(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
JEREMY Corbyn has reported an MP for harassment who questioned Labour’s woeful media performance.
He's preparing the ground for his lawsuit for constructive dismissal and loss of earnings if they oust him.
Taking into account the period he would have had as PM if the party had been united plus his post Downing Street book deal and speaking fees, he could take the Labour Party for £10m.
No chance. He is not employed by the Labour Party. They don't pay his salary. He could not take them for a single penny.
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
It cannot be done. Militant / Momentum's job is to purify the party, not to break bread with unbelievers.
It is a Kinnock style leader that is needed to purge the loony left, but hopefully one who will do the job right this time
Kinnock did do the job properly. He can't be held accountable for the lunacy that let them back in again.
Edit. Though it has to be said that he did endorse Ed Miliband's campaign for the leadership (in contravention of the convention that former leaders remain neutral in leadership contests).
Corbyn entered Parliament in 1983 and so was an MP the entire time Kinnock was leader. He was never expelled by Kinnock despite being an infamous Trot.
He was absolutely harmless where he was (and in fact was a decent constituency MP). The present state of the party is down to the introduction of a mechanism whereby Trots and Tories could join on mass to affect a leadership election result. If the Tories had done something similar a few years ago, they could have ended up with Bill Cash as leader, which would have had the same kind of electoral impact.
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
You're all misinterpreting it (including Newton Dunn)
"We're looking at" = "[some bloody idiot proposed this stupid idea, which we are never going to implement in a million years, but we are required to demonstrate due process so] we are looking at barrista visas"
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
The government will be taking positions on how many workers we need in every sector of the economy now that it has decided that the simplest method, that has coincided with record levels of employment, is inadequate. I suppose that Londoners should be grateful that the out-of-towners accept that we can continue to buy cups of coffee if we so choose.
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
Yep, that's the man. And he certainly did deliver letters in the 1970s. It's the reason he has a genuine resonance with ordinary voters that other politicians can only dream of.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
Last year that was true. Their average seems to be 10 so far this year. Last few polls have shown the Lib Dems at 11.
If Labour is 23% [it's probably not] and the Lib Dems are 11% then crossover could happen at about 17-18%. That's not unbelievable for the yellow peril.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
It cannot be done. Militant / Momentum's job is to purify the party, not to break bread with unbelievers.
It is a Kinnock style leader that is needed to purge the loony left, but hopefully one who will do the job right this time
Kinnock did do the job properly. He can't be held accountable for the lunacy that let them back in again.
Edit. Though it has to be said that he did endorse Ed Miliband's campaign for the leadership (in contravention of the convention that former leaders remain neutral in leadership contests).
Corbyn entered Parliament in 1983 and so was an MP the entire time Kinnock was leader. He was never expelled by Kinnock despite being an infamous Trot.
He was absolutely harmless where he was (and in fact was a decent constituency MP). The present state of the party is down to the introduction of a mechanism whereby Trots and Tories could join on mass to affect a leadership election result. If the Tories had done something similar a few years ago, they could have ended up with Bill Cash as leader, which would have had the same kind of electoral impact.
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
The government will be taking positions on how many workers we need in every sector of the economy now that it has decided that the simplest method, that has coincided with record levels of employment, is inadequate. I suppose that Londoners should be grateful that the out-of-towners accept that we can continue to buy cups of coffee if we so choose.
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
Yep, that's the man. And he certainly did deliver letters in the 1970s. It's the reason he has a genuine resonance with ordinary voters that other politicians can only dream of.
Having delivered letters 40 years ago gives genuine resonance? That's before I was even born and I'm not that young now.
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
Yep, that's the man. And he certainly did deliver letters in the 1970s. It's the reason he has a genuine resonance with ordinary voters that other politicians can only dream of.
Having delivered letters 40 years ago gives genuine resonance? That's before I was even born and I'm not that young now.
I think you need to do a bit more research into his back story. Helpfully, the man himself has written a couple of books about it.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
It cannot be done. Militant / Momentum's job is to purify the party, not to break bread with unbelievers.
It is a Kinnock style leader that is needed to purge the loony left, but hopefully one who will do the job right this time
Kinnock did do the job properly. He can't be held accountable for the lunacy that let them back in again.
Edit. Though it has to be said that he did endorse Ed Miliband's campaign for the leadership (in contravention of the convention that former leaders remain neutral in leadership contests).
Corbyn entered Parliament in 1983 and so was an MP the entire time Kinnock was leader. He was never expelled by Kinnock despite being an infamous Trot.
He was absolutely harmless where he was (and in fact was a decent constituency MP). The present state of the party is down to the introduction of a mechanism whereby Trots and Tories could join on mass to affect a leadership election result. If the Tories had done something similar a few years ago, they could have ended up with Bill Cash as leader, which would have had the same kind of electoral impact.
He was "absolutely harmless" in the same way an unexploded but still live WWII munition is absolutely harmless. If you think it's absolutely harmless to have Trots inside the party then don't be surprised when one takes over.
F1: just reading a BBC article and this bloody stood out: "After a dismal pre-season testing programme, engine partner Honda largely kept reliability under control in the first two races, albeit at the expense of performance, even if Alonso could finish neither despite strong drives into points positions."
What? McLaren had a 75% DNF rate at the first two races. From four potential finishes, they had one. How the hell is that keeping reliability under control?
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
Yep, that's the man. And he certainly did deliver letters in the 1970s. It's the reason he has a genuine resonance with ordinary voters that other politicians can only dream of.
How does that work? My postie is just a clattering noise from my letter slot followed by the noise of envelopes hitting the floor. By the time I get to the door they are already 2 or 3 doors up the street. There is not much opportunity for building resonance with voters
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
The government will be taking positions on how many workers we need in every sector of the economy now that it has decided that the simplest method, that has coincided with record levels of employment, is inadequate. I suppose that Londoners should be grateful that the out-of-towners accept that we can continue to buy cups of coffee if we so choose.
Perhaps we should have state housing and key workers subsidies for the coffee shop workers of Old London Town.
Summary please, for those of who aren’t subscribers.
Google 'London battles to keep hold of two main EU agencies' and you should be able to read the article for free.
Précis - The EU are relocating their medicine and banking bodies from London in light of Brexit, and well David Davis thinks otherwise.
Sounds a bit silly - for one, if they've announced they are doing so it's surely too late to stop, and also, of course they are relocating them. Pick your battles, I'd have thought.
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
The government will be taking positions on how many workers we need in every sector of the economy now that it has decided that the simplest method, that has coincided with record levels of employment, is inadequate. I suppose that Londoners should be grateful that the out-of-towners accept that we can continue to buy cups of coffee if we so choose.
Perhaps we should have state housing and key workers subsidies for the coffee shop workers of Old London Town.
It no longer matters what Corbyn says. The narrative is there and the public will ignore anything that doesn't fit with it and prize anything that does.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
OK. This is what I wrote when TSE said there wouldn't be a new thread. (Grr).
Labour hits its lowest poll rating in opposition since 1915*
YouGov records just 23% for Labour, and a 21% Con lead
* probably
Today’s YouGov marks another low for Corbyn’s Labour party, just two-and-a-half weeks before the key local and mayoral elections.
The survey for The Times records vote shares of
Con 44 (+2) Lab 23 (-2) LD 12 (+1) UKIP 10 (-1)
The 21-point lead ties the poll released by ComRes last week, is the joint-highest for the Conservatives in government since 1988.
Unlike the ComRes poll, however, which had shares of Con 46 / Lab 25, YouGov have Labour on just 23: a vote share that they’ve not recorded when out of government since a single ASL poll just before the 1983 general election (in which they then actually received more than 28%). Indeed, in the history of British political polling – going back to 1943 – Labour has never received a lower Westminster share when on the opposition benches (their all-time low was an 18% share recorded under Gordon Brown in May 2009).
In all probability, it’s the lowest rating in opposition in even longer. Although we don’t have polls before 1940, we do have a healthy set of by-elections, which give a good indication of public mood.
In all the inter-war general elections, Labour polled 30% or better (to the nearest point). Furthermore, they made consistent gains in by-elections during the lengthy periods of Tory rule between 1922 and 1939. Given that there were Labour ministers throughout the Asquith/Lloyd George coalitions, that implies that the 23% in today’s YouGov is Labour’s worst share since at least 1915, when there was a far from universal franchise.
The one possible exception to this might have been following the Labour split in 1931, when the official party might have been reeling from the defection of its leader and prime minister. Unfortunately, there were no useful by-elections at the time so we don’t have any data to work off. Even so, despite the catastrophic loss of seats in the general election later that year, when they were reduced to just 52 MPs, they still received over 30% of ballots cast.
Put simply, Labour is in all probability at its lowest level of support in opposition for over 100 years. The omens for what this means in 2020 if the party does nothing are obvious – and will be even more obvious come May 5. But will they act and if so, will they make the right call?
Are you still expecting Labour to lose only 50 councillors in England next month ?
If the polls are right (quite a big if these days), then Labour should be in full emergency mode. I doubt even Corbyn of McDonnell can ignore it. We'll see how they do in May.
If May 4 backs up the polls there will be changes. My hunch is the picture will be more complex and provide just enough wriggle room.
If it is end of days there is only one way out. A likeable John Smith figure, capable of having both factions in the cabinet. Hmmm.
Can you hear the call, David Miliband?
The best option for Labour would be if Al the postie could be prevailed upon to take it on a short-term basis. Such is the dire position of the party at the moment that I think he could finally be persuaded.
Who is 'Al the postie' ?
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
You say that as if those posts were handed to him by inheritance.
FWIW, I agree that Johnson could do a very good job of taking on the Howard-2003 role.
1) What will the Don't Knows in fact decide to do? Pollsters make assumptions about this but they can easily be wrong. My guess is that the lower Labour go, the more likely Don't Knows will ultimately break for Labour, as disgusted loyal Labour supporters vote to keep the party going.
2) Conversely, plenty of voters aren't really thinking about this now. When they focus on the choice, are they going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour? He's not an attractive proposition for most voters.
I think 2) outweighs 1) by quite a lot. So I expect Labour's polling could get markedly worse even from these levels.
To what level, sub 20% ?
I played around on Electoral Calculus a while back. Labour hast to get to the lower teens to be below 100 seats, perhaps 10% to cease to be the official opposition.
So 2020 should not yet be an extinction event in anticipation.
Summary please, for those of who aren’t subscribers.
Google 'London battles to keep hold of two main EU agencies' and you should be able to read the article for free.
Précis - The EU are relocating their medicine and banking bodies from London in light of Brexit, and well David Davis thinks otherwise.
I seem to recall an earnest PB Brexiteer telling us that it was a rookie mistake to think that the EMA had anything to do with the EU just because it has 'European' in the name. Perhaps he's now advising Davis.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
Morning all. Was out drinking on Saturday with fellow "Red Tory" Labourites from the disgusting wing of the party who wants to win elections rather than organise protest marches. We've broadly given up with trying to fight off the tyranny of the mob - even locally we have members who openly admit to having voted against us in 2015 berating those of us who campaign for losing Coulby Newham for not defending Corbyn on the doorstep.
The real enemy locally isn't our Tory MP or the Tory candidate for Tees Mayor on a one issue "Ben will buy Teesside Airport" campaign. The real enemy is Tom Blenkinsop who must be destroyed for not being true Labour like this entryist Judas who hated the Labour government and voted against us until Jezbollah was anointed.
The real battle isn't the May elections. Its the battle to elect delegates for conference. Many of the newer and stupid have been persuaded that the more delegates a CLP sends the more vote it gets (we don't...) and so when the rule book is quoted it's proof of a conspiracy by Murdoch to steal their party from them. Nor will the boundary change save us, it's upset so many Tory MPs and the governmentcan no nothing other than Brexit and it's not needed to give Maggie May her landslide - it won't happen.
And so we continue to wither and die. McClusky will win. Corbyn will see this leadership battle in an affiliated organisation as proof the entire Labour movement is behind him, then the McDonnell amendment will be defeated leaving Corbyn as the One True Messiah, only He can defend the party against those evil Tory scumbags known as Labour MPs Councillors Activists Officers and Employees. He has to stay on. Winning the election doesn't matter when the blame for loss is already assigned - the Labour Party.
1) What will the Don't Knows in fact decide to do? Pollsters make assumptions about this but they can easily be wrong. My guess is that the lower Labour go, the more likely Don't Knows will ultimately break for Labour, as disgusted loyal Labour supporters vote to keep the party going.
2) Conversely, plenty of voters aren't really thinking about this now. When they focus on the choice, are they going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour? He's not an attractive proposition for most voters.
I think 2) outweighs 1) by quite a lot. So I expect Labour's polling could get markedly worse even from these levels.
To what level, sub 20% ?
I played around on Electoral Calculus a while back. Labour hast to get to the lower teens to be below 100 seats, perhaps 10% to cease to be the official opposition.
So 2020 should not yet be an extinction event in anticipation.
As for electoral calculus, at one of the seminars I attended earlier on this year, someone pointed out if prior to the 2015 GE you'd have stuck in Con 45, Lab 22 into electoral calculus,
The Tories would have been on something like 430 seats, and Labour on 120 seats, of those 120 seats, 24 of them would have been Scottish seats.
All of those 24 seats are now currently held by the SNP.
Once a party craters in the polls, UNS goes out of the window.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Yes, and if you were running CCHQ strategy, you'd probably be content to accept a few losses in the SW if that's the price of much bigger gains vs Lab. Apart from the obvious top-line advantage, it would make the LDs a much more credible threat to Labour.
Morning all. Was out drinking on Saturday with fellow "Red Tory" Labourites from the disgusting wing of the party who wants to win elections rather than organise protest marches. We've broadly given up with trying to fight off the tyranny of the mob - even locally we have members who openly admit to having voted against us in 2015 berating those of us who campaign for losing Coulby Newham for not defending Corbyn on the doorstep.
The real enemy locally isn't our Tory MP or the Tory candidate for Tees Mayor on a one issue "Ben will buy Teesside Airport" campaign. The real enemy is Tom Blenkinsop who must be destroyed for not being true Labour like this entryist Judas who hated the Labour government and voted against us until Jezbollah was anointed.
The real battle isn't the May elections. Its the battle to elect delegates for conference. Many of the newer and stupid have been persuaded that the more delegates a CLP sends the more vote it gets (we don't...) and so when the rule book is quoted it's proof of a conspiracy by Murdoch to steal their party from them. Nor will the boundary change save us, it's upset so many Tory MPs and the governmentcan no nothing other than Brexit and it's not needed to give Maggie May her landslide - it won't happen.
And so we continue to wither and die. McClusky will win. Corbyn will see this leadership battle in an affiliated organisation as proof the entire Labour movement is behind him, then the McDonnell amendment will be defeated leaving Corbyn as the One True Messiah, only He can defend the party against those evil Tory scumbags known as Labour MPs Councillors Activists Officers and Employees. He has to stay on. Winning the election doesn't matter when the blame for loss is already assigned - the Labour Party.
Keep up the fight - they haven't totally won until they force you out.
TBF he says they don't "have" to. He's absolutely right. They probably will (although I would have thought that the EMA would be negotiable - although it is in demand - provided the UK remains within the common approval process for drugs)
Are people selling coffee actually net economic contributors when all costs have been taken into account. I don't, I mean I can't get my head round this. There's never been many near where I've lived mainly because people don't like to buy shite overpriced coffee. I'm a remainer and I don't see the point of this. Its not as essential job. Is this some sort of London thing ?
Its a London thing.
86% of retail, hotel and restaurant workers are British across the UK as a whole:
Yet we're told all the hotels, bars and restaurants in London are staffed by immigrants.
The government will be taking positions on how many workers we need in every sector of the economy now that it has decided that the simplest method, that has coincided with record levels of employment, is inadequate. I suppose that Londoners should be grateful that the out-of-towners accept that we can continue to buy cups of coffee if we so choose.
Perhaps we should have state housing and key workers subsidies for the coffee shop workers of Old London Town.
Or perhaps they could be paid a living wage.
Your choice - higher taxes or higher prices.
Probably both - plus lower public spending. This will affect the whole country, of course, not just London.
OK. This is what I wrote when TSE said there wouldn't be a new thread. (Grr).
Labour hits its lowest poll rating in opposition since 1915*
YouGov records just 23% for Labour, and a 21% Con lead
* probably
Today’s YouGov marks another low for Corbyn’s Labour party, just two-and-a-half weeks before the key local and mayoral elections.
The survey for The Times records vote shares of
Con 44 (+2) Lab 23 (-2) LD 12 (+1) UKIP 10 (-1)
The 21-point lead ties the poll released by ComRes last week, is the joint-highest for the Conservatives in government since 1988.
Unlike the ComRes poll, however, which had shares of Con 46 / Lab 25, YouGov have Labour on just 23: a vote share that they’ve not recorded when out of government since a single ASL poll just before the 1983 general election (in which they then actually received more than 28%). Indeed, in the history of British political polling – going back to 1943 – Labour has never received a lower Westminster share when on the opposition benches (their all-time low was an 18% share recorded under Gordon Brown in May 2009).
In all probability, it’s the lowest rating in opposition in even longer. Although we don’t have polls before 1940, we do have a healthy set of by-elections, which give a good indication of public mood.
In all the inter-war general elections, Labour polled 30% or better (to the nearest point). Furthermore, they made consistent gains in by-elections during the lengthy periods of Tory rule between 1922 and 1939. Given that there were Labour ministers throughout the Asquith/Lloyd George coalitions, that implies that the 23% in today’s YouGov is Labour’s worst share since at least 1915, when there was a far from universal franchise.
The one possible exception to this might have been following the Labour split in 1931, when the official party might have been reeling from the defection of its leader and prime minister. Unfortunately, there were no useful by-elections at the time so we don’t have any data to work off. Even so, despite the catastrophic loss of seats in the general election later that year, when they were reduced to just 52 MPs, they still received over 30% of ballots cast.
Put simply, Labour is in all probability at its lowest level of support in opposition for over 100 years. The omens for what this means in 2020 if the party does nothing are obvious – and will be even more obvious come May 5. But will they act and if so, will they make the right call?
Are you still expecting Labour to lose only 50 councillors in England next month ?
No. I'd revise that up to 80-100 now.
i am sticking at least for the moment to my forecast of 90 Labour councillor losses in England
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Yes, and if you were running CCHQ strategy, you'd probably be content to accept a few losses in the SW if that's the price of much bigger gains vs Lab. Apart from the obvious top-line advantage, it would make the LDs a much more credible threat to Labour.
That is the last thing they want. Having Labour as the opposition suits them just fine, not least because the large swathes of the country that would never elect a Labour MP are rendered safe for them; jobs for life whether they bother to do the job or not. The last thing they would want is to be up against a rival that could theoretically win almost anywhere.
Morning all. Was out drinking on Saturday with fellow "Red Tory" Labourites from the disgusting wing of the party who wants to win elections rather than organise protest marches. We've broadly given up with trying to fight off the tyranny of the mob - even locally we have members who openly admit to having voted against us in 2015 berating those of us who campaign for losing Coulby Newham for not defending Corbyn on the doorstep.
The real enemy locally isn't our Tory MP or the Tory candidate for Tees Mayor on a one issue "Ben will buy Teesside Airport" campaign. The real enemy is Tom Blenkinsop who must be destroyed for not being true Labour like this entryist Judas who hated the Labour government and voted against us until Jezbollah was anointed.
The real battle isn't the May elections. Its the battle to elect delegates for conference. Many of the newer and stupid have been persuaded that the more delegates a CLP sends the more vote it gets (we don't...) and so when the rule book is quoted it's proof of a conspiracy by Murdoch to steal their party from them. Nor will the boundary change save us, it's upset so many Tory MPs and the governmentcan no nothing other than Brexit and it's not needed to give Maggie May her landslide - it won't happen.
And so we continue to wither and die. McClusky will win. Corbyn will see this leadership battle in an affiliated organisation as proof the entire Labour movement is behind him, then the McDonnell amendment will be defeated leaving Corbyn as the One True Messiah, only He can defend the party against those evil Tory scumbags known as Labour MPs Councillors Activists Officers and Employees. He has to stay on. Winning the election doesn't matter when the blame for loss is already assigned - the Labour Party.
Keep up the fight - they haven't totally won until they force you out.
The point is that it's stalemate. Failure to pass the McDonnell amendment would mean the far left cannot win. But that means Corbyn will not resign.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
Thornbury & Yate, Bath, Cheltenham, perhaps St. Ives, or Mid-Dorset, or Yeovil, could be regained. The rest don't seem vulnerable to me.
We are now almost two years into the current 5 year Parliamentary term yet STILL there appears to be no clear indication as to when, if at all, the proposed 600 HoC seat boundaries are to be introduced. Does anyone know what the timetable is for this?
It's difficult and contentious. We all know May doesn't do difficult or contentious never mind both at once.
1) What will the Don't Knows in fact decide to do? Pollsters make assumptions about this but they can easily be wrong. My guess is that the lower Labour go, the more likely Don't Knows will ultimately break for Labour, as disgusted loyal Labour supporters vote to keep the party going.
2) Conversely, plenty of voters aren't really thinking about this now. When they focus on the choice, are they going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour? He's not an attractive proposition for most voters.
I think 2) outweighs 1) by quite a lot. So I expect Labour's polling could get markedly worse even from these levels.
To what level, sub 20% ?
I played around on Electoral Calculus a while back. Labour hast to get to the lower teens to be below 100 seats, perhaps 10% to cease to be the official opposition.
So 2020 should not yet be an extinction event in anticipation.
I don't think that's realistic. To win 100 seats, you'd probably need to average 40% in those 100. Even on a 632 GB seats, that's 6.4% in those seats alone (maybe a little lower if we accept a lower turnout in Lab seats). To be 'low teens' (13%?) overall would then imply just 8% across the rest of the country, including 100+ seats they currently hold. I don't think you could get such a stark division.
The Lib Dems and Scottish Labour in 2015 are likely to provide better examples of how seats fall in response to very large drops in support. Scottish Labour polled 24% under Miliband, for example (which is about double current levels).
1) What will the Don't Knows in fact decide to do? Pollsters make assumptions about this but they can easily be wrong. My guess is that the lower Labour go, the more likely Don't Knows will ultimately break for Labour, as disgusted loyal Labour supporters vote to keep the party going.
2) Conversely, plenty of voters aren't really thinking about this now. When they focus on the choice, are they going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn's Labour? He's not an attractive proposition for most voters.
I think 2) outweighs 1) by quite a lot. So I expect Labour's polling could get markedly worse even from these levels.
To what level, sub 20% ?
I played around on Electoral Calculus a while back. Labour hast to get to the lower teens to be below 100 seats, perhaps 10% to cease to be the official opposition.
So 2020 should not yet be an extinction event in anticipation.
As for electoral calculus, at one of the seminars I attended earlier on this year, someone pointed out if prior to the 2015 GE you'd have stuck in Con 45, Lab 22 into electoral calculus,
The Tories would have been on something like 430 seats, and Labour on 120 seats, of those 120 seats, 24 of them would have been Scottish seats.
All of those 24 seats are now currently held by the SNP.
Once a party craters in the polls, UNS goes out of the window.
Despite the counter-intuitive maths of changing opinion, UNS tended to work when the principal motivator of vote switching was people who backed the winning party last time but are now pissed off with the government. The only rationalisation ever given for why UNS worked was that, in areas of weak government support, its remaining supporters feel isolated surrounded by friends and colleagues of a different opinion, whereas in government strongholds the solidarity of others reduces the proportion of switchers. This hypothesis has, as far as I am aware, never really been tested by any meaningful research; simply put forward in the absence of any other explanation as to why UNS happens, rather than the alternative more superficially credible swing of the same proportion of a party's supporters switching in each seat.
UNS breaks down, therefore, not only when the swings become very big, but also when people's reason for switching is not to do with dissatisfactoon with government, but motivated by other considerations - this could be a positive vote for something (where one would expect a bigger swing where there are already more converts - the precise opposite of UNS) or a new fault line emerging that breaks the old Tory/Labour divide.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
I see TSE bemoaning on a previous thread that Teresa May might undo Cameron's hard fought victories in Lib Dem seats. These would be places that have only voted Tory once in 25 years largely thanks to the Lib Dem collapse after going into the coalition. It would always be very difficult for the Tories to hang onto those seats. And worth remembering it was strong Brexit territory.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
Thornbury & Yate, Bath, Cheltenham, perhaps St. Ives, or Mid-Dorset, or Yeovil, could be regained. The rest don't seem vulnerable to me.
The Cornwall results on May 4th will show that all the Cornish seats could be regained .
Entirely rhetorical points I assume. It's been entertaining to hear the Brexiteers' plaintive cries of 'Davis has been quite good actually', usually to divert attention away from the Boris & Liam clown car. All good things must come to an end.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
Thornbury & Yate, Bath, Cheltenham, perhaps St. Ives, or Mid-Dorset, or Yeovil, could be regained. The rest don't seem vulnerable to me.
The Cornwall results on May 4th will show that all the Cornish seats could be regained .
Still expecting the LDs to perhaps just manage a majority there? If these national polls are anything like accurate, surely the Tories will do even better than expected overall?
TBF he says they don't "have" to. He's absolutely right. They probably will (although I would have thought that the EMA would be negotiable - although it is in demand - provided the UK remains within the common approval process for drugs)
I think Hunt has already said we are out of approval process - because the ECJ rules on appeals against their decisions?
TBF he says they don't "have" to. He's absolutely right. They probably will (although I would have thought that the EMA would be negotiable - although it is in demand - provided the UK remains within the common approval process for drugs)
He may be pendantically correct, but we voted out and EU institutions are based within the EU. Expect to lose all EU institutions in the UK
Besides it is only 1,000 jobs and we have millions of jobs with people flocking in from all over the EU to do them.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
We are now almost two years into the current 5 year Parliamentary term yet STILL there appears to be no clear indication as to when, if at all, the proposed 600 HoC seat boundaries are to be introduced. Does anyone know what the timetable is for this?
More consultation just finished, the mapmakers are now beavering away. Final recommendations will go before parliament in 2018, and we will be lucky if they are published before Christmas, I believe early 2018 is the most likely.
It really makes one wonder how there was ever the remotest prospect of such changes having been implemented in the last Parliament when, fully five years ago, The Tories then accused the LibDems of reneging on a deal to legislate the then boundary changes in exchange for the Yellow Team getting their referendum on PR.
There was very much that prospect. Had the LDs voted the other way, the new boundaries would have been introduced. It fell at the final fence.
The same is true now, more or less. Absent an early election, we'll get the final proposals, as Ian says, either at the end of this year or the start of next (which is still only about half way through the parliament). There'll then be a vote on them and if it passes, they'll be introduced for 2020.
In fact, almost on cue, the Boundary Commission have just tweeted this:
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
As against that is the loss of the advantage of incumbency by the Lib Dems.
Can you post the text of the headline pls so we paupers can google it?
Google the last part of the url.
Here you go.... the summary
"Britain is fighting to remain the home of two of the EU’s most prestigious agencies covering medicines and banking after Brexit, in a move that is likely to cause astonishment in European capitals.
David Davis, Brexit secretary, does not accept that the two agencies and roughly 1,000 staff will have to move from London’s Canary Wharf, even though the EU is about to run a competition to relocate them."
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
Because I was made aware of the Tory private polling in the South West, the voters adored Cameron in that part of the world, they liked him as PM, they liked him as a man, they liked he spent so many holidays there. Florence Rose Endellion also helped a bit too
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
We are now almost two years into the current 5 year Parliamentary term yet STILL there appears to be no clear indication as to when, if at all, the proposed 600 HoC seat boundaries are to be introduced. Does anyone know what the timetable is for this?
It's difficult and contentious. We all know May doesn't do difficult or contentious never mind both at once.
To be fair - and adding to the conversation downthread, it is a lot more complicated this time - arising from the more inflexible criteria plus the reduction in total MPs. In the old days the criteria were flexible enough that the Commission would first break the country down into "sub-regions" - usually a county, pair of smaller counties, or pair of London Boroughs, and then re-draw the boundaries within these sub-regions. Once the sub-regional boundaries were established, no-one was allowed to contest them and this dramatically simplified the review process and reduced the number of permutations that could sensibly be advanced for any particular area. And because the number of MPs wasn't changing significantly, and population only changes slowly, most reviews were largely tweaks here and there to existing seats.
This time - as discussed below - it's a lot more complex. And the sub-regions are much larger - effectively regions (such as the whole of London, or in practice London North and London South because of the Thames east of Richmond) that hugely increases the number of permutations; because of the straighjacket criteria, making a change in one locality usually knocks on to other seats miles away.
With hindsight I expect even Tories realise the narrower and 'hard" electoral tolerance limits being used in the current review were a mistake.
Despite the counter-intuitive maths of changing opinion, UNS tended to work when the principal motivator of vote switching was people who backed the winning party last time but are now pissed off with the government. The only rationalisation ever given for why UNS worked was that, in areas of weak government support, its remaining supporters feel isolated surrounded by friends and colleagues of a different opinion, whereas in government strongholds the solidarity of others reduces the proportion of switchers. This hypothesis has, as far as I am aware, never really been tested by any meaningful research; simply put forward in the absence of any other explanation as to why UNS happens, rather than the alternative more superficially credible swing of the same proportion of a party's supporters switching in each seat.
UNS breaks down, therefore, not only when the swings become very big, but also when people's reason for switching is not to do with dissatisfactoon with government, but motivated by other considerations - this could be a positive vote for something (where one would expect a bigger swing where there are already more converts - the precise opposite of UNS) or a new fault line emerging that breaks the old Tory/Labour divide.
Thanks that is very interesting. I am embarrassed to say I had never really grasped the point that UNS needs explaining.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
Because I was made aware of the Tory private polling in the South West, the voters adored Cameron in that part of the world, they liked him as PM, they liked him as a man, they liked he spent so many holidays there. Florence Rose Endellion also helped a bit too
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
on that basis he should have taken more holidays in Scotland :-)
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
Thornbury & Yate, Bath, Cheltenham, perhaps St. Ives, or Mid-Dorset, or Yeovil, could be regained. The rest don't seem vulnerable to me.
The Cornwall results on May 4th will show that all the Cornish seats could be regained .
Still expecting the LDs to perhaps just manage a majority there? If these national polls are anything like accurate, surely the Tories will do even better than expected overall?
For reasons that I am not sure of , the Conservatives in Cornwall are in meltdown . As I posted the other day 7 sitting Conservative councillors are seeking re election as Independents all opposed by an official Conservative candidate . A split Conservative vote in these seats means 4 at least will be lost .
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
Because I was made aware of the Tory private polling in the South West, the voters adored Cameron in that part of the world, they liked him as PM, they liked him as a man, they liked he spent so many holidays there. Florence Rose Endellion also helped a bit too
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
on that basis he should have taken more holidays in Scotland :-)
I know, he denied us the pleasure of Tories gain Glasgow Central, Glasgow East, Glasgow North, Glasgow North East, Glasgow North West, Glasgow South, Glasgow South West.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
Because I was made aware of the Tory private polling in the South West, the voters adored Cameron in that part of the world, they liked him as PM, they liked him as a man, they liked he spent so many holidays there. Florence Rose Endellion also helped a bit too
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
on that basis he should have taken more holidays in Scotland :-)
I know, he denied us the pleasure of Tories gain Glasgow Central, Glasgow East, Glasgow North, Glasgow North East, Glasgow North West, Glasgow South, Glasgow South West.
and his daughter would be called Morag McTurnip Cameron
In fairness, Lib Dem complacency and Lord Ashcroft's polling also helped the Tories in the South West.
In probably the most ballsy moment of the 2015 general election campaign, David Cameron went to campaign in Yeovil, 200 yards from Lord Ashdown's house.
Lord Ashdown concluded that Cameron and Crosby didn't have a fcking clue about campaigning if they were wasting their time in Yeovil.
Rochdale - that's very, well, illuminating. However it is no use simply saying you want to win elections. People aren't going to assume you are different to Mrs May because you wear a different colour badge. Not anymore. Obviously you can make Brexit a dividing line but where does that take you? Staying in the EU? My own view is that social democrats need to ditch the Blairite fundamentalists (if any still exist) and focus on policy. Sometime somewhere, someone might pick up on it. I get that the internal party struggle must be damaging to people's energy but if you don't also focus on what is wrong with the Tories (other than Brexit) you'll get nowhere.
Despite the counter-intuitive maths of changing opinion, UNS tended to work when the principal motivator of vote switching was people who backed the winning party last time but are now pissed off with the government. The only rationalisation ever given for why UNS worked was that, in areas of weak government support, its remaining supporters feel isolated surrounded by friends and colleagues of a different opinion, whereas in government strongholds the solidarity of others reduces the proportion of switchers. This hypothesis has, as far as I am aware, never really been tested by any meaningful research; simply put forward in the absence of any other explanation as to why UNS happens, rather than the alternative more superficially credible swing of the same proportion of a party's supporters switching in each seat.
UNS breaks down, therefore, not only when the swings become very big, but also when people's reason for switching is not to do with dissatisfactoon with government, but motivated by other considerations - this could be a positive vote for something (where one would expect a bigger swing where there are already more converts - the precise opposite of UNS) or a new fault line emerging that breaks the old Tory/Labour divide.
Thanks that is very interesting. I am embarrassed to say I had never really grasped the point that UNS needs explaining.
It is basically herd theory in action, I guess. In which case you would expect it to be less relevant for minor parties, who are always in a minority in any community. Which of course is exactly what you find with LibDem, Green and PC swings.
And in thinking things through for this thread, a further thought occurs to me which (unlike the above) I have not seen explored in any academic articles.
If you take the view that Tory/Labour politics is about "looking after" "our people" and "our areas" (and having dealt with many Tory and Labour politicians over a lifetime I can assure you that sadly this is indeed how many of them think in private), then it isn't unreasonable to expect that Tory government policy will be less favourable to, and hence less popular in, Labour-voting seats, and Labour government policy less favourable to people in Tory seats. This adds a further dimension to the "influence of neighbours" theory for why the proportion of switchers away from a government is dramatically larger in its weaker seats - the whole essence of UNS after all is that a government goes from 50% to 45% in a strong area and 15% to 10% in a weak area.
and his daughter would be called Morag McTurnip Cameron
At least we can comfort ourselves with Dave's awesomeness as Tory leader in Scotland.
When he became Tory leader, the Tories had 40 fewer MPs in Scotland than Labour, when he retired as PM, the Tories had the same number of Scottish MPs as Labour.
and his daughter would be called Morag McTurnip Cameron
At least we can comfort ourselves with Dave's awesomeness as Tory leader in Scotland.
When he became Tory leader, the Tories had 40 fewer MPs in Scotland than Labour, when he retired as PM, the Tories had the same number of Scottish MPs as Labour.
well of course he's an ethnic Scot unlike those english blow in pretendy scots named after fish
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
As against that is the loss of the advantage of incumbency by the Lib Dems.
And the threat of the SNP being in government with Corbyn.
We are now almost two years into the current 5 year Parliamentary term yet STILL there appears to be no clear indication as to when, if at all, the proposed 600 HoC seat boundaries are to be introduced. Does anyone know what the timetable is for this?
It's difficult and contentious. We all know May doesn't do difficult or contentious never mind both at once.
To be fair - and adding to the conversation downthread, it is a lot more complicated this time - arising from the more inflexible criteria plus the reduction in total MPs. In the old days the criteria were flexible enough that the Commission would first break the country down into "sub-regions" - usually a county, pair of smaller counties, or pair of London Boroughs, and then re-draw the boundaries within these sub-regions. Once the sub-regional boundaries were established, no-one was allowed to contest them and this dramatically simplified the review process and reduced the number of permutations that could sensibly be advanced for any particular area. And because the number of MPs wasn't changing significantly, and population only changes slowly, most reviews were largely tweaks here and there to existing seats.
This time - as discussed below - it's a lot more complex. And the sub-regions are much larger - effectively regions (such as the whole of London, or in practice London North and London South because of the Thames east of Richmond) that hugely increases the number of permutations; because of the straighjacket criteria, making a change in one locality usually knocks on to other seats miles away.
With hindsight I expect even Tories realise the narrower and 'hard" electoral tolerance limits being used in the current review were a mistake.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
Why do you see Cameron as such an advantage over May? Don't forget Cameron's problem with female voters and and less well-heeled. And you forget one of the biggest factors for Tory success - Lib Dem voters going on strike.
Because I was made aware of the Tory private polling in the South West, the voters adored Cameron in that part of the world, they liked him as PM, they liked him as a man, they liked he spent so many holidays there. Florence Rose Endellion also helped a bit too
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
Sorry that sounds patronising and you are deluded. I can believe Cameron holidaying in Cornwall might have helped a little but just look at the results FFS. The Tory vote in Cornwall hardly increased in 2015, the Lib Dem vote collapsed. You mentioned Yeovil where to be fair the Tory vote increased by nearly 10% - which it didn't in most Tory/LD seats. But even there it was a 22% collapse in the Lib Dem vote that did it.
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
fighting this time without your two strongest advantages ?
(23% ) - Oh dear, at this rate we could see a Labour – Lib Dem cross-over before GE2020...
That is what could cause the dam to break. If the Lib Dems look like they seriously have crossed-over with Labour then that could escalate very, very quickly.
Worth noting lds being sub 10 still seems the norm.
This, er, big LibDem recovery is still falling behind the general Tory advance since the General Election. No point in winning in a personal best if your opponent just beat you by setting a new world record. Surprisingly, none of the thread writers seem to get the point.
The polling by Sir Lynton Crosby (pbuh) says otherwise.
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
Or you could have listened to those of us on the ground, posting here. And we are telling you - the LibDems are not getting those seats back without the mother of all fights.
I acknowledge that, but you'll be fighting this time with your two strongest advantages from last time
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
fighting this time without your two strongest advantages ?
Comments
There's 'Al been an MP for twenty years' and 'Al the former union boss' but has he delivered any letters since the 1970s (if then) ?
"We're looking at" = "[some bloody idiot proposed this stupid idea, which we are never going to implement in a million years, but we are required to demonstrate due process so] we are looking at barrista visas"
If Labour is 23% [it's probably not] and the Lib Dems are 11% then crossover could happen at about 17-18%. That's not unbelievable for the yellow peril.
https://www.ft.com/content/72ead180-229a-11e7-8691-d5f7e0cd0a16
"After a dismal pre-season testing programme, engine partner Honda largely kept reliability under control in the first two races, albeit at the expense of performance, even if Alonso could finish neither despite strong drives into points positions."
What? McLaren had a 75% DNF rate at the first two races. From four potential finishes, they had one. How the hell is that keeping reliability under control?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39616983
https://twitter.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/853866810508292097
Says he earned his money, doesn't have it in tax havens or any secret inheritance.
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/853642245156851718?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.playbuzz.com/bbcsport/gossip-monday
Précis - The EU are relocating their medicine and banking bodies from London in light of Brexit, and well David Davis thinks otherwise.
Has a sort of ring to it!
Or perhaps they could be paid a living wage.
Your choice - higher taxes or higher prices.
The worrying thing is that Davis might be one of the smarter of the The Three Brexiteers, imagine what the other two believe
And his polling in 2015 was spot on. I just wish I had I bet accordingly.
FWIW, I agree that Johnson could do a very good job of taking on the Howard-2003 role.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_North_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
The real enemy locally isn't our Tory MP or the Tory candidate for Tees Mayor on a one issue "Ben will buy Teesside Airport" campaign. The real enemy is Tom Blenkinsop who must be destroyed for not being true Labour like this entryist Judas who hated the Labour government and voted against us until Jezbollah was anointed.
The real battle isn't the May elections. Its the battle to elect delegates for conference. Many of the newer and stupid have been persuaded that the more delegates a CLP sends the more vote it gets (we don't...) and so when the rule book is quoted it's proof of a conspiracy by Murdoch to steal their party from them. Nor will the boundary change save us, it's upset so many Tory MPs and the governmentcan no nothing other than Brexit and it's not needed to give Maggie May her landslide - it won't happen.
And so we continue to wither and die. McClusky will win. Corbyn will see this leadership battle in an affiliated organisation as proof the entire Labour movement is behind him, then the McDonnell amendment will be defeated leaving Corbyn as the One True Messiah, only He can defend the party against those evil Tory scumbags known as Labour MPs Councillors Activists Officers and Employees. He has to stay on. Winning the election doesn't matter when the blame for loss is already assigned - the Labour Party.
The Tories would have been on something like 430 seats, and Labour on 120 seats, of those 120 seats, 24 of them would have been Scottish seats.
All of those 24 seats are now currently held by the SNP.
Once a party craters in the polls, UNS goes out of the window.
The Lib Dems and Scottish Labour in 2015 are likely to provide better examples of how seats fall in response to very large drops in support. Scottish Labour polled 24% under Miliband, for example (which is about double current levels).
UNS breaks down, therefore, not only when the swings become very big, but also when people's reason for switching is not to do with dissatisfactoon with government, but motivated by other considerations - this could be a positive vote for something (where one would expect a bigger swing where there are already more converts - the precise opposite of UNS) or a new fault line emerging that breaks the old Tory/Labour divide.
1) The threat of the SNP being in government with Ed Miliband
2) David Cameron
It's been entertaining to hear the Brexiteers' plaintive cries of 'Davis has been quite good actually', usually to divert attention away from the Boris & Liam clown car.
All good things must come to an end.
Besides it is only 1,000 jobs and we have millions of jobs with people flocking in from all over the EU to do them.
We will be fine!
After all we are still in the EU and should help us in negotiations right?
The same is true now, more or less. Absent an early election, we'll get the final proposals, as Ian says, either at the end of this year or the start of next (which is still only about half way through the parliament). There'll then be a vote on them and if it passes, they'll be introduced for 2020.
In fact, almost on cue, the Boundary Commission have just tweeted this:
https://twitter.com/BCE2018/status/853895811259809792
Here you go.... the summary
"Britain is fighting to remain the home of two of the EU’s most prestigious agencies covering medicines and banking after Brexit, in a move that is likely to cause astonishment in European capitals.
David Davis, Brexit secretary, does not accept that the two agencies and roughly 1,000 staff will have to move from London’s Canary Wharf, even though the EU is about to run a competition to relocate them."
If you read the book 'Why The Tories Won' by Tim Ross, it'll help expand your understanding.
This time - as discussed below - it's a lot more complex. And the sub-regions are much larger - effectively regions (such as the whole of London, or in practice London North and London South because of the Thames east of Richmond) that hugely increases the number of permutations; because of the straighjacket criteria, making a change in one locality usually knocks on to other seats miles away.
With hindsight I expect even Tories realise the narrower and 'hard" electoral tolerance limits being used in the current review were a mistake.
on that basis he should have taken more holidays in Scotland :-)
http://www.thenational.scot/politics/15227999.Going_Local__East_Ayshire_was_once_a_Labour_heartland_____now_the_party___s_fielding_fewer_candidates_than_they_have_councillors/?ref=twtrec
In probably the most ballsy moment of the 2015 general election campaign, David Cameron went to campaign in Yeovil, 200 yards from Lord Ashdown's house.
Lord Ashdown concluded that Cameron and Crosby didn't have a fcking clue about campaigning if they were wasting their time in Yeovil.
And in thinking things through for this thread, a further thought occurs to me which (unlike the above) I have not seen explored in any academic articles.
If you take the view that Tory/Labour politics is about "looking after" "our people" and "our areas" (and having dealt with many Tory and Labour politicians over a lifetime I can assure you that sadly this is indeed how many of them think in private), then it isn't unreasonable to expect that Tory government policy will be less favourable to, and hence less popular in, Labour-voting seats, and Labour government policy less favourable to people in Tory seats. This adds a further dimension to the "influence of neighbours" theory for why the proportion of switchers away from a government is dramatically larger in its weaker seats - the whole essence of UNS after all is that a government goes from 50% to 45% in a strong area and 15% to 10% in a weak area.
When he became Tory leader, the Tories had 40 fewer MPs in Scotland than Labour, when he retired as PM, the Tories had the same number of Scottish MPs as Labour.
No way is 25% Labour's floor under this lot. More like 18%.
A bad deal is worse than no deal for the City, and the 27 (especially the Deutschmark bloc) would be foolish to pursue a multi speed EU.