I'm normally a lurker only, but after watching the ITV Wales leaders debate I often wonder how Nick Clegg could have stayed in the same room as some tories. Andrew RT Davies was making capital out of Clegg's u-turn on tuition fees when It was a coalition policy! just shows what a pile of duplicitous s**ts the tories are! Reminds me so much of the Scorpion and Frog fable.
Clearly those which show that Labour has put on about 4% since the start of the campaign.
The fact that the Conservatives have also put on about 4%, and have therefore preserved their mountainous lead entirely intact, is conveniently ignored.
I assume this is nibbling around the edges - i.e. that the Triple Lock will be maintained?
Best strategy for May is probably to commit for the lifetime of the next Parliament, but order a review to see if it should be maintained post-2022. If this goes down sufficiently badly with the aged then she can always kick the matter further back into the long grass (perhaps bringing in more rapid rises in state retirement age and/or phased retirement, to try to mitigate the expense?)
I'm normally a lurker only, but after watching the ITV Wales leaders debate I often wonder how Nick Clegg could have stayed in the same room as some tories. Andrew RT Davies was making capital out of Clegg's u-turn on tuition fees when It was a coalition policy! just shows what a pile of duplicitous s**ts the tories are! Reminds me so much of the Scorpion and Frog fable.
You've only just realised, as a former Tory leader put it
"The Tory Party consists of shits, bloody shits, and fucking shits."
This Boris gaffe stuff is desperate stuff - I don't want him as FM, but that really does not rate as one of his gaffes. It's like when the SLAB leader tried getting worked up over May's boy jobs and girl jobs joke.
Is there final confirmation of who is on the ITV leaders debate tomorrow night?
Programme is still 2 hours - if it's just LD, UKIP, Green, SNP and PC that is going to be a long 2 hours.
Basically an immense borefest in which two leaders of regional parties that don't stand in over 90% of the country gang up with leaders of two more (weak and marginal) leftist parties, to lampoon the hapless leader of a dying right-wing party.
Of interest to none but a handful of really serious political anoraks. Don't know why they're bothering TBH.
The reason that it is a contest for third place is that May feels that she is too good to have to face the British public.
Pity poor Nuttall, he will be skinned alive, and it might even get him a few sympathy votes. This election marks the end of his brief carrer.
The fact is quite a lot of them did finally come out and vote in last year's referendum, to vote leave - and they may well do again on June 8, and that is not going to help Jeremy.
Is there final confirmation of who is on the ITV leaders debate tomorrow night?
Programme is still 2 hours - if it's just LD, UKIP, Green, SNP and PC that is going to be a long 2 hours.
Basically an immense borefest in which two leaders of regional parties that don't stand in over 90% of the country gang up with leaders of two more (weak and marginal) leftist parties, to lampoon the hapless leader of a dying right-wing party.
Of interest to none but a handful of really serious political anoraks. Don't know why they're bothering TBH.
The reason that it is a contest for third place is that May feels that she is too good to have to face the British public.
Pity poor Nuttall, he will be skinned alive, and it might even get him a few sympathy votes. This election marks the end of his brief carrer.
I guess Labour's only hope is that we have a 1983 Tory overstatement polling failure and the Tories are restricted to under 400 seats as they were then.
I thought that the 1983 fail was (a) modest and (b) under-estimated the vote share of the Alliance rather than Labour? But I may be misremembering, I've read so much of this sort of stuff over the last few weeks!
No- Labour was underestimated in 1983 and the Tories overestimated. Final polls were giving the Tories a lead of circa 21"% compared with the 15.2% outcome.
And now, as no-one asked for, some long rambling thoughts on the LD manifesto, section by section.
YOUR CHANCE TO CHANGE BRITAIN’S FUTURE BY CHANING THE OPPOSITION Simultaneously realistic and overly optimistic. Attacking May and Corbyn, recognising May is going to win, but also hoping the LDs are going to be able to make the LDs the official opposition. It’s not a bad opening, but seeing how things look to be going for them, its hopeful tone makes me sad for the party. Lots of manifesto does act like they will be in government though.
PROTECT BRITAIN’S PLACE IN EUROPE Forward says that campaigning to be the opposition, but then says here they LDs will a Brexit to deal to a vote, presuming they will be in government, or powerful enough to force that option (with a rejoin choice)?
Very clear on priorities, although obviously what they want is to stay.
SAVE OUR NHS AND SOCIAL CARE SERVICES Yet Labour and Conservative politicians refuse to be honest with the public about the scale of the crisis or the tough decisions which are needed to protect these vital services - Maybe, but they never reward you, do they?
Some funding stuff, which is better than none.
End public sector pay freeze for NHS workers? I presume not the rest of us then, diff from Labour.
Protect whistleblowers? Isn’t this already supposed to be the case?
Lots of points on mental health
Feels like a bigger emphasis on health than Labour’s even.
PUT CHILDREN FIRST Some bits I’m clear on the cost, some not.
Introduce a fairer national funding system with a protection for all schools, so that no school loses money – not a single one? Bold promise
Going after free schools – feels like less of an issue than a few years ago, but presumably still has some appeal
‘Slimmed down core national curriculum’ which they state includes PSHE – we hated PSHE when I was at school, a lot of it was useless nonsense.
Going heavy on LGBT + issues (incidentally, that’s a better acronym than LGBTIQA+, which I have seen)
Aim to meet all basic skills needs including literacy, numeracy and digital skills by 2030 – from the school of ‘who would object to that?’ policies
In fairness 1p on tax for the NHS is at least a step towards honesty with the electorate given an aging population.
Yep. Funding specific extra spending by extra taxation is perfectly fine, politics should be about decisions like this. A bit of honesty from the LDs and it should be praised.
With all the revenue they're expecting from the pot tax they're gonna need the NHS man
This Boris gaffe stuff is desperate stuff - I don't want him as FM, but that really does not rate as one of his gaffes. It's like when the SLAB leader tried getting worked up over May's boy jobs and girl jobs joke.
We just don't know. Everyone is talking about the Labour share in the polls being overestimated - what if the polls are actually UNDER ESTIMATING the Labour share by applying an out-dated methodology? I think we truly don't know...
Not that I am optimsitic however - my betting position is still based on L 160, T 400+.
This Boris gaffe stuff is desperate stuff - I don't want him as FM, but that really does not rate as one of his gaffes. It's like when the SLAB leader tried getting worked up over May's boy jobs and girl jobs joke.
Indeed.
In my experience I've never met a Sikh who didn't like a drink and Boris's wife is partly of Sikh heritage.
The fact is quite a lot of them did finally come out and vote in last year's referendum, to vote leave - and they may well do again on June 8, and that is not going to help Jeremy.
Indeed there is always the potential for more of the electorate actually voting, but the idea that they will lump for one side is risible. Corbyn would have to persuade a hell of a lot of otherwise non-voters that he's got what they want, and that seems improbable. Right now the only way Labour wins is either a polling catastrophe of unprecedented proportions, or a black swan the size of an ostrich.
Is there final confirmation of who is on the ITV leaders debate tomorrow night?
Programme is still 2 hours - if it's just LD, UKIP, Green, SNP and PC that is going to be a long 2 hours.
Basically an immense borefest in which two leaders of regional parties that don't stand in over 90% of the country gang up with leaders of two more (weak and marginal) leftist parties, to lampoon the hapless leader of a dying right-wing party.
Of interest to none but a handful of really serious political anoraks. Don't know why they're bothering TBH.
The reason that it is a contest for third place is that May feels that she is too good to have to face the British public.
Pity poor Nuttall, he will be skinned alive, and it might even get him a few sympathy votes. This election marks the end of his brief carrer.
Carrer?
Earlier, Nuttall was captain of an Aircraft Carrer.
Did you ask how many of them are actually registered to vote, in the actual election?
All of them, one of them lives in a marginal, and is sorting stuff out so they can vote in said marginal
Well at least they are engaged with the political process, even if you and I think they're wrong in their view. I wonder how many of Corbyn's band of merry students haven't registered yet, or don't know they need to?
Is there final confirmation of who is on the ITV leaders debate tomorrow night?
Programme is still 2 hours - if it's just LD, UKIP, Green, SNP and PC that is going to be a long 2 hours.
Basically an immense borefest in which two leaders of regional parties that don't stand in over 90% of the country gang up with leaders of two more (weak and marginal) leftist parties, to lampoon the hapless leader of a dying right-wing party.
Of interest to none but a handful of really serious political anoraks. Don't know why they're bothering TBH.
The reason that it is a contest for third place is that May feels that she is too good to have to face the British public.
Pity poor Nuttall, he will be skinned alive, and it might even get him a few sympathy votes. This election marks the end of his brief carrer.
Carrer?
Earlier, Nuttall was captain of an Aircraft Carrer.
Interesting, as a lot of people are under the impression May has moved the to the right, and I doubt hearing people on the right complain will change their view any.
We just don't know. Everyone is talking about the Labour share in the polls being overestimated - what if the polls are actually UNDER ESTIMATING the Labour share by applying an out-dated methodology? I think we truly don't know...
Not that I am optimsitic - my betting position is based on L 160, T 400+.
From recent research by Populus:
1. The current support base for both Tories and Labour is comprised primarily (about 75%) of their 2015 voters. In the Tories' case their VI has shot up so much that this represents the large bulk of their support under Cameron; in Labour's case they've suffered significant attrition. 2. Tory support is skewed particularly towards pensioners, a large cohort who vote religiously. Labour support is skewed particularly towards 18-24 year olds, a small cohort at least half of whom would rather go down the pub or stay in bed. 3. Of the roughly 1 in 4 supporters of each party who did not vote for them in 2015, most of the additional Tory voters are Ukip defectors, who have a proven track record of voting. Most of the additional Labour voters are people who voted neither in the previous election nor in the EU referendum, and who therefore have a proven track record of not voting.
In addition:
4. ICM, who continue to report Labour consistently at under 30%, have effectively accused other companies of not weighting turnout properly. There is also good reason to suppose that at least some of the pollsters are also incorrectly weighting by 2015 turnout, and are under-counting the Lib Dems and over-counting Labour in their final figures. 5. We ought also to remember that there is a fairly consistent trend in the polls, as seen for example in 2015, of the companies under-reporting the Conservatives and over-reporting Labour - a stubborn problem that they seem to have trouble solving.
In short, Labour is bleeding its previous supporters and reliant on the young and previous non-voters - the most unreliable sections of the electorate - to plug the gaps. The Tories are holding on to their existing support and have very strong backing both from previous Ukip voters, and from the elderly - the section of the electorate most likely to vote. Whilst one cannot be 100% certain that the polls are skewed against rather than in favour of Labour, I'd say that another polling fail, with Labour falling short of expectations, is a possibility we should consider very seriously.
This Boris gaffe stuff is desperate stuff - I don't want him as FM, but that really does not rate as one of his gaffes. It's like when the SLAB leader tried getting worked up over May's boy jobs and girl jobs joke.
I have never met a teetotal sikh – and I know many sikhs. A fair few of them drink like fishes.
I guess Labour's only hope is that we have a 1983 Tory overstatement polling failure and the Tories are restricted to under 400 seats as they were then.
I thought that the 1983 fail was (a) modest and (b) under-estimated the vote share of the Alliance rather than Labour? But I may be misremembering, I've read so much of this sort of stuff over the last few weeks!
No- Labour was underestimated in 1983 and the Tories overestimated. Final polls were giving the Tories a lead of circa 21"% compared with the 15.2% outcome.
IIRC the Conservative vote in safe seats was somewhat depressed in 1983 by the huge leads.
In 1987 and even more so 1992 it did come out leading to the Conservatives doing better than expected.
For example Hartley Booth got a higher share of the vote in Finchley in 1992 than Maggie had in 1983, and on a 8% higher turnout.
This Boris gaffe stuff is desperate stuff - I don't want him as FM, but that really does not rate as one of his gaffes. It's like when the SLAB leader tried getting worked up over May's boy jobs and girl jobs joke.
I have never met a teetotal sikh – and I know many sikhs. A fair few of them drink like fishes.
I know one, well at least I have never seen him drink. The rest drink a lot. I'm pretty sure no Sikh person is taking offence over this, as always it's white liberals taking offence on their behalf.
We just don't know. Everyone is talking about the Labour share in the polls being overestimated - what if the polls are actually UNDER ESTIMATING the Labour share by applying an out-dated methodology? I think we truly don't know...
Not that I am optimsitic - my betting position is based on L 160, T 400+.
From recent research by Populus:
1. The current support base for both Tories and Labour is comprised primarily (about 75%) of their 2015 voters. In the Tories' case their VI has shot up so much that this represents the large bulk of their support under Cameron; in Labour's case they've suffered significant attrition. 2. Tory support is skewed particularly towards pensioners, a large cohort who vote religiously. Labour support is skewed particularly towards 18-24 year olds, a small cohort at least half of whom would rather go down the pub or stay in bed. 3. Of the roughly 1 in 4 supporters of each party who did not vote for them in 2015, most of the additional Tory voters are Ukip defectors, who have a proven track record of voting. Most of the additional Labour voters are people who voted neither in the previous election nor in the EU referendum, and who therefore have a proven track record of not voting.
In addition:
4. ICM, who continue to report Labour consistently at under 30%, have effectively accused other companies of not weighting turnout properly. There is also good reason to suppose that at least some of the pollsters are also incorrectly weighting by 2015 turnout, and are under-counting the Lib Dems and over-counting Labour in their final figures. 5. We ought also to remember that there is a fairly consistent trend in the polls, as seen for example in 2015, of the companies under-reporting the Conservatives and over-reporting Labour - a stubborn problem that they seem to have trouble solving.
In short, Labour is bleeding its previous supporters and reliant on the young and previous non-voters - the most unreliable sections of the electorate - to plug the gaps. The Tories are holding on to their existing support and have very strong backing both from previous Ukip voters, and from the elderly - the section of the electorate most likely to vote. Whilst one cannot be 100% certain that the polls are skewed against rather than in favour of Labour, I'd say that another polling fail, with Labour falling short of expectations, is a possibility we should consider very seriously.
Comments
Or tell them that that 46 means he's got a 2% chance of winning a majority and they're all deluding themselves!
https://twitter.com/BraidenHT/status/864938906915090432
The fact that the Conservatives have also put on about 4%, and have therefore preserved their mountainous lead entirely intact, is conveniently ignored. I assume this is nibbling around the edges - i.e. that the Triple Lock will be maintained?
Best strategy for May is probably to commit for the lifetime of the next Parliament, but order a review to see if it should be maintained post-2022. If this goes down sufficiently badly with the aged then she can always kick the matter further back into the long grass (perhaps bringing in more rapid rises in state retirement age and/or phased retirement, to try to mitigate the expense?) Hmmmm...
I suppose at least election night will last a little bit longer than the Anglo-Zanzibar War.
https://twitter.com/kezdugdale/status/864880089607147520
"The Tory Party consists of shits, bloody shits, and fucking shits."
Amongst all the Trump-related stories it looks as if another one, from another angle is on its way.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/864941286620626944
Sky news not impressed with Tories antics today.
@bbclaurak take note
Pity poor Nuttall, he will be skinned alive, and it might even get him a few sympathy votes. This election marks the end of his brief carrer.
Toast, mate.
Or has his account been hacked by Morris Dancer?
https://twitter.com/debmattinson/status/864591691675820036
Not that I am optimsitic however - my betting position is still based on L 160, T 400+.
In my experience I've never met a Sikh who didn't like a drink and Boris's wife is partly of Sikh heritage.
But I really didn't want a Godwin's law discussion on twitter.
"That will teach them to ban turbans on the buses!"
East Germany didn't technically become Communist until 1949, remember.
Edited to make 'Easy' into 'East'. Fat finger typing par excellence!
NEW THREAD
1. The current support base for both Tories and Labour is comprised primarily (about 75%) of their 2015 voters. In the Tories' case their VI has shot up so much that this represents the large bulk of their support under Cameron; in Labour's case they've suffered significant attrition.
2. Tory support is skewed particularly towards pensioners, a large cohort who vote religiously. Labour support is skewed particularly towards 18-24 year olds, a small cohort at least half of whom would rather go down the pub or stay in bed.
3. Of the roughly 1 in 4 supporters of each party who did not vote for them in 2015, most of the additional Tory voters are Ukip defectors, who have a proven track record of voting. Most of the additional Labour voters are people who voted neither in the previous election nor in the EU referendum, and who therefore have a proven track record of not voting.
In addition:
4. ICM, who continue to report Labour consistently at under 30%, have effectively accused other companies of not weighting turnout properly. There is also good reason to suppose that at least some of the pollsters are also incorrectly weighting by 2015 turnout, and are under-counting the Lib Dems and over-counting Labour in their final figures.
5. We ought also to remember that there is a fairly consistent trend in the polls, as seen for example in 2015, of the companies under-reporting the Conservatives and over-reporting Labour - a stubborn problem that they seem to have trouble solving.
In short, Labour is bleeding its previous supporters and reliant on the young and previous non-voters - the most unreliable sections of the electorate - to plug the gaps. The Tories are holding on to their existing support and have very strong backing both from previous Ukip voters, and from the elderly - the section of the electorate most likely to vote. Whilst one cannot be 100% certain that the polls are skewed against rather than in favour of Labour, I'd say that another polling fail, with Labour falling short of expectations, is a possibility we should consider very seriously.
In 1987 and even more so 1992 it did come out leading to the Conservatives doing better than expected.
For example Hartley Booth got a higher share of the vote in Finchley in 1992 than Maggie had in 1983, and on a 8% higher turnout.
http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/Operators/Other-operators/Wiltshire-polling-station-pubs-attract-new-customers