Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The pollsters got the big picture at GE2015 absolutely righ

124»

Comments

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,214
    Pulpstar said:
    You could follow your avatar and try a comb-under?
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    Does anyone "in the know" about the Tory campaign know whether any of the Tory gains in 2015 had not even been on the Tories' target list?

    Someone told me the Plymouth Moor View Tory candidate had been "abandoned" by CCHQ and had all resources pulled because they thought it was a lost cause, but don't know how accurate that is.

    Telford seems to have been unexpected:

    ' There were a lot of rumblings from the Conservative faithful of not enough support from the central party. One said Lucy Allan had been "left hung out to dry", with no heavy hitters, let alone Cameron himself, visiting the seat. '

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000989

    Southampton Itchen was always thought the most likely Conservative gain from Labour but I doubt any of the others were anything but big surprises.

    To be fair the opinion polls weren't predicting Conservative gains from Labour.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,600
    Danny565 said:

    The difference was the Tories used their money much more efficiently, by sending tailored literature to certain people depending on what their job/ family circumstances/ interests/ concerns were. Whereas Labour mostly sent out the same generic leaflets to everyone who was designated a target voter, rather than sending out tailored leaflets to individual groups.

    Yeah for all the banging on from the left about how unfair everything is it really does seem that the Tories were just much, much better at targeting their resources. Labour's supposedly vastly bigger ground game, millions of engagements, and supposedly excellent IT systems turned out to be a load of rubbish. IOS who would bang on about this rubbish, and the day of reckoning it would bring about, has never returned as far as I know.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286

    Pulpstar said:

    Danny565 said:

    Does anyone "in the know" about the Tory campaign know whether any of the Tory gains in 2015 had not even been on the Tories' target list?

    Someone told me the Plymouth Moor View Tory candidate had been "abandoned" by CCHQ and had all resources pulled because they thought it was a lost cause, but don't know how accurate that is.

    Not true about Jonny Mercer.

    I have heard anecdotally that Telford was a surprise, Twickenham was a surprise, that they only targeted Vince Cable to keep him tied up there so he couldn't go campaigning elsewhere in the country.

    A mixture of the mansion tax and the SNP is what helped defeat him.
    Telford has indeed turned out to be a a surprise...
    Might have been better if it has remained a Labour hold.

    Then again, Aidan Burley's bellendery didn't do the Tories any harm in Cannock Chase.
    Better to vote nobs in than Labour is the people's verdict.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Danny565 said:

    Does anyone "in the know" about the Tory campaign know whether any of the Tory gains in 2015 had not even been on the Tories' target list?

    Someone told me the Plymouth Moor View Tory candidate had been "abandoned" by CCHQ and had all resources pulled because they thought it was a lost cause, but don't know how accurate that is.

    Not true about Jonny Mercer.

    I have heard anecdotally that Telford was a surprise, Twickenham was a surprise, that they only targeted Vince Cable to keep him tied up there so he couldn't go campaigning elsewhere in the country.

    A mixture of the mansion tax and the SNP is what helped defeat him.
    Telford has indeed turned out to be a a surprise...
    Might have been better if it has remained a Labour hold.

    Then again, Aidan Burley's bellendery didn't do the Tories any harm in Cannock Chase.
    Better to vote nobs in than Labour is the people's verdict.
    Well he stood down, would have been interesting to see the result if he had stood again.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286

    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Danny565 said:

    Does anyone "in the know" about the Tory campaign know whether any of the Tory gains in 2015 had not even been on the Tories' target list?

    Someone told me the Plymouth Moor View Tory candidate had been "abandoned" by CCHQ and had all resources pulled because they thought it was a lost cause, but don't know how accurate that is.

    Not true about Jonny Mercer.

    I have heard anecdotally that Telford was a surprise, Twickenham was a surprise, that they only targeted Vince Cable to keep him tied up there so he couldn't go campaigning elsewhere in the country.

    A mixture of the mansion tax and the SNP is what helped defeat him.
    Telford has indeed turned out to be a a surprise...
    Might have been better if it has remained a Labour hold.

    Then again, Aidan Burley's bellendery didn't do the Tories any harm in Cannock Chase.
    Better to vote nobs in than Labour is the people's verdict.
    Well he stood down, would have been interesting to see the result if he had stood again.
    Probably would have won still. People tend really not to care when the choice is a potential Miliband Gov't.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    A pact that might keep the SNP in power at Westminster in perpetuity will go down well in England, as we saw in May 2015.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Solving the conundrum that is our triple-headed general election system will take more than just one change.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    I would presume there must be at least a dozen Tories who might support a switch to PR? I understand they would lose their jobs but surely amongst 300+ there must be at least 12 that have some sort of principles.

    Of course holding together the Labour party on such a matter would probably be a far harder proposition.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627
    Danny565 said:



    Richard, I'm someone who has canvassed for the Tory for many years, this time I was amazed at how sophisticated it was this time.

    We knew which voters we had to target, and what their 'topics' were.

    We also knew which voters to avoid, we knew they were never voting Tory and trying to canvass them or send them leaflets was a waste of time.

    If you get the chance, read the book 'Why the Tories Won' by Tim Ross, explains it there too.

    I think we learned the lessons of 2010.

    One thing that was interesting from the Electoral Commission figures the other day was that, apparently, Labour didn't even spend that much less in their campaign than the Tories did.
    Really? Well, that's another myth dispelled, I hope they learn from it
    glw said:

    JJ wants a power sharing deal with the Argies over the Falklands...

    There's a bit of me that thinks Corbyn is deliberately coming out with some of this barmy stuff to force the moderates to push off.
    I find it hard to believe, but on the other hand, it would be so easy for him to fudge a response on his previous views on such subjects so they don't cause a fuss that the unhappy but loyal cannot ignore (and if a Corbynista wants to tell me the man is different and doesn't do spin like that, they can take the blinkers off right now). Being at best equivocal about the rights of the Falkland Islanders and at worse seemingly confirming he's happy to hand the islands over, making Trident a centrepiece of his leadership efforts to change the party - either he wants to force a confrontation (which he presumably thinks he would win, or else why force it now), or he has zero political nous and genuinely had no idea those ideas would cause an issue (which given how he is putting in concerted efforts to change the party position on Trident, doesn't seem likely either).

    Of the two issues, the Falklands one is the more baffling. There are people who agree with him, but far fewer than those who agree or are at least uncertain about Trident. As I said, if other people bring it up, he can fudge a response and avoid the worst, it's not like his core supporters would mind him dodging a straight answer on the subject.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 115,921
    edited January 2016
    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    Everyone else, the morning thread is now about you know what.
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    A pact that might keep the SNP in power at Westminster in perpetuity will go down well in England, as we saw in May 2015.
    The SNP are far more likely to be involved in some sort of power sharing under FPTP than they would be under AMS, STV or PR.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627
    edited January 2016
    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    I would presume there must be at least a dozen Tories who might support a switch to PR? I understand they would lose their jobs but surely amongst 300+ there must be at least 12 that have some sort of principles.
    .
    If the party's prospects look poorer under a new leader (for Tories and, perhaps, Labour) perhaps that would encourage reform sympathetic Tories to be bolder. Not as much to fear, career punishment wise, if the party are looking to do badly anyway. Of course, right now the current leadership clique are very buoyant and confident and look to remain that way for awhile, but time will tell.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    Everyone else, the morning thread is now about you know what.

    Scottish AV ?
  • Options
    One interesting thing about the 2015 election was how many Conservative MPs stood down in marginal constituencies such as Cannock, Dudley S, Erewash, Ribble S and Warwickshire N only for the Conservatives to retain them with increased majorities.

  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,627

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    More vitally, does that mean the world's worst pun is delayed as well, or was that another planned thread.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 115,921
    edited January 2016
    Pulpstar said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    Everyone else, the morning thread is now about you know what.

    Scottish AV ?
    Nearly, electoral reform, AV will feature heavily.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    More vitally, does that mean the world's worst pun is delayed as well, or was that another planned thread.
    Yes, the world's worst pun has been delayed a week.
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    I would presume there must be at least a dozen Tories who might support a switch to PR? I understand they would lose their jobs but surely amongst 300+ there must be at least 12 that have some sort of principles.
    It was argued fairly convincingly at the time of the referendum that AV could actually help the Tories. They were fairly unanimous in sticking to their principles and rejecting it anyway.

  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Pulpstar said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    Everyone else, the morning thread is now about you know what.

    Scottish AV ?
    Nearly, electoral reform, AV will feature heavily.
    AV is a form of FPTP, it is a tweak rather than a reform.
  • Options
    Tim_B said:

    MTimT said:

    Dair said:

    ydoethur said:

    Dair said:

    ydoethur said:

    Okayyyyy

    Crimes of Britain
    It was Elizabeth I who licensed thieves, kitting them out as pirates. British fortune spawned from a criminal enterprise.

    In which case it was a crime of England, not Britain. There was no 'Britain' until she died and James called his personal union of the crowns Britain - and of course it was not formalised until 1707.
    Or "England and Wales" for those believers in the "Wales is really a country, no honestly IT IS, IT IS" myth.

    Incidentally there is an interesting twitter trend #DespiteBeingTaughtInWelsh developing at the moment. The BBC have wisely edited their initial story, it seems.
    Wales was annexed by England in 1536 and 1543 - before Elizabeth came to the throne. It had ceased to exist- as Britannica Used to say, 'For Wales, see England'. Scotland staggered on for a bit longer.

    Of course, you could quibble about the extent to which Scotland was a 'nation' in the modern sense either, given its vast regional differences, multiple languages and weak central government. But TBH the further back you go the less meaningful such labels become anyway.
    I thought the annexation and extinguishing of Wales was in 1284?

    The wiki article on the C16th stuff seems to indicate that all that happened then was to give those in the Wales region the same rights as other Englishmen.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_in_Wales_Acts_1535_and_1542
    England with the help of a few Welsh archers used to own half of France. Shall we have it back? I guess we would leave Calais out of this.
    If we go by a LOFI approach (Last out, First in), Calais should be the first part of France to rejoin the UK.
    Didn't Elizabeth ! say that Calais was engraved on her heart?

    How are your horses etc doing?
    Big sis.
  • Options
    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)
  • Options
    watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    kle4 said:

    Danny565 said:



    Richard, I'm someone who has canvassed for the Tory for many years, this time I was amazed at how sophisticated it was this time.

    We knew which voters we had to target, and what their 'topics' were.

    We also knew which voters to avoid, we knew they were never voting Tory and trying to canvass them or send them leaflets was a waste of time.

    If you get the chance, read the book 'Why the Tories Won' by Tim Ross, explains it there too.

    I think we learned the lessons of 2010.

    One thing that was interesting from the Electoral Commission figures the other day was that, apparently, Labour didn't even spend that much less in their campaign than the Tories did.
    Really? Well, that's another myth dispelled, I hope they learn from it
    glw said:

    JJ wants a power sharing deal with the Argies over the Falklands...

    There's a bit of me that thinks Corbyn is deliberately coming out with some of this barmy stuff to force the moderates to push off.
    I find it hard to believe, but on the other hand, it would be so easy for him to fudge a response on his previous views on such subjects so they don't cause a fuss that the unhappy but loyal cannot ignore (and if a Corbynista wants to tell me the man is different and doesn't do spin like that, they can take the blinkers off right now). Being at best equivocal about the rights of the Falkland Islanders and at worse seemingly confirming he's happy to hand the islands over, making Trident a centrepiece of his leadership efforts to change the party - either he wants to force a confrontation (which he presumably thinks he would win, or else why force it now), or he has zero political nous and genuinely had no idea those ideas would cause an issue (which given how he is putting in concerted efforts to change the party position on Trident, doesn't seem likely either).

    Of the two issues, the Falklands one is the more baffling. There are people who agree with him, but far fewer than those who agree or are at least uncertain about Trident. As I said, if other people bring it up, he can fudge a response and avoid the worst, it's not like his core supporters would mind him dodging a straight answer on the subject.
    Factor in the cost of all those call centres provided by the unions to Labour. Bet that skews the numbers a bit.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Ed's first foreign trip was to France to lick Hollande's boots.

    Jezza's first foreign trip was to France to slate their operation on Calais.

  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,600
    kle4 said:

    Of the two issues, the Falklands one is the more baffling. There are people who agree with him, but far fewer than those who agree or are at least uncertain about Trident.

    Yeah the number of people who would agree with him about the Falklands who aren't already die hard left wingers must be tiny, and vastly outnumbered by the people who will think he is off his rocker. But Corbyn doesn't seem at all bothered about explaining or moderating his previously stated views.

    The Tories don't need a dirty tricks dept. they can simply publish stuff Jeremy Corbyn has actually said and still believes.
  • Options
    dyingswandyingswan Posts: 189
    As Mr Corbyn likes us to submit questions that he can ask, here are mine. They should be asked of the people he met today in Calais and Dunkirk.
    1. As you are safe in Socialist France why not stay here?
    2.What is it about Socialist France that makes the UK so attractive?
    3How many of you are really from countries where there is war?
    4.Are you not guilty of deliberate child neglect by bringing children to filthy insanitary conditions?
    5.How many of you are carrying knives?
    6If the UK agreed to take you in,how many more from your countries would demand the same?
    7.If you are allocated to another safe country in the EU e.g Greece, Bulgaria by a decision of the EU member states will you stay there?
    8.What do you think of the behaviour of male migrants in Cologne Berlin and Sweden?
    Etc etc.....
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Dair said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    Everyone else, the morning thread is now about you know what.

    Scottish AV ?
    Nearly, electoral reform, AV will feature heavily.
    AV is a form of FPTP, it is a tweak rather than a reform.
    A pact is a form of AV, without the option of truncating your preferences...
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,214

    kle4 said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    More vitally, does that mean the world's worst pun is delayed as well, or was that another planned thread.
    Yes, the world's worst pun has been delayed a week.
    Punus interruptus
  • Options
    Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    kle4 said:

    Apologies to AlanBrooke, but my anyone but Osborne thread is now being shunted to next weekend.

    More vitally, does that mean the world's worst pun is delayed as well, or was that another planned thread.
    Yes, the world's worst pun has been delayed a week.
    Punus interruptus
    pungent
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294

    Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat leader, is in secret talks with Jeremy Corbyn about voting reform in a bid to form a progressive electoral alliance against the Conservatives.

    Mr Farron’s aides are talking to a Labour MP – a close ally of Mr Corbyn – who is acting as a conduit between the two leaders, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

    http://goo.gl/Gllf00

    Bring it on.

    We'd get a solid Tory-UKIP Government in England under EVEL.
  • Options
    Anyone got a link to the GB share of the vote at the 2015 general election please?
  • Options

    MP_SE said:

    kle4 said:


    Most interestingly from my perspective is the back page has a whole list of UKIP Myths' and 'UKIP Propaganda' (though smaller print says 'UKIP and others' spreading myths. I'm curious why the association of the 'myths' purely with UKIP. It claims to be SW focused (sections on 'Business in the SW', so maybe they didn't want to trash it as Tory eurosceptic myths as well to not upset partisans. Additionally, it counters each 'myth' statement with the 'truth' and for some reason includes a source for the claims on some, but not all of them for some reason.

    Also, it is listed as for January/February 2016, which makes me worried I'll get 6 of these a year.

    That would be a spend of approximately £9million. They don't have the manpower to deliver them by hand and have to rely on posting them. This is where the Eurofanatics will come unstuck. I doubt they have sufficient activists to spread their message in the way that Eurosceptics do. My constituncy has had 10s of thousands of leaflets delivered, street stalls, etc.
    You sound like a Labour activist just before the election, hyping up their awesome ground game with their many thousands of activists.

    Remain have Stephen Gilbert working for them, he worked for CCHQ at the election, and was one of the architects of the Tory customised targeting strategy that worked wonders in appealing to the voters that matter.
    Actually Labour's groundgame was successful where it was used. Labour's problem was that sending thousands of activists into Hornsey and Bermondsey (as IOS boasted about) wasn't the best use of their resources. But then Labour have been withdrawing ever more into their comfort zone for a decade.

    Meanwhile many of the Conservatives best results came as a surprise to them, not to mention the 'experts', but not perhaps to those who have been saying since 2007 that Labour's industrial wwc vote was unravelling.

    How effective Stephen Gilbert was I don't know - I always have doubts about the cult of the current 'genius' - but I'd say this image shifted thousands of votes rightwards:

    http://mashable.com/2015/04/17/debate-photo-hug/

    Richard, I'm someone who has canvassed for the Tory for many years, this time I was amazed at how sophisticated it was this time.

    We knew which voters we had to target, and what their 'topics' were.

    We also knew which voters to avoid, we knew they were never voting Tory and trying to canvass them or send them leaflets was a waste of time.

    If you get the chance, read the book 'Why the Tories Won' by Tim Ross, explains it there too.

    I think we learned the lessons of 2010.
    Thanks for the recommendation.

    I'll have a look at that book.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,411



    We would have to check with Nick P but my understanding of Swiss government (which is incredibly confusing) is that there are only 7 actual positions on the Federal Council which is the equivalent of our Government. Everything else is done by those committees (at least at the Federal level).

    Yes, my involvement was mainly at cantonal level where most of the power is (I was on the economic policy committee of the Basel Social Democrats, for what it's worth) but that's my understanding too.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    MP_SE said:

    kle4 said:

    Just received a 4 page newspaper size 'Europe and You' sheet from Britain Stronger in Europe.

    Moters each 'myth' statement with the 'truth' and for some reason includes a source for the claims on some, but not all of them for some reason.

    Also, it is listed as for January/February 2016, which makes me worried I'll get 6 of these a year.

    That would be a spend of approximately £9million. They don't have the manpower to deliver them by hand and have to rely on posting them. This is where the Eurofanatics will come unstuck. I doubt they have sufficihousands of leaflets delivered, street stalls, etc.


    Remain have Stephen Gilbert working for them, he worked for CCHQ at the election, and was one of the architects of the Tory customised targeting strategy that worked wonders in appealing to the voters that matter.

    How effective Stephen Gilbert was I don't know - I always have doubts about the cult of the current 'genius' - but I'd say this image shifted thousands of votes rightwards:

    http://mashable.com/2015/04/17/debate-photo-hug/

    Richard, I'm someone who has canvassed for the Tory for many years, this time I was amazed at how sophisticated it was this time.

    We knew which voters we had to target, and what their 'topics' were.

    We also knew which voters to avoid, we knew they were never voting Tory and trying to canvass them or send them leaflets was a waste of time.

    If you get the chance, read the book 'Why the Tories Won' by Tim Ross, explains it there too.

    I think we learned the lessons of 2010.
    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.
  • Options

    MP_SE said:

    kle4 said:


    .

    That would be a spend of approximately £9million. They don't have the manpower to deliver them by hand and have to rely on posting them. This is where the Eurofanatics will come unstuck. I doubt they have sufficient activists to spread their message in the way that Eurosceptics do. My constituncy has had 10s of thousands of leaflets delivered, street stalls, etc.
    Actually Labour's groundgame was successful where it was used. Labour's problem was that sending thousands of activists into Hornsey and Bermondsey (as IOS boasted about) wasn't the best use of their resources. But then Labour have been withdrawing ever more into their comfort zone for a decade.

    Meanwhile many of the Conservatives best results came as a surprise to them, not to mention the 'experts', but not perhaps to those who have been saying since 2007 that Labour's industrial wwc vote was unravelling.

    How effective Stephen Gilbert was I don't know - I always have doubts about the cult of the current 'genius' - but I'd say this image shifted thousands of votes rightwards:

    http://mashable.com/2015/04/17/debate-photo-hug/

    Richard, I'm someone who has canvassed for the Tory for many years, this time I was amazed at how sophisticated it was this time.

    We knew which voters we had to target, and what their 'topics' were.

    We also knew which voters to avoid, we knew they were never voting Tory and trying to canvass them or send them leaflets was a waste of time.

    If you get the chance, read the book 'Why the Tories Won' by Tim Ross, explains it there too.

    I think we learned the lessons of 2010.
    Thanks for the recommendation.

    I'll have a look at that book.
    The kindle edition is now £6.02, is a very good read.
  • Options
    welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    glw said:

    kle4 said:

    Of the two issues, the Falklands one is the more baffling. There are people who agree with him, but far fewer than those who agree or are at least uncertain about Trident.

    Yeah the number of people who would agree with him about the Falklands who aren't already die hard left wingers must be tiny, and vastly outnumbered by the people who will think he is off his rocker. But Corbyn doesn't seem at all bothered about explaining or moderating his previously stated views.

    The Tories don't need a dirty tricks dept. they can simply publish stuff Jeremy Corbyn has actually said and still believes.
    Too true. Allegedly in '83 the Tories in Cardiff Central gave up giving out their own leaflets and were madly photocopying the Labour leaflet for distribution as it was a far better vote winner for them than anything they could think up. I can see similar happening if Brother Corbyn remains in situ come 2020. (They won by the way in rather unnatural territory).
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    @TSE

    Con 37.7%
    Lab 31.2%
    UKIP 12.9
    LD 8.1%
    SNP 4.9%
    Oth 5.2%
  • Options
    RodCrosby said:

    @TSE

    Con 37.7%
    Lab 31.2%
    UKIP 12.9
    LD 8.1%
    SNP 4.9%
    Oth 5.2%

    Thanks Rod.
  • Options
    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    You make some huge sacrifices for this site.

    Can't you let the current thread run overnight and do it in the morning?
  • Options
    PongPong Posts: 4,693
    More speculation about a Bloomberg run.

    He's in to 25/1-50/1
  • Options
    DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Anyone considering an outside bet on RISE getting an MSP at Holyrood 2016 should reconsider. It seems the SSP (by far the bulk of the RISE project) are falling apart. Again.

    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1094830987236563&id=100001290175028&p=10&refid=52
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
    We found the polls deflating, in the sense we would go out an have a good night canvassing. All our pledges were staying with us, and we would be picking up now and then the labour switcher, yet we would be reading another poll of tories and labour on 34/33. It didnt gel with what we were experiencing.

    For Labour to be confident, they must have experienced the same thing, I cannot understand how they could have been doing accurate canvassing and not picked up that they were slightly down on last time.

    This was a seat that Labour *expected* to win fairly easily.
  • Options

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    You make some huge sacrifices for this site.

    Can't you let the current thread run overnight and do it in the morning?
    When I go to bed and haven't written a morning thread, I can't sleep, so is better to do it at 1am than at 4am.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 115,921
    edited January 2016
    notme said:

    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
    We found the polls deflating, in the sense we would go out an have a good night canvassing. All our pledges were staying with us, and we would be picking up now and then the labour switcher, yet we would be reading another poll of tories and labour on 34/33. It didnt gel with what we were experiencing.

    For Labour to be confident, they must have experienced the same thing, I cannot understand how they could have been doing accurate canvassing and not picked up that they were slightly down on last time.

    This was a seat that Labour *expected* to win fairly easily.
    That's why with the great polling feck up, I do wonder if we had some shy Tories, telling Labour and the pollsters they would vote Labour when deep down they had no intention of ever doing so.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,416
    People seem to have misunderstood the article linked below.

    They aren't talking about an electoral pact in 2020 or about trying to introduce PR in this Parliament.

    They are talking about both putting PR in their 2020 manifestos. Then, if they end up in coalition, they would introduce PR without a referendum - based on it being in both manifestos.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...
  • Options
    Chris_AChris_A Posts: 1,237
    MikeL said:

    People seem to have misunderstood the article linked below.

    They aren't talking about an electoral pact in 2020 or about trying to introduce PR in this Parliament.

    They are talking about both putting PR in their 2020 manifestos. Then, if they end up in coalition, they would introduce PR without a referendum - based on it being in both manifestos.

    Quite right too - a referendum is a ridiculous idea. As is the one we're wasting money on this year.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    You make some huge sacrifices for this site.

    Can't you let the current thread run overnight and do it in the morning?
    When I go to bed and haven't written a morning thread, I can't sleep, so is better to do it at 1am than at 4am.
    Cripes. To be fair, I'd probably be the same.

    Sounds like you need to share the load more.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited January 2016

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    It shouldn't be hard to beat Stoke in the Cup this week, they were pretty poor today.

    Leicester are top of the league again, 34 days this season already, 1 more than Spurs have managed since the Premiership was created. Lets hope Arsenal drop points to Chelsea.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    notme said:

    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
    We found the polls deflating, in the sense we would go out an have a good night canvassing. All our pledges were staying with us, and we would be picking up now and then the labour switcher, yet we would be reading another poll of tories and labour on 34/33. It didnt gel with what we were experiencing.

    For Labour to be confident, they must have experienced the same thing, I cannot understand how they could have been doing accurate canvassing and not picked up that they were slightly down on last time.

    This was a seat that Labour *expected* to win fairly easily.
    How's Corbyn going down in Morecambe ?
  • Options

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    You make some huge sacrifices for this site.

    Can't you let the current thread run overnight and do it in the morning?
    When I go to bed and haven't written a morning thread, I can't sleep, so is better to do it at 1am than at 4am.
    Cripes. To be fair, I'd probably be the same.

    Sounds like you need to share the load more.
    It's not a load issue, you plan to do the Sunday morning thread on subject x, then at 10.30pm on Saturday night a story breaks that means you have to do the morning thread on that.
  • Options

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    It shouldn't be hard to beat Stoke in the Cup this week, they were pretty poor today.

    Leicester are top of the league again, 34 days this season already, 1 more than Spurs have managed since the Premiership was created. Lets hope Arsenal drop points to Chelsea.

    I have tickets for the match on Tuesday.

    I'm tempted not to go given my recent record of watching Liverpool
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...
    The LDs tried playing games with the political system for their own benefit in 2011. That didn't end well. Would this really fare any better? The Tory campaign in 2020 would surely feature "all they can do is talk about fixing things for their benefit; we're talking about what the country needs".
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    "Jeremy Corbyn | Sky News Interview in Refugee Camp in France

    As a matter of urgency, David Cameron should act to give refuge to unaccompanied refugee children now in Europe – as we did with Jewish Kindertransport children escaping from Nazi tyranny in the 1930s"

    I don't begrudge anyone helping kids, but this is bloody FRANCE. FRANCE. It is richer than us, has more usable room than us, is far less crowded and has plenty of ethnic diversity especially around Paris.

    Comparing the Hollande Gov't to Nazi tyranny in the 1930s. Well !
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    MikeL said:

    People seem to have misunderstood the article linked below.

    They aren't talking about an electoral pact in 2020 or about trying to introduce PR in this Parliament.

    They are talking about both putting PR in their 2020 manifestos. Then, if they end up in coalition, they would introduce PR without a referendum - based on it being in both manifestos.

    The principle that major constitutional changes require a referendum is now well established.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    MikeL said:

    People seem to have misunderstood the article linked below.

    They aren't talking about an electoral pact in 2020 or about trying to introduce PR in this Parliament.

    They are talking about both putting PR in their 2020 manifestos. Then, if they end up in coalition, they would introduce PR without a referendum - based on it being in both manifestos.

    The principle that major constitutional changes require a referendum is now well established.
    A principle established by referendum, no doubt...
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    It shouldn't be hard to beat Stoke in the Cup this week, they were pretty poor today.

    Leicester are top of the league again, 34 days this season already, 1 more than Spurs have managed since the Premiership was created. Lets hope Arsenal drop points to Chelsea.

    I have tickets for the match on Tuesday.

    I'm tempted not to go given my recent record of watching Liverpool
    If you are a jinx for Liverpool, could I encourage you to visit the KP on 2nd Feb?

    Shawcross's injury looked bad, so I don't think that he will be playing. With both teams having shocking defences I expect lots of goals on Tuesday.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    MikeL said:

    People seem to have misunderstood the article linked below.

    They aren't talking about an electoral pact in 2020 or about trying to introduce PR in this Parliament.

    They are talking about both putting PR in their 2020 manifestos. Then, if they end up in coalition, they would introduce PR without a referendum - based on it being in both manifestos.

    Whilst the idea of Labour being in power after the next election might seem laughable - with the Lib Dems perhaps getting on a VERY good night 11 MPs or so, the idea of them being in coalition is completely absurd lol.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294

    I really wanted an early night tonight, but I'm going to stay up till probably 1am writing this thread. Plus I'm dosed up to the eyeballs on painkillers (I injured my knee celebrating Liverpool's injury time, better than sex, winner against Norwich)

    You make some huge sacrifices for this site.

    Can't you let the current thread run overnight and do it in the morning?
    When I go to bed and haven't written a morning thread, I can't sleep, so is better to do it at 1am than at 4am.
    Cripes. To be fair, I'd probably be the same.

    Sounds like you need to share the load more.
    It's not a load issue, you plan to do the Sunday morning thread on subject x, then at 10.30pm on Saturday night a story breaks that means you have to do the morning thread on that.
    But you could give yourself more of a break at weekends, and let someone else cover the shift.
  • Options
    notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    notme said:

    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
    We found the polls deflating, in the sense we would go out an have a good night canvassing. All our pledges were staying with us, and we would be picking up now and then the labour switcher, yet we would be reading another poll of tories and labour on 34/33. It didnt gel with what we were experiencing.

    For Labour to be confident, they must have experienced the same thing, I cannot understand how they could have been doing accurate canvassing and not picked up that they were slightly down on last time.

    This was a seat that Labour *expected* to win fairly easily.
    That's why with the great polling feck up, I do wonder if we had some shy Tories, telling Labour and the pollsters they would vote Labour when deep down they had no intention of ever doing so.
    the one word that described the labour vote 'soft'. Ive canvassed for eighteen years.... You get a feeling in your bones when you do areas you are familiar with, and you have past voting patterns (and the marked register to see if they actually vote).
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294
    Pulpstar said:

    "Jeremy Corbyn | Sky News Interview in Refugee Camp in France

    As a matter of urgency, David Cameron should act to give refuge to unaccompanied refugee children now in Europe – as we did with Jewish Kindertransport children escaping from Nazi tyranny in the 1930s"

    I don't begrudge anyone helping kids, but this is bloody FRANCE. FRANCE. It is richer than us, has more usable room than us, is far less crowded and has plenty of ethnic diversity especially around Paris.

    Comparing the Hollande Gov't to Nazi tyranny in the 1930s. Well !

    He's a dickhead.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    notme said:

    notme said:

    I was part of a campaign in a hyper marginal in the north. We had good data, we *knew* what we were going to get on election night. The only doubts was how the ukip/libdem churn would have to the Labour vote.

    I did repeatedly mention on here that there was no swing against the Tories, and a mild movement towards us, and that I had had discussions with someone in a position to know how a few other similar seats were going in the north west.. PS that person got every prediction right, including the ones we lost.
    We trebled the majority. We knew it would be better in total numbers than 2010. What was confusing is that Labour went into that count on election night thinking they had won. Their intelligence of the state of play obviously was not as good, or the candidate was been kept out of the loop.


    I spoke to someone on the Labour side after election day, he said Labour's confidence was that they were doing a lot of traditional canvassing in the seat, and not seeing much of the Tories, and thought that gave them the advantage in GOTV.

    Other little things gave them confidence too, UKIP would hurt the Tories more, the national polling/Ashcroft's marginal polling and they just couldn't believe disgruntled Lib Dems would move to the Tories. It just didn't compute, they thought they had them in the bag since 2010.
    We found the polls deflating, in the sense we would go out an have a good night canvassing. All our pledges were staying with us, and we would be picking up now and then the labour switcher, yet we would be reading another poll of tories and labour on 34/33. It didnt gel with what we were experiencing.

    For Labour to be confident, they must have experienced the same thing, I cannot understand how they could have been doing accurate canvassing and not picked up that they were slightly down on last time.

    This was a seat that Labour *expected* to win fairly easily.
    How's Corbyn going down in Morecambe ?
    Don't you mean Carlisle ?
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 57,294
    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...
    Except voters don't like these sort of stitch-ups and games. Votes aren't interchangeable, as GE2015 showed, and voters don't like to be taken for granted.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if it backfired.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,281
    Could Liam Fox be ready to back Theresa May in a future Tory leadership contest?
    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/01/mays-fox-accessory.html
  • Options
    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,306

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    thousand year reich nailed on?

    titters :D
  • Options
    Interview with Ken Livingstone in the Sunday Times

    Livingstone:

    •Said he could stage a comeback to the Commons

    •Called for talks with Isis

    •Defended Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Putin

    •Backed the deselection of moderate Labour MPs

    •Said Tony Blair should face trial for war crimes

    •Said he gave Boris Johnson career advice.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659817.ece
  • Options
    To be fair to Ken

    He also condemned Jeremy Corbyn’s plan to send Britain’s nuclear submarines to sea with no warheads and dismissed his plans to abolish Trident and negotiate with Argentina over the Falkland islands as a distraction, saying he should focus on the economy instead if he wants to win the next election.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    Bleh, the misses reckons I have tonsilitis ><
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    Ahah Eddie Izzard always good for a good laugh :)
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    edited January 2016

    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...

    Except voters don't like these sort of stitch-ups and games. Votes aren't interchangeable, as GE2015 showed, and voters don't like to be taken for granted.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if it backfired.
    FPTP invites this sort of thing to happen. After all, FPTP is a stitch-up. And Tories just love it.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Republican lawyer tries to get Cruz removed from ballot...
    http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/motion-demands-cruz-be-removed-from-illinois-ballot/
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    Who is your pick for president?

    Donald Trump (57%, 897 Votes)


    Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/super-poll/#pHLs4MSHQIaf3Igm.99
  • Options
    TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    Pulpstar said:

    "Jeremy Corbyn | Sky News Interview in Refugee Camp in France

    As a matter of urgency, David Cameron should act to give refuge to unaccompanied refugee children now in Europe – as we did with Jewish Kindertransport children escaping from Nazi tyranny in the 1930s"

    I don't begrudge anyone helping kids, but this is bloody FRANCE. FRANCE. It is richer than us, has more usable room than us, is far less crowded and has plenty of ethnic diversity especially around Paris.

    Comparing the Hollande Gov't to Nazi tyranny in the 1930s. Well !

    He's a dickhead.
    Second that.
  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    Ahah Eddie Izzard always good for a good laugh :)
    Yes, Eddie Izzard campaigning alongside Jim Murphy worked so well in Scotland last year ...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,281

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    Ahah Eddie Izzard always good for a good laugh :)
    Yes, Eddie Izzard campaigning alongside Jim Murphy worked so well in Scotland last year ...
    Yes, they won the referendum!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,286
    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    Ahah Eddie Izzard always good for a good laugh :)
    Yes, Eddie Izzard campaigning alongside Jim Murphy worked so well in Scotland last year ...
    Yes, they won the referendum!
    At a big cost to Scottish Labour though.

    A big price...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,281
    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Labour are fecked

    THE comedian Eddie Izzard is being touted by Labour moderates as their secret weapon in the battle to wrest control of the party back from Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-left supporters.

    Izzard, 53, is a long-standing Labour activist and will be approached by senior MPs to stand for the ruling national executive committee (NEC) this year.

    http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/homeV2/article1659822.ece

    Ahah Eddie Izzard always good for a good laugh :)
    Yes, Eddie Izzard campaigning alongside Jim Murphy worked so well in Scotland last year ...
    Yes, they won the referendum!
    At a big cost to Scottish Labour though.

    A big price...
    So what, they still saved the UK which was what they campaigned for in that campaign alongside the other unionist parties, Scottish Labour was doomed regardless
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    RodCrosby said:

    Republican lawyer tries to get Cruz removed from ballot...
    http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/motion-demands-cruz-be-removed-from-illinois-ballot/

    Trump toys with sueing too...
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/23/trump-weighs-lawsuit-over-cruz-citizenship.html
    “I don’t really think its going to matter, that’s probably why I want to save the legal fees … maybe I would do it, maybe I won’t either”
  • Options

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...
    Except voters don't like these sort of stitch-ups and games. Votes aren't interchangeable, as GE2015 showed, and voters don't like to be taken for granted.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if it backfired.
    At least such a pact would remove any lingering doubt that a vote for the LibDems is a vote for Labour.

    Good luck to Farron & Co. with that one ..... perhaps he's trying to achieve further taxi fare savings for his party!
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,101

    RodCrosby said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How are Labour/Lib Dems intending to get that there VI reform through the house with the Tory majority. Or will the candidates not stand against each other ?

    I guess the Lib Dems probably can't afford 600+ lost deposits next GE tbh.

    A one-time pact to bust the system...
    Would it even work ?
    An interesting question! Will look into it.
    Of course, a formal Lib-Lab alliance last May would have seen fewer votes than the two parties individually actually got (some LD voters were very happy with the coalition thank-you-very-much...)
    Yeah, it would probably have to be some kind of asymmetric pact.

    Lab & Greens stand down in 50 Con-LD seats
    Greens stand down in 50 Con-Lab seats, but the LDs don't.
    LDs maybe stand down in a few SNP-Lab contests.
    Lab stand down in Pavilion...
    Except voters don't like these sort of stitch-ups and games. Votes aren't interchangeable, as GE2015 showed, and voters don't like to be taken for granted.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if it backfired.
    At least such a pact would remove any lingering doubt that a vote for the LibDems is a vote for Labour.

    Good luck to Farron & Co. with that one ..... perhaps he's trying to achieve further taxi fare savings for his party!
    No doubt the SNP would want to be 'helpful' too.......
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,057
    edited January 2016
    Seems the lady who showed our JJ around the Jungle is involved with a charming anarchist group.....

    Tory CCHQ add yet another dodgy link to dossier for election time.

    I remember a time when if you were high profile opposition MP having one dinner with a dodgy Russian metal magnet would make you headline news for 2 weeks. Now we have the the leader of the Labour party and shadow chancellor consistently hanging out with dodgy individuals without more than a passing mummer.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,928

    Seems the lady who showed our JJ around the Jungle is involved with a charming anarchist group.....

    Tory CCHQ add yet another dodgy link to dossier for election time.

    I remember a time when if you were high profile opposition MP having one dinner with a dodgy Russian metal magnet would make you headline news for 2 weeks. Now we have the the leader of the Labour party and shadow chancellor consistently hanging out with dodgy individuals without more than a passing mummer.

    This shows how right the PM was to go on about the security implications of Corbyn early on, and why he is now trying to implicate the whole Labour Party rather than just the man himself.

    The election campaign if JC is still there will be brutal, there's plenty to go on why they are positively dangerous for the country, starting with their willingness to give bits of it away and their association with people who would like to see it defeated.
This discussion has been closed.