totals are apportioned by Hare quota (of the total votes of parties which pass the threshold), plus largest remainders.
Constituency seats are first apportioned by Hare quota (total votes). Unfilled constituency seats are filled with those who have the largest remainders of Hare quotas, firstly examining the 3 and 2-member seats, then apportioning remaining seats by smallest national party first, to its largest Hare quota constituency remainder.
The 50 bonus seats are then distributed to the remaining unfilled seats in the constituencies.
Some odd features of the Greek electoral system.
There are eight FPTP seats, but the winner only gets the seat if it also crosses the 3% national threshold...
The lists are normally open, but I understand for this election they will be closed, due to the fact that the last election was less than 18 months ago.
*a majority could be won with fractionally less than this number, depending on how many parties are chasing how many remainder seats.
Yougov has the SNP on 44% (down 6% since the election), Labour on 28% (up 4%) and the Tories on 21% (up 6%)
But He will never be prime minister, he's just unlikeable.
Sadly for you, you will be held to it.
How about a wager...what odds are you tightfisted misanthropic orangeman offering?
I suppose we have to discount the Opinium sub sample as well showing SNP at c 55% in Scotland.
Basically what you mean is that it doesn't agree with your prejudices!
If you cite a poll as evidence then it should back up your argument not destroy it and there is no point in rubbishing Comres it after you had cited it!
In 1846 there was no opposition to Bentinck, probably the nearest parallel to Corbyn for a party leadership, and every leader in the Commons from then until 1911 began their career as the nominee of a leader in the Lords (Granby, Disraeli, Northcote, Hicks Beach and Balfour). In 1911 there was due to be an election but two of the three candidates withdrew because they feared the Unionists would collapse if either of them lost to the other. In 1921 there was no opposition to Austen Chamberlain, in 1922 none to Bonar Law and in 1940 there was none to Churchill (as in 2003 there was none to Howard). Eden and Chamberlain were selected as the 'obvious' candidates; Baldwin and Macmillan by consensus among the cabinet; Home by a blatant stitch-up.
Not a great democratic record, really!
I see so you are the arbiter of what is correct and what is not and extrapolation of results is selective based on what you think is correct.
Subsambles are used toilet paper./
As for knowing your party, I doubt it.
Tories like power and Grimla Wormtongues younger brother will keep them out of it.
He'll get passed over for someone electable.
And you're backing a guy voters rate alongside Corbyn. Who's the nutter ?
It is possible to not see the plurality system as the acme of electoral perfection, after all.
I bet you thought like many people that the polls were right in predicting a hung parliament...
I knew something was very wrong with the polls but didn't know what. The polling companies still haven't decided what happened (AFAIK)
Playing around with subsamples is a fruitless exercise.
The bits on the miners strike, and on when OPEC tried to get Britain to join are particularly interesting.
Opinium gives both SNP total and total Scottish sample and therefore it is possible to estimate SNP share after allowing for don't knows etc which gives the c55% figure. It is not possible to work out the other parties since there is no Scottish breakdown for them. However if SNP are anything over 50 then it seems very unlikely that Opinium holds up your theory of Labour improvement in Scotland. There would be nothing left for the Tories which then would shoot down your second theory of Tory improvement!
I don't really rate any sub sample at all except averaging over a substantial period. My objection was to you citing a Comres poll which showed the opposite of what you were arguing and then elevating a single YouGov sub sample to a level which it simply cannot bear.
It is also reasonable to point out that the more likely/less likely question for YouGov gives no support whatsoever to the view that Corbyn is any more effective in Scotland. More likely that doubts questions over his credibility as a Prime Minister counteract whatever specific attraction his politics may have for Scotland.
You can thank me for Liverpool not winning and Coutinho missing a hat trick of chances... he was my skipper!
Latest GOP Poll:
Trump 24%
Fiorina 15%
Carson 14%
Rubio 11%
Bush 9%
Anyone still think Fiorina is running for VP?