The Andrew Neil Interviews will be the ones to watch. We all know he is the best at what he does, and he won't pull any punches with any of the leaders. The QT specials, I'm not so sure. I just hope that Corbyn's past associations and all of the crack pot things he has supported and endorsed, are brought up and probed. He must not be allowed to weasel his way out of commemorating dead IRA soldiers and sharing platforms with Holocaust deniers without the full glare of public scrutiny.
One other thing about the current polls - with LD and UKIP both now low it's much harder for the Con and Lab shares to change much in the sense that there is little scope for them to take votes from LD or UKIP as they are both already low.
And all evidence for many years is that very few people indeed switch directly between Con and Lab .
So there is little scope for Con or Lab to pick up votes. OK, it could be argued they could lose votes to LD or UKIP - but LD seem to have little momentum and it appears almost nobody would switch to UKIP at the moment.
That's a very good point. It's extremely rare to meet anyone who is wavering between Con and Lab. And I can't remember meeting a single person switching to UKIP. It feels as though it's all about differential turnout now. There's the "can't vote Corbyn, never vote Tory, suppose I'll abstain" group, which does exist though probably no more than 3-4% of the electorate - they actually need a more vigorous Tory campaign to react against. And there's the "I want May but not by a humungous majority" group, who may abstain if it looks like a walkover.
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
'EdM was getting higher than 32% during the 2015 GE campaign.'
On the other hand if the methodology used in 2015 was unchanged , this poll would probably be giving Labour a 34% vote share.
There are no Shy Tories anymore. Since the Brexit vote, they are screaming at the top of their voices.
The 2010 Lab> 2015 UKIP> 2017 Tory or 2015 Lab> 2017 Tory switchers are probably shy
I prob wont vote, but if there wasn't such a stigma to voting Tory, or if my vote counted, I would. Canvassers asked me today, and I said I was happy enough with how things are, and as I live in an ultra safe Tory seat, no need to vote
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
1983 did have a 16% lead against an opposition split down the middle. That will not be the case this time.
One other thing about the current polls - with LD and UKIP both now low it's much harder for the Con and Lab shares to change much in the sense that there is little scope for them to take votes from LD or UKIP as they are both already low.
And all evidence for many years is that very few people indeed switch directly between Con and Lab .
So there is little scope for Con or Lab to pick up votes. OK, it could be argued they could lose votes to LD or UKIP - but LD seem to have little momentum and it appears almost nobody would switch to UKIP at the moment.
That's a very good point. It's extremely rare to meet anyone who is wavering between Con and Lab. And I can't remember meeting a single person switching to UKIP. It feels as though it's all about differential turnout now. There's the "can't vote Corbyn, never vote Tory, suppose I'll abstain" group, which does exist though probably no more than 3-4% of the electorate - they actually need a more vigorous Tory campaign to react against. And there's the "I want May but not by a humungous majority" group, who may abstain if it looks like a walkover.
That's because they have probably already made up their mind and Labour voters up till now aren't going to tell Labour canvassers they are voting Tory. I certainly wouldn't if I was changing my vote.
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
1983 did have a 16% lead against an opposition split down the middle. That will not be the case this time.
Tory lead in 1983 was 15.2% Rounding of party vote shares has the effect of raising it to 16%.
In the event of a national swing of 3.7% , I would expect 2 or 3 of the seats gained by Labour from the Tories.in 2015 to resist the tide with the help of first term incumbency in the same way that Tory MPs in marginal seats survived the small pro- Labour swing in England at the last election..
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
One other thing about the current polls - with LD and UKIP both now low it's much harder for the Con and Lab shares to change much in the sense that there is little scope for them to take votes from LD or UKIP as they are both already low.
And all evidence for many years is that very few people indeed switch directly between Con and Lab .
So there is little scope for Con or Lab to pick up votes. OK, it could be argued they could lose votes to LD or UKIP - but LD seem to have little momentum and it appears almost nobody would switch to UKIP at the moment.
That's a very good point. It's extremely rare to meet anyone who is wavering between Con and Lab. And I can't remember meeting a single person switching to UKIP. It feels as though it's all about differential turnout now. There's the "can't vote Corbyn, never vote Tory, suppose I'll abstain" group, which does exist though probably no more than 3-4% of the electorate - they actually need a more vigorous Tory campaign to react against. And there's the "I want May but not by a humungous majority" group, who may abstain if it looks like a walkover.
I think the first group (who to be fair are most of my extended family) only have a decision to make if the polls tighten to the point where Jeremy Corbyn PM becomes a possibility. Otherwise I think they mostly stick with Labour. And they would dread being put in the position where they had to make that decision.
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
1983 did have a 16% lead against an opposition split down the middle. That will not be the case this time.
Would you like a friendly bet with me (rsc1000 can sort put the details), of a tory majority of 100+ I'm pretty certain it will be 100 seats or more. a small bet of £50?
Add to this that after 7 weeks of 'Conservative landslide nailed on' some swing voters might put their X by the Labour candidate name just to ensure that the landslide is not of proportions which would render the government obnoxious for lack of an opposition.
yes, I have heard anecdotal evidence of this. They don't like labour or Corbyn but will vote Labour to stop a massive majority.
People following that line of thinking appear to have, erm, stopped actually thinking halfway through...
Since when have people ever thought things though in anything?
Except for me of course.
Cyrus the Virus (John Malkovich): [holding the pilot at gunpoint] Say there was a disturbance but you've got it under control. Say it, or I will kill you.
Pilot: Without me you got nobody to fly the plane.
Interesting report in Scandinavian media - Norway is brokering secret talks between US and North Korean officials, following their past record of hosting secret Israel-PLO talks.
One other thing about the current polls - with LD and UKIP both now low it's much harder for the Con and Lab shares to change much in the sense that there is little scope for them to take votes from LD or UKIP as they are both already low.
And all evidence for many years is that very few people indeed switch directly between Con and Lab .
So there is little scope for Con or Lab to pick up votes. OK, it could be argued they could lose votes to LD or UKIP - but LD seem to have little momentum and it appears almost nobody would switch to UKIP at the moment.
That's a very good point. It's extremely rare to meet anyone who is wavering between Con and Lab. And I can't remember meeting a single person switching to UKIP. It feels as though it's all about differential turnout now. There's the "can't vote Corbyn, never vote Tory, suppose I'll abstain" group, which does exist though probably no more than 3-4% of the electorate - they actually need a more vigorous Tory campaign to react against. And there's the "I want May but not by a humungous majority" group, who may abstain if it looks like a walkover.
Nick, it's me, MikeK, no supporter of yours, though I do hope you beat that cringing Tory leaver that is defending her seat. However even you must admit that the May bandwaggon will run over and flatten Corbyn and all who stand by him. We must have a cuppa sometime.
Interesting report in Scandinavian media - Norway is brokering secret talks between US and North Korean officials, following their past record of hosting secret Israel-PLO talks.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
Yes, it feels wrong, but it's a very useful thought experiment (particularly as I have a fair chunk of change riding on a Con majority of over 100...)
I think there is a strong case to be made that Labour tribalism + attracting votes from the hard left, the greens and the lib dems, plus the fact that Corbyn's objective is to maximise vote share rather than win in marginals, means Corbyn will poll 30% or more, which we are starting to see in the polls.
The question for me is where this leaves Labour in seat terms. I'm in trouble if, say, the Conservative majority is 96 rather than 101.
Mr. Calum, talking of the right way up, I saw an amazing drawing on Twitter. It was arguing the world can't possibly be round, because, as water flows down, if it were then all the oceans would be in the bottom half of the Earth.
The downside of democracy is that people who have that sort of perspective have the same voting rights as everyone else
That's because they have probably already made up their mind and Labour voters up till now aren't going to tell Labour canvassers they are voting Tory. I certainly wouldn't if I was changing my vote.
But wouldn't you tell opinion pollsters? I think you're on thin ice if you reject both polling and canvassing reports. You're thinking like some left-wing friends:
!. People would be quite mad if they voted differently from what I and all my friends think. 2. I don't believe the public has many really insane people. 3. Therefore, the polls are wrong.
The flaw is in point 1 - if you aren't out canvassing, you don't actually meet many people outside your social circle, and they're unlikely to be representative no matter how many friends you have. Our friends tend to be rather like us.
But hey, you're 15 points or so ahead. Stop worrying!
That's because they have probably already made up their mind and Labour voters up till now aren't going to tell Labour canvassers they are voting Tory. I certainly wouldn't if I was changing my vote.
But wouldn't you tell opinion pollsters? I think you're on thin ice if you reject both polling and canvassing reports. You're thinking like some left-wing friends:
!. People would be quite mad if they voted differently from what I and all my friends think. 2. I don't believe the public has many really insane people. 3. Therefore, the polls are wrong.
The flaw is in point 1 - if you aren't out canvassing, you don't actually meet many people outside your social circle, and they're unlikely to be representative no matter how many friends you have. Our friends tend to be rather like us.
But hey, you're 15 points or so ahead. Stop worrying!
I certainly don't believe polls. One has good reason not to after the last GE. I don't believe the rubbish I hear on the radio that facebook is full of Labour stuff and nothing from the Tories. It depends on the algorithms. As for canvassing, I am reading what David Herdson says/has said with great interest as I am not doing any this time due to a gammy leg. I assume you are canvassing in Broxtowe.. what were your canvas returns telling you in 2015?.
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
1983 did have a 16% lead against an opposition split down the middle. That will not be the case this time.
It's the lead that counts. A 47/31/20 result in 1983 would have produced a similar majority.
Interesting report in Scandinavian media - Norway is brokering secret talks between US and North Korean officials, following their past record of hosting secret Israel-PLO talks.
Don't worry, Trump will put a stop to all that by Twitter at some point in next few days.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
All this 'rise in the polls' would still produce a 3.5% swing from Labour to the Tories on today's ORB since the last election as the 2% rise in the Labour share is more than matched by an even larger 9% rise in the Tory vote thanks mainly to the fall in the UKIP share, the poll also shows a 4.5% swing from the LDs to the Tories as the LDs are unchanged on 2015. Personally I think the Tory voteshare is about right but the Labour voteshare too high and the LD voteshare too low
Surely Con should go big on that - implies he was against Falklands.
I am surprised Con haven't yet gone all guns blazing re defence.
The other issue they need to ensure gets brought up is the Monarchy because Corbyn will not say he supports it - and that opens up another major avenue of attack.
I actually think the BBC has a big decision to make re that QT Special - they'll definitely have a section on defence but will they have an audience question on the Monarchy? If they do it could well be absolutely disastrous for Lab - and it would then be guaranteed to be the lead story in the tabloid press etc - under one week from polling day.
Spain's expected to be a two stop race with a safety car possible. The soft tyre is miles (perhaps as much as 2.5s) a lap faster than the medium. The hard is not expected to be used.
The Economist rather let their own assumptions show with the last sentence: "Even when focusing on the young, Britons are still among the EU’s most reluctant Europeans." The results surely show that far from being reluctant Europeans, young Britons are the most reluctant members of the EU. A very different thing!
Those ORB figures imply a swing from Lab to Con of 3.7% and would – if the swing is universal – result in 31 Tory gains from Labour. Labour would end up on 201 seats plus any that might be clawed back from the SNP.
Possible, if still unlikely. Seems like the upper limit.
It would suggest a Tory majority similar to 1987 & 1959.
In practice, a lead of 16% would probably produce a bigger majority.
1983 did have a 16% lead against an opposition split down the middle. That will not be the case this time.
The final polls in 1983 were showing a 21 point lead , the polls at the beginning of May were showing on average an 18 point lead . They consistently overstated the Conservatives by around 3-4%
Mr. L, perhaps. And with the news being full of the cyberstory now isn't the time to launch something significant.
Mr. Baskerville, quite.
It's also ironic the EU salivates over the concept of a single European culture whilst at the same time facilitating the importing of millions of people with no desire or intention to integrate with it.
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
I may be wrong but I feel that all out personal attacks on Corbyn by the Conservatives will be counter productive and just shore up the Labour vote at around 33%
UKIP got 4m votes last time and won the 2014 Euros. That's why they get coverage. People need to get over it.
Very true.They also deserve more recognition in influencing the conservative party to eventually get them to talk about Europe all the time, and have a united position.
Mr. L, perhaps. And with the news being full of the cyberstory now isn't the time to launch something significant.
Mr. Baskerville, quite.
It's also ironic the EU salivates over the concept of a single European culture whilst at the same time facilitating the importing of millions of people with no desire or intention to integrate with it.
The Economist, and the FT, seem to see the arrival of Macron and his plans for eurobonds, a eurozone budget and a eurozone parliament as some sort of Nirvana. Personally, I think they could lead to a serious split between the euro and non-euro states. My piece here: http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/careful-what-you-wish-for
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
I may be wrong but I feel that all out personal attacks on Corbyn by the Conservatives will be counter productive and just shore up the Labour vote at around 33%
I think it depends what they focus on. A lot of Corbyn's domestic policies are popular, but it's a different matter on international affairs.
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
I may be wrong but I feel that all out personal attacks on Corbyn by the Conservatives will be counter productive and just shore up the Labour vote at around 33%
I think you have a point about personal attacks. Neither the New Labour, New Danger nor the William Hague as Thatcher posters would have had much impact. But merely quoting Corbyn cannot be seen as a personal attack, so I would expect a lot of social media effort will go into this area... there's simply too much material out there for it not to be used.
Mr. Baskerville, interesting article. I agree with your conclusions. As the eurozone integrates further, EU members outside it (now with sod all hope of a blocking majority in QMV) will face pressure to jump one way or the other.
Tories have dropped from the ludicrously high post-announcement polls but appear to have been stable - and up - over the campaign.
All four minor parties on this are being squeezed - and that's in agreement with what most anecdotes are saying. Labour are gaining a vote from the previous 'others'/minors that don't want a 100+ majority.
Mr. Baskerville, interesting article. I agree with your conclusions. As the eurozone integrates further, EU members outside it (now with sod all hope of a blocking majority in QMV) will face pressure to jump one way or the other.
A lot, of course, will hinge on the success, or not, of Brexit. If HMS UK sails serenely on, outrunning the continent in employment and growth, then the hard-EU will lose a lot of its appeal. If Brexit is a disaster, on the other hand...
The non-EZ nations that share broadly similar attitudes to ourselves realise that the european balance has shifted in a way that is detrimental to them, whether it is budget contributions, majority voting or free-trade thinking.
It's inevitable that they will be pushed to make up their minds eventually. The EZ is the real EU.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
Mr. Baskerville, if we have a very hard time that will also negatively affect the EU, which may drive its integration more rapidly (within the eurozone), alarming non-euro countries.
Recessions are for Christmas, but EU integration is for life (unless you leap out of the window).
Gordon Brown accuses Tories of 'waging war against poor'
Oh good, that lazy line. It's amazing how many poor people still vote for them considering they are the target of a way. Old ones are the best though I suppose, and Corbyn has prompted a return to some old lazy lines the other way, so why not.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
He should tell Andrew Neil he watches The Crown on Netflix and likes leaders who stay in place well into their nineties.
He should just tell the truth. The monarchy is an outdated relic, but there is no intention to abolish it.
It's a relic, but not necessarily outdated. If people think it is outdated, they should at least try to abolish it, not just say they don't want it but won't even bother to try.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
So all those voters questioned on the news and the Daily Politics are deliberately misleading about their voting intention? Come on. That's not credible.
F1: although Raikkonen wasn't on pole, the hedge was matched, so the bet's greenery or not depends on that.
I also put a tiny bit on the Ladbrokes exchange for the first time, but the hedge there was not matched, it seems (I only tipped Betfair so that's green).
Edited extra bit: on-topic: it's an interesting problem of providing fair coverage to minor parties. I do think focusing on the electoral results from last time is perhaps the least worst option as it's least open to gerrymandering, bias or the vagaries of opinion polls.
Glad to hear the hedge came off for you, Mr.D. And pleased I was right that Hamilton would get P1, after my earlier flirtation with Raikkonnen.
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
He should tell Andrew Neil he watches The Crown on Netflix and likes leaders who stay in place well into their nineties.
He should just tell the truth. The monarchy is an outdated relic, but there is no intention to abolish it.
It's a relic, but not necessarily outdated. If people think it is outdated, they should at least try to abolish it, not just say they don't want it but won't even bother to try.
Hardly worth bothering the English know their place .The rich man in his castle the poor man at his gate.
Mr. B, quite tricky to try and predict the race. Ferrari do need to sort their starts out. Two stops plus perhaps a safety car mean bad luck with traffic could screw someone over (likewise safety car timing, should it come).
Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.
It could be that they are waiting to time it - there are still almost 4 weeks to go - and no line can be sustained for anywhere near that long.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
He should tell Andrew Neil he watches The Crown on Netflix and likes leaders who stay in place well into their nineties.
He should just tell the truth. The monarchy is an outdated relic, but there is no intention to abolish it.
It's a relic, but not necessarily outdated. If people think it is outdated, they should at least try to abolish it, not just say they don't want it but won't even bother to try.
Hardly worth bothering the English know their place .The rich man in his castle the poor man at his gate.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
Mr. B, quite tricky to try and predict the race. Ferrari do need to sort their starts out. Two stops plus perhaps a safety car mean bad luck with traffic could screw someone over (likewise safety car timing, should it come).
Hamilton - pole, and superior race pace, judging by practice. Unless he has a poor start, it should be in the bag. This was one of Ferrari's banker tracks; I think it might be over for them this season.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
The plan of watching Labour destroy themselves via their own words is failing. It puts Labour centre stage and on its own agenda. The Tories have made the classic mistake of underestimating their opponents.
Viewing from afar and 8 hours behind I would suggest the following.
Conservatives about right Labour too high Lib Dems too low UKIP bit high
Next week the serious manifesto for government will be released and the narrative will move from labour's suicide note and the conservative proposition for government..
I think keeping TM relatively low profile and allowing labour to show their hand has been tactically astute and expect to see a full on attack on labour from monday.
Over here in Canada all the talk, and I mean all the talk, is about Trump and the trade war developing between the US and Canada. Lots of anger and dismay widely seen. Rocky (forgive the pun) times ahead by the looks of it
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
You know my views on the polling, but certainly Labour have had a huge amount of publicity over the last week, and I don't suppose it can be all bad. Next week is the crucial one really, and it will cement the outcome of the election. The TV interviews will either confirm or deny what most people think anyway, but I do think it's absolutely crucial that Corbyn is not let off the hook because of 'politeness' or some such sentiment.
Mr. B, I still think you're being too pessimistic about the Prancing Horse. Practically no difference on pace in qualifying, and if Mercedes still has the turned-up-wick mode then that means Ferrari has the edge on race pace. Plus they've been sharper on strategy.
Hard to pass, and the start will be critical.
Got a few potential betting ideas (too many, to be honest). Got to go afk for a bit, so I imagine it'll be up around half five to six.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
So all those voters questioned on the news and the Daily Politics are deliberately misleading about their voting intention? Come on. That's not credible.
Some will be supporters of other parties the media find them to fit their agenda.You now can hardly find anyone who supported the Iraq war .However at the time in 2003 it had support .
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
So all those voters questioned on the news and the Daily Politics are deliberately misleading about their voting intention? Come on. That's not credible.
Some will be supporters of other parties the media find them to fit their agenda.You now can hardly find anyone who supported the Iraq war .However at the time in 2003 it had support .
Hm, maybe that's because they have changed their opinion in it, like the former Labour voters mentioned by Jason?
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
So all those voters questioned on the news and the Daily Politics are deliberately misleading about their voting intention? Come on. That's not credible.
Some will be supporters of other parties the media find them to fit their agenda.You now can hardly find anyone who supported the Iraq war .However at the time in 2003 it had support .
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
You have a Tory friend....I call that about as likely as Justin Kill Em bumping into Clive Lewis in a pub in Norwich on the day he was getting married in London.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
you are going to be sorely disapointed I think
The rest of us will be overjoyed that the cabal of trots were kept away from power
Gordon Brown accuses Tories of 'waging war against poor'
Oh good, that lazy line. It's amazing how many poor people still vote for them considering they are the target of a way. Old ones are the best though I suppose, and Corbyn has prompted a return to some old lazy lines the other way, so why not.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
A friend of mine recently told me I was going to win the Euro Millions triple rollover. It didn't happen. Ah shyte.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
He was in York City centre last Wednesday afternoon .There was a big crowd to see him alongside the local MP for York Central.The local press gave him some balanced coverage.I still think it will be a 150 Maj for the blues.However he is motivating a certain section of society.He is good on the stump meeting the public.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
The only problem even if you're right is that the lowest turnout in all recent elections is in safe Lab seats.
So if lots of previous non-voters do come out for Lab, the vast majority will have no impact at all in changing seat results.
Tories have dropped from the ludicrously high post-announcement polls but appear to have been stable - and up - over the campaign.
All four minor parties on this are being squeezed - and that's in agreement with what most anecdotes are saying. Labour are gaining a vote from the previous 'others'/minors that don't want a 100+ majority.
Tories have dropped from the ludicrously high post-announcement polls but appear to have been stable - and up - over the campaign.
All four minor parties on this are being squeezed - and that's in agreement with what most anecdotes are saying. Labour are gaining a vote from the previous 'others'/minors that don't want a 100+ majority.
I think the Tories have to be careful about unleashing personal attacks on Corbyn. The smartest thing they could do is to use his own words and actions against him. It's not as if there isn't enough ammunition. Let the fool condemn himself with a little encouragement from the Tories.
That's what they've been doing so far. They're still ahead and winning, but Labour (possibly) are improving.
I recall my Tory friend telling me about 6 months back that Trump would win. He was not backing Trump but he felt the people who do not vote will turn out.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
He was in York City centre last Wednesday afternoon .There was a big crowd to see him alongside the local MP for York Central.The local press gave him some balanced coverage.I still think it will be a 150 Maj for the blues.However he is motivating a certain section of society.He is good on the stump meeting the public.
He is good on the stump meeting the public...as long as it is only friendlies....you obviously missed when a veteran wanted to ask a question.
Defence: I think Corbyn has worked out that if he wrecks the economy completely that the IMF won't let us keep much more than a few pointy sticks to defend ourselves. Nukes will be long gone. This is clearly his plan.
Foreign policy: Venezuela really will be the shining example for us to aspire to once Corbyn is in charge of our economy
Education: This is clearly a very long term aim but if we have no money whatsoever to spend on any teachers at all, and if all aspiring students have no lights to do anything flash like read with then eventually Dianne Abbot will start to look above average intellectually.
Policing: 'Boys in blue'? I think not - Red guards are the way forwards.
Aren't we once again underestimating the public? All this talk of abstensions, low turnout, voting to stop a Tory landslide - I do think a lot of this is nonsense. You could equally argue (similar to the 1992 election), that millions will turn out to stop Corbyn.
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
It is not surprising he is outperforming Brown because the LibDem vote is so much weaker. Compared with 2015 we appear to be seeing a lower vote share not only from UKIP but also the Greens and SNP. There is also quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of previous non-voters turning out for Corbyn - I was speaking to a lady last night who intends to vote for the first time since 1992.
I think we can all find narratives to suit us anecdotally. Every time I turn on the news I hear lifelong Labour voters right across Britain saying they are switching to the Tories because of Corbyn. I also hear people who have never voted saying they will vote Tory to make sure Brexit happens - that seems far more realistic to me than legions of non-voters saying they will turn out and vote for a terrorist sympathiser.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
How do you know they are Labour voters ? I bet you also watch Question time and believe that the audience are not members of a political party.
So all those voters questioned on the news and the Daily Politics are deliberately misleading about their voting intention? Come on. That's not credible.
Some will be supporters of other parties the media find them to fit their agenda.You now can hardly find anyone who supported the Iraq war .However at the time in 2003 it had support .
Hm, maybe that's because they have changed their opinion in it, like the former Labour voters mentioned by Jason?
Nothing to do with changing their opinion , that they forget they gave their support at the time.
Tories have dropped from the ludicrously high post-announcement polls but appear to have been stable - and up - over the campaign.
All four minor parties on this are being squeezed - and that's in agreement with what most anecdotes are saying. Labour are gaining a vote from the previous 'others'/minors that don't want a 100+ majority.
Comments
I prob wont vote, but if there wasn't such a stigma to voting Tory, or if my vote counted, I would. Canvassers asked me today, and I said I was happy enough with how things are, and as I live in an ultra safe Tory seat, no need to vote
Plus there's the Brexit vote to add on to that.
It's why I genuinely believe Labour's apparent rise in the polls is dubious. Is Corbyn really outperforming Brown and Miliband? It just doesn't 'feel' right, and I know that sounds flakey too. However, I do trust my own instincts, and anything over 30% for Labour doesn't sit right with me.
Cyrus the Virus (John Malkovich): [holding the pilot at gunpoint] Say there was a disturbance but you've got it under control. Say it, or I will kill you.
Pilot: Without me you got nobody to fly the plane.
Cyrus: I never think that far ahead.
SCONcan beat the SNP !!https://twitter.com/blairmcdougall/status/862642070854434817
I think there is a strong case to be made that Labour tribalism + attracting votes from the hard left, the greens and the lib dems, plus the fact that Corbyn's objective is to maximise vote share rather than win in marginals, means Corbyn will poll 30% or more, which we are starting to see in the polls.
The question for me is where this leaves Labour in seat terms. I'm in trouble if, say, the Conservative majority is 96 rather than 101.
The downside of democracy is that people who have that sort of perspective have the same voting rights as everyone else
!. People would be quite mad if they voted differently from what I and all my friends think.
2. I don't believe the public has many really insane people.
3. Therefore, the polls are wrong.
The flaw is in point 1 - if you aren't out canvassing, you don't actually meet many people outside your social circle, and they're unlikely to be representative no matter how many friends you have. Our friends tend to be rather like us.
But hey, you're 15 points or so ahead. Stop worrying!
I assume you are canvassing in Broxtowe.. what were your canvas returns telling you in 2015?.
Britain’s pro-Brussels brigade still looks Eurosceptic when compared with other Europeans of a similar age
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/05/daily-chart-9?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/
https://mobile.twitter.com/Mike_Blackley/status/863144464763760643/photo/1
Nuttall on telly is a vote loser for the kippers, while I am happy for the Greens to take the backseat.
"Britain has not fought just war since 1945, says Jeremy Corbyn, prompting anger from veterans"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/12/britain-has-not-fought-just-war-since-1945-says-jeremy-corbyn/
I am surprised Con haven't yet gone all guns blazing re defence.
The other issue they need to ensure gets brought up is the Monarchy because Corbyn will not say he supports it - and that opens up another major avenue of attack.
I actually think the BBC has a big decision to make re that QT Special - they'll definitely have a section on defence but will they have an audience question on the Monarchy? If they do it could well be absolutely disastrous for Lab - and it would then be guaranteed to be the lead story in the tabloid press etc - under one week from polling day.
Spain's expected to be a two stop race with a safety car possible. The soft tyre is miles (perhaps as much as 2.5s) a lap faster than the medium. The hard is not expected to be used.
Manifestos this week coming up so maybe they go big on Corbyn's defence record the week after.
They also have to ensure the Monarchy question gets asked - I guess Andrew Neil may ask it in his Corbyn interview.
Mr. Baskerville, quite.
It's also ironic the EU salivates over the concept of a single European culture whilst at the same time facilitating the importing of millions of people with no desire or intention to integrate with it.
My piece here:
http://www.lifestuff.xyz/blog/careful-what-you-wish-for
The CON share is strong and stable.
Lib Dems = http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4jbuk8Bes1rwkg8yo1_500.gif
It's inevitable that they will be pushed to make up their minds eventually. The EZ is the real EU.
Also, I was reading some interesting comments on another forum about unweighted polling figures. Someone mentioned Labour's raw figures were just 23% and the Tories were 51%. So naturally, Labour's are rounded up by a substantial margin and the Tories were rounded down by 5 percentage points.
Even if we generously halve those figures, it puts Labour on a far more realistic 26% and the Tories on 48%.
I might me a mile wide of the mark, but I somehow doubt it.
Recessions are for Christmas, but EU integration is for life (unless you leap out of the window).
Oh good, that lazy line. It's amazing how many poor people still vote for them considering they are the target of a way. Old ones are the best though I suppose, and Corbyn has prompted a return to some old lazy lines the other way, so why not.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39906815
And pleased I was right that Hamilton would get P1, after my earlier flirtation with Raikkonnen.
'Mr. L, I agree. The Conservatives have been far too soft on Corbyn.'
Probably saving the IRA / hug a terrorist bit for the final week of the campaign
This was one of Ferrari's banker tracks; I think it might be over for them this season.
https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/fr/cp0/e15/q65/18404093_10155403442541661_992529550328386673_o.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=51c2374c7b399b8f3d1579da33dbf07b&oe=59B42BBA
Conservatives about right
Labour too high
Lib Dems too low
UKIP bit high
Next week the serious manifesto for government will be released and the narrative will move from labour's suicide note and the conservative proposition for government..
I think keeping TM relatively low profile and allowing labour to show their hand has been tactically astute and expect to see a full on attack on labour from monday.
Over here in Canada all the talk, and I mean all the talk, is about Trump and the trade war developing between the US and Canada. Lots of anger and dismay widely seen. Rocky (forgive the pun) times ahead by the looks of it
Hard to pass, and the start will be critical.
Got a few potential betting ideas (too many, to be honest). Got to go afk for a bit, so I imagine it'll be up around half five to six.
He also told me that Jezza would do very well. Even I had to laugh. He said the same thing would happen: many who do not vote normally will turn out Corbyn. Let's see what happens .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/01/telegraph-cartoons-may-2017/
The rest of us will be overjoyed that the cabal of trots were kept away from power
The voters hate the poor.
Idiot.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/863005988743512064
So if lots of previous non-voters do come out for Lab, the vast majority will have no impact at all in changing seat results.
Foreign policy: Venezuela really will be the shining example for us to aspire to once Corbyn is in charge of our economy
Education: This is clearly a very long term aim but if we have no money whatsoever to spend on any teachers at all, and if all aspiring students have no lights to do anything flash like read with then eventually Dianne Abbot will start to look above average intellectually.
Policing: 'Boys in blue'? I think not - Red guards are the way forwards.
Immigration: Are you kidding, with him in charge?