" Paddy Power offering 5/4 on five or more Labour MPs leaving to found a new party before the next election"
Crikey those odds are a bit short. Either Paddy Power is having a bit of fun or all the money is going one way. I wonder if five or more Labour MPs each got a few grand down at longer odds.
Well said. FPTP usually delivers a majority government,rather than have the politicians throw away their manifestos in coalition talks after the election.
I'm also with you on 350-360 Tory seats in 2020. Have ordered a crate of popcorn for the Labour conference next week. Does anyone know of any markets on MP defections? I'm positive we'll see at least a couple over the conference season, in one direction or another.
Not that I'm aware of (although I'm not the best person to ask - I come to this site entirely to try to get a handle of what's going on in politics, rather than for the gambling aspect.)
You raise an interesting point though. I wonder if there are any fed up Labour MPs, just waiting for Corbyn to be re-elected before announcing their intention either to defect, or to sit as independents whilst they wait to see how things play out?
If any desperadoes are going to jump ship then one assumes they will come from amongst members who decline to run the gauntlet of Momentum activists at conference. Look out for anyone who is conspicuous by their absence on day one.
(PS Have had a quick web browse - Paddy Power offering 5/4 on five or more Labour MPs leaving to found a new party before the next election.)
Yes, I saw that PP one, thanks for looking though. That won't cover defections to other existing parties, nor a group of Lab MPs deciding to resign the whip and sit as independent Labour. On that basis, the 5/4 is a rather stingy, should really be around 3/1. A new party only really works if more than half the MPs defect to it, and their numbers give them the role of the Official Opposition in Parliament - which requires balls of steel that seem rather non-existant among the PLP.
I'd be surprised if the LDs and Tories don't have a moderate Labour MP or two lined up for their conferences, wouldn't be shocked to see Douglas Carswell return home to the Tories either. Defections give a massive boost to the party faithful.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
I am not a Tory. I don't belong to any party. If there was an election tomorrow I would vote for them, but that's not the same thing.
My conviction is based on the fact that there is
My assessment of the Tories' ability to hold on to Cameron's voters is not based primarily on the voting intention numbers, but for what it's worth they were reasonably accurate in all but one respect last year: they overestimated Labour by about 3%, and underestimated the Tories by a similar amount. Even if the pollsters have successfully corrected their biases, the Tories are still miles ahead of Labour - extraordinary for this stage in a Parliament - and the Lib Dems are becalmed on the 8% or so of the vote which the polls accurately predicted they would win in GE 2015.
In short, the Conservatives' position is, at present, close to invulnerable. Until a party comes along that can prize large numbers of Yellow Tory votes from their grip then it will remain so.
Exactly. Disgruntled lifelong wets have nowhere to go regardless of what Theresa decides to do. Look at the grammar debacle (for it was that). P****d off a bunch of Cons voters, had plenty of others scratching their heads, but...what on earth are they going to do about it? Nada. They sure as hell ain't going to the LDs; Lab obvs not; UKIP? They are wet, not nutters...so that leaves Cons.
Hmmmm, seem to be getting some flashback about Labour and certain people pondering about their support having non other option.
Well...look at me. I am an economically bone dry but socially gaylord ponceyboots Conservative voter. I could not bring myself to vote for any other party that, economically, is so illiterate.
Now, the austerity debate is interesting. There are plenty of reasons why the UK didn't need to adopt austerity post-Greece, but, based upon what little they knew, the public had no appetite for a non-austerity party. So the Cons spotted that to hoover up those TINAs of other parties they had to be pro-austerity. Which took the rug under the carpet from EdM. Funnily enough, now that we are where we are, he perhaps should have been bolder anti-austerity.
My point being, that if it is the economics that motivate you, then it is difficult to change parties.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Ha Ha Ha the Tories hav eno sense of humour whatsoever
Did they call her a Dyke? yes or no.
Would it be a joke if the boot was on other foot and it was Sturgeon?
Of course not. Well, not in SNP World, anyway. As was recently accurately commented, too many so-called progressives regard "jokes" made at the expense of conservatives as satire, but "jokes" made at the expense of themselves as abuse.
If someone had decided to do a rap about Sturgeon's miscarriage, sobbing Nationalists would've raised a petition on anti-social media demanding their arrest within about five minutes.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
I am not a Tory. I don't belong to any party. If there was an election tomorrow I would vote for them, but that's not the same thing.
My conviction is based on the fact that there is nowhere else for people who picked Cameron over Miliband to go in 2020. None of the Tory voters who resisted Ukip the last time are liable to defect this time around: if anything there'll be a flow back in the opposite direction. Labour and the Greens are both too far Left to be appealing. This only leaves the Lib Dems, but (a) they have gone leftwards as well, (b) they are a minor party which struggles to gain a hearing nationally, and (c) they are always vulnerable to the "Vote Farron, get Corbyn" line of attack in a Parliamentary election. Beyond which, we should not confuse moderate successes in some local and devolved elections (and, just as they've made modest net local councillor gains and picked up a couple of Holyrood constituencies, they've gone backwards in London and performed catastrophically in Wales,) with any likelihood of a marked improvement in the next General Election. People simply don't vote in identical ways in every different kind of election.
In short, the Conservatives' position is, at present, close to invulnerable. Until a party comes along that can prize large numbers of Yellow Tory votes from their grip then it will remain so.
Exactly. Disgruntled lifelong wets have nowhere to go regardless of what Theresa decides to do. Look at the grammar debacle (for it was that). P****d off a bunch of Cons voters, had plenty of others scratching their heads, but...what on earth are they going to do about it? Nada. They sure as hell ain't going to the LDs; Lab obvs not; UKIP? They are wet, not nutters...so that leaves Cons.
Although both an LD revival and a centrist/SDP breakaway look unlikely, what seems even less likely is that centrists like myself will go unrepresentated *if* May takes hard Brexit turn.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
Somehow, whether from die hard Cameroonians, or one of the two unlikelihoods above, or some complicated combination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
Yes, I saw that PP one, thanks for looking though. That won't cover defections to other existing parties, nor a group of Lab MPs deciding to resign the whip and sit as independent Labour. On that basis, the 5/4 is a rather stingy, should really be around 3/1. A new party only really works if more than half the MPs defect to it, and their numbers give them the role of the Official Opposition in Parliament - which requires balls of steel that seem rather non-existant among the PLP.
I'd be surprised if the LDs and Tories don't have a moderate Labour MP or two lined up for their conferences, wouldn't be shocked to see Douglas Carswell return home to the Tories either. Defections give a massive boost to the party faithful.
Carswell clearly a reasonable bet, with Cameron obviously out of the way and several prominent activist and ex-party officer defections from Ukip to Conservative already having taken place.
One has to assume that defections to other parties are much more likely in marginals, i.e. where the defecting MP would have a reasonable chance of holding on for their new party against a Labour challenge next time, or where their seat is going to be abolished under the boundary reforms. One would need to draw up a list of all the most restless Labour MPs, and then see which ones could make a plausible defence, or have no seat and nothing left to lose by seeking a new one with a new party.
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
"Although not a centrally contracted player for the last 12 months, Yorkshire required clearance from the ECB to play Bairstow."
If he's not centrally contracted, then why do England need to give permission for Yorkshire to play him? This sounds like England trying to expand their squad without paying for it.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
My conviction is based on the fact that there is nowhere else for people who picked Cameron over Miliband to go in 2020. None of the Tory voters who resisted Ukip the last time are liable to defect this time around: if anything there'll be a flow back in the opposite direction. Labour and the Greens are both too far Left to be appealing. This only leaves the Lib Dems, but (a) they have gone leftwards as well, (b) they are a minor party which struggles to gain a hearing nationally, and (c) they are always vulnerable to the "Vote Farron, get Corbyn" line of attack in a Parliamentary election. Beyond which, we should not confuse moderate successes in some local and devolved elections (and, just as they've made modest net local councillor gains and picked up a couple of Holyrood constituencies, they've gone backwards in London and performed catastrophically in Wales,) with any likelihood of a marked improvement in the next General Election. People simply don't vote in identical ways in every different kind of election.
In short, the Conservatives' position is, at present, close to invulnerable. Until a party comes along that can prize large numbers of Yellow Tory votes from their grip then it will remain so.
Exactly. Disgruntled lifelong wets have nowhere to go regardless of what Theresa decides to do. Look at the grammar debacle (for it was that). P****d off a bunch of Cons voters, had plenty of others scratching their heads, but...what on earth are they going to do about it? Nada. They sure as hell ain't going to the LDs; Lab obvs not; UKIP? They are wet, not nutters...so that leaves Cons.
Although both an LD revival and a centrist/SDP breakaway look unlikely, what seems even less likely is that centrists like myself will go unrepresentated *if* May takes hard Brexit turn.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
Somehow, whether from die hard Cameroonians, or one of the two unlikelihoods above, or some complicated combination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
I think several Cons MPs thought thus, as the Brexit debate was at its nadir. But somehow with Theresa, who gave what I thought was a very thoughtful pro-Remain speech, it has somehow dulled their edge. She will keep enough onside to stave off (IMO) a centrist party emerging, as she will judge the flavour of Brexit such that it keeps everyone onside, if disgruntled.
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
"Although not a centrally contracted player for the last 12 months, Yorkshire required clearance from the ECB to play Bairstow."
If he's not centrally contracted, then why do England need to give permission for Yorkshire to play him? This sounds like England trying to expand their squad without paying for it.
Yorshire fans thinking more to this with strauss Middlesex connections ;-) but Rashid coming in for more stick.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
I am not a Tory. I don't belong to any party. If there was an election tomorrow I would vote for them, but that's not the same thing.
My conviction is based on the fact that there is nowhere else for people who picked Cameron over Miliband to go in 2020. None of the Tory voters who resisted Ukip the last time are liable to defect this time around: if anything there'll be a flow back in the opposite direction. Labour and the Greens are both too far Left to be appealing. This only leaves the Lib Dems, but (a) they have gone leftwards as well, (b) they are a minor party which struggles to gain a hearing nationally, and (c) they are always vulnerable to the "Vote Farron, get Corbyn" line of attack in a Parliamentary election. Beyond which, we should not confuse moderate successes in some local and devolved elections (and, just as they've made modest net local councillor gains and picked up a couple of Holyrood constituencies, they've gone backwards in London and performed catastrophically in Wales,) with any likelihood of a marked improvement in the next General Election. People simply don't vote in identical ways in every different kind of election.
My assessment of the Tories' ability to hold on to Cameron's voters is not based primarily on the voting intention numbers, but for what it's worth they were reasonably accurate in all but one respect last year: they overestimated Labour by about 3%, and underestimated the Tories by a similar amount. Even if the pollsters have successfully corrected their biases, the Tories are still miles ahead of Labour - extraordinary for this stage in a Parliament - and the Lib Dems are becalmed on the 8% or so of the vote which the polls accurately predicted they would win in GE 2015.
In short, the Conservatives' position is, at present, close to invulnerable. Until a party comes along that can prize large numbers of Yellow Tory votes from their grip then it will remain so.
Exactly. Disgruntled lifelong wets have nowhere to go regardless of what Theresa decides to do. Look at the grammar debacle (for it was that). P****d off a bunch of Cons voters, had plenty of others scratching their heads, but...what on earth are they going to do about it? Nada. They sure as hell ain't going to the LDs; Lab obvs not; UKIP? They are wet, not nutters...so that leaves Cons.
Governments become unpopular, it's a fact of political life. Then there's Brexit, everybody has their own version of what Brexit means and May won't be able to make everyone happy.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
Yes, I saw that PP one, thanks for looking though. That won't cover defections to other existing parties, nor a group of Lab MPs deciding to resign the whip and sit as independent Labour. On that basis, the 5/4 is a rather stingy, should really be around 3/1. A new party only really works if more than half the MPs defect to it, and their numbers give them the role of the Official Opposition in Parliament - which requires balls of steel that seem rather non-existant among the PLP.
I'd be surprised if the LDs and Tories don't have a moderate Labour MP or two lined up for their conferences, wouldn't be shocked to see Douglas Carswell return home to the Tories either. Defections give a massive boost to the party faithful.
Carswell clearly a reasonable bet, with Cameron obviously out of the way and several prominent activist and ex-party officer defections from Ukip to Conservative already having taken place.
One has to assume that defections to other parties are much more likely in marginals, i.e. where the defecting MP would have a reasonable chance of holding on for their new party against a Labour challenge next time, or where their seat is going to be abolished under the boundary reforms. One would need to draw up a list of all the most restless Labour MPs, and then see which ones could make a plausible defence, or have no seat and nothing left to lose by seeking a new one with a new party.
One thought on defections is the Carswell Precident, whereby he crossed the floor but resigned to do so, triggering a by-election. Clearly that only works in a marginal seat, but is a recent invention. David Cameron's predecessor as MP for Witney defected to Labour, funnily enough not resigning his very safe Tory seat to do so. Labour found him somewhere else safe at the next election, which was the old convention.
The current Labour MP for marginal Barrow (John Woodcock) has hinted that he would quit Labour if they press on with nuclear disarmament - the nuclear industry is a huge employer in Barrow - so he is one to watch for a defection to the Blues.
MPs close to Heathrow are also ones to watch as the decision looms. We could see Zak Goldsmith resign his seat, maybe standing as an independent or even a Green in opposition to the expansion. A Labour MP might resign the other way, in protest at their party's opposition to local job creation. Some say that the govt are holding this decision back until after Conference season for exactly this reason.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
it will remain so.
Somehow, whether from die hard Cameroonians, or one of the two unlikelihoods above, or some complicated combination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
I think several Cons MPs thought thus, as the Brexit debate was at its nadir. But somehow with Theresa, who gave what I thought was a very thoughtful pro-Remain speech, it has somehow dulled their edge. She will keep enough onside to stave off (IMO) a centrist party emerging, as she will judge the flavour of Brexit such that it keeps everyone onside, if disgruntled.
I hope so, although it's as yet unclear what kind of Brexit could avoid some severe splintering.
In my view, unhindered access to the single market alongside freedom to work as opposed to movement, would almost square the circle.
In return we would probably surrender passporting and may need to continue stumping up some EU subs.
However, May's task is Herculean.
First she needs to keep the hard Brexiters on side, although she has started well here by co-opting them into Cabinet.
Then, she needs to keep the soft Tory Brexiters happy en route to securing a tacit agreement on the shape of a Brexit before exercising Article 50.
Finally, she needs to confirm, with 27 head of state, and perhaps others, an agreement de jure. Likely there will be rather ugly horse trading at this point and further opportunities for both hard Brexit and centrist wobbles domestically.
Running in parallel must be an effort to envision, and then pursue, an new direction for the UK and a new relationship with the economic behemoth on our doorstep. We must look seriously at our security architecture, as Brexit also disturbs an already creaky status quo in NATO.
May can expect no help from UKIP or Corbyn, but the great majority in parliament and in the country wish for the country to succeed. It's really War Ministry stuff, and requires rather better use of talent than we've seen thus far.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
That's always the case with postal votes. It was mentioned here in the context of the EU referendum too. In reality the number is something like 1 in 10,000 of those aged over 60, if the election is that close then we're in Florida 2000 territory all over again!
If any desperadoes are going to jump ship then one assumes they will come from amongst members who decline to run the gauntlet of Momentum activists at conference. Look out for anyone who is conspicuous by their absence on day one.
Lots of MPs almost NEVER go to party conferences. The first time you go, it's thrilling - zillions of fringe events on everything under the sun, the chance to meet all those people you've only read about. Second tie, still pretty interesting. The 10th time? Not so much.
If anyone's going to defect, I'd think it would be announced at the "recipient" party conference. Tim Farron saying "do come" is no substitute for someone actually coming.
Incidentally, I'll be at the Labour conference (launching a policy package at the Labour Animal Welfare Society fringe on Monday). If anyone else here is around, do get in touch.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
But you are assuming that all the voters who will die are Democrats or Republicans- the vast majority of those votes will probably cancel each other out (NC = TCTC) (Democrats more likely to vote by mail, Republicans are older)
It'd be ironical if the Cold War was finally ended by lots of nationalists agreeing that their rival patriotisms were a reason to cuddle up.
Perhaps a James led government would ferment and finance ethnic British seccessionist movements in Canada, Australia and South Africa, then invade in their support.
The PB League of Empire Loyalists would be in rapture.
It'd be ironical if the Cold War was finally ended by lots of nationalists agreeing that their rival patriotisms were a reason to cuddle up.
Perhaps a James led government would ferment and finance ethnic British seccessionist movements in Canada, Australia and South Africa, then invade in their support.
The PB League of Empire Loyalists would be in rapture.
Daniel Hannan ✔ @DanielJHannan Sorry to be a bore, Mark Carney, but where's that "technical recession" you threatened us with in 2016? Just so that I can plan my holidays.
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
The ECB say they told Yorkshire in July that he'd be unavailable.
But he's not centrally contracted to them,doesn't that count ?
If his contract is with the country then it should be up to them if he plays. If the ECB can't stump up the I think it's £120k per year to retain the player for themselves, then they don't have the right to tell his county he's unavailable for a big match!
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
In short, the Conservatives' position is, at present, close to invulnerable. Until a party comes along that can prize large numbers of Yellow Tory votes from their grip then it will remain so.
Exactly. Disgruntled lifelong wets have nowhere to go regardless of what Theresa decides to do. Look at the grammar debacle (for it was that). P****d off a bunch of Cons voters, had plenty of others scratching their heads, but...what on earth are they going to do about it? Nada. They sure as hell ain't going to the LDs; Lab obvs not; UKIP? They are wet, not nutters...so that leaves Cons.
Although both an LD revival and a centrist/SDP breakaway look unlikely, what seems even less likely is that centrists like myself will go unrepresentated *if* May takes hard Brexit turn.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
Somehow, whether from die hard Cameroonians, or one of the two unlikelihoods above, or some complicated combination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
I think several Cons MPs thought thus, as the Brexit debate was at its nadir. But somehow with Theresa, who gave what I thought was a very thoughtful pro-Remain speech, it has somehow dulled their edge. She will keep enough onside to stave off (IMO) a centrist party emerging, as she will judge the flavour of Brexit such that it keeps everyone onside, if disgruntled.
Yes, no Tory will defect. It will become internal opposition in a defacto one party state for the next decade.
Daniel Hannan ✔ @DanielJHannan Sorry to be a bore, Mark Carney, but where's that "technical recession" you threatened us with in 2016? Just so that I can plan my holidays.
Sorry to be a bore, Daniel, but where's the "EEA option" you promised us in 2016? Just so I can plan the rest of my life.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
it will remain so.
mbination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
I think several Cons MPs thought thus, as the Brexit debate was at its nadir. But somehow with Theresa, who gave what I thought was a very thoughtful pro-Remain speech, it has somehow dulled their edge. She will keep enough onside to stave off (IMO) a centrist party emerging, as she will judge the flavour of Brexit such that it keeps everyone onside, if disgruntled.
I hope so, although it's as yet unclear what kind of Brexit could avoid some severe splintering.
In my view, unhindered access to the single market alongside freedom to work as opposed to movement, would almost square the circle.
In return we would probably surrender passporting and may need to continue stumping up some EU subs.
However, May's task is Herculean.
First she needs to keep the hard Brexiters on side, although she has started well here by co-opting them into Cabinet.
Then, she needs to keep the soft Tory Brexiters happy en route to securing a tacit agreement on the shape of a Brexit before exercising Article 50.
Finally, she needs to confirm, with 27 head of state, and perhaps others, an agreement de jure. Likely there will be rather ugly horse trading at this point and further opportunities for both hard Brexit and centrist wobbles domestically.
Running in parallel must be an effort to envision, and then pursue, an new direction for the UK and a new relationship with the economic behemoth on our doorstep. We must look seriously at our security architecture, as Brexit also disturbs an already creaky status quo in NATO.
May can expect no help from UKIP or Corbyn, but the great majority in parliament and in the country wish for the country to succeed. It's really War Ministry stuff, and requires rather better use of talent than we've seen thus far.
Bit if she pulls it off...
There are a lot of balls to keep in the air. Increasingly I think that Brexit means the one tiny, nuanced, arcane issue that any given Brexiteer wants, while leaving the rest untouched.
Now of course control of our borders is neither tiny nor arcane nor nuanced and that is where we will have to see how flexible the EU27 will be.
I suspect they will go for a hugely sub-optimal outcome with one marquee "win" probably in immigration.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
In 2008 and 2012 it looks like 1 vote is Washoe translate to 5.8 votes state wide. For the Republicans it was 4.5 in 2008 and 5 in 2012 (and 4.1 in 2004) so lets say they can punch it to 5.4 this time round.
In 2008 Dems got a 108% and 105% return on registered votes in Washoe, Pubs got 84% and 96%. Lets say Dems get 102% return and Pubs get 98%.
So at the start of month registration figures (the 6000 registration gap) than means Dems winning Nevada 531079 to 501507
Pile on peeps.
EDIT: Even in pubs match the Dems Washoe returns at 102% each then the Dems superiour Washoe-to-Nevada vote co-efficient still clinches the state for them by 10000 votes.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
It's common for Southern States to have more registered Democrats than Republicans, reflecting the 120 years of Democratic hegemony up till the 1990's. Many registered Democrats vote Republican at Statewide level.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
But you are assuming that all the voters who will die are Democrats or Republicans- the vast majority of those votes will probably cancel each other out (NC = TCTC) (Democrats more likely to vote by mail, Republicans are older)
I'm imagining a really unfortunate coach accident or a meteor strike at a political rally.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
That's always the case with postal votes. It was mentioned here in the context of the EU referendum too. In reality the number is something like 1 in 10,000 of those aged over 60, if the election is that close then we're in Florida 2000 territory all over again!
Uk ballots are confirmed 19 days before the election. North CArolina is 60 days!
There are a lot of balls to keep in the air. Increasingly I think that Brexit means the one tiny, nuanced, arcane issue that any given Brexiteer wants, while leaving the rest untouched.
Now of course control of our borders is neither tiny nor arcane nor nuanced and that is where we will have to see how flexible the EU27 will be.
I suspect they will go for a hugely sub-optimal outcome with one marquee "win" probably in immigration.
What are the chances of getting some form of sufficient immigration control and remaining in single market, if we agree to pay bucketloads of money into the EU budget. i.e we buy the deal we want? Seems to me the EU budget is the weakest link compared to losing single market membership and free movement, the one that will do least damage economically or politically. Big loser would be the NHS's 350mil a week, but as that was never going to happen anyway...
Yes, no Tory will defect. It will become internal opposition in a defacto one party state for the next decade.
@Fox- there's nowhere for any buggar to defect to..Tory, Labour or LD. Although I'm a Labour Party member I have never felt more alienated from my party, and less inclined to join any of the others.
I saw your reply to my Clarets jibe......I love the fact that Leicester is a successful multicultural community
There are a lot of balls to keep in the air. Increasingly I think that Brexit means the one tiny, nuanced, arcane issue that any given Brexiteer wants, while leaving the rest untouched.
Now of course control of our borders is neither tiny nor arcane nor nuanced and that is where we will have to see how flexible the EU27 will be.
I suspect they will go for a hugely sub-optimal outcome with one marquee "win" probably in immigration.
What are the chances of getting some form of sufficient immigration control and remaining in single market, if we agree to pay bucketloads of money into the EU budget. i.e we buy the deal we want? Seems to me the EU budget is the weakest link compared to losing single market membership and free movement, the one that will do least damage economically or politically. Big loser would be the NHS's 350mil a week, but as that was never going to happen anyway...
For all the hard brexit willy waving on both sides I would be surprised if we dont wake up in EEA/EFTA in 2019.
A trump victory and some manouvers by Uncle Vlad would be quite useful in helping the EU to come to a sensible agreement in everyones interest.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it couovernment byelections show.
it will remain so.
mbination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
I think several Cons MPs thought thus, as the Brexit debate was at its nadir. But somehow with Theresa, who dulled their edge. She will keep enough onside to stave off (IMO) a centrist party emerging, as she will judge the flavour of Brexit such that it keeps everyone onside, if disgruntled.
off...
There are a lot of balls to keep in the air. Increasingly I think that Brexit means the one tiny, nuanced, arcane issue that any given Brexiteer wants, while leaving the rest untouched.
Now of course control of our borders is neither tiny nor arcane nor nuanced and that is where we will have to see how flexible the EU27 will be.
I suspect they will go for a hugely sub-optimal outcome with one marquee "win" probably in immigration.
It would be depressing, though probably most likely, for the UK to emerge from this a little worse off and with some untidy fudge of an agreement that formally delivers "Brexit" long after most people have lost interest. We'd be poorer, both economically and culturally - because we will have created significant upheaval in exchange for very little.
I hope there is another way. Some questions:
1. How can the UK address its very poor productivity in relation to its peers?
2. How can the UK close the widest gaps in regional inequality in the OECD (the NE for example, has approx. similar quality of life to parts of Poland or Hungary)
3. How to retain and grow London as a global financial and cultural capital?
4. How to advance export performance, especially to emerging economies (where our performance is well behind our neighbours, proving that EU membership was actually no barrier)?
5. How to reduce c. 45%?separatist sentiment in Scotland where - let us not forget, independence was supported by less than a third a mere four or five years ago.
6. What relationship, economic and diplomatic, are we to have with the EU, now under the very clear hegemony of Germany?
7. What is our approach to Russia's activities, the growing power of China in SE Asia; the increased anti-liberal alliance between the two?
My (naive) hope is that Brexit forces us to confront these, much of which have been obscured too long under the rubric of "EU made us do it".
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
You are way too kind.
I did not want to be modded. I think of all the PM's we have had, and I really loathed Blair, Brown takes the biscuit as the most detestable shit ever, not only for what he did in Govt, but what he did to his party and the resulting vacuum after he left.. Most of the decent Labour heavies thought fuck it, and went off to do other things. Brown is responsible for Labour's current position. An utter shit who should never be offered ANY honour by HMQ.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
Indeed, it was a serious effort by the Labour Party to polish a turd.
In the Seventies there was a strong National Front presence, but nothing like that in recent times.
Leicester is a pretty relaxed place as far as race relations go. The football crowd is too. One of my favourites at the victory parade was a group of Sikhs wearing turbans made of the team colours, and a group of muslim teenagers in blue and white hijabs. It was a great atmosphere, and everyone comfortable.
Our departmental Christmas party is being organised by a Hindu, who has apologised that the food is not Halal, but the vegetarian option is good, for example!
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
Greetings from Brighton. Sniffing around the fringe there were two interesting meetings. Caroline Lucas and Lisa Nandy spoke at a Social Liberal Forum meeting about a progressive alliance. While much of the discussion has been at a philosophical and policy level there are discussions going on about local tactical initiatives. Watch Sussex county elections next year. On Brexit Vince Cable said a compromise on free movement was difficult but could happen. However it was clear that on the economic future we will be unlikely to get a Norwegian or Canadian deal -:it looks like WTO or nothing.
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
He had a good flood.
A reminder, perhaps, to some overexcited PBTories that polling when a new PM is in their honeymoon is not a good indicator of how things will be long-term.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
As bad as they got Brown never achieved the even worse worst ratings of both Thatcher and Major whose figures of 17% approval 76% disapproval in August 1994 remain the record .
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
As bad as they got Brown never achieved the even worse worst ratings of both Thatcher and Major whose figures of 17% approval 76% disapproval in August 1994 remain the record .
Aah But Mrs Thatcher's disapproval ratings(unlike the others) meant she was doing the right thing (poll tax excepted 79-89ish were her glory years.
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
As bad as they got Brown never achieved the even worse worst ratings of both Thatcher and Major whose figures of 17% approval 76% disapproval in August 1994 remain the record .
Aah But Mrs Thatcher's disapproval ratings(unlike the others) meant she was doing the right thing (poll tax excepted 79-89ish were her glory years.
Just out of curiosity, how do we know when bad ratings are for doing the right thing or the wrong thing? If 76% disapproval was a good thing for Thatcher in 94 should Corbyn be shooting to get even more disapproval?
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
As bad as they got Brown never achieved the even worse worst ratings of both Thatcher and Major whose figures of 17% approval 76% disapproval in August 1994 remain the record .
Aah But Mrs Thatcher's disapproval ratings(unlike the others) meant she was doing the right thing (poll tax excepted 79-89ish were her glory years.
Just out of curiosity, how do we know when bad ratings are for doing the right thing or the wrong thing? If 76% disapproval was a good thing for Thatcher in 94 should Corbyn be shooting to get even more disapproval?
I think the difference is between being in Government and being in Opposition.
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
that la times black percentage sounds way off, based on the other pollsters. after this birther stuff, assume to around 3% african american appeal
ON THREAD May I just add that its nice to know that in modern times that Brown had the worst "satisfaction" ratings of any modern Labour leader. Next time Jonathan tries to excuse/give excuses for this most detestable and damaging Labour leader and Prime Minister, it would be as well to remind him of what the Great British Public thought of such a terrible man.. a shit of epic proportions, and should be remembered as such.
Although, of course, when Brown had only been PM for 2 months, his approval ratings were almost as good as May's currently are.
As bad as they got Brown never achieved the even worse worst ratings of both Thatcher and Major whose figures of 17% approval 76% disapproval in August 1994 remain the record .
Aah But Mrs Thatcher's disapproval ratings(unlike the others) meant she was doing the right thing (poll tax excepted 79-89ish were her glory years.
Just out of curiosity, how do we know when bad ratings are for doing the right thing or the wrong thing? If 76% disapproval was a good thing for Thatcher in 94 should Corbyn be shooting to get even more disapproval?
By all means permit him to do so!!!. Its a question of perception.. Mrs Thatcher was not liked but people voted for her even tho they didn't "like her" they respected her.
Who respects Corbyn? Take your time answering, it may be a long time...
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
The LA Times must hate that daily poll.
depends how accurate it ends up!
and obama's appeal was great. Using his high approval ratings to good effect
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
The latest Fox Poll has Obama with +7 approval rating and Trump +1. Plugging their racial demographics in (which is harder to do as they don't break down as much as the LA Times poll) gives the state to Clinton by 309,744 votes and due to my conservative apportioning of the vote it would be more than that. Even by the male/female split alone Clinto wins by 73 thousand odd.
The LA Times poll is a massive outlier. It is the YouGov daily poll of the election.
I really didn't see the Obama appeal as desperate at all, it sounded and looked confident and commanding to me.
You can guarantee that all those WWC or more technically WNWC anti immigrants will not be rushing to take up jobs on building sites .
How many WWC (contractors, plumbers, electricians etc) were complaining that the wages they could earn had been decimated by immigrants working for less?
I bet they'll be back on the sites before you can say "Bob The Builder".
You can guarantee that all those WWC or more technically WNWC anti immigrants will not be rushing to take up jobs on building sites .
How many WWC (contractors, plumbers, electricians etc) were complaining that the wages they could earn had been decimated by immigrants working for less?
I bet they'll be back on the sites before you can say "Bob The Builder".
Whenever I met Boris I felt he was a Remainer but he knew that if he led Brexit, he would be seen as PM in waiting...and knew he would lose the referendum. But his side won!
When I met Mrs May, I felt she was a Brexiteer and was told to keep quiet by Cameron if she wanted to be next PM. Her side lost the ref., but she actually won
A major factor is that essentially in came down to the fact that Boris couldn't keep his sausage in is underpants.
Whenever I met Boris I felt he was a Remainer but he knew that if he led Brexit, he would be seen as PM in waiting...and knew he would lose the referendum. But his side won!
When I met Mrs May, I felt she was a Brexiteer and was told to keep quiet by Cameron if she wanted to be next PM. Her side lost the ref., but she actually won
A major factor is that essentially in came down to the fact that Boris couldn't keep his sausage in is underpants.
Let's put to bed using that Twitter "poll" to judge the Commander in Chief forum and build narratives. The Economist/youGov poll ( https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/13/yougoveconomist-poll-september-10-13-2016/ ) did actual proper polling on it and it comes out 42/40 in Clinton's favour. So let's lose the notion of a Commander-In-Chief forum being the reason for the Trump Bump, it's all down to Clinton Collapse and nothing else.
Let's put to bed using that Twitter "poll" to judge the Commander in Chief forum and build narratives. The Economist/youGov poll ( https://today.yougov.com/news/2016/09/13/yougoveconomist-poll-september-10-13-2016/ ) did actual proper polling on it and it comes out 42/40 in Clinton's favour. So let's lose the notion of a Commander-In-Chief forum being the reason for the Trump Bump, it's all down to Clinton Collapse and nothing else.
Not sure i've seen that mentioned as the reason for Trump's recent polling figures. That same poll does indicate expectations were a bit different, so that could contribute something:
"By 44% to 33%, voters expect Clinton to do better than Trump in the debate"
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
that la times black percentage sounds way off, based on the other pollsters. after this birther stuff, assume to around 3% african american appeal
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Using the LA Times racial demographic breakdown Trump wins by 344,045 votes. However if his African American support gow back to the long term figure of Trump 4.5% Hilary 85% from the poll then Clinton wins by 113,176 votes.
The desperate sounding appeal from Obama suggests that the Democrats are not confident that the demographic block vote will turn out for them.
The latest Fox Poll has Obama with +7 approval rating and Trump +1. Plugging their racial demographics in (which is harder to do as they don't break down as much as the LA Times poll) gives the state to Clinton by 309,744 votes and due to my conservative apportioning of the vote it would be more than that. Even by the male/female split alone Clinto wins by 73 thousand odd.
The LA Times poll is a massive outlier. It is the YouGov daily poll of the election.
I really didn't see the Obama appeal as desperate at all, it sounded and looked confident and commanding to me.
I would respectfully point out that Obama isn't running for President - but Trump is and the latest Polls show him neck and neck with Clinton on unpopularity.
"By 44% to 33%, voters expect Clinton to do better than Trump in the debate"
That's for the upcoming debates not the CinC forum.
Good catch, but probably representative figures.
It means that Clinton has a higher bar to clear.
Well yeah, but I was talking about the previous forum thing. While it may have been a draw in terms of who won, Trump exceeded expectations, which could have contributed a bit to the polling bounce perhaps!
"By 44% to 33%, voters expect Clinton to do better than Trump in the debate"
That's for the upcoming debates not the CinC forum.
Good catch, but probably representative figures.
It means that Clinton has a higher bar to clear.
Well yeah, but I was talking about the previous forum thing. While it may have been a draw in terms of who won, Trump exceeded expectations, which could have contributed a bit to the polling bounce perhaps!
Always nice to get polling by correct methodologies, even if my first impressions were incorrect.
Washoe County Nevada is the swing county in a swing state (the county voted Obama 50.79% in 2012). Two weeks ago it had 6000 more registered Republicans than Democrats, today it was 2500 more.
In 2012 by close of registration it had 1132 more republicans (Dems win state by 6.7%). In 2008 it had 1278 more Democrats in 2004 (Dems win state by 12.5%) In 2004 it had 17543 more Republicans (Republican win state by 2.6%) In 2000 it had 14858 more Republicans (Republicans win state by 3.5%)
It seems to be 5000 or so https://www.washoecounty.us/voters/ which would just tip it red based on 2004/ 2008. Large number of NonPartisan though - so the $64000 question is: for whom will they vote?
Now that we're starting to see real numbers, it only reinforces the point that the election is too close to call. God help us all if this is a rerun of Bush v Gore from sixteen years ago.
Just think, North Carolina postal voting has started. How many people who have postal voted will die between now and the election? Imagine if the state is decided by a figure less than that number.
* sorrowful voice* ....It's what they would have wanted....
More exit poll data from Berlin: 55% think the influx of refugees "enriches" Germany, though a majority do want some limit on numbers. 84% think the AfD is too right-wing, including half of those who voted for them; many of these also say they wanted to protest against the other "old" parties, only 30% say it related to immigration. The Sociliasts and Left got high ratings for competence and dealing with the housing crisis; but both lost votes among unemployed voters. The Greens scored on "fresh innovation". Former CDU voters voting AfD partly cite immigration, partly just that the party has "lost its way" and is "out of touch". The Left had a big lead among younger voters.
For reasons previously explained, I don't see how they can lose any significant proportion of the 37% of voters they won under Cameron last year, and that alone is enough for victory.
You don`t, Mr Rook? I do, and it could quite easily happen. People vote for one particular political party at one election, but that does not follow that they will do the same at the next.
For a start,Mr Cameron adopted the "nice Conservative" continuity-Coalition line, and that persuaded many people to give the Conservatives their vote last time. As has already been mentioned, many people were stampeded into voting Tory when threatened by the prospect of a Milliband-Sturgeon government. And thirdly we had the Tory dirty tricks (still being investigated by the police, I understand).
I don`t think any of these three factors will come into play next time.
On top of that, you PB Tories are putting a lot of your hopes on the opinion polls. Without going into the question of whether these are right or wrong overall, in terms of how each individual elector might vote, there is also the question of by how much.
For example, if an elector thinks that all politicians are rubbish, but that the Tory candidate is the best of a bad bunch, his voting intention is scored as a point for the Tories - even though he dislikes them almost as much as the rest.
Similarly, if an elector is keen on the Tories (and then there is another tick in the Tory column) but thinks that the Lib Dems are also fairly sound and decent, it might not take very much for him to cast his vote for the Lib Dem candidate on the actual day.
So there could be a lot of movement on polling day, despite the opinion polls currently giving the Tories a large lead over Labour.
And despite the constant repetition from the PB Tories, the Lib Debs are by no means dead in the water - as recent local government byelections show.
One of the things that's missing in all the PBTory spaffing at Theresa May's personal ratings and the Tories' poll ratings -- approval ratings for the GOVERNMENT as a whole are still pretty poor. In the latest IPSOS-MORI poll, government approval is a net -13 (39% satisfied, 52% dissatisfied).
One-fifth of people who currently intend to vote Tory say they are "dissatisfied with the way the government is running the country". That is hardly a sign of the Tory voteshare being rock-solid and invulnerable to any decline, when May's honeymoon ends.
39% is quite a good rating for a government (government ratings are almost always negative)
Government disapproval has been as low as -42 for the Tories this year and they were still ahead. I wonder what happened there..
More exit poll data from Berlin: 55% think the influx of refugees "enriches" Germany, though a majority do want some limit on numbers. 84% think the AfD is too right-wing, including half of those who voted for them; many of these also say they wanted to protest against the other "old" parties, only 30% say it related to immigration. The Sociliasts and Left got high ratings for competence and dealing with the housing crisis; but both lost votes among unemployed voters. The Greens scored on "fresh innovation". Former CDU voters voting AfD partly cite immigration, partly just that the party has "lost its way" and is "out of touch". The Left had a big lead among younger voters.
How representative are Berlin voters of German voters in general?
Comments
Crikey those odds are a bit short. Either Paddy Power is having a bit of fun or all the money is going one way. I wonder if five or more Labour MPs each got a few grand down at longer odds.
Would it be a joke if the boot was on other foot and it was Sturgeon?
What more do people want?
Stick to your guns Jezza!
So perhaps you are off message.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/11483441/SNP-member-suspended-over-vile-homophobic-abuse-of-Ruth-Davidson.html
I'd be surprised if the LDs and Tories don't have a moderate Labour MP or two lined up for their conferences, wouldn't be shocked to see Douglas Carswell return home to the Tories either. Defections give a massive boost to the party faithful.
Now, the austerity debate is interesting. There are plenty of reasons why the UK didn't need to adopt austerity post-Greece, but, based upon what little they knew, the public had no appetite for a non-austerity party. So the Cons spotted that to hoover up those TINAs of other parties they had to be pro-austerity. Which took the rug under the carpet from EdM. Funnily enough, now that we are where we are, he perhaps should have been bolder anti-austerity.
My point being, that if it is the economics that motivate you, then it is difficult to change parties.
If someone had decided to do a rap about Sturgeon's miscarriage, sobbing Nationalists would've raised a petition on anti-social media demanding their arrest within about five minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seKYakhu6dc
Yorkshire fume at ECB over Bairstow while Rashid opts out of title decider.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/sep/18/yorkshire-angry-jonny-bairstow-refused-permission-title-finale
Yorkshire fans fuming with former Middlesex man strauss of not letting bairstow not to play in the title decider against Middlesex and Rashid of saying he needs a rest ,this tweet from the captain of Yorkshire -
https://twitter.com/GaleyLad/status/777485164758831104
And Club statement on Jonny Bairstow availability -
https://yorkshireccc.com/news/view/5169/club-statement-on-jonny-bairstow-availability
Nature abhors a vacuum.
Somehow, whether from die hard Cameroonians, or one of the two unlikelihoods above, or some complicated combination of them all --- an Opposition will arise.
One has to assume that defections to other parties are much more likely in marginals, i.e. where the defecting MP would have a reasonable chance of holding on for their new party against a Labour challenge next time, or where their seat is going to be abolished under the boundary reforms. One would need to draw up a list of all the most restless Labour MPs, and then see which ones could make a plausible defence, or have no seat and nothing left to lose by seeking a new one with a new party.
"Although not a centrally contracted player for the last 12 months, Yorkshire required clearance from the ECB to play Bairstow."
If he's not centrally contracted, then why do England need to give permission for Yorkshire to play him? This sounds like England trying to expand their squad without paying for it.
The current Labour MP for marginal Barrow (John Woodcock) has hinted that he would quit Labour if they press on with nuclear disarmament - the nuclear industry is a huge employer in Barrow - so he is one to watch for a defection to the Blues.
MPs close to Heathrow are also ones to watch as the decision looms. We could see Zak Goldsmith resign his seat, maybe standing as an independent or even a Green in opposition to the expansion. A Labour MP might resign the other way, in protest at their party's opposition to local job creation. Some say that the govt are holding this decision back until after Conference season for exactly this reason.
In my view, unhindered access to the single market alongside freedom to work as opposed to movement, would almost square the circle.
In return we would probably surrender passporting and may need to continue stumping up some EU subs.
However, May's task is Herculean.
First she needs to keep the hard Brexiters on side, although she has started well here by co-opting them into Cabinet.
Then, she needs to keep the soft Tory Brexiters happy en route to securing a tacit agreement on the shape of a Brexit before exercising Article 50.
Finally, she needs to confirm, with 27 head of state, and perhaps others, an agreement de jure. Likely there will be rather ugly horse trading at this point and further opportunities for both hard Brexit and centrist wobbles domestically.
Running in parallel must be an effort to envision, and then pursue, an new direction for the UK and a new relationship with the economic behemoth on our doorstep. We must look seriously at our security architecture, as Brexit also disturbs an already creaky status quo in NATO.
May can expect no help from UKIP or Corbyn, but the great majority in parliament and in the country wish for the country to succeed.
It's really War Ministry stuff, and requires rather better use of talent than we've seen thus far.
Bit if she pulls it off...
If anyone's going to defect, I'd think it would be announced at the "recipient" party conference. Tim Farron saying "do come" is no substitute for someone actually coming.
Incidentally, I'll be at the Labour conference (launching a policy package at the Labour Animal Welfare Society fringe on Monday). If anyone else here is around, do get in touch.
Daniel Hannan ✔ @DanielJHannan
Sorry to be a bore, Mark Carney, but where's that "technical recession" you threatened us with in 2016? Just so that I can plan my holidays.
http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=09-17-2016
Amazed this is TCTC with 640,000 more registered democrats than republicans.
Be good to be a male there - 500,000 more females.
Now of course control of our borders is neither tiny nor arcane nor nuanced and that is where we will have to see how flexible the EU27 will be.
I suspect they will go for a hugely sub-optimal outcome with one marquee "win" probably in immigration.
In 2008 Dems got a 108% and 105% return on registered votes in Washoe, Pubs got 84% and 96%. Lets say Dems get 102% return and Pubs get 98%.
So at the start of month registration figures (the 6000 registration gap) than means Dems winning Nevada 531079 to 501507
Pile on peeps.
EDIT: Even in pubs match the Dems Washoe returns at 102% each then the Dems superiour Washoe-to-Nevada vote co-efficient still clinches the state for them by 10000 votes.
Yes, no Tory will defect. It will become internal opposition in a defacto one party state for the next decade.
@Fox- there's nowhere for any buggar to defect to..Tory, Labour or LD. Although I'm a Labour Party member I have never felt more alienated from my party, and less inclined to join any of the others.
I saw your reply to my Clarets jibe......I love the fact that Leicester is a successful multicultural community
A trump victory and some manouvers by Uncle Vlad would be quite useful in helping the EU to come to a sensible agreement in everyones interest.
I hope there is another way. Some questions:
1. How can the UK address its very poor productivity in relation to its peers?
2. How can the UK close the widest gaps in regional inequality in the OECD (the NE for example, has approx. similar quality of life to parts of Poland or Hungary)
3. How to retain and grow London as a global financial and cultural capital?
4. How to advance export performance, especially to emerging economies (where our performance is well behind our neighbours, proving that EU membership was actually no barrier)?
5. How to reduce c. 45%?separatist sentiment in Scotland where - let us not forget, independence was supported by less than a third a mere four or five years ago.
6. What relationship, economic and diplomatic, are we to have with the EU, now under the very clear hegemony of Germany?
7. What is our approach to Russia's activities, the growing power of China in SE Asia; the increased anti-liberal alliance between the two?
My (naive) hope is that Brexit forces us to confront these, much of which have been obscured too long under the rubric of "EU made us do it".
I think of all the PM's we have had, and I really loathed Blair, Brown takes the biscuit as the most detestable shit ever, not only for what he did in Govt, but what he did to his party and the resulting vacuum after he left.. Most of the decent Labour heavies thought fuck it, and went off to do other things. Brown is responsible for Labour's current position. An utter shit who should never be offered ANY honour by HMQ.
In the Seventies there was a strong National Front presence, but nothing like that in recent times.
Leicester is a pretty relaxed place as far as race relations go. The football crowd is too. One of my favourites at the victory parade was a group of Sikhs wearing turbans made of the team colours, and a group of muslim teenagers in blue and white hijabs. It was a great atmosphere, and everyone comfortable.
Our departmental Christmas party is being organised by a Hindu, who has apologised that the food is not Halal, but the vegetarian option is good, for example!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11925511/Labour-directs-its-impotent-fury-at-all-but-those-responsible-itself.html
By all means permit him to do so!!!. Its a question of perception.. Mrs Thatcher was not liked but people voted for her even tho they didn't "like her" they respected her.
Who respects Corbyn? Take your time answering, it may be a long time...
and obama's appeal was great. Using his high approval ratings to good effect
The LA Times poll is a massive outlier. It is the YouGov daily poll of the election.
I really didn't see the Obama appeal as desperate at all, it sounded and looked confident and commanding to me.
I bet they'll be back on the sites before you can say "Bob The Builder".
When I met Mrs May, I felt she was a Brexiteer and was told to keep quiet by Cameron if she wanted to be next PM. Her side lost the ref., but she actually won
A major factor is that essentially in came down to the fact that Boris couldn't keep his sausage in is underpants.
"By 44% to 33%, voters expect Clinton to do better than Trump in the debate"
Just rejoice at that news
https://morningconsult.com/2016/09/18/clinton-maintains-lead-trump-despite-health-scare/
* In Russian parliamentary elections.