Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the Tory vote is rock solid.
Simply the numbers reflect an opposition in turmoil, with lots of non Tory voters being demoralized, not knowing who to vote for or even if it's worth to vote at all.
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
Cambridge, Edinburgh West, Fife NE, maybe a Highland seat.
Its also possible that they make a gain or two from the Conservatives even while the Conservatives are hammering Labour nationally. SW London is the most likely areas for that or in a constituency where a Conservative MP is involved in a scandal.
That's pretty much exactly my view: three seats in Scotland, two in South West London, one in Wales, Westmoreland, Sheffield, Cambridge ....
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
We need a graph with 2015 LibDem vote and 2016 Remain vote - the constituencies at the top right corner will be the most likely LibDem at the next election.
Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the Tory vote is rock solid.
Simply the numbers reflect an opposition in turmoil, with lots of non Tory voters being demoralized, not knowing who to vote for or even if it's worth to vote at all.
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
I shall be surprised if the Tories manage 39% - never mind 43%. Even today when May still has a honeymoon they appear to be at 42%.
If May delivers a half decent exit from the EU, 43% at the next election will be well on the low side.
And if she simply gets unlucky and the Uk enters recession in 2018?
How much difference, short of a complete catastrophe, is this likely to make, given the state of the Opposition?
The Conservatives' *floor* is probably nearly everybody who voted for them in 2015 and, given the state of Labour and the return of former Tory voters from Ukip, it could be significantly higher than that.
I believe your assumption that 2015 represents the Conservative 'floor' is rather optimistic. Many who voted Tory in response to the SNP scare campaign may well not do so again.
Wait till the poster of Jeremy Corbyn & John McDonnell in Gerry Adams' pocket goes viral.
Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the Tory vote is rock solid.
Simply the numbers reflect an opposition in turmoil, with lots of non Tory voters being demoralized, not knowing who to vote for or even if it's worth to vote at all.
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
Cambridge, Edinburgh West, Fife NE, maybe a Highland seat.
Its also possible that they make a gain or two from the Conservatives even while the Conservatives are hammering Labour nationally. SW London is the most likely areas for that or in a constituency where a Conservative MP is involved in a scandal.
That's pretty much exactly my view: three seats in Scotland, two in South West London, one in Wales, Westmoreland, Sheffield, Cambridge ....
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
We need a graph with 2015 LibDem vote and 2016 Remain vote - the constituencies at the top right corner will be the most likely LibDem at the next election.
There's a very strong correlation in most places. The only exceptions would be places like Burnley and Bradford East where LD support was/is based on a strong personal vote.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
As a crude oversimplification I divide the country into Remainia, Brexitshire and Leaverstan. Remainia will continue to thrive under Brexit for the reasons it thrived under EU membership. EG the Google and Facebook investments. Brexitshire will have problems under Brexit. But as rural Tory areas they will be looked after by Tory governments and have high social capital.
Leaverstan will be shafted by Brexit ( Nissan being a Canary snatched from the Coal Mine in time ) and have no one to care. The Tories will never need the sort of Labour seats these are and their votes only count in close national referendums. It's safe to say we won't be having anymore referendums for decades. So Leaverstan is UKIP's big growth area. As all the forces that drove Brexit grind remorselessly on and the logic of FPTP reasserts it's self the capacity for UKIP to do to Labour what the SNP did to them in Scotland is real.
You seem keen to ignore the existence of Remainastan.
Inner city shitholes are still inner city shitholes even if they voted Remain.
Yeh, Merseyside, Glasgow, Manchester, South Armagh and West Belfast aren't economic powerhouses.
'The 20 towns and cities in Britain that pay the most tax
10. Liverpool, Tax paid: £4.4m The service industry plays a major role in helping Liverpool become one of the largest economies in the UK. The film industry provides jobs - and taxes - as the area is the second most filmed city in Britain outside London.
4. Glasgow, Tax paid: £8.25m Paying over £2m taxes than Edinburgh, the city of Glasgow comes in fourth place on the list. It has the largest economy in Scotland and has high employment in business and financial sectors.
2. Manchester, Tax paid: £16.51m Despite being second on the list, Manchester’s tax haul has grown by just 1% over the past decade. Two of the country’s busiest airports are located in the northern town.'
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
The evidence is that Labour support is holding up best in places like London, which by extension must mean the party is doing even worse in the marginals than the polls would suggest on a national swing.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
I am only taking it from what I hear from Labour traditional voters. They will not vote Labour whilst Corbyn is leader IMHO. They'll most likely sit on their hands. UKIP is in meltdown.. Possibly . a LD resurgence, but nothing seen yet.
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
I shall be surprised if the Tories manage 39% - never mind 43%. Even today when May still has a honeymoon they appear to be at 42%.
If May delivers a half decent exit from the EU, 43% at the next election will be well on the low side.
And if she simply gets unlucky and the Uk enters recession in 2018?
How much difference, short of a complete catastrophe, is this likely to make, given the state of the Opposition?
The Conservatives' *floor* is probably nearly everybody who voted for them in 2015 and, given the state of Labour and the return of former Tory voters from Ukip, it could be significantly higher than that.
I believe your assumption that 2015 represents the Conservative 'floor' is rather optimistic. Many who voted Tory in response to the SNP scare campaign may well not do so again.
Wait till the poster of Jeremy Corbyn & John McDonnell in Gerry Adams' pocket goes viral.
I was around in the Seventies and Eighties, and my Dad was a quarter mile of the Birmingham pub bomb. Nonetheless, I am not bothered by the above. SF are now in government and shake hands with the Queen and PM rather than try to murder them. Times have moved on.
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
lots of people don't bother about local elections.. turnout is far too low to draw meaningful conclusions.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
If there's a Lib Dem win next week it will completely change the complexion of the media coverage going into next year.
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
lots of people don't bother about local elections.. turnout is far too low to draw meaningful conclusions.
except if Conservatives do well in them as they are in Scotland when the results become meaningful ?
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
That, of course, still leaves 30% unaccounted for.
On 40% of 8%, the SNP is 3.5%. So, 26.5% between UKIP, the Greens and the LibDems.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
The evidence is that Labour support is holding up best in places like London, which by extension must mean the party is doing even worse in the marginals than the polls would suggest on a national swing.
Sounds plausible. IIRC Labour under-performed/Tories over-performed in marginals at the last election.
At this rate, the next election will probably be about the Tories clearing up all the existing Lab/Con marginals, and perhaps converting another twenty Labour safe seats into new marginals. How many of Labour's surviving bastions then hold firm will depend on whether or not Ukip and Plaid can start chewing away at some of those areas - in South Wales, urban Yorkshire and the North East - where Labour ought to be acutely vulnerable, but is kept safe by the ongoing cultural aversion to Toryism in many poorer communities.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
lots of people don't bother about local elections.. turnout is far too low to draw meaningful conclusions.
except if Conservatives do well in them as they are in Scotland when the results become meaningful ?
It only serves to reinforce how fecked Labour are in Scotland, nationally it means very little
Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the Tory vote is rock solid.
Simply the numbers reflect an opposition in turmoil, with lots of non Tory voters being demoralized, not knowing who to vote for or even if it's worth to vote at all.
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
Cambridge, Edinburgh West, Fife NE, maybe a Highland seat.
Its also possible that they make a gain or two from the Conservatives even while the Conservatives are hammering Labour nationally. SW London is the most likely areas for that or in a constituency where a Conservative MP is involved in a scandal.
That's pretty much exactly my view: three seats in Scotland, two in South West London, one in Wales, Westmoreland, Sheffield, Cambridge ....
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
We need a graph with 2015 LibDem vote and 2016 Remain vote - the constituencies at the top right corner will be the most likely LibDem at the next election.
Didn't Andy do that? There was a v high correlation between LD support and Remoania Remainia.
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
Weren't PBers only recently saying that this party would overtake Labour within two election cycle? That elections would be 'centre-right vs far-right?' LOL.
Just on the safe side in case the pollsters have messed up their turnout model, in a clean 10/10 certainty to vote (which also is close to the turnout by age in 2015) the results from ICM are:
CON 38 LAB 27 UKIP 11 LD 7 OTH 8
D/K 10
The LD have the biggest problem with certainty to vote and retaining their past voters. Only the Tory vote is rock solid.
Simply the numbers reflect an opposition in turmoil, with lots of non Tory voters being demoralized, not knowing who to vote for or even if it's worth to vote at all.
The LibDems are going to suffer at the next election because of:
1) The loss of incumbency and personal votes 2) The loss of tactical votes 3) The loss of relevancy votes (unless a hung parliament looks likely)
They are likely to gain other votes but in some constituencies they haven't reached their trough yet.
Ultimately, though, they're likely to be on 12% rather than 8%. That's 50% more votes. I'd be very surprised if that didn't lead to more seats.
But if the Tories are on 43%, those LibDem seats are gong to have to come from Labour or (don't laugh at the back) the SNP.
Cambridge, Edinburgh West, Fife NE, maybe a Highland seat.
Its also possible that they make a gain or two from the Conservatives even while the Conservatives are hammering Labour nationally. SW London is the most likely areas for that or in a constituency where a Conservative MP is involved in a scandal.
That's pretty much exactly my view: three seats in Scotland, two in South West London, one in Wales, Westmoreland, Sheffield, Cambridge ....
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
On 600 seats, and 12%, I reckon they get 10-14 seats.
But it is not solidly based. In early 1989 there were polls giving the Tories leads of 12 and 13% with poll shares as high as 46% and 50%. The Tories fell well short of such a performance in April 1992 - even having ditched Thatcher.
Once you get past the deliberately click-bait hyperbole, his point is hardly new. Cronyist Capitalism and State Corporatism with the concomitant pay-to-play has castrated democracy to a large extent, offering only minor differences of nuance post elections, leading to a sense of plus ca change ...
How do we get politicians and political parties to actually listen to, and engage, the disenfranchised? For those of us who are not disenfranchised, we may be tempted to say, why bother? If we engage them, we're less likely to get the politics we support.
But in the long term, we have to avoid creating conditions of political hopelessness in any large part of the electorate. Failure to do so will not end well. Ask Assad.
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
I know Lewes, and I think it's a rather unlikely LibDem regain, even assuming no boundary changes. A lot of the LibDem vote was very much Normal Baker's personal vote and I think that has largely dissipated. Maria Caulfield is hard-working and should get a good incumbency bonus.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
The alt-right are the new global conspiracy - they're everywhere and nowhere.
The alt-right is the new boogeyman for lefties. But as far as I can tell it seems to mainly consists of kids posting memes. Perhaps if you candidate is defeated by such people the problem really lies with your party and policies?
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
I've been laying out Juppe in some attempt to get my book back to somewhere near 0, so I hope this is right.
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
I know Lewes, and I think it's a rather unlikely LibDem regain, even assuming no boundary changes. A lot of the LibDem vote was very much Normal Baker's personal vote and I think that has largely dissipated. Maria Caulfield is hard-working and should get a good incumbency bonus.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
I struggle to see the LDs doing well in the SW. Bath is a possibility, where Don Foster's stepping down was a big factor.
The alt-right are the new global conspiracy - they're everywhere and nowhere.
The alt-right is the new boogeyman for lefties. But as far as I can tell it seems to mainly consists of kids posting memes. Perhaps if you candidate is defeated by such people the problem really lies with your party and policies?
Don't forget "Fake News". The webbles are all too stupid to realise it is fake and results in votes for Brexit and Trump.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
I happily concede that my knowledge of French politics is limited (to say the least,) but I have been reading today about Mr Fillon's surprise win and the implications are really rather extraordinary.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
The evidence is that Labour support is holding up best in places like London, which by extension must mean the party is doing even worse in the marginals than the polls would suggest on a national swing.
Sounds plausible. IIRC Labour under-performed/Tories over-performed in marginals at the last election.
At this rate, the next election will probably be about the Tories clearing up all the existing Lab/Con marginals, and perhaps converting another twenty Labour safe seats into new marginals. How many of Labour's surviving bastions then hold firm will depend on whether or not Ukip and Plaid can start chewing away at some of those areas - in South Wales, urban Yorkshire and the North East - where Labour ought to be acutely vulnerable, but is kept safe by the ongoing cultural aversion to Toryism in many poorer communities.
Although Labour are within MOE against Brown and Miliband's vote share. Tories are better placed, but there is a long way to go.
I agree with Justin -- Labour will hold Cambridge.
The LibDems have gone backwards on the Council, and Jeremy Corbyn is the kind of person to appeal to a Cambridge electorate.
Ceredigion will be difficult too. Remember, the sole LibDem in the Welsh Assembly chose to prop up a tired Labour administration that has been in power continuously since the Assembly was created. Boundary changes (if they go through) in Ceredigion favour Plaid Cymru too.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
I don't know if you missed the article i linked to earlier today which said that the main reason for 42% of those voting at the weekend was to stop Sarkozy.
IOne has to assume therefore that most of those votes will have gone to Fillon because according to the polls, he was fighting for second place with Sarkozy.
One wonders, therefore, with Sarkozy gone, whether they will have the same incentive to vote next weekend and if so, whether their votes stay with Fillon.
Not saying that Juppe will win, but I think he has a glimmer of hope if he performs well in the debate this week. I see the final head to head being a lot closer than most are anticipating and there may even be another shock on the cards.
The alt-right are the new global conspiracy - they're everywhere and nowhere.
The alt-right is the new boogeyman for lefties. But as far as I can tell it seems to mainly consists of kids posting memes. Perhaps if you candidate is defeated by such people the problem really lies with your party and policies?
Don't forget "Fake News". The webbles are all too stupid to realise it is fake and results in votes for Brexit and Trump.
There's fake news?
PS Actually, given the way the MSM has gone, the more appropriate question is where is the real news? It seems to have gone absent.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
And a large Conservative lead would be totally inconsistent with council elections where they struggle yo get 30% of the vote which is the Conservative floor
Haven't we been here before with the council elections stuff?
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
I've been laying out Juppe in some attempt to get my book back to somewhere near 0, so I hope this is right.
I haven't laid Juppe, because Bayrou won't stand if Juppe is the candidate, pretty much guaranteeing him the second round and the Presidency. If Fillon is the LR candidate (which is by far the most likely outcome from the Primary), then Macron could sneak through and face Le Pen in the second round.
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
I know Lewes, and I think it's a rather unlikely LibDem regain, even assuming no boundary changes. A lot of the LibDem vote was very much Normal Baker's personal vote and I think that has largely dissipated. Maria Caulfield is hard-working and should get a good incumbency bonus.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
I struggle to see the LDs doing well in the SW. Bath is a possibility, where Don Foster's stepping down was a big factor.
A huge amount depends on whether the change to 600 seats happens. Not only is it intrinsically more difficult for a small party to get a good concentration of votes in larger constituencies, but also all those years of LibDem development of their best targets will have to be redone in the new wards added to them. Lewes is a very good example of that - if the proposed changes go ahead, it will gain a significant chunk of true-blue from what is currently Wealden.
If pollsters are still out by around the same margin on headline VI as before the last GE, then probably more like Con 45%, Lab 25%.
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
The evidence is that Labour support is holding up best in places like London, which by extension must mean the party is doing even worse in the marginals than the polls would suggest on a national swing.
Sounds plausible. IIRC Labour under-performed/Tories over-performed in marginals at the last election.
At this rate, the next election will probably be about the Tories clearing up all the existing Lab/Con marginals, and perhaps converting another twenty Labour safe seats into new marginals. How many of Labour's surviving bastions then hold firm will depend on whether or not Ukip and Plaid can start chewing away at some of those areas - in South Wales, urban Yorkshire and the North East - where Labour ought to be acutely vulnerable, but is kept safe by the ongoing cultural aversion to Toryism in many poorer communities.
Although Labour are within MOE against Brown and Miliband's vote share. Tories are better placed, but there is a long way to go.
Unless Corbyn dies or is incapacitated before the Far Left assumes complete control of the Labour Party's machinery, I don't see that there's anywhere to go but a convincing Tory victory. The Conservatives can only defeat themselves by splitting, and there's no sign whatsoever of that.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
I happily concede that my knowledge of French politics is limited (to say the least,) but I have been reading today about Mr Fillon's surprise win and the implications are really rather extraordinary.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
Le Pen is a statist, pro-regulation, anti-business, nationalist. Fillon is a free market nationalist.
Between them, they are c. 50% of the electorate. On the Left and Centre there are the Greens, Melenchon, Bayrou, Hollande/Valls, and Macron.
If there were to be a surprise, it would most likely be - to my mind - that Macron collected a lot more first round votes than expected as Hollande/Melenchon/Green/Bayrou voters reckoned he was the most likely 'left-ish' candidate to make the second round.
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
This pollster (OpinionWay) gave a last first round poll of Juppe 33 Sarkozy 25, Fillon 25, so I would be sceptical of their numbers, especially as they pretend that FN voters would vote Juppé, which makes absolutely no sense.
Any way my point was that I just can't find a way fo Juppe to win the second tound.
I don't know if you missed the article i linked to earlier today which said that the main reason for 42% of those voting at the weekend was to stop Sarkozy.
IOne has to assume therefore that most of those votes will have gone to Fillon because according to the polls, he was fighting for second place with Sarkozy.
One wonders, therefore, with Sarkozy gone, whether they will have the same incentive to vote next weekend and if so, whether their votes stay with Fillon.
Not saying that Juppe will win, but I think he has a glimmer of hope if he performs well in the debate this week. I see the final head to head being a lot closer than most are anticipating and there may even be another shock on the cards.
I didn't, but as I am sticking with my (very small) Juppe position, it's good to hear something that backs it up
If there were to be a surprise, it would most likely be - to my mind - that Macron collected a lot more first round votes than expected as Hollande/Melenchon/Green/Bayrou voters reckoned he was the most likely 'left-ish' candidate to make the second round.
A 38 year old investment banker as the last best chance of the French left!
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday. A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting : Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%) Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%) Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%) Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%) Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%) Poisson 59 934 (1,5%) Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral). Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6% Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned. This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
There was a poll out today showing 57:43 to Fillon, and I'd expect Sunday's result to fall halfway between that and your forecast - say 63:37.
This pollster (OpinionWay) gave a last first round poll of Juppe 33 Sarkozy 25, Fillon 25, so I would be sceptical of their numbers, especially as they pretend that FN voters would vote Juppé, which makes absolutely no sense.
Any way my point was that I just can't find a way fo Juppe to win the second tound.
I think all the pollsters got the direction of the Fillon move right, but they may simply have - by dint of collecting opinions over a 2-3 day period - have missed the magnitude.
If there were to be a surprise, it would most likely be - to my mind - that Macron collected a lot more first round votes than expected as Hollande/Melenchon/Green/Bayrou voters reckoned he was the most likely 'left-ish' candidate to make the second round.
A 38 year old investment banker as the last best chance of the French left!
I met Macron last January, and was very impressed. Mind you, I met Hillary, so me meeting politicians pretty much dooms them
The alt-right are the new global conspiracy - they're everywhere and nowhere.
The alt-right is the new boogeyman for lefties. But as far as I can tell it seems to mainly consists of kids posting memes. Perhaps if you candidate is defeated by such people the problem really lies with your party and policies?
Nah. It is just like hemlines and flared trousers. Old fashioned bigotry can once again be displayed in public.
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
I know Lewes, and I think it's a rather unlikely LibDem regain, even assuming no boundary changes. A lot of the LibDem vote was very much Normal Baker's personal vote and I think that has largely dissipated. Maria Caulfield is hard-working and should get a good incumbency bonus.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
I struggle to see the LDs doing well in the SW. Bath is a possibility, where Don Foster's stepping down was a big factor.
Would concur. Tories now hold almost all of those seats with majorities in excess of 5,000, and most of them by substantially larger margins. There are also, of course, no incumbency advantages for the LDs anywhere in the region. About the nearest to a win they have in theory is Torbay, but running as the Ukip of Remain is hardly going to help matters there. It voted nearly 2:1 to Leave.
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
Worth a thread
tories and Labour never go below 160 seats. It would take meltdown in Wales and Midland Cities to go below 160 for Labour. Unlikely.
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
Worth a thread
tories and Labour never go below 160 seats. It would take meltdown in Wales and Midland Cities to go below 160 for Labour. Unlikely.
We live in very strange times though.
If 2016 has proved anything it's that nobody really knows what's going to happen next...
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
I happily concede that my knowledge of French politics is limited (to say the least,) but I have been reading today about Mr Fillon's surprise win and the implications are really rather extraordinary.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
Given Fillon himself has also been highly critical of radical islam, and supports better relations with Russia, he's not much more than Le Pen Lite on those issues, while actually being more socially conservative on a lot of other ones. Factor in his thatcherite economic views and he starts looking more like the Ted Cruz to Le Pen's Trump - radical, but not in the right way to the right voters (this may be a slightly harsh comparison to Fillon, but you can see what I mean).
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I happily concede that my knowledge of French politics is limited (to say the least,) but I have been reading today about Mr Fillon's surprise win and the implications are really rather extraordinary.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
What will they do? Whine for 6 months or so. And then most of them will vote for Fillon. The main thing is that the left in France is a minority (a bit more than a third of votes in recent élections, counting all the far-left) but sill does not understand it has no divine right to decide for all the others.
I actually read this morning an article complaining that the right-wing primary will actually produce a right-wing candidate...
Indeed, lol. In a way, the MSM are buggered either way. They have to cover the President (-elect). If they attack him, they are just continuing to help him as he'll continue to use their attacks to bolster his support.
They'll want access, so they'll fall into line. Watch some quite changes in line-ups of news programmes and presenters. Not good for freedom of the press, but still worthwhile schadenfreude fuel. Popcorn, anyone?
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
I happily concede that my knowledge of French politics is limited (to say the least,) but I have been reading today about Mr Fillon's surprise win and the implications are really rather extraordinary.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
Given Fillon himself has also been highly critical of radical islam, and supports better relations with Russia, he's not much more than Le Pen Lite on those issues, while actually being more socially conservative on a lot of other ones. Factor in his thatcherite economic views and he starts looking more like the Ted Cruz to Le Pen's Trump - radical, but not in the right way to the right voters (this may be a slightly harsh comparison to Fillon, but you can see what I mean).
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I think she will win it.
Do you think she beats Macron in the second round? Or just Fillon?
Do you think she beats Macron in the second round? Or just Fillon?
But isn't Macron also for economic deregulation and liberalization? Hasn't he been the target of union protests? It seems to me that the voters who'd baulk at Fillon might also baulk at Macron.
I mean what did they expect. They spent over a year giving him both barrels. Most of it fair criticism, but some of it absolute horseshit, while at the same time doing everything to minimize Clinton issues. Then they expect him not to repeat what he said in public 100s of times to their faces. This is Donald Trump we are talking about, not "I have a public and private position" Clinton.
Bath, Cheltenham, Lewes and St Ives are possibles as well, particularly the first two.
I know Lewes, and I think it's a rather unlikely LibDem regain, even assuming no boundary changes. A lot of the LibDem vote was very much Normal Baker's personal vote and I think that has largely dissipated. Maria Caulfield is hard-working and should get a good incumbency bonus.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
I struggle to see the LDs doing well in the SW. Bath is a possibility, where Don Foster's stepping down was a big factor.
A huge amount depends on whether the change to 600 seats happens. Not only is it intrinsically more difficult for a small party to get a good concentration of votes in larger constituencies, but also all those years of LibDem development of their best targets will have to be redone in the new wards added to them. Lewes is a very good example of that - if the proposed changes go ahead, it will gain a significant chunk of true-blue from what is currently Wealden.
The change to 600 was definitely designed to hurt Labour and the Lib Dems, although in the end it turned out to be unnecessary because the SNP and the coalition did the job just as well.
Don't forget "Fake News". The webbles are all too stupid to realise it is fake and results in votes for Brexit and Trump.
Yeah it's really all just "code" for calling Trumpers a bunch of stupid, racist, white trash.
It is actually rather worrying. It is censorship. I think Alex Jones is a complete whack job, but I don't think it is right he is censored...and I actually think it is worse, it adds weight to his globalist conspiracy theory stuff.
You beat these people by ensuring you calmly and clearly argue why what they say isn't true, not scream fake news.
Yes I know it is claimed it is only directed at genuine "fake news" sites (which the Facebook / Google / Twitter police will decide), but that is a bit like when the government claims nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Furthermore, the likes of the Daily Mash are also lumped in there. Who the f##k thinks that a headline from something called the Daily Mash is real.
Nah. It is just like hemlines and flared trousers. Old fashioned bigotry can once again be displayed in public.
But the alt-right really is 80% kids on forums making stupid pictures and repeating the same old joke a thousand times, and maybe 20% the traditional right alternative media. The idea that this is a force is laughable, their previous greatest success was naming Mountain Dew flavours.
It is actually rather worrying. It is censorship. I think Alex Jones is a complete whack job, but I don't think it is right he is censored...and I actually think it is worse, it adds weight to his globalist conspiracy theory stuff.
You beat these people by ensuring you calmly and clearly argue why what they say isn't true, not scream fake news.
Yes I know it is claimed it is only directed at genuine "fake news" sites (which the Facebook / Google / Twitter police will decide), but that is a bit like when the government claims nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Furthermore, the likes of the Daily Mash are also lumped in there. Who the f##k thinks that a headline from something called the Daily Mash is real.
Well clearly people keep on voting wrong, so something has to be done!
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
Worth a thread
tories and Labour never go below 160 seats. It would take meltdown in Wales and Midland Cities to go below 160 for Labour. Unlikely.
There are some amusing Tory gains currently being projected between seats 175 and 200 of (Notionally Left wing) - Electoral calculus
181 Batley and Spen 176 Luton South 190 Coventry North West 185 Mansfield
If the polling says they'll drop, then they could well drop. "That CAN'T happen" are 3 very expensive words.
Given Fillon himself has also been highly critical of radical islam, and supports better relations with Russia, he's not much more than Le Pen Lite on those issues, while actually being more socially conservative on a lot of other ones. Factor in his thatcherite economic views and he starts looking more like the Ted Cruz to Le Pen's Trump - radical, but not in the right way to the right voters (this may be a slightly harsh comparison to Fillon, but you can see what I mean).
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I think she will win it.
Do you think she beats Macron in the second round? Or just Fillon?
Hmmm, i'm not so sure. I think Macron could win there - he's personally popular and charismatic in a way that the other challengers aren't, and he will put himself forward as a centrist candidate that will be a lot more palatable to both sides of the spectrum. Untainted by left/right hatred of 'the other lot' should help with that too. And yet, he's completely unproven so far, never held elected office before, and it's unclear what exactly his plan is for France - so far it seems to be a similar vague 'happy identity' thing like Juppe has been pushing. Which means he ends up becoming just the "Not Le Pen" candidate in round 2.
I think I'd lean towards Macron because his relative newness to politics means he's not a polarised candidate and should better manage to assemble a 'republican front' against Le Pen with his centrist image (I don't think his economic views are actually a world away from Fillon's, but he will be better able to fudge that in the campaign as an independent centrist, and his social liberalism will mean the left 'forgive him' more easily).
Given Fillon himself has also been highly critical of radical islam, and supports better relations with Russia, he's not much more than Le Pen Lite on those issues, while actually being more socially conservative on a lot of other ones. Factor in his thatcherite economic views and he starts looking more like the Ted Cruz to Le Pen's Trump - radical, but not in the right way to the right voters (this may be a slightly harsh comparison to Fillon, but you can see what I mean).
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I think she will win it.
Fillon as Ted Cruz is a nice caricature that the French left would love (if they knew who Cruz was) but it is as far away from reality as saying that Ed Milliband is Kim Jong-Un.
Socially conservative? As someone not opposed to gay marriage and abortion, Fillon is not even close to a US Republican. He has no major difference with Le Pen on this (a lot of her supporters are more conservative than she is, so is always prudent on these issues).
Thatcherite? France has the 2nd highest public spending level in Europe and has added 1 million civil servants since 2000. Even if Fillon managed to reduce the size of the public sector by 500 000 workers, France would still be a very large state, 2 million more civil servants than in the UK...
Le Pen's appeal is all in the anti-elite mood (even if she literally inherited her dad's business) . For her, Juppé was a much easier target and Macron would be a dream. Fillon does not look and sound like a technocrat (like Juppé) or a jet-setter (like Sarkozy) .
Given Fillon himself has also been highly critical of radical islam, and supports better relations with Russia, he's not much more than Le Pen Lite on those issues, while actually being more socially conservative on a lot of other ones. Factor in his thatcherite economic views and he starts looking more like the Ted Cruz to Le Pen's Trump - radical, but not in the right way to the right voters (this may be a slightly harsh comparison to Fillon, but you can see what I mean).
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I think she will win it.
Do you think she beats Macron in the second round? Or just Fillon?
Hmmm, i'm not so sure. I think Macron could win there - he's personally popular and charismatic in a way that the other challengers aren't, and he will put himself forward as a centrist candidate that will be a lot more palatable to both sides of the spectrum. Untainted by left/right hatred of 'the other lot' should help with that too. And yet, he's completely unproven so far, never held elected office before, and it's unclear what exactly his plan is for France - so far it seems to be a similar vague 'happy identity' thing like Juppe has been pushing. Which means he ends up becoming just the "Not Le Pen" candidate in round 2.
I think I'd lean towards Macron because his relative newness to politics means he's not a polarised candidate and should better manage to assemble a 'republican front' against Le Pen with his centrist image (I don't think his economic views are actually a world away from Fillon's, but he will be better able to fudge that in the campaign as an independent centrist, and his social liberalism will mean the left 'forgive him' more easily).
That's pretty much my view too, and I think it's probably enough to win a fairly comfortable margin against Le Pen.
Do you think she beats Macron in the second round? Or just Fillon?
But isn't Macron also for economic deregulation and liberalization? Hasn't he been the target of union protests? It seems to me that the voters who'd baulk at Fillon might also baulk at Macron.
Macron has centered his whole campaign on an economically liberal and socially liberal platform. He has no chance to attract working-class voters but I think he could beat Le Pen with the support of traditional centre-right voters (especially catholics that tend to reject Le Pen).
However this second round remains unlikely because Macron's main problem is that the left and centre-left will probably have at least 6 candidates: 2 trotskyst candidates, Melenchon, a socialist, a Green and himself. All the others are strongly anti-Macron and will maintain their candidacies even if none of them has a chance. For one of them to get around 20% to qualify for the second round seems very difficult.
So Trump isn't going to be good for free trade is he?
President-elect Donald Trump says US will quit Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal on his first day in office
American jobs for American workers.
Quite. The yanks aren't buying our steel are they
America has both a large internal market, and alot of potentially exploitable resources along with (for now) the world's reserve currency. It'll also take a while to "turn the oil tanker" into a preotectionist position - all of the above most likely means that Trump is going to have a boom for the first four years of his leadership, I reckon he'll time his bust for when he leaves too.
Comments
This is the moment when Labour's poll rating gets a lot, lot worse
At no time in the modern era has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2016/11/moment-when-labours-poll-rating-gets-lot-lot-worse
An enormous Conservative lead would certainly be consistent with the huge Tory leads on the supplementary questions - both on leadership and economic competence - which, of course, suggested Cameron's outright win in 2015 even as nearly all of the VI polls pointed towards a hung Parliament.
A much better measure.
I thought they still wanted to join the EU.
https://twitter.com/colinjones/status/800822032535470080
https://twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/800122482380472320
The Jerry Springer Show comes to mind.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/800823819451580418
"At no time in the modern era, if we take that as meaning the period since 1970, has Labour in opposition gone up in the polls from this point. Between 1993 and 1997, a youthful and popular Tony Blair managed to keep the party's ratings high all the way through to an election - the polling score fell only by 0.4 per cent. But that is the exception. In fact, at this point in Parliament, Labour while in opposition has on average lost 7.2 per cent."
Rowan Williams: "Mass democracy has failed – it's time to seek a humane alternative"
http://www.newstatesman.com/world/2016/11/mass-democracy-has-failed-its-time-seek-humane-alternative
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cx0Z1gcWIAEjpx7.jpg
On 40% of 8%, the SNP is 3.5%. So, 26.5% between UKIP, the Greens and the LibDems.
Broken, sleazy Tories ... On the slide.... NO I'M NOT CRYING LEAVE ME ALONE
At this rate, the next election will probably be about the Tories clearing up all the existing Lab/Con marginals, and perhaps converting another twenty Labour safe seats into new marginals. How many of Labour's surviving bastions then hold firm will depend on whether or not Ukip and Plaid can start chewing away at some of those areas - in South Wales, urban Yorkshire and the North East - where Labour ought to be acutely vulnerable, but is kept safe by the ongoing cultural aversion to Toryism in many poorer communities.
That Milo certainly looks like a lizard to me:
https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-gWmE14LMaU4/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAoM/U6yZN9czBG4/s0-c-k-no-ns/photo.jpg&imgrefurl=https://plus.google.com/u/0/114265179622481003860&h=1201&w=1201&tbnid=hwCxOrl3tX07MM:&vet=1&tbnh=186&tbnw=186&docid=j77JUGB7uZueDM&itg=1&usg=__RrJpcdM8uDCMz90kN8nU8T5Xi2Q=&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9m_Gj8rrQAhUnCMAKHf7DBjAQ_B0IdTAO&ei=gXQzWL3XG6eQgAb-h5uAAw
The second round debate between Fillon and Juppé will take place on Thursday.
A Juppé win seems extremely unlikely now. Apparently he briefly considered conceding after the first round on Sunday night.
First round results with 96% reporting :
Fillon 1 821 608 (44.1%)
Juppé 1 177 790 (28.5%)
Sarkozy 852 111 (20,6%)
Kosciusko- Morizet 105 416 (2.6%)
Le Maire 98 316 (2.4%)
Poisson 59 934 (1,5%)
Copé 12 208 (0,3%)
Sarkozy and Le Maire support Fillon and Poisson supporters despise Juppé (even if Poisson himself if officially neutral).
Kosciusko Morizet and Copé support Fillon
Fillon + Sarkozy + Le Maire + Poisson = 68,6%
Juppé + Kosciusko- Morizet + Copé = 31,4%
Even in the unlikely case of all Sarkozy or Le Maire supporters staying home, it is difficult to see how Juppé could attract some 700 000 new voters to catch Fillon.
Of course, the demonization of Fillon by the left-wing media and twitterati has already started, as they are furious that the Left cannot in fact choose the right-wing candidate as planned.
This might help Juppé keep a part of his left wing supporters (around half his first round score) but risks to motivate the other side even more.
As Sunday's results proved, despite the overwhelming media narrative, the left-wing vote did not play a particularly significant role. Yes it was a main factor of Sarkozy's defeat but he would have been crushed on the second round by Fillon anyway.
The paradox of this election is that Sarkozy's attacks on Juppé as a weak candidate supported mostly by the left and the media did work... but to the benefit of Fillon.
How do we get politicians and political parties to actually listen to, and engage, the disenfranchised? For those of us who are not disenfranchised, we may be tempted to say, why bother? If we engage them, we're less likely to get the politics we support.
But in the long term, we have to avoid creating conditions of political hopelessness in any large part of the electorate. Failure to do so will not end well. Ask Assad.
Next door Eastbourne is probably more vulnerable, IMO.
Imagine the quandary facing the battered, splintered French Left if forced to contemplate voting in a run-off between Le Pen and Fillon. Le Pen is widely derided as a neo-fascist, but also represents many of the protectionist and Leviathan state instincts that French Trots adore.
Fillon, meanwhile, is free of the taint of the Front National, but is an admirer of Margaret Thatcher. Vote for him to beat Le Pen and you're endorsing a platform of economic liberalisation and a smaller state, starting with the mass sacking of half-a-million Government employees.
Under such circumstances, what the Hell are they going to do? Insofar as I am aware, Le Pen has already badly hollowed out support for the left-wing parties amongst more economically distressed workers; if an insufficient number of bourgeois middle-class socialists (i.e. the approximate French equivalent of Corbynites) can't bring themselves to vote for Fillon then Le Pen could very well win.
The LibDems have gone backwards on the Council, and Jeremy Corbyn is the kind of person to appeal to a Cambridge electorate.
Ceredigion will be difficult too. Remember, the sole LibDem in the Welsh Assembly chose to prop up a tired Labour administration that has been in power continuously since the Assembly was created. Boundary changes (if they go through) in Ceredigion favour Plaid Cymru too.
I suspect the LibDem's woes are far from over.
I don't know if you missed the article i linked to earlier today which said that the main reason for 42% of those voting at the weekend was to stop Sarkozy.
IOne has to assume therefore that most of those votes will have gone to Fillon because according to the polls, he was fighting for second place with Sarkozy.
One wonders, therefore, with Sarkozy gone, whether they will have the same incentive to vote next weekend and if so, whether their votes stay with Fillon.
Not saying that Juppe will win, but I think he has a glimmer
of hope if he performs well in the debate this week. I see the final head to head being a lot closer than most are anticipating and there may even be another shock on the cards.
PS Actually, given the way the MSM has gone, the more appropriate question is where is the real news? It seems to have gone absent.
Springtime for Stormers
Fillon is a free market nationalist.
Between them, they are c. 50% of the electorate. On the Left and Centre there are the Greens, Melenchon, Bayrou, Hollande/Valls, and Macron.
If there were to be a surprise, it would most likely be - to my mind - that Macron collected a lot more first round votes than expected as Hollande/Melenchon/Green/Bayrou voters reckoned he was the most likely 'left-ish' candidate to make the second round.
Any way my point was that I just can't find a way fo Juppe to win the second tound.
https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/800829536128507904
If 2016 has proved anything it's that nobody really knows what's going to happen next...
Let's hope him and Putin don't get into a bust up like that in due course...
Where's my Anderson shelter?
Le Pen is smart, knows how to stay on message, and runs a pretty tight ship, there are nowhere near as many random "bongo bongo land" outbursts from councillors as there are with UKIP for example. She will keep the campaign focused on the economic side of things, where she is actually closer to the average french voter (who have shown no indication recently for freer market reforms, protesting heavily against Hollande's recent attempts).
I think she will win it.
They'll want access, so they'll fall into line. Watch some quite changes in line-ups of news programmes and presenters. Not good for freedom of the press, but still worthwhile schadenfreude fuel. Popcorn, anyone?
You beat these people by ensuring you calmly and clearly argue why what they say isn't true, not scream fake news.
Yes I know it is claimed it is only directed at genuine "fake news" sites (which the Facebook / Google / Twitter police will decide), but that is a bit like when the government claims nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Furthermore, the likes of the Daily Mash are also lumped in there. Who the f##k thinks that a headline from something called the Daily Mash is real.
181 Batley and Spen
176 Luton South
190 Coventry North West
185 Mansfield
If the polling says they'll drop, then they could well drop. "That CAN'T happen" are 3 very expensive words.
I think I'd lean towards Macron because his relative newness to politics means he's not a polarised candidate and should better manage to assemble a 'republican front' against Le Pen with his centrist image (I don't think his economic views are actually a world away from Fillon's, but he will be better able to fudge that in the campaign as an independent centrist, and his social liberalism will mean the left 'forgive him' more easily).
Socially conservative? As someone not opposed to gay marriage and abortion, Fillon is not even close to a US Republican. He has no major difference with Le Pen on this (a lot of her supporters are more conservative than she is, so is always prudent on these issues).
Thatcherite? France has the 2nd highest public spending level in Europe and has added 1 million civil servants since 2000. Even if Fillon managed to reduce the size of the public sector by 500 000 workers, France would still be a very large state, 2 million more civil servants than in the UK...
Le Pen's appeal is all in the anti-elite mood (even if she literally inherited her dad's business) . For her, Juppé was a much easier target and Macron would be a dream. Fillon does not look and sound like a technocrat (like Juppé) or a jet-setter (like Sarkozy) .
All going to be pumped out via Youtube and twitter !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xX_KaStFT8
President-elect Donald Trump says US will quit Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal on his first day in office
However this second round remains unlikely because Macron's main problem is that the left and centre-left will probably have at least 6 candidates: 2 trotskyst candidates, Melenchon, a socialist, a Green and himself. All the others are strongly anti-Macron and will maintain their candidacies even if none of them has a chance. For one of them to get around 20% to qualify for the second round seems very difficult.
His comments on the Clinton News Network are about right though.
Journalists