Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Don't you need to add the Bayrou total to Hollande+Melanchon in 2012 ?
But Macron is a long way lower than Hollande was in 2012 - Holland got over 50% in the three tropical territories.
Macron is only getting half of the former Hollande vote.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
The Welsh poll tomorrow is likely going to show no Labour seats west or north of the Valleys. Which will be horrific enough. But if Labour truly melts down, and the valleys aren't ultra safe, which seats there might also fall? Would welcome your thoughts....
Torfaen.
Interesting call. If the Tories can mop up the UKIP vote and Labour does drop markedly, that could be a big win for the blues. Labour has been lucky in the past that they have had an evenly split opposition.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
Those who published such results are reliable sources (for ex Belgian state TV). They will usually also leak the exit poll earlier .
However, I would read the Outre-mér trends as fun at this point. The Metropole may move in different directions, especially how the former Hollande vote split this time (in those American territories it's breaking towards Melenchon).
It's like trends in Liverpool wouldn't necessarily match the trend in the rest of UK.
Kind of a shame they can't have Ukip 6.5, Green 3.25 mind you.
Assuming Labour levels of support holding up at around 44% in London, and in the low 50s in Manchester and Liverpool, back of the envelope gives Labour on 19% in the rest of England. Is that right?
We don't have the tables yet for the latest YouGov, but the previous poll was only a few days before that and gave similar headline VI.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15 Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15 Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8 North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11 Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
I take your point about whether Trafalgar really saved England from threat of invasion in 1805/6. That must remain a matter for debate. What I think sets it above the Nile is that it shattered French and Spanish claims to seapower superiority not just for the remainder of the Napoleonic war but for the rest of the 19th century. Not until the early 20th century was the RNs mastery in the big oceans seriously challenged.
Mr. Fishing's new list seems very reasonable to me, though I am sure some would quibble over detail. I wonder what Mr. Dura_Ace, gent of this parish and former RN officer, would make of it.
The French innovation of promoting from the ranks worked well in the army, up against officers of their opponents mostly appointed through privilege, wealth and connection. In the navy, where some knowledge of commanding a ship came in handy, it wasn't such a success.
On the original tack (!) wasn’t the effect of the loss of the Prince of Wales etc off Singapore much more importnat in the event than the loss at Beachy Head. The French, after all, didn’t follow it up; the Japanese did.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Don't you need to add the Bayrou total to Hollande+Melanchon in 2012 ?
But Macron is a long way lower than Hollande was in 2012 - Holland got over 50% in the three tropical territories.
Macron is only getting half of the former Hollande vote.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Don't you need to add the Bayrou total to Hollande+Melanchon in 2012 ?
But Macron is a long way lower than Hollande was in 2012 - Holland got over 50% in the three tropical territories.
Macron is only getting half of the former Hollande vote.
The increases in Melanchon's vote are huge - more than tripled.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
The Welsh poll tomorrow is likely going to show no Labour seats west or north of the Valleys. Which will be horrific enough. But if Labour truly melts down, and the valleys aren't ultra safe, which seats there might also fall? Would welcome your thoughts....
Torfaen.
Interesting call. If the Tories can mop up the UKIP vote and Labour does drop markedly, that could be a big win for the blues. Labour has been lucky in the past that they have had an evenly split opposition.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
In the most recently available YouGov tables, you have 20% of the 2015 LD vote going Tory, and 5% of the 2015 Tory vote going LD.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
I take your point about whether Trafalgar really saved England from threat of invasion in 1805/6. That must remain a matter for debate. What I think sets it above the Nile is that it shattered French and Spanish claims to seapower superiority not just for the remainder of the Napoleonic war but for the rest of the 19th century. Not until the early 20th century was the RNs mastery in the big oceans seriously challenged.
Mr. Fishing's new list seems very reasonable to me, though I am sure some would quibble over detail. I wonder what Mr. Dura_Ace, gent of this parish and former RN officer, would make of it.
The French innovation of promoting from the ranks worked well in the army, up against officers of their opponents mostly appointed through privilege, wealth and connection. In the navy, where some knowledge of commanding a ship came in handy, it wasn't such a success.
Eventually, promoting from the ranks did let Napoleon down on land as well as at sea - see Ney's complete lack of tactical nouse at Waterloo for an example. Whereas, the allied armies professionalism won through, even if its officers were appointed for the "wrong" reasons.
I have two papers that one day I will get round to finishing and publishing. The first investigates the myth that discipline in the RN at the time of the Napoleonic War was harsh in the context of the day. The second explores the way that the RN of that period produced very, very good leaders, even though the basic system was based on nepotism, influence and connection.
If the Tories really are strong seconds in Scotland, surely there's a chance of the SNP slipping in a lot more than 10 seats? DYOR, but the 12/1 at Skybet on the SNP failing to win a majority of Scottish seats looks a good longshot to me. It's basically a 12/1 bet on the Tories doing so, which seems less crazy if they actually do poll 50% nationally.
Not a prayer. The Conservatives would be very pleased with 3 seats. The 12 projected by Curtice based on the Panelbase survey would be extraordinary.
But even if the Tories and Lib Dems combined took 15, that would still leave the SNP with 44.
So long as (a) Scottish politics remains divided along Unionist/Nationalist lines, and (b) SLAB is still alive, the SNP are (mostly) untouchable.
My logic is as follows:
1. Let's assume the two Scottish polls are correct. Thus Scotland currently is roughly 43%/29% SNP/Tory. 2. Given the FPTP system and minimal non SNP/Tory strongholds, let's assume the Tories are likely to win a majority of Scottish seats if they win a plurality of votes. (A couple of LD seats benefit the bet, but are of relatively minor importance. SLAB's final seat slightly harms the bet, but is likewise minor.)
Question: Are the chances of Tory momentum increasing for a further ~6% swing more or less than 8% (12/1)? Conclusion: Given Tory strength and recent Scottish volatility, probably, though it remains unlikely.
CUCKOO, lets suppose my grandmother had cojones , was she my grandfather , answer is a resounding NO.
I made two assumptions: that the polls are right and that the party with the most votes will win the most seats. The first is unknowable, since there's still 6 weeks of campaigning. How much do you want to bet on the second?
Kind of a shame they can't have Ukip 6.5, Green 3.25 mind you.
Assuming Labour levels of support holding up at around 44% in London, and in the low 50s in Manchester and Liverpool, back of the envelope gives Labour on 19% in the rest of England. Is that right?
We don't have the tables yet for the latest YouGov, but the previous poll was only a few days before that and gave similar headline VI.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15 Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15 Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8 North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11 Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
LDs really struggling in MIdlands/Wales.
It occurs that even if the results in England, Wales and Scotland are not as dramatic as the latest polling rounds would indicate (and even if they were in Scotland that would not be as dramatic as in 2015), they will still be pretty significant, meaning the only place where it is likely to be broadly business as usual is NI. Comment on that though and we'll just get typical 'You don't understand NI' responses.
If the Tories really are strong seconds in Scotland, surely there's a chance of the SNP slipping in a lot more than 10 seats? DYOR, but the 12/1 at Skybet on the SNP failing to win a majority of Scottish seats looks a good longshot to me. It's basically a 12/1 bet on the Tories doing so, which seems less crazy if they actually do poll 50% nationally.
Not a prayer. The Conservatives would be very pleased with 3 seats. The 12 projected by Curtice based on the Panelbase survey would be extraordinary.
But even if the Tories and Lib Dems combined took 15, that would still leave the SNP with 44.
So long as (a) Scottish politics remains divided along Unionist/Nationalist lines, and (b) SLAB is still alive, the SNP are (mostly) untouchable.
My logic is as follows:
1. Let's assume the two Scottish polls are correct. Thus Scotland currently is roughly 43%/29% SNP/Tory. 2. Given the FPTP system and minimal non SNP/Tory strongholds, let's assume the Tories are likely to win a majority of Scottish seats if they win a plurality of votes. (A couple of LD seats benefit the bet, but are of relatively minor importance. SLAB's final seat slightly harms the bet, but is likewise minor.)
Question: Are the chances of Tory momentum increasing for a further ~6% swing more or less than 8% (12/1)? Conclusion: Given Tory strength and recent Scottish volatility, probably, though it remains unlikely.
CUCKOO, lets suppose my grandmother had cojones , was she my grandfather , answer is a resounding NO.
I made two assumptions: that the polls are right and that the party with the most votes will win the most seats. The first is unknowable, since there's still 6 weeks of campaigning. How much do you want to bet on the second?
Who will get most votes in Scotland?
Probably the SNP, as I've said. The question is about probabilities.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
The Welsh poll tomorrow is likely going to show no Labour seats west or north of the Valleys. Which will be horrific enough. But if Labour truly melts down, and the valleys aren't ultra safe, which seats there might also fall? Would welcome your thoughts....
Torfaen.
Interesting call. If the Tories can mop up the UKIP vote and Labour does drop markedly, that could be a big win for the blues. Labour has been lucky in the past that they have had an evenly split opposition.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
That's a good question, I think its the assumption that the people who voted LD in 2010 but switched to Lab in 2015 will largely come back to LD in 2017. This may indeed happen, but it may be swamped by other swings, UKIP to Con, Lab to Con, and as discussed even some LD to Con. + the new incumbency factor.
SW of London may be different, but I don't expect there to be many LD gains in the SW of England.
And IMO to replace Beachy Head with Chesapeake Bay.
So we now have:
-140 Spanish Armada -120 Battle of the Nile -100 Trafalgar -80 Quiberon Bay -60 Taranto -40 Dogger Bank -20 The Saints 0 Cape Finisterre +20 Sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse +40 Chesapeake Bay
In the most recently available YouGov tables, you have 20% of the 2015 LD vote going Tory, and 5% of the 2015 Tory vote going LD.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
The Welsh poll tomorrow is likely going to show no Labour seats west or north of the Valleys. Which will be horrific enough. But if Labour truly melts down, and the valleys aren't ultra safe, which seats there might also fall? Would welcome your thoughts....
Torfaen.
Interesting call. If the Tories can mop up the UKIP vote and Labour does drop markedly, that could be a big win for the blues. Labour has been lucky in the past that they have had an evenly split opposition.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
It's 2015 LDs to Tories.
The figure the other way is 3-5% of Tories going to the LDs.
In rough and ready terms they will each take 400k-500k worth of votes from each other. I guess the question is in which places?
If the Tories really are strong seconds in Scotland, surely there's a chance of the SNP slipping in a lot more than 10 seats? DYOR, but the 12/1 at Skybet on the SNP failing to win a majority of Scottish seats looks a good longshot to me. It's basically a 12/1 bet on the Tories doing so, which seems less crazy if they actually do poll 50% nationally.
Not a prayer. The Conservatives would be very pleased with 3 seats. The 12 projected by Curtice based on the Panelbase survey would be extraordinary.
But even if the Tories and Lib Dems combined took 15, that would still leave the SNP with 44.
So long as (a) Scottish politics remains divided along Unionist/Nationalist lines, and (b) SLAB is still alive, the SNP are (mostly) untouchable.
My logic is as follows:
1. Let's assume the two Scottish polls are correct. Thus Scotland currently is roughly 43%/29% SNP/Tory. 2. Given the FPTP system and minimal non SNP/Tory strongholds, let's assume the Tories are likely to win a majority of Scottish seats if they win a plurality of votes. (A couple of LD seats benefit the bet, but are of relatively minor importance. SLAB's final seat slightly harms the bet, but is likewise minor.)
Question: Are the chances of Tory momentum increasing for a further ~6% swing more or less than 8% (12/1)? Conclusion: Given Tory strength and recent Scottish volatility, probably, though it remains unlikely.
CUCKOO, lets suppose my grandmother had cojones , was she my grandfather , answer is a resounding NO.
I made two assumptions: that the polls are right and that the party with the most votes will win the most seats. The first is unknowable, since there's still 6 weeks of campaigning. How much do you want to bet on the second?
Who will get most votes in Scotland?
Probably the SNP, as I've said. The question is about probabilities.
I was asking if your bet was who gets most votes , ie SNP or Tories. If that is your intention I will have £50 on SNP getting more votes than the Tories.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
Edit: sorry Melenchon is up more than i thought. Please ignore this post.
Do we think Centre is going to be as radical as Guyana? Probably not. That's what it comes down to. Two credible revolutionary candidates compared to none last time.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That looks very good for Melanchon and Le Pen.
Doesn't anyone have data on what par would have been? IIRC that Reunion and other of the external departments vote quite differently to metropolitan France
Think I am going to put a small sum on Fillon this afternoon on the grounds that if he just squeezes past Macron he would still probably beat Le Pen in the runoff and at abour 6-1 plus it is worth a punt. However I still expect it to be a Macron v Le Pen runoff
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That looks very good for Melanchon and Le Pen.
Doesn't anyone have data on what par would have been? IIRC that Reunion and other of the external departments vote quite differently to metropolitan France
There simply isn't a comparison. Macron lacks Hollande's appeal, Le Pen is higher, perhaps, but we can't be more certain than that. It's like putting a par on Gibraltar in the EUref.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That's a remarkable result for Le Pen in Guyane. An alleged racist, hard right leader coming second in a largely minority ethnic *colony*?
But I don't know the context. Maybe Guyane is always rightwing or eccentric?
There have been large-scale protests that have shut down much of the region, basically about feeling left behind by the French state.
When you consider that many of the few ethnic French there are in the region are high-paid spaceport workers unlikely to vote for Le Pen it is even more crazy.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That looks very good for Melanchon and Le Pen.
Doesn't anyone have data on what par would have been? IIRC that Reunion and other of the external departments vote quite differently to metropolitan France
That's the problem. These are hardly typical places, and Guyana in particular has been an absolute disaster zone in the last couple of years thanks to commodity price moves.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
And IMO to replace Beachy Head with Chesapeake Bay.
So we now have:
-140 Spanish Armada -120 Battle of the Nile -100 Trafalgar -80 Quiberon Bay -60 Taranto -40 Dogger Bank -20 The Saints 0 Cape Finisterre +20 Sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse +40 Chesapeake Bay
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That's a remarkable result for Le Pen in Guyane. An alleged racist, hard right leader coming second in a largely minority ethnic *colony*?
But I don't know the context. Maybe Guyane is always rightwing or eccentric?
Unemployment has gone through the roof there as commodity prices have come down. I think it's moved from 12% to north of 30%.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That's a remarkable result for Le Pen in Guyane. An alleged racist, hard right leader coming second in a largely minority ethnic *colony*?
But I don't know the context. Maybe Guyane is always rightwing or eccentric?
There have been large-scale protests that have shut down much of the region, basically about feeling left behind by the French state.
When you consider that many of the few ethnic French there in the region are high-paid spaceport workers unlikely to vote for Le Pen it is even more crazy.
There are only a couple of hundred native French at the space port, i think.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
I make it that Melanchon is up about 20 ?
Please let it be Melanchon vs Marine
Please let it not be.
A disaster for France, the EU and more importantly my book.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
I make it that Melanchon is up about 20 ?
Yes, i edited it to say ignore :-)
I've just increased my red on Fillon and increased my green on Melanchon.
If the Tories really are strong seconds in Scotland, surely there's a chance of the SNP slipping in a lot more than 10 seats? DYOR, but the 12/1 at Skybet on the SNP failing to win a majority of Scottish seats looks a good longshot to me. It's basically a 12/1 bet on the Tories doing so, which seems less crazy if they actually do poll 50% nationally.
Not a prayer. The Conservatives would be very pleased with 3 seats. The 12 projected by Curtice based on the Panelbase survey would be extraordinary.
But even if the Tories and Lib Dems combined took 15, that would still leave the SNP with 44.
So long as (a) Scottish politics remains divided along Unionist/Nationalist lines, and (b) SLAB is still alive, the SNP are (mostly) untouchable.
My logic is as follows:
1. Let's assume the two Scottish polls are correct. Thus Scotland currently is roughly 43%/29% SNP/Tory. 2. Given the FPTP system and minimal non SNP/Tory strongholds, let's assume the Tories are likely to win a majority of Scottish seats if they win a plurality of votes. (A couple of LD seats benefit the bet, but are of relatively minor importance. SLAB's final seat slightly harms the bet, but is likewise minor.)
Question: Are the chances of Tory momentum increasing for a further ~6% swing more or less than 8% (12/1)? Conclusion: Given Tory strength and recent Scottish volatility, probably, though it remains unlikely.
CUCKOO, lets suppose my grandmother had cojones , was she my grandfather , answer is a resounding NO.
I made two assumptions: that the polls are right and that the party with the most votes will win the most seats. The first is unknowable, since there's still 6 weeks of campaigning. How much do you want to bet on the second?
Who will get most votes in Scotland?
Probably the SNP, as I've said. The question is about probabilities.
I was asking if your bet was who gets most votes , ie SNP or Tories. If that is your intention I will have £50 on SNP getting more votes than the Tories.
My bet was whether the party which wins the most votes will win the most seats, whichever party that is. That's the only testable assumption I've stated, and I thought you were suggesting I made cuckoo assumptions.
Kind of a shame they can't have Ukip 6.5, Green 3.25 mind you.
Assuming Labour levels of support holding up at around 44% in London, and in the low 50s in Manchester and Liverpool, back of the envelope gives Labour on 19% in the rest of England. Is that right?
We don't have the tables yet for the latest YouGov, but the previous poll was only a few days before that and gave similar headline VI.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15 Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15 Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8 North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11 Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
LDs really struggling in MIdlands/Wales.
It occurs that even if the results in England, Wales and Scotland are not as dramatic as the latest polling rounds would indicate (and even if they were in Scotland that would not be as dramatic as in 2015), they will still be pretty significant, meaning the only place where it is likely to be broadly business as usual is NI. Comment on that though and we'll just get typical 'You don't understand NI' responses.
The Lib Dems suffered especially badly in Wales post-2010. I guess it hardly helps that Welsh politics is the most plural - Plaid and, more recently, Ukip have been factors there as well as the old big two-and-a-half. Their performance in the Assembly election was absolutely dismal, and they have one surviving Westminster MP.
The Lib Dems have also been entirely eradicated from the Midlands at Parliamentary level.
The Scottish wing has been pluckily fighting its corner these past few years, and they've decent chances of a couple of gains up there. However, what's left of the party is, primarily, Southern English in focus. Of the 16 LD targets requiring swings from the incumbent of 5% or less, 12 are in the South, 1 is in the North, and 3 are in Scotland.
It is dangerous to read too much into the overseas results, it is not like they were representative of the Metropole in 2012 either...
The only interesting thing for me is Macron perhaps not consolidating enough of the Hollande vote.
I remind you of my post yesterday about, having psyched myself to place a bet on Macron vs LePen for the final two, I turned up at Laddies, only to discover that it had gone.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
...
Torfaen.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
In the most recently available YouGov tables, you have 20% of the 2015 LD vote going Tory, and 5% of the 2015 Tory vote going LD.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
Indeed - though with ICM Labour's vote share has been pretty stable since last summer. Yougov have also had them mostly in the 24% - 26% range since beginning of December. The sudden jump in the Tory lead reflects a UKIP - rather than Labour - collapse.
And IMO to replace Beachy Head with Chesapeake Bay.
So we now have:
-140 Spanish Armada -120 Battle of the Nile -100 Trafalgar -80 Quiberon Bay -60 Taranto -40 Dogger Bank -20 The Saints 0 Cape Finisterre +20 Sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse +40 Chesapeake Bay
Interesting list, Mr. Brooke. A Conservative majority of of 140 should be likened to the fall of Singapore but a Labour increase of seats of 40 to the battle of Vitoria - not a set of comparisons I would agree with though some might. I am surprised that you do.
If the Tories really are strong seconds in Scotland, surely there's a chance of the SNP slipping in a lot more than 10 seats? DYOR, but the 12/1 at Skybet on the SNP failing to win a majority of Scottish seats looks a good longshot to me. It's basically a 12/1 bet on the Tories doing so, which seems less crazy if they actually do poll 50% nationally.
Not a prayer. The Conservatives would be very pleased with 3 seats. The 12 projected by Curtice based on the Panelbase survey would be extraordinary.
But even if the Tories and Lib Dems combined took 15, that would still leave the SNP with 44.
So long as (a) Scottish politics remains divided along Unionist/Nationalist lines, and (b) SLAB is still alive, the SNP are (mostly) untouchable.
My logic is as follows:
1. Let's assume the two Scottish polls are correct. Thus Scotland currently is roughly 43%/29% SNP/Tory. 2. Given the FPTP system and minimal non SNP/Tory strongholds, let's assume the Tories are likely to win a majority of Scottish seats if they win a plurality of votes. (A couple of LD seats benefit the bet, but are of relatively minor importance. SLAB's final seat slightly harms the bet, but is likewise minor.)
Question: Are the chances of Tory momentum increasing for a further ~6% swing more or less than 8% (12/1)? Conclusion: Given Tory strength and recent Scottish volatility, probably, though it remains unlikely.
CUCKOO, lets suppose my grandmother had cojones , was she my grandfather , answer is a resounding NO.
I made two assumptions: that the polls are right and that the party with the most votes will win the most seats. The first is unknowable, since there's still 6 weeks of campaigning. How much do you want to bet on the second?
Who will get most votes in Scotland?
Probably the SNP, as I've said. The question is about probabilities.
I was asking if your bet was who gets most votes , ie SNP or Tories. If that is your intention I will have £50 on SNP getting more votes than the Tories.
My bet was whether the party which wins the most votes will win the most seats, whichever party that is. That's the only testable assumption I've stated, and I thought you were suggesting I made cuckoo assumptions.
My cuckoo was to the Tories winning most seats which I say is as likely as me flying to the moon. SNP will have most votes and majority of seats , that is a certainty
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
How does that compare with 2012?
Assuming that the Le Pen moves are replicated in metropolitan France, that would mean age is up 7-8 points to 24-25 and the Les Republicain candidate is down 9 to around 17-18.
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
I make it that Melanchon is up about 20 ?
Please let it be Melanchon vs Marine
Two candidates who think the problem with France is that it's too business friendly.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
OK but, do we have a reasonable comparison with an earlier election? the others may not have stood but how did Le Pen do last time?
Hollande won Martinique, Guyane, Guadaloupe and St Pierre and Miquelon in 2012 but St Martin and Saint Barthelemy backed Sarkozy so the latter will be interesting to watch, if Le Pen wins there or Macron or Melenchon they will almost certainly be in the runoff and Fillon out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2012
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
In the most recently available YouGov tables, you have 20% of the 2015 LD vote going Tory, and 5% of the 2015 Tory vote going LD.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
If Lab votes go to Lib and Con, does that help Libs or help Con? Are there Labour Remain areas in which the Libs are not infinitesimal? (do such chimarae exist?)
My cuckoo was to the Tories winning most seats which I say is as likely as me flying to the moon. SNP will have most votes and majority of seats , that is a certainty
That's what I love about the internet. This disagreement comes down to me thinking the Tories have a 10% chance of winning Scotland and you thinking it's 0%. Thank goodness you called me names to make clear how absurdly far apart our views are.
And IMO to replace Beachy Head with Chesapeake Bay.
So we now have:
-140 Spanish Armada -120 Battle of the Nile -100 Trafalgar -80 Quiberon Bay -60 Taranto -40 Dogger Bank -20 The Saints 0 Cape Finisterre +20 Sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse +40 Chesapeake Bay
Interesting list, Mr. Brooke. A Conservative majority of of 140 should be likened to the fall of Singapore but a Labour increase of seats of 40 to the battle of Vitoria - not a set of comparisons I would agree with though some might. I am surprised that you do.
Ah Mr L, I understood us to be rating the scale of Labour's losses ( as seen by Labour )
Interesting list, Mr. Brooke. A Conservative majority of of 140 should be likened to the fall of Singapore but a Labour increase of seats of 40 to the battle of Vitoria - not a set of comparisons I would agree with though some might. I am surprised that you do.
Yes, I would have reversed the order, too. -140 Agincourt - 120 Vitoria -100 Blenheim, etc., down to +40 Singapore. There are more glorious military victories in our history than catastrophic defeats, at least in big, set piece battles.
I take your point about whether Trafalgar really saved England from threat of invasion in 1805/6. That must remain a matter for debate. What I think sets it above the Nile is that it shattered French and Spanish claims to seapower superiority not just for the remainder of the Napoleonic war but for the rest of the 19th century. Not until the early 20th century was the RNs mastery in the big oceans seriously challenged.
Mr. Fishing's new list seems very reasonable to me, though I am sure some would quibble over detail. I wonder what Mr. Dura_Ace, gent of this parish and former RN officer, would make of it.
The French innovation of promoting from the ranks worked well in the army, up against officers of their opponents mostly appointed through privilege, wealth and connection. In the navy, where some knowledge of commanding a ship came in handy, it wasn't such a success.
Eventually, promoting from the ranks did let Napoleon down on land as well as at sea - see Ney's complete lack of tactical nouse at Waterloo for an example. Whereas, the allied armies professionalism won through, even if its officers were appointed for the "wrong" reasons.
I have two papers that one day I will get round to finishing and publishing. The first investigates the myth that discipline in the RN at the time of the Napoleonic War was harsh in the context of the day. The second explores the way that the RN of that period produced very, very good leaders, even though the basic system was based on nepotism, influence and connection.
NAM Rodger is outstanding on the RN.
As he put it, the prospect of being drowned through incompetence concentrates the mind wonderfully. A Captain won't appoint stupid friends or relatives as his officers when they could sink his ship. Nor will he recommend them to other captains.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Someone suggested yesterday UKIP acted as a bit of a gateway for former Lab to now switch to Con.
Switcher Numbers to Con (across ICM, ComRes, Survation, Yougov)
Labour Range: 6-13% Lib Dem range: 13-22% UKIP range: 34-48%
Is that 13-22% of 2015 LibDem voters switching to Tory? What is the opposite direction? Or is that net? If so, how are LibDems going to be making gains from the Tories?
In the most recently available YouGov tables, you have 20% of the 2015 LD vote going Tory, and 5% of the 2015 Tory vote going LD.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
Indeed - though with ICM Labour's vote share has been pretty stable since last summer. Yougov have also had them mostly in the 24% - 26% range since beginning of December. The sudden jump in the Tory lead reflects a UKIP - rather than Labour - collapse.
Nevertheless the upshot is that Labour is down and out.
The LibDems usually put huge effort into their target shire campaigns telling voters that Labour cannot win. This time they will have every media outlet in the country doing the same for the next six weeks.
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
Kind of a shame they can't have Ukip 6.5, Green 3.25 mind you.
Assuming Labour levels of support holding up at around 44% in London, and in the low 50s in Manchester and Liverpool, back of the envelope gives Labour on 19% in the rest of England. Is that right?
We don't have the tables yet for the latest YouGov, but the previous poll was only a few days before that and gave similar headline VI.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15 Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15 Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8 North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11 Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
Why would you give Labour 50% in Gtr Manchester? In the City, maybe. They will be nowhere near that. Bolton, Stockport, Bury and Trafford already have Tory MP's. Wigan and Salford may well get 45%. Merseyside also has Southport and Wirral. They will be delighted with 45% in Merseyside as a whole.
Kind of a shame they can't have Ukip 6.5, Green 3.25 mind you.
Assuming Labour levels of support holding up at around 44% in London, and in the low 50s in Manchester and Liverpool, back of the envelope gives Labour on 19% in the rest of England. Is that right?
We don't have the tables yet for the latest YouGov, but the previous poll was only a few days before that and gave similar headline VI.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15 Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15 Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8 North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11 Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
LDs really struggling in MIdlands/Wales.
It occurs that even if the results in England, Wales and Scotland are not as dramatic as the latest polling rounds would indicate (and even if they were in Scotland that would not be as dramatic as in 2015), they will still be pretty significant, meaning the only place where it is likely to be broadly business as usual is NI. Comment on that though and we'll just get typical 'You don't understand NI' responses.
The Lib Dems suffered especially badly in Wales post-2010. I guess it hardly helps that Welsh politics is the most plural - Plaid and, more recently, Ukip have been factors there as well as the old big two-and-a-half. Their performance in the Assembly election was absolutely dismal, and they have one surviving Westminster MP.
The Lib Dems have also been entirely eradicated from the Midlands at Parliamentary level.
The Scottish wing has been pluckily fighting its corner these past few years, and they've decent chances of a couple of gains up there. However, what's left of the party is, primarily, Southern English in focus. Of the 16 LD targets requiring swings from the incumbent of 5% or less, 12 are in the South, 1 is in the North, and 3 are in Scotland.
They are shacked up with Labour in Wales, which was hardly good timing.
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
Does anyone have any thoughts on Ynys Mon? I've backed the Tories at 4/1.
Plaid pretty well nailed on. Wales opinion poll out tomorrow will confirm.
The Welsh poll tomorrow is likely going to show no Labour seats west or north of the Valleys. Which will be horrific enough. But if Labour truly melts down, and the valleys aren't ultra safe, which seats there might also fall? Would welcome your thoughts....
Torfaen.
Interesting call. If the Tories can mop up the UKIP vote and Labour does drop markedly, that could be a big win for the blues. Labour has been lucky in the past that they have had an evenly split opposition.
(I'm just looking to find my Gower equivalent win from last time! Torfaen might be it....)
Weren't we told that the UKIP vote was not all 'Tories on holiday' and that they were a danger to Labour?
Even if they are not. What choice do say the strongly leave inclined WWC ex Labour kippers have? There is no chance they will vote for the LDs because of their europhilia, they won't be going back to Labour because Corbyn and his right-on metro-Trotskyism, and they won't stay with the kippers because any fule can see they are imploding and it will be a wasted vote. They probably joined the kippers because they want to leave the EU, for which the only answer is to hold their noses and put the X next to Mrs May's offering.
Belgium and Swiss press is leaking result as usual...
Outre-mér that voted yesterday
Martinique: Mélenchon 27.36% Macron 25.53% Fillon 16.85% LePen 10.94% Hamon 9,75% Guyane: Mélenchon 24.72% LePen 24.29% Macron 18.75% Fillon 14.66% Hamon 5.69% Guadaloupe: : Macron 30.32% Mélenchon 23,99% Fillon 14.87% LePen 13.47% Hamon 9,72% St Pierre et Miquelon: : Mélenchon 35.45% LePen 18.16% Macron 17.97% Fillon 9,32% LHamon 8,24%
Waiting with trepidation for results from Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy
That's a remarkable result for Le Pen in Guyane. An alleged racist, hard right leader coming second in a largely minority ethnic *colony*?
But I don't know the context. Maybe Guyane is always rightwing or eccentric?
There have been large-scale protests that have shut down much of the region, basically about feeling left behind by the French state.
When you consider that many of the few ethnic French there are in the region are high-paid spaceport workers unlikely to vote for Le Pen it is even more crazy.
Christ. Imagine if it is Melenchon versus Le Pen.
If you were a sane Frenchman or woman, who would you vote for? It would have to be Le Pen, as Melenchon would destroy the economy. But the polls say Melanchon would win that run-off...
I still think it will be Macron v Le Pen. But, wow. These results are odd, even if they are Outremer.
Buckle up!
The real problem would be neither of them could govern. They wouldn't be able to approach a majority. Nothing would get done. Which is probably a good thing.
Interesting to see Tony Blair effectively backing tactical voting for 'soft Brexit' candidates on the World at One
Next, we need Hezza or Ken Clarke to do the same from the Tory side.
I would not be surprised to see Hezza certainly do the same
Ideally he should come out for a pre-electoral pact between pro-Remain Tories, pro-Remain Labour, Lib.Dems and Greens. Whichever candidate(s) is/are getting in the way would be asked to stand down - in Bath, it might be the Greens. He might like to talk to Gina Miller first if she's already putting money up.
I don't think anyone sensible would propose 'stopping Brexit'. The purpose of any pact is to stop the UK jumping off an economic cliff by adopting the most extreme position of any western European non-EU member state and elect MPs who will realise that and safeguard the UK's national interest.
Further evidence for Labourgeddon, based on recently released data from the British Election Study, compiled at the end of last year. Early evidence of the Ukip squeeze, and also of the breakdown of changes in the Labour vote by constituency. Labour appears to be doing disproportionately badly in its own territory.
"These figures represent the state of play in December of last year, using weights from even earlier. As I have already said, wave 10 of the BES, when weighted using the weights from the previous wave, under-estimates the increase in the Conservative vote share seen in current opinion polls. If all these swings are increased (or decreased) to bring them in line with current polling, the results could be truly disastrous for Labour. They would end up with fewer seats than would be predicted using a uniform national swing, because they would have fallen back in areas where the Conservatives are on the attack. Note though that the picture is complicated, and it's possible that Labour might gain some Conservative seats even as it loses many more of its own.
"Why might this pattern of changes occur? As Rob Ford has noted in today's Observer, patterns of vote switching are crucial. Apparently safe Labour seats could be jeopardised if Labour simultaneously leaks Remain votes to the Liberal Democrats and Leave votes to Ukip, while the Conservatives squeeze a large 2015 Ukip vote.
"The analysis above is more consistent with the second part of this analysis ("UKIP squeeze") than the first part. A fuller analysis would have to bring in much more individual level data, maybe even some small area estimation. There are, however, clear warning signs for Labour that the party may under-perform in seats its current miserable levels in (reported) vote share."
I'm not sure that I buy the idea of Labour making any gains against the Conservatives at all, if things carry on as they are; however, if the Tories lose five seats in one direction and gain 60 or 70 in the other, I'm sure they won't be that disappointed!
To what extent would the dynamics of the campaign be changed if disastrous Local election results on May 4th forced Corbyn to step down?
I think Labour are stuck with Corbyn now. They would find it exceptionally difficult to change a leader or PM candidate in the middle of a campaign. I'm not sure it's even possible.
When you consider that many of the few ethnic French there are in the region are high-paid spaceport workers unlikely to vote for Le Pen it is even more crazy.
French Guiana seems to be the Greece of South America - locked in an unsustainable currency union though shocks (in its case commodity prices) have just kneed its economy in the balls.
Further evidence for Labourgeddon, based on recently released data from the British Election Study, compiled at the end of last year. Early evidence of the Ukip squeeze, and also of the breakdown of changes in the Labour vote by constituency. Labour appears to be doing disproportionately badly in its own territory.
"These figures represent the state of play in December of last year, using weights from even earlier. As I have already said, wave 10 of the BES, when weighted using the weights from the previous wave, under-estimates the increase in the Conservative vote share seen in current opinion polls. If all these swings are increased (or decreased) to bring them in line with current polling, the results could be truly disastrous for Labour. They would end up with fewer seats than would be predicted using a uniform national swing, because they would have fallen back in areas where the Conservatives are on the attack. Note though that the picture is complicated, and it's possible that Labour might gain some Conservative seats even as it loses many more of its own.
"Why might this pattern of changes occur? As Rob Ford has noted in today's Observer, patterns of vote switching are crucial. Apparently safe Labour seats could be jeopardised if Labour simultaneously leaks Remain votes to the Liberal Democrats and Leave votes to Ukip, while the Conservatives squeeze a large 2015 Ukip vote.
"The analysis above is more consistent with the second part of this analysis ("UKIP squeeze") than the first part. A fuller analysis would have to bring in much more individual level data, maybe even some small area estimation. There are, however, clear warning signs for Labour that the party may under-perform in seats its current miserable levels in (reported) vote share."
I'm not sure that I buy the idea of Labour making any gains against the Conservatives at all, if things carry on as they are; however, if the Tories lose five seats in one direction and gain 60 or 70 in the other, I'm sure they won't be that disappointed!
There are almost always seats that move against the trend. Labour gained 2 in Liverpool from the Conservatives in 1983.
A few snippets from the Survation polls on Scotland:
Age Results
18-34: SNP 46 Tory 12 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 54% 35-54: SNP 37 Tory 24 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 68% 55 up: SNP 31 Tory 30 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 87%
10/10 Likelihood to Vote by 2015 Vote (suggested 71% turnout)
91.2% Liberal Democrat 87.4% Conservative 83.3% SNP 81.2% Labour
The Tories lead the SNP in South Scotland by 42-39 and the Highlands and Islands at 44-30. They are also ahead of Labour in Glasgow according to the subsample. The SNP lead in the majority of regions.
However, the under 35 and usually 'can't be bothered' vote seems to be sitting in the SNP's column.
I have two papers that one day I will get round to finishing and publishing. The first investigates the myth that discipline in the RN at the time of the Napoleonic War was harsh in the context of the day. The second explores the way that the RN of that period produced very, very good leaders, even though the basic system was based on nepotism, influence and connection.
They sound interesting. Lmk if you ever do get around to completing them.
To what extent would the dynamics of the campaign be changed if disastrous Local election results on May 4th forced Corbyn to step down?
God alone knows. But ditching your Prime Ministerial candidate in the middle of a General Election campaign isn't a good look, now is it?
On the one hand, Labour would be rid of Corbyn. On the other, they would have no replacement leader - just a caretaker. The party would appear to the electorate, and would be, entirely chaotic - and they wouldn't be able to ask the question of who the Prime Minister or any of the key members of a prospective Labour cabinet would be. How could they? The chances of the other key shadow ministers - McDonnell, Abbott and Thornberry - surviving the election of a more moderate leader would be nil, there wouldn't be the time available to elect a replacement, and the public would have no guarantee that they wouldn't end up with a similarly repulsive Far Leftist at the end of the process. Again, how could they? The PLP chose Corbyn in the first place, and the mass party membership voted for him. Twice.
Labour MP's position would move from "We think Jeremy Corbyn would make a shite Prime Minister. Vote Labour" to "We have no idea who we want to be the Prime Minister. Vote Labour." It's hard to know what's worse. At least about 15% of the population seems to rate Corbyn. Nobody can vote for an empty chair.
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
Interesting to see Tony Blair effectively backing tactical voting for 'soft Brexit' candidates on the World at One
Next, we need Hezza or Ken Clarke to do the same from the Tory side.
I would not be surprised to see Hezza certainly do the same
Ideally he should come out for a pre-electoral pact between pro-Remain Tories, pro-Remain Labour, Lib.Dems and Greens. Whichever candidate(s) is/are getting in the way would be asked to stand down - in Bath, it might be the Greens. He might like to talk to Gina Miller first if she's already putting money up.
I don't think anyone sensible would propose 'stopping Brexit'. The purpose of any pact is to stop the UK jumping off an economic cliff by adopting the most extreme position of any western European non-EU member state and elect MPs who will realise that and safeguard the UK's national interest.
Only just over 6 weeks left ...
Something like that, Blair suggested voting for LD, Labour or even Tory candidates if they had the most soft Brexit position of the leading candidates, although he said he himself would vote Labour
Further evidence for Labourgeddon, based on recently released data from the British Election Study, compiled at the end of last year. Early evidence of the Ukip squeeze, and also of the breakdown of changes in the Labour vote by constituency. Labour appears to be doing disproportionately badly in its own territory.
"These figures represent the state of play in December of last year, using weights from even earlier. As I have already said, wave 10 of the BES, when weighted using the weights from the previous wave, under-estimates the increase in the Conservative vote share seen in current opinion polls. If all these swings are increased (or decreased) to bring them in line with current polling, the results could be truly disastrous for Labour. They would end up with fewer seats than would be predicted using a uniform national swing, because they would have fallen back in areas where the Conservatives are on the attack. Note though that the picture is complicated, and it's possible that Labour might gain some Conservative seats even as it loses many more of its own.
"Why might this pattern of changes occur? As Rob Ford has noted in today's Observer, patterns of vote switching are crucial. Apparently safe Labour seats could be jeopardised if Labour simultaneously leaks Remain votes to the Liberal Democrats and Leave votes to Ukip, while the Conservatives squeeze a large 2015 Ukip vote.
"The analysis above is more consistent with the second part of this analysis ("UKIP squeeze") than the first part. A fuller analysis would have to bring in much more individual level data, maybe even some small area estimation. There are, however, clear warning signs for Labour that the party may under-perform in seats its current miserable levels in (reported) vote share."
I'm not sure that I buy the idea of Labour making any gains against the Conservatives at all, if things carry on as they are; however, if the Tories lose five seats in one direction and gain 60 or 70 in the other, I'm sure they won't be that disappointed!
There are almost always seats that move against the trend. Labour gained 2 in Liverpool from the Conservatives in 1983.
But in 1983 there were Boundary Changes so any Labour gains were in seats which were 'notionally' Tory in 1979.
To what extent would the dynamics of the campaign be changed if disastrous Local election results on May 4th forced Corbyn to step down?
God alone knows. But ditching your Prime Ministerial candidate in the middle of a General Election campaign isn't a good look, now is it?
On the one hand, Labour would be rid of Corbyn. On the other, they would have no replacement leader - just a caretaker. The party would appear to the electorate, and would be, entirely chaotic - and they wouldn't be able to ask the question of who the Prime Minister or any of the key members of a prospective Labour cabinet would be. How could they? The chances of the other key shadow ministers - McDonnell, Abbott and Thornberry - surviving the election of a more moderate leader would be nil, there wouldn't be the time available to elect a replacement, and the public would have no guarantee that they wouldn't end up with a similarly repulsive Far Leftist at the end of the process. Again, how could they? The PLP chose Corbyn in the first place, and the mass party membership voted for him. Twice.
Labour MP's position would move from "We think Jeremy Corbyn would make a shite Prime Minister. Vote Labour" to "We have no idea who we want to be the Prime Minister. Vote Labour." It's hard to know what's worse. At least about 15% of the population seems to rate Corbyn. Nobody can vote for an empty chair.
I believe there are provisions in Labour Constitution for holding a Conference at short notice to appoint a successor in the event of a leader passing away suddenly or becoming incapacitated - ie if John Smith had died in an election campaign. Have no idea as to details.
A few snippets from the Survation polls on Scotland:
Age Results
18-34: SNP 46 Tory 12 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 54% 35-54: SNP 37 Tory 24 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 68% 55 up: SNP 31 Tory 30 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 87%
10/10 Likelihood to Vote by 2015 Vote (suggested 71% turnout)
91.2% Liberal Democrat 87.4% Conservative 83.3% SNP 81.2% Labour
The Tories lead the SNP in South Scotland by 42-39 and the Highlands and Islands at 44-30. They are also ahead of Labour in Glasgow according to the subsample. The SNP lead in the majority of regions.
However, the under 35 and usually 'can't be bothered' vote seems to be sitting in the SNP's column.
Turnout is one of the great unknowables for Scotland. It was obviously enormous for the independence vote, but below the UK average for the EU referendum, IIRC. If some of the enthusiasm of the younger SNP voters has worn off a bit, this could provide a little help to their opponents. However, I expect that the weighting in the poll has already taken account of that...
Edit: I wouldn't read anything into those regional subsets. They are minuscule.
To what extent would the dynamics of the campaign be changed if disastrous Local election results on May 4th forced Corbyn to step down?
I cant see him stepping down, it just does not seem to be in his personality, but hay we have all been surprised my so much in the last 12 mouths that hay who knows.
more likely I think is we get an avalanche of Lab MPs saying if reelected they will not vote for Corbyn and instead will vote for ......
But I think they will wait till nominations have closed so they do not get some Momentum 'last ditchers' standing as Continuity labour or whatever
To what extent would the dynamics of the campaign be changed if disastrous Local election results on May 4th forced Corbyn to step down?
God alone knows. But ditching your Prime Ministerial candidate in the middle of a General Election campaign isn't a good look, now is it?
On the one hand, Labour would be rid of Corbyn. On the other, they would have no replacement leader - just a caretaker. The party would appear to the electorate, and would be, entirely chaotic - and they wouldn't be able to ask the question of who the Prime Minister or any of the key members of a prospective Labour cabinet would be. How could they? The chances of the other key shadow ministers - McDonnell, Abbott and Thornberry - surviving the election of a more moderate leader would be nil, there wouldn't be the time available to elect a replacement, and the public would have no guarantee that they wouldn't end up with a similarly repulsive Far Leftist at the end of the process. Again, how could they? The PLP chose Corbyn in the first place, and the mass party membership voted for him. Twice.
Labour MP's position would move from "We think Jeremy Corbyn would make a shite Prime Minister. Vote Labour" to "We have no idea who we want to be the Prime Minister. Vote Labour." It's hard to know what's worse. At least about 15% of the population seems to rate Corbyn. Nobody can vote for an empty chair.
Tom Watson would take over wouldn't he? I don't think there is anyway even somebody as stupid and stubborn as Jezlamic State can weather seven weeks of this.
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
Many leaders in our political history have been poor speakers compared to say Enoch Powell or Michael Foot. I wouldn't rate him as bottom of the list although I'd agree many have been better, e.g. of course his mentor Benn senior.
Yes his lists of names are ultra-dull but to the converted he's the messiah; what more do they want than a man with a grey beard and the initials J.C.?!
I think you're slightly judging the presentation because you know the policies, some of which are certain vote-losers. If he'd attack May for failures which affect the living standards of normal voters, i.e., continuing lack of workers on the boards of companies (unlike other prosperous northern European countries), letting agents ripping off tenants (and even landlords) he might do a bit better.
But it's 1983 all over again, I agree, except the non-Tory vote split is different and Scotland no longer delivers Labour seats.
Watch this for a sense of just how bad Corbyn is. He's on a stage, now, in lefty North London, literally preaching to the converted. He's banging on about his days fighting the National Front.
This, surely, is the one place, speaking on the one subject, where he should be really good: rousing, confident, compelling. He's been doing this for 30 years.
He's just terrible. Meandering and dull, waffly and wooden.
Comments
But Macron is a long way lower than Hollande was in 2012 - Holland got over 50% in the three tropical territories.
Macron is only getting half of the former Hollande vote.
However, I would read the Outre-mér trends as fun at this point. The Metropole may move in different directions, especially how the former Hollande vote split this time (in those American territories it's breaking towards Melenchon).
It's like trends in Liverpool wouldn't necessarily match the trend in the rest of UK.
These are literally detached territories.
The only interesting thing for me is Macron perhaps not consolidating enough of the Hollande vote.
Breakdowns were as follows:
London: Con 42, Lab 26, LD 15
Rest of South: Con: 58, LD 16, Lab 15
Midlands/Wales: Con 50, Lab 28, LD 8
North: Con 45, Lab 32, LD 11
Scotland: SNP 49, Con 29, Lab 15
This puts Labour on 24% in England and Wales, excluding Greater London. This is the same as the overall headline figure: they're doing better in London, but worse in Scotland.
If you were then to give Labour a 50% vote share in Greater Manchester and Merseyside, that would leave them on about 20.5% for the rest of England and Wales.
Because the Lib Dem vote was so small in 2015, this actually represents a modest net flow from Con to Lib Dem.
My interpretation of this is that the remaining Yellow Tories have deserted in one direction, but Continuity Remainers have moved in the other. That bodes well for the Liberal Democrats in heavily Remain-leaning seats that they need to capture from the Conservatives - but there aren't that many of those available, and you don't have to go very far down the Lib Dem target list before they start to need increasingly large swings.
Overall, however, most of the Lib Dems' gains appear to have come from Labour; again, there's been movement in both directions between the parties, but the net flow strongly favours the Yellows.
Labour is haemorrhaging significant amounts of support to both the Lib Dems and Conservatives. About half of the Ukip 2015 vote had deserted in that poll, four-fifths of them to the Tories.
I have two papers that one day I will get round to finishing and publishing. The first investigates the myth that discipline in the RN at the time of the Napoleonic War was harsh in the context of the day. The second explores the way that the RN of that period produced very, very good leaders, even though the basic system was based on nepotism, influence and connection.
It occurs that even if the results in England, Wales and Scotland are not as dramatic as the latest polling rounds would indicate (and even if they were in Scotland that would not be as dramatic as in 2015), they will still be pretty significant, meaning the only place where it is likely to be broadly business as usual is NI. Comment on that though and we'll just get typical 'You don't understand NI' responses.
SW of London may be different, but I don't expect there to be many LD gains in the SW of England.
So we now have:
-140 Spanish Armada
-120 Battle of the Nile
-100 Trafalgar
-80 Quiberon Bay
-60 Taranto
-40 Dogger Bank
-20 The Saints
0 Cape Finisterre
+20 Sinking of the Prince of Wales and the Repulse
+40 Chesapeake Bay
Anybody want to do a British army list?
The figure the other way is 3-5% of Tories going to the LDs.
In rough and ready terms they will each take 400k-500k worth of votes from each other. I guess the question is in which places?
She is definitely in the second round on these numbers, and Fillon is definitely out. Melachon needs to be up 12 to make the second round, and he's only up 8 or 9, so he's probably just short.
But. But. But.
There is no guarantee that these results are particularly representative of metropolitan France.
Edit: sorry Melenchon is up more than i thought. Please ignore this post.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_social_unrest_in_French_Guiana
When you consider that many of the few ethnic French there are in the region are high-paid spaceport workers unlikely to vote for Le Pen it is even more crazy.
-120 Isandlwana
-100 Yorktown
-80 Kut al Amara
-60 Dieppe
-40 Gallipoli
-20 Passchenadele
0 Caen
+20 Alamein
+40 Vitoria
A disaster for France, the EU and more importantly my book.
The Lib Dems have also been entirely eradicated from the Midlands at Parliamentary level.
The Scottish wing has been pluckily fighting its corner these past few years, and they've decent chances of a couple of gains up there. However, what's left of the party is, primarily, Southern English in focus. Of the 16 LD targets requiring swings from the incumbent of 5% or less, 12 are in the South, 1 is in the North, and 3 are in Scotland.
It appears that I may have had a lucky escape...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_presidential_election,_2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmyuE0NpNgE
As he put it, the prospect of being drowned through incompetence concentrates the mind wonderfully. A Captain won't appoint stupid friends or relatives as his officers when they could sink his ship. Nor will he recommend them to other captains.
The LibDems usually put huge effort into their target shire campaigns telling voters that Labour cannot win. This time they will have every media outlet in the country doing the same for the next six weeks.
A Melanchon victory would be horrible for the people of France.
I don't think anyone sensible would propose 'stopping Brexit'. The purpose of any pact is to stop the UK jumping off an economic cliff by adopting the most extreme position of any western European non-EU member state and elect MPs who will realise that and safeguard the UK's national interest.
Only just over 6 weeks left ...
Further evidence for Labourgeddon, based on recently released data from the British Election Study, compiled at the end of last year. Early evidence of the Ukip squeeze, and also of the breakdown of changes in the Labour vote by constituency. Labour appears to be doing disproportionately badly in its own territory.
"These figures represent the state of play in December of last year, using weights from even earlier. As I have already said, wave 10 of the BES, when weighted using the weights from the previous wave, under-estimates the increase in the Conservative vote share seen in current opinion polls. If all these swings are increased (or decreased) to bring them in line with current polling, the results could be truly disastrous for Labour. They would end up with fewer seats than would be predicted using a uniform national swing, because they would have fallen back in areas where the Conservatives are on the attack. Note though that the picture is complicated, and it's possible that Labour might gain some Conservative seats even as it loses many more of its own.
"Why might this pattern of changes occur? As Rob Ford has noted in today's Observer, patterns of vote switching are crucial. Apparently safe Labour seats could be jeopardised if Labour simultaneously leaks Remain votes to the Liberal Democrats and Leave votes to Ukip, while the Conservatives squeeze a large 2015 Ukip vote.
"The analysis above is more consistent with the second part of this analysis ("UKIP squeeze") than the first part. A fuller analysis would have to bring in much more individual level data, maybe even some small area estimation. There are, however, clear warning signs for Labour that the party may under-perform in seats its current miserable levels in (reported) vote share."
I'm not sure that I buy the idea of Labour making any gains against the Conservatives at all, if things carry on as they are; however, if the Tories lose five seats in one direction and gain 60 or 70 in the other, I'm sure they won't be that disappointed!
http://www.commission-des-sondages.fr/hist/communiques/communique-election-presidentielle-1er-tour-20-avril-2017.htm
So, handle any exit polls that are published with extreme care.
First official results are due out around 8.00 pm UK time.
Age Results
18-34: SNP 46 Tory 12 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 54%
35-54: SNP 37 Tory 24 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 68%
55 up: SNP 31 Tory 30 - 10/10 likelihood to vote 87%
10/10 Likelihood to Vote by 2015 Vote (suggested 71% turnout)
91.2% Liberal Democrat
87.4% Conservative
83.3% SNP
81.2% Labour
The Tories lead the SNP in South Scotland by 42-39 and the Highlands and Islands at 44-30. They are also ahead of Labour in Glasgow according to the subsample. The SNP lead in the majority of regions.
However, the under 35 and usually 'can't be bothered' vote seems to be sitting in the SNP's column.
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Sunday-Post-Tables-Final-1d4f6h-180417APCH.pdf
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/856091954819497984
On the one hand, Labour would be rid of Corbyn. On the other, they would have no replacement leader - just a caretaker. The party would appear to the electorate, and would be, entirely chaotic - and they wouldn't be able to ask the question of who the Prime Minister or any of the key members of a prospective Labour cabinet would be. How could they? The chances of the other key shadow ministers - McDonnell, Abbott and Thornberry - surviving the election of a more moderate leader would be nil, there wouldn't be the time available to elect a replacement, and the public would have no guarantee that they wouldn't end up with a similarly repulsive Far Leftist at the end of the process. Again, how could they? The PLP chose Corbyn in the first place, and the mass party membership voted for him. Twice.
Labour MP's position would move from "We think Jeremy Corbyn would make a shite Prime Minister. Vote Labour" to "We have no idea who we want to be the Prime Minister. Vote Labour." It's hard to know what's worse. At least about 15% of the population seems to rate Corbyn. Nobody can vote for an empty chair.
http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/general-election-2017-yeovil-liberal-democrat-party-candidate-to-withdraw-for-personal-reasons/story-30288101-detail/story.html
Edit: I wouldn't read anything into those regional subsets. They are minuscule.
more likely I think is we get an avalanche of Lab MPs saying if reelected they will not vote for Corbyn and instead will vote for ......
But I think they will wait till nominations have closed so they do not get some Momentum 'last ditchers' standing as Continuity labour or whatever
Yes his lists of names are ultra-dull but to the converted he's the messiah; what more do they want than a man with a grey beard and the initials J.C.?!
I think you're slightly judging the presentation because you know the policies, some of which are certain vote-losers. If he'd attack May for failures which affect the living standards of normal voters, i.e., continuing lack of workers on the boards of companies (unlike other prosperous northern European countries), letting agents ripping off tenants (and even landlords) he might do a bit better.
But it's 1983 all over again, I agree, except the non-Tory vote split is different and Scotland no longer delivers Labour seats.