The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Microsoft offered a free upgrade to windows 10 for everyone.
Which may well not be guaranteed to work with much of the equipment in the hospital, as the suppliers only tested it on an ancient OS ten years ago. That kit will probably work fine under Windows 10, but they won't guarantee it, and any deaths that occur are your fault for not using the OS they've tested it with ...
Unless you want to give them £x for the latest version, which is guaranteed to work with Windows 10.
These software related deaths that you're alluding to. Care to list them?
Whilst not wishing to interfere in this sub-thread, JJ earlier makes a reference to Therac-25 which takes us to deaths here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
Rather scary for the Lib Dems that the national polls are now showing swings away from them to both the Tories and Labour.
I suspect the LD swing is to Labour not Tory, and it is the tactical vote effect as the question who will you vote for ? becomes more real and specific.
I doubt that. After all, the Lib Dem opinion poll rating normally increases during an election campaign.
Automatic upgrades are mostly done automatically. Some firms spend a fortune on people that actually hold back the upgrades from Microsoft etc so that their IT guys can 'test' them. In almost all cases this is just stupid. There is basically zero cost in letting Microsoft do this for you. They're good at it, and if you're fully up to date then you can have a bit of a gripe at them. Running versions of Internet Explorer that are around 6 versions behind the current one (as my company did) isn't wise.
Unless your business is operating systems and the like there's not a chance in hell that your support guys are even 10% as good as the people at Microsoft. There's a good chance that you can buy in some help that is nearly to that standard - install some sort of anti-virus thing, but even better tell your staff to stop clicking on links.
I'm fairly certain you're wrong about that. As a slightly silly example, MS cannot test the connection to the hospital's Therac-25 (*) machine, which is connected to the PC via an ancient serial bus. Or the slightly odd way the network's configured because a slightly obscure machine designed in the Windows XP - era requires string and beeswax to operate.
It isn't just the specialist software that's being run on the PC (though that can be difficult enough): it's the peripherals that are connected to the PCs. When I was working in the tech industry, we'd see all sorts of problems caused by OS updates, from GPIB cards suddenly breaking (stopping all testing) to design data suddenly being inaccessible (stopping all design work).
This probably isn't the case for a GP surgery, and in many cases there is probably an over-abundance of caution. However for large organisations, or those using uncommon equipment, or where failures could cost vast sums of money or even lives, testing is vital.
(*) Extra points for people who realise the relevance of this.
I'm fairly certain that I'm wrong about this.
So, yes, you are right. Better still what you say is informative. (long delay to replying and longer delay still to understanding - thanks Mssr JJ)
By the way, do we have "made up my mind" figures broken down by party?
Dr P - have you made up your mind? You've often expressed support for Corbyn, but (and I find this contradictory) you've also often said wise things. I'm sure you know without doubt that were Mr Corbyn to be elected we'd immediately be in a financial crisis. That crisis in itself will disable his plans. His plans though are so raddled that even if the markets greeted him with joy they'd be unworkable. You have to know this - you're far too clever not to. Care to comment?
One of the strengths of the Labour Party in this campaign is that nobody expects Labour to win. Therefore, all these "costing" nonsense which Labour has to answer and the Tories don't will not make much of an impact this time.
Many Labour voters who do not like Corbyn particularly, will still vote Labour to stop the landslide.
All this "costing" nonsense... Yes. This geeky detail about whether we have or haven;t got a spare £250 billion. As in 'I was planning to retire next month and buy a yacht, but my wife is obsessed with "costing" nonsense about mortgages and food.'
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
The ransomware attack affected more than just hospitals which ameliorated the impact of any attack on the government. But the Tories need a solid manifesto, they need more funding for schools and hospitals at least.
If they commit an extra £350m to the NHS it'd be an act of political genius - especially as it'll happen over time anyway. Although it'd financial folly without root and branch restructuring at the same time.
Also, I'd almost certainly choke to death on a glass of (decent) whisky if that happened, so win-win. You'll miss me when I'm gone.
I said on here three weeks ago that Theresa May should pledge it by GE2022.
Tories still ahead, 41-35 but Labour picked up 4pts on last time.
Even this one is at variance with the local election polls.
The yougov ,_2017
Whoa .... In Welsh Local elections, the Independents are usually Tories. To get the Tory vote, a simple thing to do is to take 80 per cent of the Independent vote and put it in the Tory column.
This gives Labour 472 councillors, and the Tories on 184 + 0.8 * 322 = 441 councillors.
I.e. Labour slightly ahead in the Locals, which is what the polling predicted for the Locals (from memory, Labour 28 per cent, Tories 26 per cent).
In that case, shouldn't the pollsters also have asked about Independents if they are so numerous ?
So, it looks to me as though the Tory tide will stop at Bridgend. The Tories won’t take the Newport seats.
Considering the allegations of bullying and infighting in Cardiff Labour, I am surprised they didn’t lose control of the Council. It was a very good result for Labour. I see now though they have deposed the old leader Phil Bale and have installed Huw ‘Tippex’ Thomas as the new leader.
“Tippex” Thomas was the Labour student who wanted the Welsh to spatter English cars with Tippex. He was one of the participants in the incredibly dirty Ceredigion election in 2015.
Labour's Welsh vote was flattered by fielding more candidates than the other parties.
It's very difficult to attribute votes for Independents to other parties. My guess is that in places like Bridgend, Pembroke, Powys, Vale of Glamorgan , many Independents are Conservatives, whereas in the Valleys they're Labour supporters who've fallen out with the local party.
That figures.
I think that also what helps is that Labour locally still has quite a strong Welsh identity.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
This guy is no John 'speaks his mind' Buchan, but I'm sure Angus will appreciate his support.
'Moray Brexit leader backs Robertson in general election
The man who led Moray to the brink of a Brexit vote has backed the SNP’s Angus Robertson in the general election. Last year, Paul Briggs and Mr Robertson clashed bitterly over the UK’s place in Europe. Despite being an SNP member, Mr Briggs encouraged people to vote against the wishes of the party. And in June, 49.9% of voters in Moray said they wanted out of the European Union. The Remain camp triumphed by only 122 votes. Mr Briggs still supports Brexit, but says he has grown disillusioned with Prime Minister Theresa May’s “hard” approach.'
One of the most satisfying things about this campaign is watching the Zoomers splutter as they try to comprehend and respond to the Tory surge in Scotland.
By the way, do we have "made up my mind" figures broken down by party?
Dr P - have you made up your mind? You've often expressed support for Corbyn, but (and I find this contradictory) you've also often said wise things. I'm sure you know without doubt that were Mr Corbyn to be elected we'd immediately be in a financial crisis. That crisis in itself will disable his plans. His plans though are so raddled that even if the markets greeted him with joy they'd be unworkable. You have to know this - you're far too clever not to. Care to comment?
One of the strengths of the Labour Party in this campaign is that nobody expects Labour to win. Therefore, all these "costing" nonsense which Labour has to answer and the Tories don't will not make much of an impact this time.
Many Labour voters who do not like Corbyn particularly, will still vote Labour to stop the landslide.
All this "costing" nonsense... Yes. This geeky detail about whether we have or haven;t got a spare £250 billion. As in 'I was planning to retire next month and buy a yacht, but my wife is obsessed with "costing" nonsense about mortgages and food.'
Oh yes ! Tory Party pledges to eliminate the deficit by 2015. What happened ?
The Tories borrowed £100bn more than it had planned ! Nothing happened. The world did not collapse.
Based on the coloured bar chart at the top of this thread, the Baxterised numbers are as follows:
Con .......... 381
Labour ..... 188
LibDem ....... 5
UKIP ........... 0
Green ......... 0
Is now the time to SELL the Tories with Spreadex at 397 seats, or to BUY Labour with Sporting or Spreadex at 162 seats? As the chap on Big Brother is apt to say ..... You decide! (I placed my spread bets yesterday)
Is there a day you haven't either laid or sold the Tories yet ?
I'm not playing on the spreads on either the Tories or Labour at current prices.
The only thing I'm confident about is selling the Lib Dems.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
If we are to believe Comres then Labour is well down on 2015 in every region, including East Mids btw, except the South East (+6) and South West (+7).
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
By the way, do we have "made up my mind" figures broken down by party?
Dr P - have you made up your mind? You've often expressed support for Corbyn, but (and I find this contradictory) you've also often said wise things. I'm sure you know without doubt that were Mr Corbyn to be elected we'd immediately be in a financial crisis. That crisis in itself will disable his plans. His plans though are so raddled that even if the markets greeted him with joy they'd be unworkable. You have to know this - you're far too clever not to. Care to comment?
One of the strengths of the Labour Party in this campaign is that nobody expects Labour to win. Therefore, all these "costing" nonsense which Labour has to answer and the Tories don't will not make much of an impact this time.
Many Labour voters who do not like Corbyn particularly, will still vote Labour to stop the landslide.
Strangely enough round here Labour voters are sullen and reluctant to talk politics and the Labour vote collapsed at the County Council elections in May.. I suspect a lot will not vote.. Mention Corbyn to them and they change the subject..
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
If we are to believe Comres then Labour is well down on 2015 in every region except the South East (+6) and South West (+7).
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
It's up up up for Labour. Tories reached their ceiling (48-50), Labour reached their floor (26-30)
Being behind by 14-18% is not something to celebrate.
No, but it encourages all their support to firm up, and save seats that might otherwise be lost, and so prevents the worst possible scenarios.
Getting a bad result rather than a disastrous one is not a win for Labour, but it is better. At the moment the Tories are lazy, assuming that because Corbyn has poor ratings they need say nothing (we keep hearing they are holding back - until when? And why?), and while his allies have messed up Corbyn so far has not, meaning the 'let him tie his own rope' strategy has been ineffective, even if it has not led to a shift that would change the outcome from anything other than a Tory win.
It depends what you mean by disastrous. I expect this year to be 1997 in reverse.
Isn't Corbyn surviving Labour's worst possible scenario according to many soft-leftists/'centrists'?
On Comres at least the Tories would get a majority of just over 100 but Labour 30% which would be enough for Corbyn to probably be re elected Labour leader by the membership, Blairites worst nightmare
I disagree . Even 32% would be a heavy defeat on these poll figures. The mere fact that Corbyn bowed meekly to May's wish to call the election would justify ousting him. By doing so he betrayed the interests of the party he claims to lead.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
It's up up up for Labour. Tories reached their ceiling (48-50), Labour reached their floor (26-30)
Being behind by 14-18% is not something to celebrate.
No, but it encourages all their support to firm up, and save seats that might otherwise be lost, and so prevents the worst possible scenarios.
Getting a bad result rather than a disastrous one is not a win for Labour, but it is better. At the moment the Tories are lazy, assuming that because Corbyn has poor ratings they need say nothing (we keep hearing they are holding back - until when? And why?), and while his allies have messed up Corbyn so far has not, meaning the 'let him tie his own rope' strategy has been ineffective, even if it has not led to a shift that would change the outcome from anything other than a Tory win.
It depends what you mean by disastrous. I expect this year to be 1997 in reverse.
Isn't Corbyn surviving Labour's worst possible scenario according to many soft-leftists/'centrists'?
On Comres at least the Tories would get a majority of just over 100 but Labour 30% which would be enough for Corbyn to probably be re elected Labour leader by the membership, Blairites worst nightmare
I disagree . Even 32% would be a heavy defeat on these poll figures. The mere fact that Corbyn bowed meekly to May's wish to call the election would justify ousting him. By doing so he betrayed the interests of the party he claims to lead.
Yes, absolutely. The man is in politics but is not a politician. Also surrounded by idiots.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
No, the Tories had a terrible night in the locals.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
and your downside is negligible. Corbyn could announce a plan to disband the armed forces and you still wouldn't be that badly exposed at 160. I think Baxter is driving the spreads market and it is giving way to much credence to the idea that Brexit Labour voters accross the board will vote Tory. He has the Tories at 40% of the vote in seats like Makerfield. Never ever been close to that and won't be this time.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
#ComRes Most likely to keep Britain safe from terrorism
May 47% Corbyn 14%
#Comres Best to lead Britain’s negotiations over Brexit
May 50% Corbyn 15%
And Labour are at 32%. Right.
The uptick has to be students...has to be. Labour aren't even ahead with public sector workers or the working class.
Is that not pilling up votes in areas they are already well ahead
It's one possible scenario.
a - Polls are just wrong - there is some reason for believing this might be the case, given anecdata and Labour struggles in many areas in locals and mayoralties
b - Piling up votes in safe seats, losing elsewhere - Similar to a), but would mean polls could be right even as Labour's struggles are genuine and would be repeated at a GE
c - There is a surge for Labour and Corbyn for some reason (fear of a big Tory majority, nonvoters saying they will vote Labour, popular policies overcoming doubts over Corbyn, sclerotic LD vote).
My theory is:
a) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from the Lib Dems; b) They are picking up around 2% of the electorate from the Greens; c) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from Plaid; d) They are picking up DNVs who will not actually vote when it comes to it; e) These votes are in overwhelmingly safe seats - Labour Urbans/Tory suburbans
I don't think there is any significant swing to the Tories in SE/SW or East.
Plaid only had 1% to start with! More likely is that some UKIP voters are going back to Labour.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
#ComRes Most likely to keep Britain safe from terrorism
May 47% Corbyn 14%
#Comres Best to lead Britain’s negotiations over Brexit
May 50% Corbyn 15%
And Labour are at 32%. Right.
The uptick has to be students...has to be. Labour aren't even ahead with public sector workers or the working class.
Is that not pilling up votes in areas they are already well ahead
It's one possible scenario.
a - Polls are just wrong - there is some reason for believing this might be the case, given anecdata and Labour struggles in many areas in locals and mayoralties
b - Piling up votes in safe seats, losing elsewhere - Similar to a), but would mean polls could be right even as Labour's struggles are genuine and would be repeated at a GE
c - There is a surge for Labour and Corbyn for some reason (fear of a big Tory majority, nonvoters saying they will vote Labour, popular policies overcoming doubts over Corbyn, sclerotic LD vote).
My theory is:
a) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from the Lib Dems; b) They are picking up around 2% of the electorate from the Greens; c) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from Plaid; d) They are picking up DNVs who will not actually vote when it comes to it; e) These votes are in overwhelmingly safe seats - Labour Urbans/Tory suburbans
I don't think there is any significant swing to the Tories in SE/SW or East.
Plaid only had 1% to start with! More likely is that some UKIP voters are going back to Labour.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
A gain of 550 seats. Victories in the West Midlands and Teesside.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
When you say 'far more' how many do you think?
Labour will win 180 - 200.
And how much have you bet per seat? (Percentage of monthly income say)
#ComRes Most likely to keep Britain safe from terrorism
May 47% Corbyn 14%
#Comres Best to lead Britain’s negotiations over Brexit
May 50% Corbyn 15%
And Labour are at 32%. Right.
The uptick has to be students...has to be. Labour aren't even ahead with public sector workers or the working class.
Is that not pilling up votes in areas they are already well ahead
It's one possible scenario.
a - Polls are just wrong - there is some reason for believing this might be the case, given anecdata and Labour struggles in many areas in locals and mayoralties
b - Piling up votes in safe seats, losing elsewhere - Similar to a), but would mean polls could be right even as Labour's struggles are genuine and would be repeated at a GE
c - There is a surge for Labour and Corbyn for some reason (fear of a big Tory majority, nonvoters saying they will vote Labour, popular policies overcoming doubts over Corbyn, sclerotic LD vote).
My theory is:
a) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from the Lib Dems; b) They are picking up around 2% of the electorate from the Greens; c) They are picking up around 1% of the electorate from Plaid; d) They are picking up DNVs who will not actually vote when it comes to it; e) These votes are in overwhelmingly safe seats - Labour Urbans/Tory suburbans
I don't think there is any significant swing to the Tories in SE/SW or East.
Plaid only had 1% to start with! More likely is that some UKIP voters are going back to Labour.
Triple lock !
It was smart to court the grey vote. If only a little can be brought back, it's very helpful.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
A gain of 550 seats. Victories in the West Midlands and Teesside.
An arse-hole won by a few hundred votes in Teesside on a 29% turnout.
By the way, do we have "made up my mind" figures broken down by party?
Dr P - have you made up your mind? You've often expressed support for Corbyn, but (and I find this contradictory) you've also often said wise things. I'm sure you know without doubt that were Mr Corbyn to be elected we'd immediately be in a financial crisis. That crisis in itself will disable his plans. His plans though are so raddled that even if the markets greeted him with joy they'd be unworkable. You have to know this - you're far too clever not to. Care to comment?
One of the strengths of the Labour Party in this campaign is that nobody expects Labour to win. Therefore, all these "costing" nonsense which Labour has to answer and the Tories don't will not make much of an impact this time.
Many Labour voters who do not like Corbyn particularly, will still vote Labour to stop the landslide.
All this "costing" nonsense... Yes. This geeky detail about whether we have or haven;t got a spare £250 billion. As in 'I was planning to retire next month and buy a yacht, but my wife is obsessed with "costing" nonsense about mortgages and food.'
Oh yes ! Tory Party pledges to eliminate the deficit by 2015. What happened ?
The Tories borrowed £100bn more than it had planned ! Nothing happened. The world did not collapse.
And the Bank of England created about £450 billion using the magic money tree known as quantitative easing to buy bonds (including £60 billion of Government Bonds since last August to help cover the deficit).
All this costing nonsense ...
Money is created by banks. Value is created by people working productively.
There are too many accountant politicians who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. It is an irritating political disease.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
A gain of 550 seats. Victories in the West Midlands and Teesside.
An arse-hole won by a few hundred votes in Teesside on a 29% turnout.
Have they actually done something bad, or is this just smearing because you don't like the result?
Tories still ahead, 41-35 but Labour picked up 4pts on last time.
Even this one is at variance with the local election polls.
The yougov welsh local elections poll way underestimated labour (28%) theyactually got 35% and way overestimated tories (26%) they actually got 13%, so half of what yougov were predicting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_local_elections,_2017
).
In that case, shouldn't the pollsters also have asked about Independents if they are so numerous ?
But, how could the pollsters do that? Independent means different things in different wards. In my ward in Wales, the Independent was an Extreme Welsh Nationalist, more nationalist than Plaid Cymru.
As a rough rule of thumb, 80 percent of the Welsh Independents are Tories. The local election results in Wales were consistent with the polls for the local elections, once this is taken into account.
To be honest, the results were not too disastrous for Labour in Wales. I think Wrexham, Clwyd South, Alyn & Deeside, Delyn and Bridgend are already lost.
The next batch of vulnerable seats are the Newport and Cardiff ones.
Labour did well in the cities in Wales -- Newport, Cardiff, Swansea & Llanelli. Labour lost seats outside the cities.
So, it looks to me as though the Tory tide will stop at Bridgend. The Tories won’t take the Newport seats.
Considering the allegations of bullying and infighting in Cardiff Labour, I am surprised they didn’t lose control of the Council. It was a very good result for Labour. I see now though they have deposed the old leader Phil Bale and have installed Huw ‘Tippex’ Thomas as the new leader.
“Tippex” Thomas was the Labour student who wanted the Welsh to spatter English cars with Tippex. He was one of the participants in the incredibly dirty Ceredigion election in 2015.
You may be correct that 80% of Independent councillors in Wales are Tories in private - though I would guess it is more like two thirds - but those who vote for them will have a wide range of persuasions.It is very likely that whilst 70% of Independents are Tories fewer than 50% of those supporting them would be Tory voters.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
and your downside is negligible. Corbyn could announce a plan to disband the armed forces and you still wouldn't be that badly exposed at 160. I think Baxter is driving the spreads market and it is giving way to much credence to the idea that Brexit Labour voters accross the board will vote Tory. He has the Tories at 40% of the vote in seats like Makerfield. Never ever been close to that and won't be this time.
Baxter is computing absolute nonsense. Predicting Tories will win 413 seats. I hope the bettors are not plumping for that !
Labour's Welsh vote was flattered by fielding more candidates than the other parties.
It's very difficult to attribute votes for Independents to other parties. My guess is that in places like Bridgend, Pembroke, Powys, Vale of Glamorgan , many Independents are Conservatives, whereas in the Valleys they're Labour supporters who've fallen out with the local party.
I think that is correct. 80 per cent is a rough rule.
Labour did well in the cities -- they even gained seats in Swansea and Llanelli, and the losses in Cardiff were less than they should have been. Plaid Cymru did well in the rural areas.
I think this points to 6 Lab losses: Ynys Mon -> PC or Tory, and the 4 Welsh NE seats & Bridgend -> Tories.
I think Ceredigion is TCTC, and my bet for a surprise result would be the Rhondda where Chris Bryant has lost votes in every election.
I grew up in Pembrokeshire and am aware of many non-Tory Independents. Quite a few were Labour.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
As a Hull City fan it pains to mention that they were relegated from the Premier League in 2010 and 2015. They may be a pattern here involving increased numbers of Tory MPs.
Why is it that team from Leave areas get relegated ?
Because they are in poor wwc areas abandoned by those left leaning parties that tried to make the case for Remain.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
Except it isn't true. The PBV has the Tories on 38, which is higher than what they got in 2015. That's forgetting that comparing locals with a GE is a fools errand.
Apparently there has been an 8 point swing to Labour in the South since the GE. Conservative unchanged, Labour up 8.
Well we know it isn't racking up the vote in London based on the London Yougov poll, so where is this supposed swing coming from? Home counties UKIP going all to Labour?
That is actually a 4% swing - not 8%. But I have never rated Comres - often produce garbage!
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
I think most of the movement in the polls is either campaign noise (fundamentals are stable) or else that slight rallying for Labour would have happened in any event, because the election was unexpected and it's focused minds.
I'll be very surprised if Labour beat 30% on the day and, if I were a moderate, I really wouldn't want them to.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
Except it isn't true. The PBV has the Tories on 38, which is higher than what they got in 2015. That's forgetting that comparing locals with a GE is a fools errand.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
Except it isn't true. The PBV has the Tories on 38, which is higher than what they got in 2015. That's forgetting that comparing locals with a GE is a fools errand.
Excluding NI they got more than 38% in 2015
AH, how could I forget with Justin telling us all the time. Still, the second point stands.
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
"Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway. "
Or alternatively a section of the Labour vote finds the idea of Corbyn defending the nation and Diane Abbott in charge of the Police to be frightening, but as long as the polls show this as remote they don't have a decision to make and can stick with supporting Labour.
Either way, it means Labour won't get wiped out anywhere near as bad as once seemed possible.
That's been my view for weeks. Buying at 160 is a great opportunity.
The Labour spread is now a serious money making opportunity.
Go on, I'm going to bite. What precisely is a money-making opportunity there?
The spread is 154 - 160. Labour will win far more than 160.
Whilst not wishing to interfere in this sub-thread, JJ earlier makes a reference to Therac-25 which takes us to deaths here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
I used to tell all new graduate engineers about the Therac-25 story, as it's a classic example of how testing can miss perfectly reasonable use-cases. In the case of the Therac-25, there were several problems in the software and wider system design.
To make matters worse, they fixed a bug, and everything seemed fine. Except there was another similar bug that killed another patient a few years later ...
Labour's Welsh vote was flattered by fielding more candidates than the other parties.
It's very difficult to attribute votes for Independents to other parties. My guess is that in places like Bridgend, Pembroke, Powys, Vale of Glamorgan , many Independents are Conservatives, whereas in the Valleys they're Labour supporters who've fallen out with the local party.
I think that is correct. 80 per cent is a rough rule.
Labour did well in the cities -- they even gained seats in Swansea and Llanelli, and the losses in Cardiff were less than they should have been. Plaid Cymru did well in the rural areas.
I think this points to 6 Lab losses: Ynys Mon -> PC or Tory, and the 4 Welsh NE seats & Bridgend -> Tories.
I think Ceredigion is TCTC, and my bet for a surprise result would be the Rhondda where Chris Bryant has lost votes in every election.
I grew up in Pembrokeshire and am aware of many non-Tory Independents. Quite a few were Labour.
I live in Pembs and half the last bloody cabinet were Labour defectors. Working hard down here. Just put up my Philippa Thompson poster.
"The NHS also has a way to go before it can transition away from XP.
But the GDS is determined not to renew the contract, saying instead that slow coaches must adhere to government guidelines on lowering risk – or sort their own support out."
18-24 Con 26, Lab 51 25-34 Con 28, Lab 51 (looks suspect to yours truly) 35-44 Con 39, Lab 37 45-54 Con 44, Lab 29 55-64 Con 50, Lab 26 65+ Con 66, Lab 15
The evidence of what'#s happening is really pretty clear, confirmed by polls, canvassing and anecdotal evidence - there's almost no confusion:
1. Tories have a huge swing from UKIP 2. Labour is close to where they were in 2015. 3.The LibDems are drifting 4. UKIP is plunging.
I see there are still posters denying it all - Labour must be below 25%, etc. But without evidence to the contrry, it seems reasonable to believe the polls.
Whether this will change when the manifestos appear and the Tories start showing some ankle is an interesting question. It appears so far that May really wanted a pretty blank cheque - we might raise taxes, or not; we may chip away the pension lock, or not; we will have Brexit, but who knows on what basis. That was to be delivered by an "eek the alternative is Corbyn" campaign. I think that that is already factored in, though - Labour voters are well aware of Corbyn's alleged defects, and either disagree or are inclined to vote Labour anyway.
It's also striking that the LibDem campaign is invisible so far. They're in favour of a new referendum, Farron's decided on balance that gay sex is not a sin, and that's all I'm aware of. Less engaged voters probably have hardly noticed them at all so far.
But i wouldn't bet on the spreads on any of this just yet!
Surely Nick your instinct must tell you that Labour is not going to stay steady from 2015? We had the Council elections last week which were worse than those for Michael Foot in a similar position. This has all the hallmarks of your tick tock prediction.
But the 1983 local elections did not occur in the context of a general election campaign. Whilst the election announcement did happen the following week , it came as a bit of a surprise. A few days earlier commentators had expected the election to be held in the autumn.
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
Presumably when Jeremy Hunt does emerge from purdah, we will know more.
Holy shit ! This article is from May 2015. And he and the government was warned.
We need to be a bit careful but it certainly looks that way, and presumably the Sundays will have more details.
Being on extended windows XP support would not have prevented this. MS have only today issued a patch for XP.
Decisions were made by the Government Digital Service which is I think ultimately responsible to the Cabinet Office - minister Maude under coalition, then Hancock - I am guessing other depts can say they were acting on advice. Good thing the Home Sec at the time looks to be in the clear.
Apparently there has been an 8 point swing to Labour in the South since the GE. Conservative unchanged, Labour up 8.
Well we know it isn't racking up the vote in London based on the London Yougov poll, so where is this supposed swing coming from? Home counties UKIP going all to Labour?
That is actually a 4% swing - not 8%. But I have never rated Comres - often produce garbage!
Yes I meant 8 points up. However i later corrected myself as I was looking at the wrong figures, Labour would be 5 points up and Con 4.
18-24 Con 26, Lab 51 25-34 Con 28, Lab 51 (looks suspect to yours truly) 35-44 Con 39, Lab 37 45-54 Con 44, Lab 29 55-64 Con 50, Lab 26 65+ Con 66, Lab 15
Students for jezza bumping up labours numbers...We know how reliable they are when it comes to voting day.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
Except it isn't true. The PBV has the Tories on 38, which is higher than what they got in 2015. That's forgetting that comparing locals with a GE is a fools errand.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Not really , overall they fell a little short of their 2015 GE vote share . Did better in some areas such as NE but they had done very badly in 2013 hence the big gains .
Thanks, Mark. You know these facts far better than me.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
Except it isn't true. The PBV has the Tories on 38, which is higher than what they got in 2015. That's forgetting that comparing locals with a GE is a fools errand.
Labour's Welsh vote was flattered by fielding more candidates than the other parties.
It's very difficult to attribute votes for Independents to other parties. My guess is that in places like Bridgend, Pembroke, Powys, Vale of Glamorgan , many Independents are Conservatives, whereas in the Valleys they're Labour supporters who've fallen out with the local party.
I think that is correct. 80 per cent is a rough rule.
Labour did well in the cities -- they even gained seats in Swansea and Llanelli, and the losses in Cardiff were less than they should have been. Plaid Cymru did well in the rural areas.
I think this points to 6 Lab losses: Ynys Mon -> PC or Tory, and the 4 Welsh NE seats & Bridgend -> Tories.
I think Ceredigion is TCTC, and my bet for a surprise result would be the Rhondda where Chris Bryant has lost votes in every election.
I grew up in Pembrokeshire and am aware of many non-Tory Independents. Quite a few were Labour.
It appears to be: 1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn 2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
I think the Conservative campaign is going very much to plan. They've won very big in the local elections and have a big lead in the polls.
Did the Tories really win big in the locals ? All the figures are compared to 2013 or 2012 in Scotland. Not compared to 2015.
Och, don't begrudge the Kippers in kilts their wee seconds..sorry..victories. If their candidates manage to delete all their racist, bigoted FB posts & tweets, they might even equal Thatcher's worst ever result in Scotland!
It looks like the Tories might have dodged two bullets this week. The expenses stuff and now the NHS ransom-ware. Given nearly all the NHS trusts are back online, there is limited scope for attacking the government handling (although in these situation the role of central government is always overstated both positively and negatively).
Bit difficult to confine it to the NHS when it was a worldwide attack hitting lots of different countries and industries
No attacks in Wales, apparently. The Welsh government did pay for the security upgrade.
I suspect the truth of your statement is akin to the truth of the viz article linked earlier. The security upgrade is of course free.
It's not free. For EOL operating systems like XP, extended support needs to be paid for. If Wales paid and England stopped paying in 2014, it explains Jeremy Hunt's disappearing act as well as why Wales was not hit. (Actually Microsoft has now made the patch free.)
Since, most NHS computers apparently are XP, did the government take a decision not to go for extended support ? Even my company is covered.
However the locals were on the day of the GE in 2015 and so turnout relatively high. Locals outside of a general election like this year should favour parties who do better with the politically engaged, particularly the LDs but to a lesser extent Labour. The swing against the LDs at least should be slightly higher this year.
Labour's Welsh vote was flattered by fielding more candidates than the other parties.
It's very difficult to attribute votes for Independents to other parties. My guess is that in places like Bridgend, Pembroke, Powys, Vale of Glamorgan , many Independents are Conservatives, whereas in the Valleys they're Labour supporters who've fallen out with the local party.
I think that is correct. 80 per cent is a rough rule.
Labour did well in the cities -- they even gained seats in Swansea and Llanelli, and the losses in Cardiff were less than they should have been. Plaid Cymru did well in the rural areas.
I think this points to 6 Lab losses: Ynys Mon -> PC or Tory, and the 4 Welsh NE seats & Bridgend -> Tories.
I think Ceredigion is TCTC, and my bet for a surprise result would be the Rhondda where Chris Bryant has lost votes in every election.
I grew up in Pembrokeshire and am aware of many non-Tory Independents. Quite a few were Labour.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25
So, yes, you are right. Better still what you say is informative. (long delay to replying and longer delay still to understanding - thanks Mssr JJ)
Yes. This geeky detail about whether we have or haven;t got a spare £250 billion.
As in 'I was planning to retire next month and buy a yacht, but my wife is obsessed with "costing" nonsense about mortgages and food.'
I think that also what helps is that Labour locally still has quite a strong Welsh identity.
It appears to be:
1.Make it personal - May v. Corbyn
2. Keep quiet or equivocal about specific policies.
Although May outshines Corbyn, she only has a downside as she is exposed to be somewhat robotic, secretive, untrustworthy and not very competent or likeable. Corbyn, on the other hand, can only go up as he gets more TV exposure as a decent, likable open fellow with popular policies and not at all as portrayed in the right wing newspapers.
He has a very long way to go and won't catch up with her but he's narrowing the gap. That's the dynamic.
The Tories borrowed £100bn more than it had planned ! Nothing happened. The world did not collapse.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/gb/gb2015/ch1_gb2015.pdf#page=14
The only thing I'm confident about is selling the Lib Dems.
But wdik.
I think Baxter is driving the spreads market and it is giving way to much credence to the idea that Brexit Labour voters accross the board will vote Tory. He has the Tories at 40% of the vote in seats like Makerfield. Never ever been close to that and won't be this time.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/26/uk-government-pcs-open-to-hackers-as-paid-windows-xp-support-ends
Presumably when Jeremy Hunt does emerge from purdah, we will know more.
All this costing nonsense ...
Money is created by banks. Value is created by people working productively.
There are too many accountant politicians who know the price of everything and the value of nothing. It is an irritating political disease.
You know how I am voting this time ? You can use that for the next 5 years !!
I'll be very surprised if Labour beat 30% on the day and, if I were a moderate, I really wouldn't want them to.
He's an excerpt
The only age groups more likely to vote Labour than Conservative are 18-24 year olds (51% v 26%) and 25-34 year olds (51% v 28%).
These age groups are considerably less likely to vote than older, more Conservative people.
http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/therac.pdf
To make matters worse, they fixed a bug, and everything seemed fine. Except there was another similar bug that killed another patient a few years later ...
2015 GE
Con 37.8
Lab 31.2
LD 8.1
UKIP 12.9
2015 Locals (PNVS)
Con 31.3
Lab 30.3
LD 13.7
UKIP 13.3
Delta (GE - locals)
Con 6.5
Lab 0.9
LD -5.6
UKIP -0.4
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Let's see what tomorrow brings. £5.5m
"The NHS also has a way to go before it can transition away from XP.
But the GDS is determined not to renew the contract, saying instead that slow coaches must adhere to government guidelines on lowering risk – or sort their own support out."
Has anyone seen Hunt today ?
18-24 Con 26, Lab 51
25-34 Con 28, Lab 51 (looks suspect to yours truly)
35-44 Con 39, Lab 37
45-54 Con 44, Lab 29
55-64 Con 50, Lab 26
65+ Con 66, Lab 15
Triple Lock ! Triple Lock ! Triple Lock ! Triple Lock ! Triple Lock ! Triple Lock ! Triple Lock !
https://twitter.com/siongwilym/status/860622162738257927/photo/1
Look at where the independents are. They are in the Tory seats.
Ynys Mon has zero Tory Councillors.
Yet, the Tories will either come first or a very close second next month.
If their candidates manage to delete all their racist, bigoted FB posts & tweets, they might even equal Thatcher's worst ever result in Scotland!
25-34 Con 28, Lab 51 (looks suspect to yours truly)
35-44 Con 39, Lab 37
It is more than safe to assume. It's an almost bloody guarantee ! Maybe even including those upto 54 years of age.
Can we conclude more taxpayers vote Labour than the Tories ?