Even that is a swing of 4.5% from 2012. According to the Wiki page there should be a lot more LG elections than you listed unless some have got out of sync.
Overall your list makes it clear that Thursday will be the most important election day until the next GE. And Labour really aren't in a good place. There has to be a real chance that by the referendum Labour will be embroiled in another leadership election. Really not sure how that will play.
If Khan wins on Friday that will instantly take the focus away from the LG elections and Corbyn will be safe
Sadly you could be right but the LG elections are far and wide and a much more important indicator of the national state of play.
Have to say, John Ashworth isn't at all convincing on BBC or Sky re anti-Semitism. He looks like a political smoothy in a sharp suit wheeled out for the cameras. He's cutting no ice with me.
John Ashworth is no smoothie. He is an ambitious party apparatchik, former SPAD, and well connected within the party. He was parachuted into the safe seat of Leicester South in the 2011 byelection.
His willingness to defend the indefensible, does make me think that he is a possible dark horse for the Labour leadership, being not particularly associated with either wing, and having significant backing in the Unions.
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
It's hard to think that this row won't hurt Labour next week, but the Conservatives won't finish 20% clear of Labour, which they'd need to, to regain all the seats they lost to Labour in 2012. But, any lead for the governing party over the Opposition, in terms of NEV, is bad news for the Opposition.
The tories were 20% ahead in 2008 (why oh why did Labour not dump that idiot Brown then?) but Labour were only 7% ahead in 2012. Opinium says the tories are 8% ahead now which is where I started from but it is right to say that there are fewer seats in play and the swing in favour of Labour in 2012 was much larger than is likely to happen this time.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Labour voters split 59 to 13 (UK worse off post Brexit to better off) p6 of the tables, the split is 37 to 6 when asked if they would personally be worse off.
Tony Blair & Gordon Brown both recognised that Diane Abbott was unfit to hold any Ministerial Office. Her performance today, reinforces their judgement.
She would know a smear if she saw one, you'd hope, given her use of them.
Labour, and probably others, has a problem with anti semitism is no smear, there is evidence to support it and the question is how much if one. Labour as a whole is antisemitic would count as a smear, as it is clearly false.
I don't believe it has. It's a storm being whipped up by people with an agenda mainly on the right with an appaling history of racism and anti semitism.
It is very bizarre that the likes of John Mann should pontificate on what he believes Jewish people should feel. Read the letter by 83 REAL Jews in Yestrday's Guardian
I'm not by nature a conspiracy theorist but now that Lynton Crosby and Mark Regev are on the case I'm not so sure. The idea that they are trying to paint Sadiq Khan in a contest against Zak Goldsmith as a racist is so preposterous it has to have someone other than Guido's dirty fingerprints on it
Ken appears to handed over his shovel to Diane Abbott, - keep on digging loopy.
Diane was really very grumpy and rattled. I haven't seen her like that in a very long time. McDonnell isn't getting anywhere near this. He's marked his territory by saying they all have to be thrown out. I'm guessing he's hoping all of Jezza's and Diane's Muslim/anti-Semite mates are defenestrated - leaving his intact ... ready for a leadership takeover.
But how does that happen? Labour's far left and its Islamist muslim support are so intertwined that I can't see how you get a clean handover. But then I can't see how you can get anyone to Kinnock the new Militant with Labour in its current state anyway.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided. Even if the swing was only half of what Opinium is indicating surely Labour are looking at losing 1,000+ councillors?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
The 16% the Lib Dems scored was their local election NEV; they were polling about 11-12% in GE VI at the time. So if they're currently polling about 7-8% in GE intention, that should translate to about 12% in their local election performance given the boost they traditionally get in that arena.
"If Leave wants to win they need to show that Brexit is the better option for the economy and the financial wellbeing of voters."
This analysis is wrong.
"We’ve been here before. We see the headline voting intention figures showing it neck and neck, yet the supplementaries on the economy show one side extending their clear lead further. (...) (T)his referendum campaign, with the supplementaries showing more and more voters saying Brexit would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their personal financial situation, with Remain being the best option, is all very reminiscent of the polling we saw at the 2015 general election, the Tories and Labour tied but the Tories significantly ahead on the economy."
The analogy doesn't hold. Try applying it to the EU election of 2014, won by UKIP. What did people think of UKIP's politics where "jobs" were concerned"? Sorry. Wrong question.
This isn't a general election. Imagine a general election. Then imagine moving towards what an EU election is like. Now imagine moving further on in the same direction. Eventually you will get to what this referendum is like.
The result of the EU referendum like the general election will have an impact on the economy, jobs, and the economic wellbeing of voters.
Important as the European elections are, they will never have an impact on the economy, jobs, and the economic wellbeing of voters in the same way.
Yes, although I might qualify that by saying GEs affect personal taxation, borrowing, government expenditure and budget prioritisation so the economic salience is much higher.
The EU does not so it's more second-order fear of knock-on impacts, which is why the Government is trying to "price up" a cost for voters, of course.
Similarly, the Sindyref had a dimension of currency and UK pensions, which the EU does not.
I think the truth is somewhere between you and Sean Fear. The economy is Remain's strongest card and may well clinch the victory, but I seriously doubt it'll be enough for a 20%+ victory.
The halo and aeroscreen (windscreen) are two potential changes. Some drivers, like Hamilton and Hulkenberg, are not taken with the halo [unsure of Hulkenberg's view on the aeroscreen, Hamilton reckons it looks like a riot shield].
There are issues with any potential solution. A canopy isn't yet seriously mooted, but that could trap drivers (particularly worrying when the car is on its roof and/or fire). If the halo/aeroscreen were hit at high speed and broke, shards could then impale the driver. They'll make head protection as strong as possible, but nothing's unbreakable.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
So the idea is hopeful but baseless speculation.
It doesn't as yet merit the incessant repetition the idea is getting.
You might ask why it is being incessantly repeated.
Even that is a swing of 4.5% from 2012. According to the Wiki page there should be a lot more LG elections than you listed unless some have got out of sync.
Overall your list makes it clear that Thursday will be the most important election day until the next GE. And Labour really aren't in a good place. There has to be a real chance that by the referendum Labour will be embroiled in another leadership election. Really not sure how that will play.
If Khan wins on Friday that will instantly take the focus away from the LG elections and Corbyn will be safe
Sadly you could be right but the LG elections are far and wide and a much more important indicator of the national state of play.
Perhaps but the Mayoral election will get all the headlines and Corbyn can say Labour has won the Mayoralty of the largest city in the nation for the first time in 8 years under his leadership
Have to say, John Ashworth isn't at all convincing on BBC or Sky re anti-Semitism. He looks like a political smoothy in a sharp suit wheeled out for the cameras. He's cutting no ice with me.
John Ashworth is no smoothie. He is an ambitious party apparatchik, former SPAD, and well connected within the party. He was parachuted into the safe seat of Leicester South in the 2011 byelection.
His willingness to defend the indefensible, does make me think that he is a possible dark horse for the Labour leadership, being not particularly associated with either wing, and having significant backing in the Unions.
I was going to say ambitious SPAD-U-Like but wasn't sure of his provenance! I see he is exactly as he appears from his CV in that case.
Mr. Eagles, Cooper's point is sound but requires a caveat: a referendum is a different bag of monkeys to an election. I think his point is of use but it won't be a perfect comparison.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided.
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
Thanks for your thoughts David,
The LibDems, will probably loos yet more seats, but for labour gains from Lib Dem will be partially balanced by loses to Con, It may be that having won so many in 2012 most of the remaining Lib Dem seats don't have Labour in second, but I have not seen any analysis to back this up.
Do Councillors have an incumbency bounce? I haven't seen any analysis to back this up, so just my opinion, but if it happens with MPs it is logical to assume that to some extent they will, but it probably depends greatly on the councillor in question.
She would know a smear if she saw one, you'd hope, given her use of them.
Labour, and probably others, has a problem with anti semitism is no smear, there is evidence to support it and the question is how much if one. Labour as a whole is antisemitic would count as a smear, as it is clearly false.
I don't believe it has. It's a storm being whipped up by people with an agenda mainly on the right with an appaling history of racism and anti semitism.
It is very bizarre that the likes of John Mann should pontificate on what he believes Jewish people should feel. Read the letter by 83 REAL Jews in Yestrday's Guardian
I'm not by nature a conspiracy theorist but now that Lynton Crosby and Mark Regev are on the case I'm not so sure. The idea that they are trying to paint Sadiq Khan in a contest against Zak Goldsmith as a racist is so preposterous it has to have someone other than Guido's dirty fingerprints on it
Another who thinks Labour is unimpeachable now because of real or perceived achievements in the past.
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
The 16% the Lib Dems scored was their local election NEV; they were polling about 11-12% in GE VI at the time. So if they're currently polling about 7-8% in GE intention, that should translate to about 12% in their local election performance given the boost they traditionally get in that arena.
I wonder if that boost might now fade.
With each year of defeats they have fewer councillors having an incumbency bonus, the reason for tactical voting LibDem ends and the number of NOTA above parties grows.
We can export to the world while retaining full, unfettered access to the single market. Giving that up for nothing in return - and there is absolutely nothing right now - makes no sense to me whatsoever.
--------------------------------
Well the government's own impact assessments suggest a regulatory cost of £33 billion per year. Other assessments are higher still.
You are also still completely focused on the 'market access' aspect of this, which are less dramatic than you imply and which is to miss important parts of the picture.
In particular, domestically-focused firms are also affected by the unnecessary EU regulatory burden and by not being able to source imports at the lowest costs due to EU trade barriers against the ROW. Consumers also suffer a loss in living standards due to the same reason - they are not getting the consumer goods they want at the lowest prices either.
There are efficiency gains to be had from 1) sourcing imports more cheaply 2) cutting away unnecessary regulation 3) diverting resources away from industries over-sized due to EU protection towards industries more competitive at world prices. These gains are potentially pretty large.
Am I right in thinking that most of the English LG elections this time were last up in 2012? In those results Labour were on 38% and the Tories on 31. If you believe the Opinium poll that is completely reversed with the Tories up 7, Labour down 8, a swing of 7.5%.
The thing is that the forecasts I have seen for net gains and losses are significantly smaller than 2012. Those forecasts were made when the polling was closer but still involved a larger swing to the Tories (from 2012) than Labour achieved then.
Am I missing something? If the Opinium figures are even close to right, and I think they were in the field before Ken's brain fart, Labour are surely deep in dockside hooker territory facing huge losses against a government well past its honeymoon and deeply divided.
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
Thanks for your thoughts David, Do Councillors have an incumbency bounce? I haven't seen any analysis to back this up, so just my opinion, but if it happens with MPs it is logical to assume that to some extent they will, but it probably depends greatly on the councillor in question.
It does exist but it varies by how effective each candidate and its party, is at communicating what they do and who they are.
OT If anyone is a fan of the dark arts of political persuasion practiced by Australian Lynton Crosby they'll be delighted to know that the new Israeli ambassador to the Uk is none other than Mark Regev. This former Australian in his work as head of the Israeli propaganda ministry during the Gaza conflict and beyond makes Crosby seem like a first year amateur.
He's on Marr this morning.
It's all a Jewish conspiracy Roger.
It's interesting that every time you come nto this site it's to talk about anti semitism. Is it your specialist subject or are you paranoid about something?
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
The 16% the Lib Dems scored was their local election NEV; they were polling about 11-12% in GE VI at the time. So if they're currently polling about 7-8% in GE intention, that should translate to about 12% in their local election performance given the boost they traditionally get in that arena.
Not sure that works to that extent any more. They must have something in excess of 350 seats up this time and I would not be surprised if they were around 200 by the end of the night.
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Labour voters split 59 to 13 (UK worse off post Brexit to better off) p6 of the tables, the split is 37 to 6 when asked if they would personally be worse off.
Which company's tables are you refering to?
The yougov data linked from below the histogram. P2 has the voting intention certainty table.
At the Euros in 2014 Ukip got 4.3m million votes, 27%, at the GE they got 3.8m, 13%. Clearly there was an element of protest voting involved.
I'd say at the referendum the least we can expect is 4m OUT votes from ukip supporters/sympathisers. % turnout is hard to predict, more than 60% seems unlikely, this is going to be down simply to who can motivate their voters.
Or as Abbot said its just Ken being Ken... So that's OK then?
“I’m Jewish,” explained the reporter in his taped transcript. “I wasn’t a German war criminal.” All that remained was for Ken to double down. “Well, you might be,” he conceded, presumably always mindful of the possibility of faux Jews. “But actually, you are just like a concentration camp guard: you’re just doing it because you are paid to, aren’t you?” Oh dear. It always comes out, sooner or later, with Ken.
I'm giving advice to Leave how to win, it's not my fault people choose not to read, the sensible Leavers agree with me. I've just noticed, Lord Cooper, founder of Populus and David Cameron's former Director of Strategy thinks like I do. Great minds think alike
Cooper pushed Cameron into that political act of stupidity a Govt backed same sex marriage act etc etc and lost tens of thousands of members. A sensible strategist would have gone for the route of the 1967 private members bill. Cooper has form in providing stupid advice to the Conservative party.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
No the key focus group finding was that Labour voters did not want to give Cameron a kicking if it saw him replaced by a rightwing Brexiteer who was even worse!
But only the politically engaged will understand such a nuanced argument. As @blackburn63 has suggested, a poster of a grinning Dave and George wrapped in an EU flag in WWC areas could well bring out a few kick-the-govt voters for Leave. Labour have been completely silent on the EU debate until now, maybe they'll wake up next week once the other elections are out of the way.
"If Leave wants to win they need to show that Brexit is the better option for the economy and the financial wellbeing of voters."
This analysis is wrong.
"We’ve been here before. We see the headline voting intention figures showing it neck and neck, yet the supplementaries on the economy show one side extending their clear lead further. (...) (T)his referendum campaign, with the supplementaries showing more and more voters saying Brexit would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their personal financial situation, with Remain being the best option, is all very reminiscent of the polling we saw at the 2015 general election, the Tories and Labour tied but the Tories significantly ahead on the economy."
The analogy doesn't hold. Try applying it to the EU election of 2014, won by UKIP. What did people think of UKIP's politics where "jobs" were concerned"? Sorry. Wrong question.
Euro 2014 was not "won" by UKIP in any meaningful way.
Did UKIP get a majority of votes as the referendum requires? A majority of seats? Did they form a coalition to reach a majority of seats? No, no, no.
I'm giving advice to Leave how to win, it's not my fault people choose not to read, the sensible Leavers agree with me. I've just noticed, Lord Cooper, founder of Populus and David Cameron's former Director of Strategy thinks like I do. Great minds think alike
Cooper pushed Cameron into that political act of stupidity a Govt backed same sex marriage act etc etc and lost tens of thousands of members. A sensible strategist would have gone for the route of the 1967 private members bill. Cooper has form in providing stupid advice to the Conservative party.
That strategy helped in part the Tories win a majority in 2015.
Was the cherry on the parfait of the detoxification project.
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
Did you see the Israeli ambassador on Marr? Ouch. And the letter from the Israeli Labour leader? Treble ouch. The killer point was - if you wouldn't share a platform with anti-black or anti-gay campaigners - why would you share one with anti-Semites?
No missed that and it sounds bad but well deserved.
Some are more equal than others of course with Labour. Hodge said this morning on Murnaghan that the Labour Party are founded on anti racism and supports equality and you know I actually believe her sincerity on this. However it only works if you are not a Jew or anyone that has a different view to you in which case you get threatened with violence. ( John Mann reports abuse and threats of violence to police mentioned up thread)
"While Ken Livingstone is surely anti-Semitic beyond hope of redemption,"
So a question.
Under labours own laws they introduced in office a hate crime which racism is certainly part of is deemed to have occurred when the person on the receiving end feels that it has occurred. I would suggest that this recipient has determined just that by the words "beyond redemption"
So when is Livingstone going to be arrested?
If it had been anyone else they would have had his collar felt already and been up in front of the beak in the morning. Merkel did that for a comedian who simply cracked a joke after all.
"Earth to Ken Livingstone, thanks, you have delighted us enough. If that was not the cry going up in Team Corbyn yesterday, it should have been. The former mayor of London did what must have been his 19th interview (with LBC) about antisemitism, the Labour party and the views of Adolf Hitler, and refused 20 times to say sorry for doing so. He then said he would do no more interviews, apart from the ones he did when leaving the radio station (in which he was asked by Sky's Jason Farrell what point he was trying to make by bringing up Hitler and replied: "I can't remember.") Then he claimed to be heading for his garden to tend to his newts, a promise he first made 48 hours earlier. "
Did you see the Israeli ambassador on Marr? Ouch. And the letter from the Israeli Labour leader? Treble ouch. The killer point was - if you wouldn't share a platform with anti-black or anti-gay campaigners - why would you share one with anti-Semites?
But they do share a platform with anti gays. Islamists do not exhibit much tolerance of homosexuality do they? Also segregating women is fine if it will bring in votes.
Nick Cohen's critique of labour in the Guardian today is superb. Very good read.
Very readable and his first paragraph is as you described. Unfortunately he went down the Melanie Phillips route and he believes any criticism of Israel is anti Semitic. No ifs no Buts. It's a strange dichotomy among the non Israeli Jewish population of those who do and those who don't.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
No the key focus group finding was that Labour voters did not want to give Cameron a kicking if it saw him replaced by a rightwing Brexiteer who was even worse!
But only the politically engaged will understand such a nuanced argument. As @blackburn63 has suggested, a poster of a grinning Dave and George wrapped in an EU flag in WWC areas could well bring out a few kick-the-govt voters for Leave. Labour have been completely silent on the EU debate until now, maybe they'll wake up next week once the other elections are out of the way.
These weren't the politically engaged as such just a cross-section of typical Labour voters. Corbyn has spoken out for Remain and Remain could just as easily put up a poster of Gove and IDS as Leave cheerleaders
Ken appears to handed over his shovel to Diane Abbott, - keep on digging loopy.
Diane was really very grumpy and rattled. I haven't seen her like that in a very long time. McDonnell isn't getting anywhere near this. He's marked his territory by saying they all have to be thrown out. I'm guessing he's hoping all of Jezza's and Diane's Muslim/anti-Semite mates are defenestrated - leaving his intact ... ready for a leadership takeover.
Diane annoys the hell out of me, IMHO she's just about as racist as Nick Griffin yet she is still tolerated by the Labour Party. They really need to get rid of the lot of them, but that's never happening under Corbyn and McDonnell.
The old Labour WWC trade unionists must be wondering WTF has happened to the workers' party.
Seems like that massive hole to Australia that Ken has been digging...Dianne Abbott has decided to just straight in and give him a hand finishing it off.
If Labour have a night of catastrophes (3rd in Scotland, losing their majority in Wales, 300 LG losses) plus a comfortable Khan victory in London common sense suggests that Corbyn gets Khan out of the HoC sharpish. Even Corbyn is not stupid enough to keep him hanging around.
Ken appears to handed over his shovel to Diane Abbott, - keep on digging loopy.
Diane was really very grumpy and rattled. I haven't seen her like that in a very long time. McDonnell isn't getting anywhere near this. He's marked his territory by saying they all have to be thrown out. I'm guessing he's hoping all of Jezza's and Diane's Muslim/anti-Semite mates are defenestrated - leaving his intact ... ready for a leadership takeover.
Diane annoys the hell out of me, IMHO she's just about as racist as Nick Griffin yet she is still tolerated by the Labour Party. They really need to get rid of the lot of them, but that's never happening under Corbyn and McDonnell.
The old Labour WWC trade unionists must be wondering WTF has happened to the workers' party.
Diane exploits the unwritten rule of modern Britain. Only White People Can Be Racists.
I am surprised McTernan comments yesterday on BBC News haven't received wider attention. He managed to get every PB Tory attack on Jahadi Jez into a 2 minute interview (and this is from a Labour guy).
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
No the key focus group finding was that Labour voters did not want to give Cameron a kicking if it saw him replaced by a rightwing Brexiteer who was even worse!
But only the politically engaged will understand such a nuanced argument. As @blackburn63 has suggested, a poster of a grinning Dave and George wrapped in an EU flag in WWC areas could well bring out a few kick-the-govt voters for Leave. Labour have been completely silent on the EU debate until now, maybe they'll wake up next week once the other elections are out of the way.
Nope, Laboiur will remain (haha) silent, Cameron went hand in hand with the Unions last week, Labour stood by and watched.
Labour just aren't bothered, what they're really bothered about is seeing the Tories fighting each other, they love it. Labour voters just won't vote, every abstention is a vote for Leave.
"If Leave wants to win they need to show that Brexit is the better option for the economy and the financial wellbeing of voters."
This analysis is wrong.
"We’ve been here before. We see the headline voting intention figures showing it neck and neck, yet the supplementaries on the economy show one side extending their clear lead further. (...) (T)his referendum campaign, with the supplementaries showing more and more voters saying Brexit would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their personal financial situation, with Remain being the best option, is all very reminiscent of the polling we saw at the 2015 general election, the Tories and Labour tied but the Tories significantly ahead on the economy."
The analogy doesn't hold. Try applying it to the EU election of 2014, won by UKIP. What did people think of UKIP's politics where "jobs" were concerned"? Sorry. Wrong question.
Euro 2014 was not "won" by UKIP in any meaningful way.
Did UKIP get a majority of votes as the referendum requires? A majority of seats? Did they form a coalition to reach a majority of seats? No, no, no.
I voted UKIP at that election [gasps from the audience!]
UKIP 27% (24 seats) Anti-semitic Labour Party 24% (20 seats) Tory Boy Party 23% (19 seats)
I'm giving advice to Leave how to win, it's not my fault people choose not to read, the sensible Leavers agree with me. I've just noticed, Lord Cooper, founder of Populus and David Cameron's former Director of Strategy thinks like I do. Great minds think alike
Cooper pushed Cameron into that political act of stupidity a Govt backed same sex marriage act etc etc and lost tens of thousands of members. A sensible strategist would have gone for the route of the 1967 private members bill. Cooper has form in providing stupid advice to the Conservative party.
That strategy helped in part the Tories win a majority in 2015.
Was the cherry on the parfait of the detoxification project.
And it was the right thing to do. Just occasionally there is a reward for that (he said naively).
I wake up to ... another article that is pro REMAIN and anti LEAVE...... Does the economy matter most to the biggest group of voters that back REMAIN? That is the key question about LABOUR voters.
Labour voters split 59 to 13 (UK worse off post Brexit to better off) p6 of the tables, the split is 37 to 6 when asked if they would personally be worse off.
Which company's tables are you refering to?
The yougov data linked from below the histogram. P2 has the voting intention certainty table.
Thank you. That is the voting intention at a GE not at the referendum.
Incidentally it also has an incredible certainty to vote amongst the 65+ year olds (at a GE) of only 70%.
Seems like that massive hole to Australia that Ken has been digging...Dianne Abbott has decided to just straight in and give him a hand finishing it off.
New Zealand, NOT Australia. The "antipode" to London is 51.5 degrees south, 0.5 degrees east.
We can export to the world while retaining full, unfettered access to the single market. Giving that up for nothing in return - and there is absolutely nothing right now - makes no sense to me whatsoever.
--------------------------------
Well the government's own impact assessments suggest a regulatory cost of £33 billion per year. Other assessments are higher still.
You are also still completely focused on the 'market access' aspect of this, which are less dramatic than you imply and which is to miss important parts of the picture.
In particular, domestically-focused firms are also affected by the unnecessary EU regulatory burden and by not being able to source imports at the lowest costs due to EU trade barriers against the ROW. Consumers also suffer a loss in living standards due to the same reason - they are not getting the consumer goods they want at the lowest prices either.
There are efficiency gains to be had from 1) sourcing imports more cheaply 2) cutting away unnecessary regulation 3) diverting resources away from industries over-sized due to EU protection towards industries more competitive at world prices. These gains are potentially pretty large.
There are also efficiencies to be lost. It's a balance. What we know is that if we want Brexit to mean we gain significantly more control over immigration, we will lose our current level of access to the single market. The rest is speculation.
In his most recent focus group Lord Ashcroft found little evidence that Labour voters would use the referendum to kick David Cameron.
For the unitiated (not Mr Meeks). Focus groups are samples of very few people. They are designed to pick up themes, feelings and reactions, which summarise issues which can then be checked by larger scale research.
What we have here are the reactions of this minuscule sample. It does indicate that there is no massive overhelming view in Labour supporters. But, since the LEAVE campaign has barely started and many Labour areas are focused on local elections, it should not be judged as indicating that Labour voters will not sieze the chance to give Cameron a kicking or boycott him. We are still 7 weeks away from the vote.
No the key focus group finding was that Labour voters did not want to give Cameron a kicking if it saw him replaced by a rightwing Brexiteer who was even worse!
But only the politically engaged will understand such a nuanced argument. As @blackburn63 has suggested, a poster of a grinning Dave and George wrapped in an EU flag in WWC areas could well bring out a few kick-the-govt voters for Leave. Labour have been completely silent on the EU debate until now, maybe they'll wake up next week once the other elections are out of the way.
The only talking head I've seen more than once is Chuka. Sky is my default TV station, so whenever I'm finished watching whatever DVR - it pops back up. Labour are almost invisible on this subject.
1992 - a month after a general election defeat 1987 - a month before a general election defeat 1985 - the big local government breakthrough year for the 'Alliance' 1982 - the 'Falklands election' and the first election after the SDP breakaway
No matter how much Labour try to keep the focus on London a nationwide loss of councillors will be bad.
And seen to be overly focused on London could well lead to even further disaffection to Labour from the rest of the country.
"If Leave wants to win they need to show that Brexit is the better option for the economy and the financial wellbeing of voters."
This analysis is wrong.
"We’ve been here before. We see the headline voting intention figures showing it neck and neck, yet the supplementaries on the economy show one side extending their clear lead further. (...) (T)his referendum campaign, with the supplementaries showing more and more voters saying Brexit would be bad for the economy, jobs, and their personal financial situation, with Remain being the best option, is all very reminiscent of the polling we saw at the 2015 general election, the Tories and Labour tied but the Tories significantly ahead on the economy."
The analogy doesn't hold. Try applying it to the EU election of 2014, won by UKIP. What did people think of UKIP's politics where "jobs" were concerned"? Sorry. Wrong question.
Euro 2014 was not "won" by UKIP in any meaningful way.
Did UKIP get a majority of votes as the referendum requires? A majority of seats? Did they form a coalition to reach a majority of seats? No, no, no.
In the Euro 14 elections UKIP came first on 26.6% of the vote. Even if you add in the other fringe eurosceptic and nationalist parties the total is less than 30%. Add in half or even 2/3 of the Con vote and you are in the low 40's percentage. That was on a 34% turnout (substantially less than the AV referendum).
I really do not think that a low turnout would save Leave's bacon. The drop off in younger voters would be balanced by the drop off in C1DE voters. Indeed I would expect that the young voters who did turnout to be the young ABC1s who are even stronger for Remain.
Ken appears to handed over his shovel to Diane Abbott, - keep on digging loopy.
Diane was really very grumpy and rattled. I haven't seen her like that in a very long time. McDonnell isn't getting anywhere near this. He's marked his territory by saying they all have to be thrown out. I'm guessing he's hoping all of Jezza's and Diane's Muslim/anti-Semite mates are defenestrated - leaving his intact ... ready for a leadership takeover.
Diane annoys the hell out of me, IMHO she's just about as racist as Nick Griffin yet she is still tolerated by the Labour Party. They really need to get rid of the lot of them, but that's never happening under Corbyn and McDonnell.
The old Labour WWC trade unionists must be wondering WTF has happened to the workers' party.
Diane exploits the unwritten rule of modern Britain. Only White People Can Be Racists.
No - that is a core rule of the SJW movement and is infecting public discourse around the world.
You only have to look at a recent debate at one of the Ivy League Universities in the US - where black students were calling on a white participant to commit suicide if he wanted to prove how anti-racist he was - as his life did not matter.
It is quite terrifying when you look at how twisted things have become. And it is all coming from the regressive Left.
Still Diane likes to do dog whistle comments of her own doesn't she.
what was it about divide and rule for example.........
Or that we "would never understand the Afro-Caribbean culture of parents wanting to do the best for their children" to defend her hypocritical decision to send her children all away across London to a private school. However she had already criticised Blair and Harman for doing just that previously.
Only the best for our Dianne heh? her offspring don't have to suffer the comprehensive system that's the system she supports for everyone else children. Labour personified.
Still Diane likes to do dog whistle comments of her own doesn't she.
what was it about divide and rule for example.........
Or that we "would never understand the Afro-Caribbean culture of parents wanting to do the best for their children" to defend her hypocritical decision to send her children all away across London to a private school. However she had already criticised Blair and Harman for doing just that previously.
Only the best for our Dianne heh? her offspring don't have to suffer the comprehensive system that's the system she supports for everyone else children. Labour personified.
Diane went to a comprehensive school (with Portillo) and Oxbridge.
Kudos to Zac for sticking so scrupulously to the script that he's been given.
For not recognising it's a shite script, not so much.
'On Thursday, are we really going to hand the world's greatest city to a Labour party that thinks terrorists is its friends? A passionate plea from ZAC GOLDSMITH four days before Mayoral election'
The Labour party where able to pick up 800 Seats in 2012, but are only likely to loos 150-200 now for what I can see as 3 reasons:
2012 included Scotland and Wails, this time the elections in these to places have been delayed so as to not clash with the devolved election.
Also 2012 had an implosion of LibDems, I cant see many of these being recaptured.
In the remaining seats that Lab took from Con in 2012, they will have some equivalent of the 'double incumbency bounce' I don't know how effective this will be, but may have some impact on the most marginal seats.
The Scotland and Wales point is a good one although those elections seem to promise little good news for Labour.
Not so sure about there not being another Lib Dem implosion. Their share of the vote could fall from 16% to 7 or 8%, basically half.
Do you get an incumbency bounce in LG? I suppose you might if you were a hard working councillor etc but how many people know who their local councillor is? The other way of looking at it is that Labour's exceptional results in 2008 mean that quite a lot of their seats are in what might normally be unfavourable territory.
The 16% the Lib Dems scored was their local election NEV; they were polling about 11-12% in GE VI at the time. So if they're currently polling about 7-8% in GE intention, that should translate to about 12% in their local election performance given the boost they traditionally get in that arena.
Not sure that works to that extent any more. They must have something in excess of 350 seats up this time and I would not be surprised if they were around 200 by the end of the night.
Even last year the Lib Dems achieved around 5% more votes in the local elections than they did in the GE . They are defending around 270 seats . All out elections in a few councils on new boundaries will also distort the results Knowsley currently 63 Labour councillors will go down to 45 again all Labour . Is that No change or a loss of 18 Winchester 32 Con 23 Lib Dem 2 Labour goes down to 45 perhaps Con 25 Lib Dem 20 The one Labour ward is dismembered so have they lost 2 councillors or is it no change as they would have had none if previous elections had been fought on the new boundaries . Forecasts are Lab minus 150 Rallings and Thrasher minus 151 Fisher Con plus 50 R and T plus 19 Fisher LDem plus 40 R and T plus 93 Fisher UKIP plus 40 R and T no forecast Fisher Others plus 20 R and T no forecast Fisher
FWIW my forecast Lab minus 110 Con plus 20 LDem plus 50 UKIP plus 20 Others plus 20
Looking at this Yougov data. just on rerefenda data.
Amongst the 18-24 year olds they have 49% saying that they are absolutely 10/10 certain to vote in the referendum.... Another 19% are an 8/10 or 9/10 certainty to vote. That is saying that 68% are an 8 -to 10/10 certain to vote? Bigger than the 67% 8-10/10 of the 25-49 year olds certain to vote.....
The halo and aeroscreen (windscreen) are two potential changes. Some drivers, like Hamilton and Hulkenberg, are not taken with the halo [unsure of Hulkenberg's view on the aeroscreen, Hamilton reckons it looks like a riot shield].
There are issues with any potential solution. A canopy isn't yet seriously mooted, but that could trap drivers (particularly worrying when the car is on its roof and/or fire). If the halo/aeroscreen were hit at high speed and broke, shards could then impale the driver. They'll make head protection as strong as possible, but nothing's unbreakable.
Don't like either design so far, would love to see more details on the aero screen though. I can't believe It would withstand the impact of another car at speed and could trap or even injure the driver - think of Spa 2012 where tyres still attached to cars were everywhere, a cockpit gives them a bigger target than just a driver's helmet.
Comments
His willingness to defend the indefensible, does make me think that he is a possible dark horse for the Labour leadership, being not particularly associated with either wing, and having significant backing in the Unions.
It is very bizarre that the likes of John Mann should pontificate on what he believes Jewish people should feel. Read the letter by 83 REAL Jews in Yestrday's Guardian
I'm not by nature a conspiracy theorist but now that Lynton Crosby and Mark Regev are on the case I'm not so sure. The idea that they are trying to paint Sadiq Khan in a contest against Zak Goldsmith as a racist is so preposterous it has to have someone other than Guido's dirty fingerprints on it
The EU does not so it's more second-order fear of knock-on impacts, which is why the Government is trying to "price up" a cost for voters, of course.
Similarly, the Sindyref had a dimension of currency and UK pensions, which the EU does not.
I think the truth is somewhere between you and Sean Fear. The economy is Remain's strongest card and may well clinch the victory, but I seriously doubt it'll be enough for a 20%+ victory.
The number of UK voters who hate the EU project is huge.
But both groups are massively overshadowed by the numbers of those who don't give it much thought. These are the people who will decide our future.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/36181514
The halo and aeroscreen (windscreen) are two potential changes. Some drivers, like Hamilton and Hulkenberg, are not taken with the halo [unsure of Hulkenberg's view on the aeroscreen, Hamilton reckons it looks like a riot shield].
There are issues with any potential solution. A canopy isn't yet seriously mooted, but that could trap drivers (particularly worrying when the car is on its roof and/or fire). If the halo/aeroscreen were hit at high speed and broke, shards could then impale the driver. They'll make head protection as strong as possible, but nothing's unbreakable.
Unless principles and decency and doing the right thing about racist's do not count
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/27/ken-livingstone-labour
Or as Abbot said its just Ken being Ken... So that's OK then?
I've just noticed, Lord Cooper, founder of Populus and David Cameron's former Director of Strategy thinks like I do. Great minds think alike
https://twitter.com/AndrewCooper__/status/725767478903709697
Leave landslide.
Believe in BRITAIN!
Be LEAVE!
Will it be enough?
Dunno. I think it will frighten some into the polling booth but not as many as the Government thinks.
The LibDems, will probably loos yet more seats, but for labour gains from Lib Dem will be partially balanced by loses to Con, It may be that having won so many in 2012 most of the remaining Lib Dem seats don't have Labour in second, but I have not seen any analysis to back this up.
Do Councillors have an incumbency bounce? I haven't seen any analysis to back this up, so just my opinion, but if it happens with MPs it is logical to assume that to some extent they will, but it probably depends greatly on the councillor in question.
Let's hope the voters deliver a suitable verdict.
With each year of defeats they have fewer councillors having an incumbency bonus, the reason for tactical voting LibDem ends and the number of NOTA above parties grows.
What regulatory costs are holding us back?
We can export to the world while retaining full, unfettered access to the single market. Giving that up for nothing in return - and there is absolutely nothing right now - makes no sense to me whatsoever.
--------------------------------
Well the government's own impact assessments suggest a regulatory cost of £33 billion per year. Other assessments are higher still.
You are also still completely focused on the 'market access' aspect of this, which are less dramatic than you imply and which is to miss important parts of the picture.
In particular, domestically-focused firms are also affected by the unnecessary EU regulatory burden and by not being able to source imports at the lowest costs due to EU trade barriers against the ROW. Consumers also suffer a loss in living standards due to the same reason - they are not getting the consumer goods they want at the lowest prices either.
There are efficiency gains to be had from 1) sourcing imports more cheaply 2) cutting away unnecessary regulation 3) diverting resources away from industries over-sized due to EU protection towards industries more competitive at world prices. These gains are potentially pretty large.
Still Diane likes to do dog whistle comments of her own doesn't she.
what was it about divide and rule for example.........
I'd say at the referendum the least we can expect is 4m OUT votes from ukip supporters/sympathisers. % turnout is hard to predict, more than 60% seems unlikely, this is going to be down simply to who can motivate their voters.
https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/726709879851892736
er......david cameron that is.
remain's 40 odd per cent is p8ss and wind, for me. Missing in action.
Did UKIP get a majority of votes as the referendum requires? A majority of seats? Did they form a coalition to reach a majority of seats? No, no, no.
Was the cherry on the parfait of the detoxification project.
"While Ken Livingstone is surely anti-Semitic beyond hope of redemption,"
So a question.
Under labours own laws they introduced in office a hate crime which racism is certainly part of is deemed to have occurred when the person on the receiving end feels that it has occurred. I would suggest that this recipient has determined just that by the words "beyond redemption"
So when is Livingstone going to be arrested?
If it had been anyone else they would have had his collar felt already and been up in front of the beak in the morning. Merkel did that for a comedian who simply cracked a joke after all.
However there is a way for The Tories to delay the by election.
To resign as an MP, Sadiq Khan has to be appointed to the Chiltern Hundreds or as the Manor of Northstead.
George Osborne is in charge of those appointments, he could accidentally lose the paperwork and prevent an early by election
The old Labour WWC trade unionists must be wondering WTF has happened to the workers' party.
Poor Diane - she genuinely seems to believe that only white people can be racist. What must it be like to be that deluded?
Labour just aren't bothered, what they're really bothered about is seeing the Tories fighting each other, they love it. Labour voters just won't vote, every abstention is a vote for Leave.
UKIP 27% (24 seats)
Anti-semitic Labour Party 24% (20 seats)
Tory Boy Party 23% (19 seats)
Incidentally it also has an incredible certainty to vote amongst the 65+ year olds (at a GE) of only 70%.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/04/will-there-be-a-late-swing-to-the-tories/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36180572
Ken Livingstone & Diane Abbott, not batting for Khan.
It's been a long time since it happened:
1992 - a month after a general election defeat
1987 - a month before a general election defeat
1985 - the big local government breakthrough year for the 'Alliance'
1982 - the 'Falklands election' and the first election after the SDP breakaway
No matter how much Labour try to keep the focus on London a nationwide loss of councillors will be bad.
And seen to be overly focused on London could well lead to even further disaffection to Labour from the rest of the country.
https://twitter.com/STJamesl/status/726702711874400256
I really do not think that a low turnout would save Leave's bacon. The drop off in younger voters would be balanced by the drop off in C1DE voters. Indeed I would expect that the young voters who did turnout to be the young ABC1s who are even stronger for Remain.
You only have to look at a recent debate at one of the Ivy League Universities in the US - where black students were calling on a white participant to commit suicide if he wanted to prove how anti-racist he was - as his life did not matter.
It is quite terrifying when you look at how twisted things have become. And it is all coming from the regressive Left.
Only the best for our Dianne heh? her offspring don't have to suffer the comprehensive system that's the system she supports for everyone else children. Labour personified.
Apathetic people are most likely to be REMAIN inclined.
But apathetic people are less likely to vote.
Apathetic people will decide the outcome of the referendum - will enough turnout to vote REMAIN?
We are in the hands of the apathetic.
http://www.politwoops.co.uk/
For not recognising it's a shite script, not so much.
'On Thursday, are we really going to hand the world's greatest city to a Labour party that thinks terrorists is its friends? A passionate plea from ZAC GOLDSMITH four days before Mayoral election'
http://tinyurl.com/jjwn82m
Knowsley currently 63 Labour councillors will go down to 45 again all Labour . Is that No change or a loss of 18
Winchester 32 Con 23 Lib Dem 2 Labour goes down to 45 perhaps Con 25 Lib Dem 20 The one Labour ward is dismembered so have they lost 2 councillors or is it no change as they would have had none if previous elections had been fought on the new boundaries .
Forecasts are
Lab minus 150 Rallings and Thrasher minus 151 Fisher
Con plus 50 R and T plus 19 Fisher
LDem plus 40 R and T plus 93 Fisher
UKIP plus 40 R and T no forecast Fisher
Others plus 20 R and T no forecast Fisher
FWIW my forecast
Lab minus 110
Con plus 20
LDem plus 50
UKIP plus 20
Others plus 20
WATCH Diane Abbott Car Crash: Anti-Semitism a "Smear" [VIDEO] https://t.co/9b6s569of0
Amongst the 18-24 year olds they have 49% saying that they are absolutely 10/10 certain to vote in the referendum.... Another 19% are an 8/10 or 9/10 certainty to vote. That is saying that 68% are an 8 -to 10/10 certain to vote?
Bigger than the 67% 8-10/10 of the 25-49 year olds certain to vote.....
Surely there is still time to get this examined by the courts