It's a tough call for a LIB by election victory to be repeated at a GE so holding Richmond Park looks a long shot.With the strength of the Tory vote the likelihood of Tory losses in London looks unlikely.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
We can use the terminology of the bunger and the bungee.
In the case of electoral law, is the bunger or the bungee (or both) guilty?
I can't see any possible comeback for the Greens having refused the cash, and Lucas is certainly not under oath on the Daily Politics. Providing she is forthcoming to the police there won't be a problem in law for the Greens here.
It's a tough call for a LIB by election victory to be repeated at a GE so holding Richmond Park looks a long shot.With the strength of the Tory vote the likelihood of Tory losses in London looks unlikely.
Except that most LibDem by-election wins have been, at least once. And RP is unusually a by-election regain of a seat they used to hold before.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
We can use the terminology of the bunger and the bungee.
In the case of electoral law, is the bunger or the bungee (or both) guilty?
I can't see any possible comeback for the Greens having refused the cash, and Lucas is certainly not under oath on the Daily Politics. Providing she is forthcoming to the police there won't be a problem in law for the Greens here.
That sounds fair enough to me.
In electoral law under what circumstances is it legal to influence another candidate to stand down / aside?
Money is clearly wrong, as this episode shows. Are reciprocal arrangements to maximize votes legal? I have no idea where the boundaries are.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
To be fair to Lucas, you wouldn't want to blurt the name of the person who you think might have loaned the cash out on national TV before revealing it to the correct authorities.
She could have prejudiced a potential enquiry, and also landed up in potential libel/slander trouble.
I'm not saying she's acted perfectly but there are very good reasons to be coy live on national TV in a situation like this.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
Very technically.
'Kezia Dugdale: I could vote for independence to keep Scotland in EU'
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
SLAB would not benefit from becoming the SNP's little echo.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
Very technically.
'Kezia Dugdale: I could vote for independence to keep Scotland in EU'
In respect of the discussion of Kate Hoey down thread - I am a resident of Vauxhall and, although I disagree with her politics, Think Kate Hoey does a solid job as a constituency MP. So presume she has a solid vote base derived from this.
Also from an anecedata persepective; neither the retired trade union convenor nor the tube driver that live in the same flats as me give two hoots about her support for brexit - the concept that there will be switchcing to the lib-dems as a rejection of her brexit position seems less likely to me
Is this poll good or bad for Con / Lab in terms of seats?
ie if National swing is 5% but London swing is only 2% is it good or bad for Con / Lab - ie are there many Lab seats in London which would fall on a swing between 2% and 5%?
And ditto re seats requiring more than 5% elsewhere?
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
It's not just hardcore Remainers. Hoey was disowned by her local party. She's gone from being a tolerable eccentric to being a pariah. The resurrection of the fox hunting debate just adds another layer of toxicity to her.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
SLAB would not benefit from becoming the SNP's little echo.
Whereas being the Tories' little echo has worked out great for them.
Can I just check, have the Tories taken another day off campaigning to watch and laugh at the other parties daily fail?
Seems like it, Mr. P. I am told Jack Dromey was on the telly earlier saying that he didn't know how much Labour's intended increase in Corporation Tax would bring in.
We can use the terminology of the bunger and the bungee.
In the case of electoral law, is the bunger or the bungee (or both) guilty?
I can't see any possible comeback for the Greens having refused the cash, and Lucas is certainly not under oath on the Daily Politics. Providing she is forthcoming to the police there won't be a problem in law for the Greens here.
Indeed - but some important questions for the LDs to answer perhaps - a Mark Pack led investigation should bear some fruit. He has a track record in analysis don't you know.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
As someone standing in the seat, who stood 2 years ago and who has lived here for over 10 years I am baffled by the Lib Dem obsession with it and would expect a result along the lines you have outlined above. The Libs might scrape 2nd if the Tory candidate and campaign play relatively absent. As well as myself, there is also a good Green candidate who stood in 2015 (but no campaign that I've seen yet) and it's somewhat bizarrely one of the seats that the Women's Equality Party is standing in for whatever difference that makes....
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
The bet for me after this poll is a 4-1 Lib Dem gain treble of Kingston,Bermondsey and Twickenham to include in a Round Robin which secures the magic of the up-and-down double. The regional polls were pretty good in GE2015.A regional poll in the South West was a particularly good betting guide to Tory gains and Lib Dem losses last time.Bath,Wells,Yeovil and St Ives need to remain a minimum. The also lose the incumbency effect in Southport and the Tory decapitation strategy has been backed by ukip in north Norfolk.7-4 on a Tory win is too big. Hard to see them beating 15 at this stage
is that a specially offered treble? Are some bookies allowing seat bets to be included in multiples?
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
It's not just hardcore Remainers. Hoey was disowned by her local party. She's gone from being a tolerable eccentric to being a pariah. The resurrection of the fox hunting debate just adds another layer of toxicity to her.
Let the voters decide. She will be returned comfortably.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
If leaving the EU had remained the preserve of single-issue parties like UKIP, the referendum wouldn't have been won.
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
It's not just hardcore Remainers. Hoey was disowned by her local party. She's gone from being a tolerable eccentric to being a pariah. The resurrection of the fox hunting debate just adds another layer of toxicity to her.
You're projecting here. The demographic profile of the seat overwhelmingly favours Labour, and there's no evidence at all that her unpopularity extends beyond rich left wingers.
Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
Ironically the ultra-remain/inner London profile of the seat probably helps Hoey in that it hinders the Tories. The Lib Dems are simply too far behind to begin with.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
If leaving the EU had remained the preserve of single-issue parties like UKIP, the referendum wouldn't have been won.
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Wrong on both counts. First most Tory voters voted Leave in the EU referendum while most Labour voters voted No in indyref 2014 and that is even more so of the few SLAB voters who still remain. SLAB backing independence would have zero impact on the future of the Union but it would lead to the likely final obliteration of SLAB
If you weren't so obsessed with hoping for Scottish independence to force rUK back into a Federal EU with its tail between its legs you would see that (not that that would happen anyway)
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
As someone standing in the seat, who stood 2 years ago and who has lived here for over 10 years I am baffled by the Lib Dem obsession with it and would expect a result along the lines you have outlined above. The Libs might scrape 2nd if the Tory candidate and campaign play relatively absent. As well as myself, there is also a good Green candidate who stood in 2015 (but no campaign that I've seen yet) and it's somewhat bizarrely one of the seats that the Women's Equality Party is standing in for whatever difference that makes....
Good luck in the seat. The LD obsession is down to Brexit and their hope that Hoey's support for Leave costs her thousands of votes in a more Remain area. The Tory candidate is a delightful young local lady Dorothy Theis who seems to have quite a bit of support, doesn't look like a paper candidate but might be biding her time for Hoey's retirement - she's 67 or 68 now I think so might be her last election.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
It's not just hardcore Remainers. Hoey was disowned by her local party. She's gone from being a tolerable eccentric to being a pariah. The resurrection of the fox hunting debate just adds another layer of toxicity to her.
You're projecting here. The demographic profile of the seat overwhelmingly favours Labour, and there's no evidence at all that her unpopularity extends beyond rich left wingers.
Well that's not my demographic as I'm not on the left. As @stuartrc said, the makeup of the seat has changed considerably. In normal circumstances it could be a three way marginal now.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
As someone standing in the seat, who stood 2 years ago and who has lived here for over 10 years I am baffled by the Lib Dem obsession with it and would expect a result along the lines you have outlined above. The Libs might scrape 2nd if the Tory candidate and campaign play relatively absent. As well as myself, there is also a good Green candidate who stood in 2015 (but no campaign that I've seen yet) and it's somewhat bizarrely one of the seats that the Women's Equality Party is standing in for whatever difference that makes....
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Did you find out? ....
Presumably the catch was in offering him about one tenth of the going rate for a smart junior partner in the City.
However, it also means loads of votes extra in Kent, Essex, Suffolf, Norfolk, Cambridgeshite, Lincolnshite.
Remind us how many Labour seats are vulnerable in these parts ?
It doesn't. As the article says, the Lab-Con swing across the whole of the South was about 1% at the time (or, excluding London, pretty much zero). So it won't mean extra votes in Kent, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk or Cambridgeshire. And while the Midlands swing does imply extra votes in Lincolnshire (particularly given the Brexit effect), there are plenty of places where there are marginals.
Comparing a poll with the last GE is one way of looking at the numbers, and a legitimate one if looking at gains and losses.
However, in terms of who's moving forwards and back on a shorter timescale, comparing with the most recent equivalent poll is more usual. On that basis:
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Oi! That's my joke.
I feel very Tim Farron-esque about lawyers. I can tolerate them, even like some of them; but ultimately, what they do is wrong, and they're going to Hell.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Oi! That's my joke.
I feel very Tim Farron-esque about lawyers. I can tolerate them, even like some of them; but ultimately, what they do is wrong, and they're going to Hell.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
I feel that would be the case were the Tories relying on winning large numbers of votes from Labour, but they're not ..... there are more than enough former UKIP votes to be squeezed to see them home.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
I thought that too. But there wasn't much of an Ian Gow effect in the Eastbourne by election of 1990.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
Also, from reports I've had, the Lib Dems are throwing activists at Twickenham like it's a by-election. Which is good news for Zac.
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Oi! That's my joke.
I feel very Tim Farron-esque about lawyers. I can tolerate them, even like some of them; but ultimately, what they do is wrong, and they're going to Hell.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
I thought that too. But there wasn't much of an Ian Gow effect in the Eastbourne by election of 1990.
Based on this poll in Londdon the Tories would gain Ealing Central and Acton, Brentford and Isleworth, Ilford North, Hampstead and Kilburn and Enfield North from Labour but lose Twickenham, Kingston and Surbiton and Sutton and Cheam to the LDs. So the Tories would still make a net gain of 2 seats in London but they will pick up many more elsewhere. You can also probably swap Richmond Park for Sutton in terms of the 3rd LD gain
Brentford and Isleworth, Ilford North, Hampstead and Kilburn and Enfield North are goners , I think.
Ealing Central and Acton, I am not so sure. Greens are standing down. I don't think Bermondsey will fall.
While every copper knows, it really stands for "Couldn't Prosecute Satan".
To be fair, he does have the best lawyers.
Eventually, he gets *all* the lawyers.
Satan once offered a bargain to a solicitor. He promised him a partnership in a prestigious City law firm, a seven figure salary, and an unbroken record of professional success. In return, he wanted his soul, the soul of his wife, and the souls of his children.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Oi! That's my joke.
I think it's older than both of you. Though the salary might have moved with the times.
Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
I don't think there's value in the Tories in Vauxhall. I am highly sceptical about Lib Dem chances too, but they are obviously working it hard. It's a 78% Remain seat with a rare UKIP lost deposit (by some margin) in 2015, and Hoey presumably has the 22% on lock-down as an arch-Leaver. There's been a lot of gentrification, but largely "citizen of the world" types who are one group who are hard for the Tories at present. It's a highly unusual seat, and one of the worst (if not the worst) in the country in terms of being fertile ground for the current Tory message.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
If leaving the EU had remained the preserve of single-issue parties like UKIP, the referendum wouldn't have been won.
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Wrong on both counts. First most Tory voters voted Leave in the EU referendum while most Labour voters voted No in indyref 2014 and that is even more so of the few SLAB voters who still remain. SLAB backing independence would have zero impact on the future of the Union but it would lead to the likely final obliteration of SLAB
If you weren't so obsessed with hoping for Scottish independence to force rUK back into a Federal EU with its tail between its legs you would see that (not that that would happen anyway)
If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
I thought that too. But there wasn't much of an Ian Gow effect in the Eastbourne by election of 1990.
thanks. No uncontested by-election there!
Or in Enfield Southgate in 1984, although the Tories kept the seat.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
If leaving the EU had remained the preserve of single-issue parties like UKIP, the referendum wouldn't have been won.
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Wrong on both counts. First most Tory voters voted Leave in the EU referendum while most Labour voters voted No in indyref 2014 and that is even more so of the few SLAB voters who still remain. SLAB backing independence would have zero impact on the future of the Union but it would lead to the likely final obliteration of SLAB
If you weren't so obsessed with hoping for Scottish independence to force rUK back into a Federal EU with its tail between its legs you would see that (not that that would happen anyway)
If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.
In club lounge awaiting flight to Vancouver just noticed that some will never accept we are out of the EU and so sad their every prayer every day is for doom and gloom for our Country in such a perverse way
I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories take a little hit in the polls due to the reporting on the battle bus stuff....people with their no smoke without fire, i don't really understand it, but I remember expense fiddling. Doesn't matter no charges or that it wasn't public money as such.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
Also, from reports I've had, the Lib Dems are throwing activists at Twickenham like it's a by-election. Which is good news for Zac.
There are many more going into Richmond than Twickenham in my view. People know their way, still have the recent memory of December's win, and it's on the Tube. Not to say Vince isn't fighting hard in Twickers, but I think you've been misinformed on the balance.
The Lib Dems will need to make some cold, hard judgments on targeting in a week or so based on data, though. SW London is a dangerous cluster of good LD prospects - huge danger of trying to win everything, and ending up with (next to) nothing.
Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
I don't think there's value in the Tories in Vauxhall. I am highly sceptical about Lib Dem chances too, but they are obviously working it hard. It's a 78% Remain seat with a rare UKIP lost deposit (by some margin) in 2015, and Hoey presumably has the 22% on lock-down as an arch-Leaver. There's been a lot of gentrification, but largely "citizen of the world" types who are one group who are hard for the Tories at present. It's a highly unusual seat, and one of the worst (if not the worst) in the country in terms of being fertile ground for the current Tory message.
Continuing my thoughts on Vauxhall; I have bought my place there 10 years ago and the amount of gentrification/claphamisation in the last three years is very noteable. Whether its enough to push the tory candiate in - I doubt.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
I don't think there's value in the Tories in Vauxhall. I am highly sceptical about Lib Dem chances too, but they are obviously working it hard. It's a 78% Remain seat with a rare UKIP lost deposit (by some margin) in 2015, and Hoey presumably has the 22% on lock-down as an arch-Leaver. There's been a lot of gentrification, but largely "citizen of the world" types who are one group who are hard for the Tories at present. It's a highly unusual seat, and one of the worst (if not the worst) in the country in terms of being fertile ground for the current Tory message.
There are some hugely expensive houses in the seat, especially around the Oval and Clapham Town. But, they're still substantially outnumbered by social housing units.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
Also, from reports I've had, the Lib Dems are throwing activists at Twickenham like it's a by-election. Which is good news for Zac.
There are many more going into Richmond than Twickenham in my view. People know their way, still have the recent memory of December's win, and it's on the Tube. Not to say Vince isn't fighting hard in Twickers, but I think you've been misinformed on the balance.
The Lib Dems will need to make some cold, hard judgments on targeting in a week or so based on data, though. SW London is a dangerous cluster of good LD prospects - huge danger of trying to win everything, and ending up with (next to) nothing.
Surely, it helps that Richmond Park and Twickenham are right next to each other.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
As someone standing in the seat, who stood 2 years ago and who has lived here for over 10 years I am baffled by the Lib Dem obsession with it and would expect a result along the lines you have outlined above. The Libs might scrape 2nd if the Tory candidate and campaign play relatively absent. As well as myself, there is also a good Green candidate who stood in 2015 (but no campaign that I've seen yet) and it's somewhat bizarrely one of the seats that the Women's Equality Party is standing in for whatever difference that makes....
Decapitation seems generally unsuccessful, and decapitation from way behind seems unlikely. Maybe it's all about fundraising? Hate can reach people you can't get to with hope.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
Also, from reports I've had, the Lib Dems are throwing activists at Twickenham like it's a by-election. Which is good news for Zac.
There are many more going into Richmond than Twickenham in my view. People know their way, still have the recent memory of December's win, and it's on the Tube. Not to say Vince isn't fighting hard in Twickers, but I think you've been misinformed on the balance.
The Lib Dems will need to make some cold, hard judgments on targeting in a week or so based on data, though. SW London is a dangerous cluster of good LD prospects - huge danger of trying to win everything, and ending up with (next to) nothing.
Fair enough. My information was from a single source, which is never entirely reliable.
I agree re targetting though. I wonder if they're making a mistake concentrating on Richmond though? Twickenham ought to be the more winnable of the two, by-elections notwithstanding. Indeed, the post-1979 Lib Dems' (or Liberals' / Alliance's) record at holding by-election gains is not great, and the GE baseline for Richmond Park means that to repeat the by-election result on a GE turnout is a big ask.
Technically Kezia Dugdale though Mcleish's proposal would of course effectively kill of SLAB as it loses voters to the Tories and LDs while regaining none from the SNP
You don't know that. Having two mainstream pro-independence parties would revolutionise Scottish politics and bring independence one step closer to inevitability.
Utter rubbish. The overwhelming majority of Scottish Labour voters left are unionists, the independence backers left for the SNP years ago
How can you substantiate the claim that they would win back none from the SNP, especially since you presumably buy into the idea that we're already past peak-SNP.
If you want nationalism you will go for the real thing not a poor latecomer to the party and even if they did win back voters from the SNP the unionist voters they lost to the Tories and LDs would mean the net impact on the future of the Union would be zero other than splitting the nationalist vote under FPTP it may give a few more MPs to the remaining Unionist parties
If leaving the EU had remained the preserve of single-issue parties like UKIP, the referendum wouldn't have been won.
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Wrong on both counts. First most Tory voters voted Leave in the EU referendum while most Labour voters voted No in indyref 2014 and that is even more so of the few SLAB voters who still remain. SLAB backing independence would have zero impact on the future of the Union but it would lead to the likely final obliteration of SLAB
If you weren't so obsessed with hoping for Scottish independence to force rUK back into a Federal EU with its tail between its legs you would see that (not that that would happen anyway)
If you weren't so complacent about Brexit you'd see that being on the Leave side of the debate will be toxic in the next political cycle.
On Batley & Spen, I have a few quid on the Tories. I think they are reasonable value at anything better than evens.
Eastbourne was a reasonably good example of the fact that voters are very mature about this. It's no insult to the memory of a respected MP (whether Gow or Cox) that their party's next choice isn't elected. Nor is it a "victory" of any kind for their murderers, who have no respect for or interest in the democratic process (hence their actions).
I think it was the wrong call (albeit understandable) of the other parties to leave Batley & Spen uncontested in the by-election. Since it was uncontested (other than by the fringe) I can't see it influencing things this time all that much.
"The big question for the blues is whether their gains can offset possible losses to the LDs"
Of all the big questions in this election, this is not anywhere near one of them.
There's only one probable LibDem gain from the Conservatives in the entire country: Twickenham. Heathrow + Brexit plus a reasonable Labour vote to squeeze means I suspect Vince edges it.
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
Also, from reports I've had, the Lib Dems are throwing activists at Twickenham like it's a by-election. Which is good news for Zac.
There are many more going into Richmond than Twickenham in my view. People know their way, still have the recent memory of December's win, and it's on the Tube. Not to say Vince isn't fighting hard in Twickers, but I think you've been misinformed on the balance.
The Lib Dems will need to make some cold, hard judgments on targeting in a week or so based on data, though. SW London is a dangerous cluster of good LD prospects - huge danger of trying to win everything, and ending up with (next to) nothing.
Fair enough. My information was from a single source, which is never entirely reliable.
I agree re targetting though. I wonder if they're making a mistake concentrating on Richmond though? Twickenham ought to be the more winnable of the two, by-elections notwithstanding. Indeed, the post-1979 Lib Dems' (or Liberals' / Alliance's) record at holding by-election gains is not great, and the GE baseline for Richmond Park means that to repeat the by-election result on a GE turnout is a big ask.
I don't know that the party machine is focusing on Richmond over Twickenham. But the activist army isn't a real army... ultimately, people decide where to go and they are both good enough prospects to be worth working hard in, but not so good that they are in the bag.
The central party are also quite mindful of the embarrassment of a Y-chromosome heavy representation in 2015 and Olney represents one of the better female prospects (although I'd say both Edinburgh West and East Dunbartonshire are better).
But there's merit in what you say. HQ have to be very hard about it if the data does point to abandoning one or the other, or they risk getting neither.
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot! As ever, DYOR.
I've looked at Batley and Spen a couple of times. Every number crunching I do says it's a Con gain. But I wonder if there could be a local Jo Cox effect here. thoughts anyone?
I feel that would be the case were the Tories relying on winning large numbers of votes from Labour, but they're not ..... there are more than enough former UKIP votes to be squeezed to see them home.
I'm sceptical that the UKIP vote in seats like Batley will be heavily squuezed in the Tories' favour, as I'm unconvinved that the UKIPers there were ever Tory in the first place.
Again looking at the pre UKIP surge result in 2010
Con 33.6% in 2010, 31.2% in 2015 Lab 42.2% in 2010, 43.2% in 2015 LD 15.8%in 2010, 4.7% in 2015 UKIP No candidate in 2010, 18% in 2015 BNP 7.2% in 2010,
To me it seems like a seat where the Tories will always struggle to get to 40% and can only win if there is a particularly favourable split of the non Tory vote.
Vauxhall is a fascinating seat, Kate Hoey has a huge majority but the LDs are pushing hard and the Tories have a young and energetic local candidate in Dorothy Theis who doesn't look like she's going to soft pedal. Not forgetting of course our own @Lennon, of the Pirate Party, ooh arrgghhh!
Kate must have a huge personal vote from 28 years as MP, she got 53% last time so I just can't see that much of a majority being overturned. If the LDs do make a big push and campaign negatively on Hoey and the EU, can she get some tactical Con Leave votes and squeeze out the small UKIP vote from 2015?
I would expect a result like 40-45% Lab, 25-30% Con 20-25% Lib Dem in that seat. Hard line Remainers are getting carried away with the idea that votes will want to punish Kate Hoey for her views.
As someone standing in the seat, who stood 2 years ago and who has lived here for over 10 years I am baffled by the Lib Dem obsession with it and would expect a result along the lines you have outlined above. The Libs might scrape 2nd if the Tory candidate and campaign play relatively absent. As well as myself, there is also a good Green candidate who stood in 2015 (but no campaign that I've seen yet) and it's somewhat bizarrely one of the seats that the Women's Equality Party is standing in for whatever difference that makes....
Good luck in the seat. The LD obsession is down to Brexit and their hope that Hoey's support for Leave costs her thousands of votes in a more Remain area. The Tory candidate is a delightful young local lady Dorothy Theis who seems to have quite a bit of support, doesn't look like a paper candidate but might be biding her time for Hoey's retirement - she's 67 or 68 now I think so might be her last election.
Thanks - it's a bit of a shame that I'm currently spending too much time nationally focused to actually do much on the ground but the outdoor hustings at the local farmers market should be fun... (Buy your organic veg here... throw them at the politicians extra! )
The CPS decision is not surprising. They don't have the balls!
So, now it is open season regarding expenses. The Tories win twice over !
Nothing to do with not having the balls. The Electoral Commission stated that they were unable to prove any intention to make false declarations. Unless you can prove intent any criminal prosecution will fail.
I'm sceptical that the UKIP vote in seats like Batley will be heavily squuezed in the Tories' favour, as I'm unconvinved that the UKIPers there were ever Tory in the first place.
But that's the whole "gateway drug" argument - that it doesn't matter where the Kippers came from (and I agree it was multiple sources) the fact is they've unwound to the Cons.
It's hard to argue with the "gateway drug" hypothesis, either statistically or anecdotally. I'd like to do so... but the evidence is what it is.
Comments
We can use the terminology of the bunger and the bungee.
In the case of electoral law, is the bunger or the bungee (or both) guilty?
https://twitter.com/GeoffShadbold/status/862281267815084032
Providing she is forthcoming to the police there won't be a problem in law for the Greens here.
In electoral law under what circumstances is it legal to influence another candidate to stand down / aside?
Money is clearly wrong, as this episode shows.
Are reciprocal arrangements to maximize votes legal?
I have no idea where the boundaries are.
Where do the LDs get 250 large from?
She could have prejudiced a potential enquiry, and also landed up in potential libel/slander trouble.
I'm not saying she's acted perfectly but there are very good reasons to be coy live on national TV in a situation like this.
'Kezia Dugdale: I could vote for independence to keep Scotland in EU'
http://tinyurl.com/hjn7wqn
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3525676/jeremy-corbyn-snapped-looking-dreadfully-pained-as-he-steps-off-labour-battlebus-in-leeds/
http://www.edvardmunch.org/the-scream.jsp
Also from an anecedata persepective; neither the retired trade union convenor nor the tube driver that live in the same flats as me give two hoots about her support for brexit - the concept that there will be switchcing to the lib-dems as a rejection of her brexit position seems less likely to me
ie if National swing is 5% but London swing is only 2% is it good or bad for Con / Lab - ie are there many Lab seats in London which would fall on a swing between 2% and 5%?
And ditto re seats requiring more than 5% elsewhere?
That's a bit harsh!
This GE is becoming a farce.
The solicitor was nobody's fool, so he thought long and hard about the offer before asking "So, what's the catch?"
Labour have long pushed a kind of 'union-scepticism' in their advocacy of ever more devolution, similar to the Euroscepticism of the Tory party in years past. If a significant portion of them crossed the line into support for full independence it would change the parameters of the debate significantly.
Currently the tory is at 7s, at 10s I might have a cheeky punt.
***** BETTING POST *****
Ladbrokes have at last been tempted to offer a meaningful number of individual constituencies about 2 full weeks after the opposition and frankly too late to represent any meaningful degree of value - but I guess that is sort of the idea from their viewpoint!
One exception I feel is their offer of 11/10 against the Tories winning Batley & Spen which was considered very marginal in 2015 but where the Blue Team's high hopes were thwarted by UKIP's mega 18% share of the vote which is likely to be heavily squeezed in the Tories' favour on 8 June. For the record Baxter gives the Tories a 56% chance of winning, compared with a 42% chance for Labour ...... not bad for an odds against shot!
As ever, DYOR.
The Lib Dems are simply too far behind to begin with.
If you weren't so obsessed with hoping for Scottish independence to force rUK back into a Federal EU with its tail between its legs you would see that (not that that would happen anyway)
The Tory candidate is a delightful young local lady Dorothy Theis who seems to have quite a bit of support, doesn't look like a paper candidate but might be biding her time for Hoey's retirement - she's 67 or 68 now I think so might be her last election.
LibDem GAIN
Which is a shame. Because Vince is on my "people I'd hoped we'd seen the last of" list.
MWD - Managers of Wealth Destruction.
The Lib Dems will need to make some cold, hard judgments on targeting in a week or so based on data, though. SW London is a dangerous cluster of good LD prospects - huge danger of trying to win everything, and ending up with (next to) nothing.
Now what is that allegation over Caroline Lucas and the Lib Dems and bungs.
Wonder when will that get coverage on Sky as the potential to hit both the greens and the lib dems is unmistakable
I agree re targetting though. I wonder if they're making a mistake concentrating on Richmond though? Twickenham ought to be the more winnable of the two, by-elections notwithstanding. Indeed, the post-1979 Lib Dems' (or Liberals' / Alliance's) record at holding by-election gains is not great, and the GE baseline for Richmond Park means that to repeat the by-election result on a GE turnout is a big ask.
Carshalton, Twickenham, Richmond, Bermondsey.
Adventures into Vauxhall won't help in those seats, though obviously there is a message that could help in say Bermondsey.
Eastbourne was a reasonably good example of the fact that voters are very mature about this. It's no insult to the memory of a respected MP (whether Gow or Cox) that their party's next choice isn't elected. Nor is it a "victory" of any kind for their murderers, who have no respect for or interest in the democratic process (hence their actions).
I think it was the wrong call (albeit understandable) of the other parties to leave Batley & Spen uncontested in the by-election. Since it was uncontested (other than by the fringe) I can't see it influencing things this time all that much.
The central party are also quite mindful of the embarrassment of a Y-chromosome heavy representation in 2015 and Olney represents one of the better female prospects (although I'd say both Edinburgh West and East Dunbartonshire are better).
But there's merit in what you say. HQ have to be very hard about it if the data does point to abandoning one or the other, or they risk getting neither.
Again looking at the pre UKIP surge result in 2010
Con 33.6% in 2010, 31.2% in 2015
Lab 42.2% in 2010, 43.2% in 2015
LD 15.8%in 2010, 4.7% in 2015
UKIP No candidate in 2010, 18% in 2015
BNP 7.2% in 2010,
To me it seems like a seat where the Tories will always struggle to get to 40% and can only win if there is a particularly favourable split of the non Tory vote.
Tables. No inner/outer London split this time.
It's hard to argue with the "gateway drug" hypothesis, either statistically or anecdotally. I'd like to do so... but the evidence is what it is.
We just need Sadiq Khan to be seen eating a bacon buttie and its been a great day!