Campaigning suits Corbyn. He will be out on the stump. There will be well attended rallies. He will make headlines. He will be more interesting than May and has nothing to lose. He might surprise.
Corbyn will talk to lots of people who agree with him and will say nothing interesting. May will avoid talking to anyone. When she is forced to she will say nothing. Farron will skip around.
I think people have whipped themselves up into a frenzy about Corbyn. Arguably he is a better campaigner than Milliband and Brown. He might surprise.
Preaching to the converted is not the same as evangelism, however.
He'll have to totally avoid the daily press conference.
I still can't see why the LibDem focus on here for gains in June is in them powering back in the SW, rather than on those seats where they challenge Labour. Since the election, the LibDems are up maybe 3% - the Tories up maybe 8%. Nationally, the goalposts have moved the seats away from the LibDems by a swing of 2.5%. But the Labour Party is down maybe 6% - nationally, the goalposts have moved to the LibDems by 4.5%.
I know, I know, UNS is not UNS....but that does seem like some big special pleading required.
LD leadership probably think they can change votes with their campaign. There's some basis for this as LDs have outpolled opinion polls in recent by-elections. Nick Clegg's 2010 campaign saw a big movement to the LDs. If so, their polling numbers are low because they reflect the relatively small number of people that have thought about voting Lib Dem, rather than those will actually vote for them when presented with a choice on the ballot paper.
I would not be surprised if the Lib Dems won 15% or so of the vote, and averaged 30% or so in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, Hampshire and Surrey.
So my hot take is the Labour absolutely have to get May to commit to brexit position. At that point they can then adopt a liberal Democrat like strategy and try to appear harder than that brexit position in hard brexit seats and softer than that position in remain seats.
If May goes for a soft brexit position or attempts to avoid spelling out a concrete brexit position then try and get UKIP riled.
It's a terrible strategy but I think it is the only one they have. Get May to spell out her brexit position
I think that is correct strategy.
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
In utterly unrelated news (I thought some light relief might be welcome), there are some rather good games pencilled in for this year. There's The Last of Us II, Shadow of War, and Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Intrigued to see how the last stands up, been following its development for some time and it looks promising.
That nice Mrs May is going to get her election - be it by a 2/3 vote to overrule FTPA or via No Confidence. If Labour forced it to be via No Confidence it would superficially look like a tactical gain. But...to the country it'd just make them look even more frit and obstructionist over Brexit. I actually think Jezza has it right to vote with the motion. Tactical gains and strategic losses is not where any party wants to be.
May really is so very, very lucky to be up against Corbyn.
Why? You think Keir Starmer, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper would wipe the floor with her?
Corbyn will certainly cost Labour a extra chunk of seats but Labour's problems go way beyond his leadership.
Corbyn takes Labour into a whole new world of public disdain and derision. Any of the above would at least have allowed the party to get some kind of respectful listening to during a campaign. With Corbyn the debate is over before it starts.
I still can't see why the LibDem focus on here for gains in June is in them powering back in the SW, rather than on those seats where they challenge Labour. Since the election, the LibDems are up maybe 3% - the Tories up maybe 8%. Nationally, the goalposts have moved the seats away from the LibDems by a swing of 2.5%. But the Labour Party is down maybe 6% - nationally, the goalposts have moved to the LibDems by 4.5%.
I know, I know, UNS is not UNS....but that does seem like some big special pleading required.
LD leadership probably think they can change votes with their campaign. There's some basis for this as LDs have outpolled opinion polls in recent by-elections. Nick Clegg's 2010 campaign saw a big movement to the LDs. If so, their polling numbers are low because they reflect the relatively small number of people that have thought about voting Lib Dem, rather than those will actually vote for them when presented with a choice on the ballot paper.
I would not be surprised if the Lib Dems won 15% or so of the vote, and averaged 30% or so in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, Hampshire and Surrey.
They are as annoying as Japanese knotweed, and just as hard to eradicate.
Every yellow diamond I see down in Hampshire raises my blood pressure.
So my hot take is the Labour absolutely have to get May to commit to brexit position. At that point they can then adopt a liberal Democrat like strategy and try to appear harder than that brexit position in hard brexit seats and softer than that position in remain seats.
If May goes for a soft brexit position or attempts to avoid spelling out a concrete brexit position then try and get UKIP riled.
It's a terrible strategy but I think it is the only one they have. Get May to spell out her brexit position
I think that is correct strategy.
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
May has declared this as a Brexit referendum, so will have to show some Brexit cards. Will the punters like them? and will it tie her (soft remainer) hands?
I wonder if parties will have time and finance to book billboards for ads, they make an enormous difference. The one with Salmond and Milliband was an absolute game changer.
So my hot take is the Labour absolutely have to get May to commit to brexit position. At that point they can then adopt a liberal Democrat like strategy and try to appear harder than that brexit position in hard brexit seats and softer than that position in remain seats.
If May goes for a soft brexit position or attempts to avoid spelling out a concrete brexit position then try and get UKIP riled.
It's a terrible strategy but I think it is the only one they have. Get May to spell out her brexit position
I think that is correct strategy.
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
May has declared this as a Brexit referendum, so will have to show some Brexit cards. Will the punters like them? and will it tie her (soft remainer) hands?
A more capable Lab leader could easily pivot onto the NHS. Not Jezza, though.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
I still can't see why the LibDem focus on here for gains in June is in them powering back in the SW, rather than on those seats where they challenge Labour. Since the election, the LibDems are up maybe 3% - the Tories up maybe 8%. Nationally, the goalposts have moved the seats away from the LibDems by a swing of 2.5%. But the Labour Party is down maybe 6% - nationally, the goalposts have moved to the LibDems by 4.5%.
I know, I know, UNS is not UNS....but that does seem like some big special pleading required.
LD leadership probably think they can change votes with their campaign. There's some basis for this as LDs have outpolled opinion polls in recent by-elections. Nick Clegg's 2010 campaign saw a big movement to the LDs. If so, their polling numbers are low because they reflect the relatively small number of people that have thought about voting Lib Dem, rather than those will actually vote for them when presented with a choice on the ballot paper.
I would not be surprised if the Lib Dems won 15% or so of the vote, and averaged 30% or so in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset, Hampshire and Surrey.
They are as annoying as Japanese knotweed, and just as hard to eradicate.
Every yellow diamond I see down in Hampshire raises my blood pressure.
Feel the same about the remaining(!) Leave posters.
Campaigning suits Corbyn. He will be out on the stump. There will be well attended rallies. He will make headlines. He will be more interesting than May and has nothing to lose. He might surprise.
Corbyn will talk to lots of people who agree with him and will say nothing interesting. May will avoid talking to anyone. When she is forced to she will say nothing. Farron will skip around.
I think people have whipped themselves up into a frenzy about Corbyn. Arguably he is a better campaigner than Milliband and Brown. He might surprise.
May really is so very, very lucky to be up against Corbyn.
Why? You think Keir Starmer, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper would wipe the floor with her?
Corbyn will certainly cost Labour a extra chunk of seats but Labour's problems go way beyond his leadership.
Corbyn takes Labour into a whole new world of public disdain and derision. Any of the above would at least have allowed the party to get some kind of respectful listening to during a campaign. With Corbyn the debate is over before it starts.
Nothing any of those candidates did led me to believe they understood the reasons for Labour's defeat, and what was required to regain power.
Those who came closest were Tristram Hunt and, in particular, Ed Balls.
Andy Burnham is a walking embarrassment and the only time you hear from Yvette is when she pops up to ask other people to take more refugees into their homes.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
Hartlepool is going to be interesting. Close to a UKIP win at the last election it's a harder call than most of the others in the North East...
Better an honourable exit than a humiliating defeat?
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
May really is so very, very lucky to be up against Corbyn.
Why? You think Keir Starmer, Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper would wipe the floor with her?
Corbyn will certainly cost Labour a extra chunk of seats but Labour's problems go way beyond his leadership.
Corbyn takes Labour into a whole new world of public disdain and derision. Any of the above would at least have allowed the party to get some kind of respectful listening to during a campaign. With Corbyn the debate is over before it starts.
Nothing any of those candidates did led me to believe they understood the reasons for Labour's defeat, and what was required to regain power.
Those who came closest were Tristram Hunt and, in particular, Ed Balls.
Andy Burnham is a walking embarrassment and the only time you hear from Yvette is when she pops up to ask other people to take more refugees into their homes.
Any news on Ed Balls? Surely there is a seat somewhere? He is a big loss to the Opposition as he actually understands some stuff.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
I think they'll do surprisingly well in terms of vote but that this won't translate into a massive surge in seats. I'm guessing 30 max.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
So my hot take is the Labour absolutely have to get May to commit to brexit position. At that point they can then adopt a liberal Democrat like strategy and try to appear harder than that brexit position in hard brexit seats and softer than that position in remain seats.
If May goes for a soft brexit position or attempts to avoid spelling out a concrete brexit position then try and get UKIP riled.
It's a terrible strategy but I think it is the only one they have. Get May to spell out her brexit position
I think that is correct strategy.
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
May has declared this as a Brexit referendum, so will have to show some Brexit cards. Will the punters like them? and will it tie her (soft remainer) hands?
A more capable Lab leader could easily pivot onto the NHS. Not Jezza, though.
Would it work though. Our Labour MP has already stated she will be campaigning on the NHS. The response of people was why you aren't going to be in a position to change anything.
The funnier bit is in the campaign to save the local A&E service the council highlighted the traffic issues getting (mainly) in and out of town as if that was a reason for saving it - sorry folks but that is a reason for moving it to the other possibly site...
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
I have a small wager on Liberals on 20+ seats. My only GE bet so far, as I can't see much value around.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
So my hot take is the Labour absolutely have to get May to commit to brexit position. At that point they can then adopt a liberal Democrat like strategy and try to appear harder than that brexit position in hard brexit seats and softer than that position in remain seats.
If May goes for a soft brexit position or attempts to avoid spelling out a concrete brexit position then try and get UKIP riled.
It's a terrible strategy but I think it is the only one they have. Get May to spell out her brexit position
I think that is correct strategy.
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
May has declared this as a Brexit referendum, so will have to show some Brexit cards. Will the punters like them? and will it tie her (soft remainer) hands?
She will say "We can only get what we can negotiate. I need a strong mandate from the country to get as good a deal as I possibly can for all parts of the United Kingdom. Blah, blah, blah. “
The problem is that the first sentence is correct. We can only get what we can negotiate.
The only choices for the negotiator are Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn or Tim Farron or (for Scotland) Nicola Sturgeon. Of those 4 names, only the two women are actually credible in this role as a tough negotiator.
Corbyn has some strengths, but he has been caught in a trap in which his strengths will count for nothing.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
I think the LD's may do a lot better than expected, possibly up to around 30. Although given my record of political predictions. It's probably the kiss of death.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
It is very hard to see more than 30 seats without a massive revival in Scotland, which in 2010 provided roughly one-fifth of their seats.
20 is an average result, anything more would be serious progress. A sensational result would be beating Labour in the popular vote, which isn't unfortunately as crazy as it sounds.
That post doesn't make sense. Labour could do what, exactly?
Labour vote against the Government's motion to dissolve Parliament.
Then call a vote of no confidence.
I think that is right.
And then what? Tories could try to limit the damage by abstaining, but then Lab could also abstain, so the two outcomes are May is so useless she lost a no confidence vote, or May is so useless she couldn't even lose a no confidence vote when she wanted to. Corbyn is in a position to do tremendous damage, and has absolutely nothing to lose. And if he is too thick to think of this stuff for himself perhaps Angus Robertson could give him some hints.
Surely the most generous bet currently available is this offering from Shadsy:
Labour to win more votes than Lib Dems ....... 1/4
In 2015 Labour won 9,347 million votes or 30.4% of the popular vote, almost four times as many as the LibDems with 2.415 million votes or 7.9%, a difference between the parties therefore of 6.932 million votes.
It is surely inconceivable that the Yellow Team could get anywhere near overhauling Labour's level of support. Were they to halve the gap to around 3.5 million votes, that in itself would be pretty sensational. There aren't too many occasions when Shadsy hands out free money, but this opportunity to make a 25% return on your money in just a few short weeks is surely one such occasion. Not a terribly exciting bet, but it looks like an absolute certainty. That said, DYOR.
I see guido was mocking labour for not having a campaign slogan ready to go. What is the Tory slogan? The lds I assume are going for 'open, tolerant and united', I've seen that plastered in many places these last months.
'Stability and security', as the slogan? Keep it simple.
"Destroy all traitors", judging by the front pages of the Sun and Mail today.
I suspect they'll go for a slightly more conciliatory tone. But I hope those headlines cost the Tories a few votes - perfectly designed to tell any waverers 'you may hate corbyn, but you cannot sit this one out'.
Surprised no ones photoshopped May as a Dalek.
It's such a shame it is Corbyn. I cannot vote for a party he leads. I suspect there are many more like me. May and the cabinet she leads are profoundly mediocre and her constant pandering to the right wing press is a sign of immense weakness; but when the choice is her or Corbyn it is perfectly understandable that most voters have concluded there is no choice.
The one good thing in all this is that it is happening three years earlier than expected. That means there is now slightly more of a chance that I will live to see another Labour government; or, failing that, the creation of a new centre-left party that can seriously challenge for power.
I continue to be hugely grateful that I was born when I was.
aw come on
you do this every election. You wobble like SeanT in a referendum and then vote Labour anyway.
Not a chance. In fact, I have only voted Labour once in a GE since 2005.
Translation - I sat one out - sounds a bit different that way eh.
@Scott_P - I see your logic (Lab votes against motion, Tezza then does or doesn't call vote of no confidence in her own govt as only way to actually get the vote), but I think it's a bit tricksy.
Plus there is no certainty as to against whom the wheel of blame would eventually stop.
I do, however, like the possible " well if you really want an election, call the VONC." But still a longshot, especially with Jezza in charge.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
I have a small wager on Liberals on 20+ seats. My only GE bet so far, as I can't see much value around.
The seat markets will be interesting. There could be some quite surprising ones that redraw the landscape.
The expected Tory landslide may change a few things, and landslides do not often bring good governments.
The Tory party may well look much less like the party of Southern England, while the LDs may well shift very much in that direction. The balance of power in the parliamentary Con party could shift quite a bit to post Industrial Britain from the Stockbroker belt.
The snag is that you can't vote against an election, vote for a MONC and then say it's voting down the latter that stopped an election.
Even somebody as thick as Arlene Foster with Diane Abbott's IQ subtracted wouldn't swallow that.
I am not suggesting Labour stop an election.
I am suggesting they oppose the Government motion for dissolution (opposition, there's an idea) and put a motion of no confidence in the Government which the PM would have to back based on the preceeding logic.
The end result is the same. Election. Corbyn gone.
The difference is Labour in the driving seat. The PM embarrassed.
It's simple, and obvious, and therefore will not happen.
While LDs will clearly benefit from an early election I can't remotely see what's in it for Labour and the SNP and I'd be tempted today to vote against dissolution if I was in their shoes.
Campaigning suits Corbyn. He will be out on the stump. There will be well attended rallies. He will make headlines. He will be more interesting than May and has nothing to lose. He might surprise.
Brexit and Trump have proved that plenty of low information idiots will vote for anything no matter how unlikely or stupid. If Labour has some newsworthy ideas in the manifesto (they don't have to be any good or really acheivable, just something that gets people to take notice) then it might not be the expected landslide...
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
I think the LD's may do a lot better than expected, possibly up to around 30. Although given my record of political predictions. It's probably the kiss of death.
There was once a pithy rule that the poll showing the Labour party in the worst position is the most accurate.
For pb with its enthusiastic Whiggery, the analogue is: The prediction showing the LibDems with the lowest seats is the most accurate.
That certainly worked in 2015.
I think the LibDems will get ~ 10 seats. What they have, minus Carshalton, plus a couple of London seats (Twickenham + Richmond + Sutton), plus maybe Bath, plus a returning Scottish seat (maybe Edin W or Fife NE).
If they get to 15, they will have done superbly. I don’t think they’ll take (m)any seats off Labour.
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
The snag is that you can't vote against an election, vote for a MONC and then say it's voting down the latter that stopped an election.
Even somebody as thick as Arlene Foster with Diane Abbott's IQ subtracted wouldn't swallow that.
I am not suggesting Labour stop an election.
I am suggesting they oppose the Government motion for dissolution (opposition, there's an idea) and put a motion of no confidence in the Government which the PM would have to back based on the preceeding logic.
The end result is the same. Election. Corbyn gone.
The difference is Labour in the driving seat. The PM embarrassed.
It's simple, and obvious, and therefore will not happen.
It's game playing and will not be looked upon well. I guess the only thing that might be fun is that Corbyn could get to be PM for a bit.
The snag is that you can't vote against an election, vote for a MONC and then say it's voting down the latter that stopped an election.
Even somebody as thick as Arlene Foster with Diane Abbott's IQ subtracted wouldn't swallow that.
I am not suggesting Labour stop an election.
I am suggesting they oppose the Government motion for dissolution (opposition, there's an idea) and put a motion of no confidence in the Government which the PM would have to back based on the preceeding logic.
The end result is the same. Election. Corbyn gone.
The difference is Labour in the driving seat. The PM embarrassed.
It's simple, and obvious, and therefore will not happen.
As mentioned, it's certainly elegant. But would the the GBP go with it or lose focus and interest at "Lab stops GE"?
Campaigning suits Corbyn. He will be out on the stump. There will be well attended rallies. He will make headlines. He will be more interesting than May and has nothing to lose. He might surprise.
Brexit and Trump have proved that plenty of low information idiots will vote for anything no matter how unlikely or stupid. If Labour has some newsworthy ideas in the manifesto (they don't have to be any good or really acheivable, just something that gets people to take notice) then it might not be the expected landslide...
Why waste a proven campaign tactic? He could argue for complete abdication as a world power - a 'Britain first Brexit':
"We spend £xx million a week on nuclear weapons, let's give it to the NHS instead."
While LDs will clearly benefit from an early election I can't remotely see what's in it for Labour and the SNP and I'd be tempted today to vote against dissolution if I was in their shoes.
whats in it for Labour is their survival as an electable party
without Jezza they may just come through, another two years and who knows what shape theyll be in. If the LDs had a leader theyd be driving Labour out of existence.
Interestingly despite the ridicule I got for pointing out the SNP will be gunning for Carmichael, they also tip Orkney as vulnerable and for the same reason.
Nae chance. Nae chance in hell.
In such an uncertain election the ground war may be critical. As such the Lib Dems have got to be fancied to pick up some seats. They have an energised membership and strong tactical skills.
In Scotland the post referendum election was won by the losers as they were more determined and more united. I am not sure this election is the slam dunk the pollsters predict.
LOL, with Willie Rennie as your leader you have no hope. They will not need a tandem that is for sure.
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
The problem for many is not so much Corbyn himself (although clearly he is a marxist tramp with terrorist buddies) but the party that wilfully elects the likes of him to leadership. Shot of Corbyn the membership is still the membership. Toxic to most WWC ex-Labour voters.
The LibDem potential performance is difficult to read.
An increase in share of the vote to 14% region seems achievable. They will target ruthlessly and Labour being a pile of cr*p will help but the cross current of UKIP voters moving to May and the strength of the Tories will mitigate against a significant yellow peril resurgence.
Realistically a few gains in London, the south, south west and in University seats and suburbs seems achievable. In Scotland Edinburgh West and Fife NE may follow the Holyrood elections and provide team yellow with a respectable return in conjunction with retaining O&S.
Can anyone hazard a guess at the final numbers for the Lib Dems? I'm guessing somewhere between 30 and 55 with the Scottish Nats staying roughly where they are.
20 LibDems MP's tops with a good number of decent second places.
I think the LD's may do a lot better than expected, possibly up to around 30. Although given my record of political predictions. It's probably the kiss of death.
There was once a pithy rule that the poll showing the Labour party in the worst position is the most accurate.
For pb with its enthusiastic Whiggery, the analogue is: The prediction showing the LibDems with the lowest seats is the most accurate.
That certainly worked in 2015.
I think the LibDems will get ~ 10 seats. What they have, minus Carshalton, plus a couple of London seats (Twickenham + Richmond + Sutton), plus maybe Bath, plus a returning Scottish seat (maybe Edin W or Fife NE).
If they get to 15, they will have done superbly. I don’t think they’ll take (m)any seats off Labour.
@Scott_P - I see your logic (Lab votes against motion, Tezza then does or doesn't call vote of no confidence in her own govt as only way to actually get the vote), but I think it's a bit tricksy.
Plus there is no certainty as to against whom the wheel of blame would eventually stop.
I do, however, like the possible " well if you really want an election, call the VONC." But still a longshot, especially with Jezza in charge.
"We have thought about it, but as Theresa May has said herself, an election would be a distraction when we are in the middle of Article 50 talks. Our job has been and will continue to be to get the best deal for Britain. We will therefore vote to keep the election date as it is".
KISS. I don't personally have a problem with an election, but it isn't difficult for Labour not to fall into May's trap.
Surely the most generous bet currently available is this offering from Shadsy:
Labour to win more votes than Lib Dems ....... 1/4
In 2015 Labour won 9,347 million votes or 30.4% of the popular vote, almost four times as many as the LibDems with 2.415 million votes or 7.9%, a difference between the parties therefore of 6.932 million votes.
It is surely inconceivable that the Yellow Team could get anywhere near overhauling Labour's level of support. Were they to halve the gap to around 3.5 million votes, that in itself would be pretty sensational. There aren't too many occasions when Shadsy hands out free money, but this opportunity to make a 25% return on your money in just a few short weeks is surely one such occasion. Not a terribly exciting bet, but it looks like an absolute certainty. That said, DYOR.
There are around 4m people who voted LD as recently as 2010 who didn’t do so in 2015. If they, or even 70 or % decide that they’ve ‘forgiven’ the Coalition years, then plus a number of new voters who want as little Brexit as possible , i.e. the Single Market, the LD’s could easily be up to the 6m mark.
While LDs will clearly benefit from an early election I can't remotely see what's in it for Labour and the SNP and I'd be tempted today to vote against dissolution if I was in their shoes.
whats in it for Labour is their survival as an electable party
without Jezza they may just come through, another two years and who knows what shape theyll be in. If the LDs had a leader theyd be driving Labour out of existence.
Ed miliband truly was an idiot
I'm sure some backbenchers with ultra safe seats take that view but why would the leadership back one at this time or indeed any Labour MP with a majority of less than say 8000?
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
The problem for many is not so much Corbyn himself (although clearly he is a marxist tramp with terrorist buddies) but the party that wilfully elects the likes of him to leadership. Shot of Corbyn the membership is still the membership. Toxic to most WWC ex-Labour voters.
Indeed. The response to "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." is "Well why was he there in the first place?".
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
And when they asked for a guarantee the next leader would not be someone equally loathsome, thick and dangerous - what would your answer be?
Unless he is abruptly removed and even more abruptly replaced, neither of which are physically possible, that answer won't wash.
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
The problem for many is not so much Corbyn himself (although clearly he is a marxist tramp with terrorist buddies) but the party that wilfully elects the likes of him to leadership. Shot of Corbyn the membership is still the membership. Toxic to most WWC ex-Labour voters.
Indeed. The response to "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." is "Well why was he there in the first place?".
with the follow-up of "and the last attempt to get rid of him worked how well?"
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
I'm not sure I follow. What terms would they ask for?
Surely the most generous bet currently available is this offering from Shadsy:
Labour to win more votes than Lib Dems ....... 1/4
In 2015 Labour won 9,347 million votes or 30.4% of the popular vote, almost four times as many as the LibDems with 2.415 million votes or 7.9%, a difference between the parties therefore of 6.932 million votes.
It is surely inconceivable that the Yellow Team could get anywhere near overhauling Labour's level of support. Were they to halve the gap to around 3.5 million votes, that in itself would be pretty sensational. There aren't too many occasions when Shadsy hands out free money, but this opportunity to make a 25% return on your money in just a few short weeks is surely one such occasion. Not a terribly exciting bet, but it looks like an absolute certainty. That said, DYOR.
It's a shame that is not a trading bet, since I would take the other side of it. Even if it doesn't happen there is sure to be a point where it looks a lot more likely than now.
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
And when they asked for a guarantee the next leader would not be someone equally loathsome, thick and dangerous - what would your answer be?
Unless he is abruptly removed and even more abruptly replaced, neither of which are physically possible, that answer won't wash.
That assumes people may vote for Labour when they haven't done so before. I am talking simply of hanging onto some of the voters they have already got. Labour's situation is desperate.
PS Everyone KNOWS Corbyn is out after this election, so your point applies anyway. It's a way of asking people to keep to the faith.
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
I'm not sure I follow. What terms would they ask for?
Surely the most generous bet currently available is this offering from Shadsy:
Labour to win more votes than Lib Dems ....... 1/4
In 2015 Labour won 9,347 million votes or 30.4% of the popular vote, almost four times as many as the LibDems with 2.415 million votes or 7.9%, a difference between the parties therefore of 6.932 million votes.
It is surely inconceivable that the Yellow Team could get anywhere near overhauling Labour's level of support. Were they to halve the gap to around 3.5 million votes, that in itself would be pretty sensational. There aren't too many occasions when Shadsy hands out free money, but this opportunity to make a 25% return on your money in just a few short weeks is surely one such occasion. Not a terribly exciting bet, but it looks like an absolute certainty. That said, DYOR.
There are around 4m people who voted LD as recently as 2010 who didn’t do so in 2015. If they, or even 70 or % decide that they’ve ‘forgiven’ the Coalition years, then plus a number of new voters who want as little Brexit as possible , i.e. the Single Market, the LD’s could easily be up to the 6m mark.
There really has to be an award for the most Optimistic LibDem Prognostication ("The Golden Sandal").
In the absence of Mark Senior, you’re winning here.
While LDs will clearly benefit from an early election I can't remotely see what's in it for Labour and the SNP and I'd be tempted today to vote against dissolution if I was in their shoes.
whats in it for Labour is their survival as an electable party
without Jezza they may just come through, another two years and who knows what shape theyll be in. If the LDs had a leader theyd be driving Labour out of existence.
Ed miliband truly was an idiot
I'm sure some backbenchers with ultra safe seats take that view but why would the leadership back one at this time or indeed any Labour MP with a majority of less than say 8000?
I didnt say it would be comfortable for them.
Mrs May has set some cats among their pigeons, they have some horrible trade offs they have to make. But theyre going to have to make them.
Still surprised Labour's apparent position is to support this.
So am I - particularly as the SNP are going to abstain. 150 Labour MPs need to abstain to block it.
It is mental, labour should vote against and tell may to get on with the job of running the country. Why they want to give her a free ticket on brexit etc is just stupid.
While LDs will clearly benefit from an early election I can't remotely see what's in it for Labour and the SNP and I'd be tempted today to vote against dissolution if I was in their shoes.
The SNP get a renewed mandate of probably 50+ seats with an manifesto commitment to a second referendum (which will be undeliverable but which they will say still constituted a mandate from the people of Scotland).
What's in it for Labour? Very little. But then Corbyn has never been the greatest tactician or strategist. Faced with the option though, it's not a good look to be scared of the electorate. For the MPs - most of whom who choose to fight will expect to survive - it means ending the Corbyn nightmare and an earlier chance to start rebuilding.
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
I'm not sure I follow. What terms would they ask for?
TMay to appear in a leaders' debate for one.
Anything beyond that? I guess timing? He can't exactly ask her not to field candidates in certain constituencies.
If Labour lose Hartlepool then they are more comprehensively and royally screwed than Messalina's bodyguards. UKIP were second last time and the Conservatives haven't won the seat since the 1959 election.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
If I were a Labour MP I would seriously campaign on a message of "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." I would have nothing to lose in doing that and could keep hold of voters for whom Corbyn is a deal-breaker.
The problem for many is not so much Corbyn himself (although clearly he is a marxist tramp with terrorist buddies) but the party that wilfully elects the likes of him to leadership. Shot of Corbyn the membership is still the membership. Toxic to most WWC ex-Labour voters.
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
The only people who care about parliamentary procedure post on this website. It doesn't matter at all.
Still surprised Labour's apparent position is to support this.
So am I - particularly as the SNP are going to abstain. 150 Labour MPs need to abstain to block it.
It is mental, labour should vote against and tell may to get on with the job of running the country. Why they want to give her a free ticket on brexit etc is just stupid.
If Labour vote against there wont be an electable party by 2020.
Comments
Such a two-faced strategy works extremely well for parties with no hope of power, as they never have to actually implement their two-faces (vide the LibDems until 2010, & the SNP/PC).
It may well work for Labour this time.
What I actually suspect is that there will a complete collapse of Labour discipline, and it will be every MP for themselves. So, a Labour MP in Remainer Cambridge will be a Staunch Remainer, a Labour MP in Leaver North East will miraculously be a Staunch Leaver.
90 per cent of Labour MPs will state they accept the verdict of their constituency in the Referendum (whether Remain or Leave) and are keen to implement it.
This will limit Labour losses, so (unless the campaign is a complete catastrophe), I don’t think the Tories will get a landslide, or the LDs get to 20 seats.
Probably any Labour MP with a majority of < 2000 -3000 is gone, but the rest pull through.
In utterly unrelated news (I thought some light relief might be welcome), there are some rather good games pencilled in for this year. There's The Last of Us II, Shadow of War, and Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Intrigued to see how the last stands up, been following its development for some time and it looks promising.
Corbyn will certainly cost Labour a extra chunk of seats but Labour's problems go way beyond his leadership.
https://twitter.com/undefined/status/854605818175660032
https://twitter.com/IainWrightMP/status/854605818175660032/photo/1
If Labour/SNP do abstain and block a GE then they will be unable to complain about anything that TMay does for the next 3 years.
PM: "This is our Brexit policy."
LotO: "We think that's bad."
PM: "Really, shall we ask the public about it?"
LotO: "Er..... no." (Sits down to much laughter)
Hartlepool is going to be interesting. Close to a UKIP win at the last election it's a harder call than most of the others in the North East...
Then call a vote of no confidence.
Better an honourable exit than a humiliating defeat?
Every yellow diamond I see down in Hampshire raises my blood pressure.
The snag is that you can't vote against an election, vote for a MONC and then say it's voting down the latter that stopped an election.
Even somebody as thick as Arlene Foster with Diane Abbott's IQ subtracted wouldn't swallow that.
Those who came closest were Tristram Hunt and, in particular, Ed Balls.
Andy Burnham is a walking embarrassment and the only time you hear from Yvette is when she pops up to ask other people to take more refugees into their homes.
More likely he couldn't face the thought of trying to defend Corbyn or worse, pass him off as a possible PM for six weeks. You can hardly blame him for that.
Unless something dramatic happens, of course.
To misquote Murray Walker: anything can happen in British politics, and it usually does.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/854612615192092672
The funnier bit is in the campaign to save the local A&E service the council highlighted the traffic issues getting (mainly) in and out of town as if that was a reason for saving it - sorry folks but that is a reason for moving it to the other possibly site...
The problem is that the first sentence is correct. We can only get what we can negotiate.
The only choices for the negotiator are Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn or Tim Farron or (for Scotland) Nicola Sturgeon. Of those 4 names, only the two women are actually credible in this role as a tough negotiator.
Corbyn has some strengths, but he has been caught in a trap in which his strengths will count for nothing.
Although given my record of political predictions.
It's probably the kiss of death.
20 is an average result, anything more would be serious progress. A sensational result would be beating Labour in the popular vote, which isn't unfortunately as crazy as it sounds.
Not my type of bet but for bigger punters that's like finding money in the street.
And then what? Tories could try to limit the damage by abstaining, but then Lab could also abstain, so the two outcomes are May is so useless she lost a no confidence vote, or May is so useless she couldn't even lose a no confidence vote when she wanted to. Corbyn is in a position to do tremendous damage, and has absolutely nothing to lose. And if he is too thick to think of this stuff for himself perhaps Angus Robertson could give him some hints.
But I'm braced for the worst.
It'll be as bigger kick to the balls as when Dave announced his resignation.
Not sure how much they'll let you have but Christmas is here.
Labour to win more votes than Lib Dems ....... 1/4
In 2015 Labour won 9,347 million votes or 30.4% of the popular vote, almost four times as many as the LibDems with 2.415 million votes or 7.9%, a difference between the parties therefore of 6.932 million votes.
It is surely inconceivable that the Yellow Team could get anywhere near overhauling Labour's level of support. Were they to halve the gap to around 3.5 million votes, that in itself would be pretty sensational.
There aren't too many occasions when Shadsy hands out free money, but this opportunity to make a 25% return on your money in just a few short weeks is surely one such occasion.
Not a terribly exciting bet, but it looks like an absolute certainty.
That said, DYOR.
Plus there is no certainty as to against whom the wheel of blame would eventually stop.
I do, however, like the possible " well if you really want an election, call the VONC." But still a longshot, especially with Jezza in charge.
The expected Tory landslide may change a few things, and landslides do not often bring good governments.
The Tory party may well look much less like the party of Southern England, while the LDs may well shift very much in that direction. The balance of power in the parliamentary Con party could shift quite a bit to post Industrial Britain from the Stockbroker belt.
I am suggesting they oppose the Government motion for dissolution (opposition, there's an idea) and put a motion of no confidence in the Government which the PM would have to back based on the preceeding logic.
The end result is the same. Election. Corbyn gone.
The difference is Labour in the driving seat. The PM embarrassed.
It's simple, and obvious, and therefore will not happen.
For pb with its enthusiastic Whiggery, the analogue is: The prediction showing the LibDems with the lowest seats is the most accurate.
That certainly worked in 2015.
I think the LibDems will get ~ 10 seats. What they have, minus Carshalton, plus a couple of London seats (Twickenham + Richmond + Sutton), plus maybe Bath, plus a returning Scottish seat (maybe Edin W or Fife NE).
If they get to 15, they will have done superbly. I don’t think they’ll take (m)any seats off Labour.
"We spend £xx million a week on nuclear weapons, let's give it to the NHS instead."
without Jezza they may just come through, another two years and who knows what shape theyll be in. If the LDs had a leader theyd be driving Labour out of existence.
Ed miliband truly was an idiot
An increase in share of the vote to 14% region seems achievable. They will target ruthlessly and Labour being a pile of cr*p will help but the cross current of UKIP voters moving to May and the strength of the Tories will mitigate against a significant yellow peril resurgence.
Realistically a few gains in London, the south, south west and in University seats and suburbs seems achievable. In Scotland Edinburgh West and Fife NE may follow the Holyrood elections and provide team yellow with a respectable return in conjunction with retaining O&S.
Labour would look like a political force instead of Tezza's little helpers.
KISS. I don't personally have a problem with an election, but it isn't difficult for Labour not to fall into May's trap.
Indeed. The response to "Don't worry about Corbyn. We're getting rid of him." is "Well why was he there in the first place?".
Unless he is abruptly removed and even more abruptly replaced, neither of which are physically possible, that answer won't wash.
@faisalislam: Id have thought the political theatre of forcing a PM to table a no confidence motion in herself, might have tempted the Opposition, but no
@faisalislam: E.g. Corbyn could've said: happy to negotiate terms for Lab to vote for GE, but if PM wants to unilaterally, confidence mechanism available
PS Everyone KNOWS Corbyn is out after this election, so your point applies anyway. It's a way of asking people to keep to the faith.
In the absence of Mark Senior, you’re winning here.
Mrs May has set some cats among their pigeons, they have some horrible trade offs they have to make. But theyre going to have to make them.
What's in it for Labour? Very little. But then Corbyn has never been the greatest tactician or strategist. Faced with the option though, it's not a good look to be scared of the electorate. For the MPs - most of whom who choose to fight will expect to survive - it means ending the Corbyn nightmare and an earlier chance to start rebuilding.
When George Osborne becomes PM, he'll get that peerage and I'll get my knighthood.
Its SDP 2 time.