We've gone from a 20+ point lead to a 5 point lead. All since Theresa released Timothy's manifesto. These policies are a disaster for our party. We are not the party of energy caps, higher taxes on risk takers or property theft. Fighting this battle on Ed Miliband's turf is a disaster. Theresa needs to beg Oliver Letwin's to come back and rewrite the manifesto over the long weekend and re-reveal it on Tuesday.
I doubt this will cheer you up Max, but coaxing the Tories to move in a more radical direction was certainly one of my objectives when I voted for Corbyn.
Well I'm off. Tories need a narrative, as mattyneth says, and yet the only suggestion seems to be the one they keep saying will happen and make all the difference, bring up Corbyn's IRA stuff. Too late. Labour are bouncing right now, Tories need to knock them back, have some big leads restored, or they risk a further unravelling as it seems more bad news is to come.
I'm hoping the IFS manifesto analysis tomorrow provides a nice pivot onto manifesto costings. Although who knows, there may be a bigger whole in the Tory one!!
The breakfast plan seems to be uncosted garbage, although it's small fry in the scheme of things. The IFS will almost certainly find some other holes, too. We'll see how serious they are.
The tories main problem is they've quietly conceded on austerity.
The breakfast plan probably will be a 'small fry'...
Can it really all be down to social care proposals?
Older voters vote Tory, they also are the largest demographic.
They also like to leave their houses to their kids tax free.
Since Thatcher, every Tory leader has pushed the home owning democracy policy and raised IHT to ensure they don't get taxed on their houses.
Mrs May has just shat all over 40 years worth Tory orthodoxy.
So where does increasing the minimum amount to be left from 24k to 100k fit in with this analysis? Or does analysys fail you when discussing Mrs May? I am left thinking you prefer Abbotts way with figures.
Then your thinking is deficient.
You have a funny way of showing it. You mention inheritance tax. Is it not labour who propose to raise IHT. Their Manifesto clearly shows that they would lower IHT threshold - ie collect more money of yoy when you are safely dead. And they make no suggestion that they make any allowance for inflation. But you seek to tar Mrs May with this brush wheras she and the Tories actually plan to inclrease the threshold so a couples allowance would be £1 million. Are you sure about your mathemetical abilities?
I wouldn't bother.
Clown_Crash_HQ and myself -- both of whom have had recent experience of the social care system -- have been trying to explain how the present system works,
No-one is interested.
If they are on the right, they want to scream 'Dementia Tax" because they believe there shouldn't be a social care system. If they are on the left, they want to scream 'Dementia Tax' because they see it can damage the Tories.
Ok but seriously, if there has not just been a polling cock up in the past week or so, how soft was the Tory support and Labour anti-corbynism? Tories are still polling high, really, albeit not as super high as they were, so have shed support, and if the polls are right then all the anti-corbyn labour people are returning with tails between their legs, and all the talk of vast Lab-UKIP_CON switchers was bullcrap.
The yougov figures show Corbyn is mainly winning 2015 LDs and some 2015 UKIP voters, the Tories are still making a net gain from Labour
I would be very interested in seeing some polling evidence of whether tactical voting is returning. That could be the difference between 150 seat majority and a 25 seat one.
Tactical voting in whose favour?
2 party voting seems to be returning, both parties are dramatically up leaving fewer third party votes to squeeze tactically.
In 1997, the LibDems dropped 1% from their 1992 total to 16.8%. Yet they increased their seat count by almost 150%. Why? Tactical voting.
Last year in Scotland, the LibDems lost share in the constituency portion of the Holyrood vote, yet doubled their number of seats, and came close in Caithness, Sutherland & Ross, and managed an impressive 15% bump in Argyll & Bute. Why? Tactical voting.
If Labour voters in Twickenham, Richmond Park, Bath, Lewes, etc., choose to vote tactically for the LibDems - which they backed away from in 2015 - then those seats could be lost, even with the LDs on just 10%.
Quite. Sarah Olney won the Richmond Park by election in part because almost all Labour supporters voted for her, unlike in 2015 when they certainly abandoned the LibDems.
I can see Labour voters tactically voting LD but fewer of the remaining LD voters voting Labour and most UKIP voters going Tory, so that means there could be a large swing to the LDs in Tory-LD Remain seats and a big swing to the Tories in Tory-Labour Leave seats and almost no change in Tory-Labour Remain seats and a small swing to the Tories in Tory-LD Leave seats
But YouGov has a panel of 800,000 people in the UK, and that has been developed over many years. You would need a huge number of people to take part in this secret infiltration operation, and it would take a long time. And what would it achieve, given that the discrepancy with phone polls would be obvious? And that only a tiny part of the electorate obsess over opinion polls anyway?
Not sure what happened to my previous answer but here goes again...
800,000 sounds impressive but the actual number of respondents will be very low and has been trending lower over time because people are less inclined to do surveys etc. The polling companies have to get a certain number of people to respond to make the poll "credible" so they will poll until they do. As I said before, standards in the industry have been cut because margins are under pressure as ad hoc research is seen as less valuable. Thus, it is likely that the polling companies are becoming reliant on a smaller number of active respondents.
The key is what I said about they need to get the numbers up to make a survey credible. For all the talk about random samples and high standards etc, if you are under time pressure and your response rate is dropping, you start relying on a smaller number of respondents, which makes it easier to influence.
IF - and let's make that a big IF for now - YouGov gets the final result seriously wrong, then their entire business model is stuffed.
Can it really all be down to social care proposals?
Older voters vote Tory, they also are the largest demographic.
They also like to leave their houses to their kids tax free.
Since Thatcher, every Tory leader has pushed the home owning democracy policy and raised IHT to ensure they don't get taxed on their houses.
Mrs May has just shat all over 40 years worth Tory orthodoxy.
So where does increasing the minimum amount to be left from 24k to 100k fit in with this analysis? Or does analysys fail you when discussing Mrs May? I am left thinking you prefer Abbotts way with figures.
Then your thinking is deficient.
You have a funny way of showing it. You mention inheritance tax. Is it not labour who propose to raise IHT. Their Manifesto clearly shows that they would lower IHT threshold - ie collect more money of yoy when you are safely dead. And they make no suggestion that they make any allowance for inflation. But you seek to tar Mrs May with this brush wheras she and the Tories actually plan to inclrease the threshold so a couples allowance would be £1 million. Are you sure about your mathemetical abilities?
It's all about PERCEPTIONS.
You know it was a crap idea, because of the u-turn.
As Sir David Butler pointed out, when was the last time a party u-turned on their manifesto during a campaign.
As I pointed several times last week, I was quite supportive of principles behind the social care changes, they needed some refinement.
U-turns are sometimes necessary to avoid a car-crash.
Con Majority is now out to 1.15 on Betfair though, so worth a top up, and tomorrow we have the joy of Corbyn's speech blaming Britain for terrorism followed by him sitting down with Andrew Neil - someone who's seen everything before and isn't going to pull any punches.
Night all!
It isn't one poll, though. There's been a rash of polls showing a sharp tightening of the race.
What doesn't make any sense to me is Copeland and the locals. The Tories got magnificent results, don't tell me that was from voters who weren't paying attention yet. And the boost for Labour in the current polling is from young and non-voters - not old voters defecting due to #DementiaTax.
Why have these voters suddenly woken up when they didn't mere weeks ago?
That suggests these poll movements are analogous to the Cleggasm - young people telling pollsters they will vote for the trendy new thing, but not actually bothering to turn up to the polling station.
If any of these things had happened to previous Labour leaders, they would have been crucified. But we have become so desensitized to Corbyn's extremism and incompetence that none of this seems to matter. Expectations are so low that he is being given an easy ride.
If in your view the Labour campaign has been poor, the Tory one so far has to be judged as truly dire, given the change in the polls since things kicked off.
Other than a bounce when May called the GE, the Tory rating has been remarkably stable. As ever, look at the share, not the lead.
Had you waited a few minutes before posting that (at 9.06pm)....
The central position might have slipped from 45-46% to 44-45%. Colour me unimpressed.
If we start seeing lots of polls at 41-43%, I'll naturally revisit this. No reason to do so yet, though.
Sporting still haven't moved their Seat Spreads for the Tories or Labour. IG are down 1 seat on the Tories at 385 - 391 and up 1 seat on Labour at 171 - 176. Nerves of steel is what I call it .... In continuing to forecast a Tory majority of upwards of 120 seats, their clients clearly have a very different take on things compared with your average PBer. With that in mind and unlike OGH, I've decided against lumping any further money on the spreads, at least for now. But I haven't chickened out altogether - sticking a nifty 50 on Hills' <388.5 Tory Seats (equivalent to a Tory majority of <126 seats at 5/6 and I've also grabbed a tenner's worth of their 326 - 350 Tory seat band at a tasty 10/1 as I referred to upthread. DYOR.
Labour have a stonking lead with 18-24-year-olds, but also a healthy 17-point lead with 25-49-year-olds (a HUGE swing with that age bracket since the start of the election). The Tories are still pretty much as strong as ever with the 65+ age bracket, a 48-point lead.
25-49 year olds ... many of whose only chance to own a house will be to inherit it from their elderly parents. A chance May (in perception at least) just torpedoed. We're doomed.
Just wondering what impact the Manchester tragedy might be having and the extent to which this might continue through until 8 June.
May, ex-Home Secretary and current PM, has tried to dodge responsibility and outrageously has tried to smear her opponent Corbyn as a security risk. The British public is expressing its disgust.
This despite spending more on MI5 and the security services? Despite Corbyn wanting to leave NATO? Despite Corbyn speaking on behalf of terrorists wherever he can find them and urging us to wave a white flag in response to the black one?
Where do you get your ideas from? There seems to be little logic to them.
What does TMA1 stand for ? Theresa May arselicker 1 ?
The last time I couldn't bear to vote for one of the main parties was in 1997. Then I voted Official Monster Raving Loony. This time there is no candidate in my constituency. Where is the loony when you need one?
As you may all have noticed I am neither an admirer of Corbyn nor a Labour supporter. I do not think that Corbyn can win this election or even draw it.
However I would be cheering from the rafters if yet another Lynton Crosby smear campaign comes unstuck.
But YouGov has a panel of 800,000 people in the UK, and that has been developed over many years. You would need a huge number of people to take part in this secret infiltration operation, and it would take a long time. And what would it achieve, given that the discrepancy with phone polls would be obvious? And that only a tiny part of the electorate obsess over opinion polls anyway?
Not sure what happened to my previous answer but here goes again...
800,000 sounds impressive but the actual number of respondents will be very low and has been trending lower over time because people are less inclined to do surveys etc. The polling companies have to get a certain number of people to respond to make the poll "credible" so they will poll until they do. As I said before, standards in the industry have been cut because margins are under pressure as ad hoc research is seen as less valuable. Thus, it is likely that the polling companies are becoming reliant on a smaller number of active respondents.
Just wondering what impact the Manchester tragedy might be having and the extent to which this might continue through until 8 June.
May, ex-Home Secretary and current PM, has tried to dodge responsibility and outrageously has tried to smear her opponent Corbyn as a security risk. The British public is expressing its disgust.
This despite spending more on MI5 and the security services? Despite Corbyn wanting to leave NATO? Despite Corbyn speaking on behalf of terrorists wherever he can find them and urging us to wave a white flag in response to the black one?
Where do you get your ideas from? There seems to be little logic to them.
What does TMA1 stand for ? Theresa May arselicker 1 ?
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Ok but seriously, if there has not just been a polling cock up in the past week or so, how soft was the Tory support and Labour anti-corbynism? Tories are still polling high, really, albeit not as super high as they were, so have shed support, and if the polls are right then all the anti-corbyn labour people are returning with tails between their legs, and all the talk of vast Lab-UKIP_CON switchers was bullcrap.
The yougov figures show Corbyn is mainly winning 2015 LDs and some 2015 UKIP voters, the Tories are still making a net gain from Labour
I would be very interested in seeing some polling evidence of whether tactical voting is returning. That could be the difference between 150 seat majority and a 25 seat one.
A big return to tactical voting would explain the figures and invalidate the Baxter type models.
Well, it all depends who the tactical vote is against.
Can it really all be down to social care proposals?
Older voters vote Tory, they also are the largest demographic.
They also like to leave their houses to their kids tax free.
Since Thatcher, every Tory leader has pushed the home owning democracy policy and raised IHT to ensure they don't get taxed on their houses.
Mrs May has just shat all over 40 years worth Tory orthodoxy.
So where does increasing the minimum amount to be left from 24k to 100k fit in with this analysis? Or does analysys fail you when discussing Mrs May? I am left thinking you prefer Abbotts way with figures.
Then your thinking is deficient.
You have a funny way of showing it. You mention inheritance tax. Is it not labour who propose to raise IHT. Their Manifesto clearly shows that they would lower IHT threshold - ie collect more money of yoy when you are safely dead. And they make no suggestion that they make any allowance for inflation. But you seek to tar Mrs May with this brush wheras she and the Tories actually plan to inclrease the threshold so a couples allowance would be £1 million. Are you sure about your mathemetical abilities?
It's all about PERCEPTIONS.
You know it was a crap idea, because of the u-turn.
As Sir David Butler pointed out, when was the last time a party u-turned on their manifesto during a campaign.
As I pointed several times last week, I was quite supportive of principles behind the social care changes, they needed some refinement.
U-turns are sometimes necessary to avoid a car-crash.
Of course this might be the election in which they vote, and the observation earlier that the Labour movement in TNS comes from those who didn't vote in the Referendum might be a leading indicator in the opposite direction than what you might think: "those older bastards did me over Brexit, I'm voting this time". But I wouldn't bet on it (literally).
Labour have a stonking lead with 18-24-year-olds, but also a healthy 17-point lead with 25-49-year-olds (a HUGE swing with that age bracket since the start of the election). The Tories are still pretty much as strong as ever with the 65+ age bracket, a 48-point lead.
25-49 year olds ... many of whose only chance to own a house will be to inherit it from their elderly parents. A chance May (in perception at least) just torpedoed. We're doomed.
A high proportion of those would be inheritors would be in southern England.
Can it really all be down to social care proposals?
Older voters vote Tory, they also are the largest demographic.
They also like to leave their houses to their kids tax free.
Since Thatcher, every Tory leader has pushed the home owning democracy policy and raised IHT to ensure they don't get taxed on their houses.
Mrs May has just shat all over 40 years worth Tory orthodoxy.
So where does increasing the minimum amount to be left from 24k to 100k fit in with this analysis? Or does analysys fail you when discussing Mrs May? I am left thinking you prefer Abbotts way with figures.
Then your thinking is deficient.
You have a funny way of showing it. You mention inheritance tax. Is it not labour who propose to raise IHT. Their Manifesto clearly shows that they would lower IHT threshold - ie collect more money of yoy when you are safely dead. And they make no suggestion that they make any allowance for inflation. But you seek to tar Mrs May with this brush wheras she and the Tories actually plan to inclrease the threshold so a couples allowance would be £1 million. Are you sure about your mathemetical abilities?
It's all about PERCEPTIONS.
You know it was a crap idea, because of the u-turn.
As Sir David Butler pointed out, when was the last time a party u-turned on their manifesto during a campaign.
As I pointed several times last week, I was quite supportive of principles behind the social care changes, they needed some refinement.
But all you do in your writings is reinforce those perceptions instead of rebutting them. Clearly old people with assets have more to fear from Corbyn than May -- its spelled out in their manifesto (and been clearly pointed out by the conservatives) - - and old people with no or limited assets have nothing to fear from May since the allowance has been increased. And of course unlike now, no one would lose any assets at all as long as they remained alive.
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Leads of 8 and 9 aren't that out of line with one of 5, albeit the Lab figure is very high.
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
Con Majority is now out to 1.15 on Betfair though, so worth a top up, and tomorrow we have the joy of Corbyn's speech blaming Britain for terrorism followed by him sitting down with Andrew Neil - someone who's seen everything before and isn't going to pull any punches.
Night all!
It isn't one poll, though. There's been a rash of polls showing a sharp tightening of the race.
What doesn't make any sense to me is Copeland and the locals. The Tories got magnificent results, don't tell me that was from voters who weren't paying attention yet. And the boost for Labour in the current polling is from young and non-voters - not old voters defecting due to #DementiaTax.
Why have these voters suddenly woken up when they didn't mere weeks ago?
That suggests these poll movements are analogous to the Cleggasm - young people telling pollsters they will vote for the trendy new thing, but not actually bothering to turn up to the polling station.
The Corbasm may have more staying power. Diane Abbott would be able to give us a definitive answer (though she might get the numbers wrong by an order of magnitude or two).
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Wakefield or Hemsworth if I may ask ?
As a minor anecdote nobody where I work has mentioned social care.
Of course this might be the election in which they vote, and the observation earlier that the Labour movement in TNS comes from those who didn't vote in the Referendum might be a leading indicator in the opposite direction than what you might think: "those older bastards did me over Brexit, I'm voting this time". But I wouldn't bet on it (literally).
I would, but not very much. Although Labour are committed to Leaving, so it'd be weird for that to be the motivator.
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
Labour have a stonking lead with 18-24-year-olds, but also a healthy 17-point lead with 25-49-year-olds (a HUGE swing with that age bracket since the start of the election). The Tories are still pretty much as strong as ever with the 65+ age bracket, a 48-point lead.
25-49 year olds ... many of whose only chance to own a house will be to inherit it from their elderly parents. A chance May (in perception at least) just torpedoed. We're doomed.
Speaking as a proud 25-49 year old, I'd much rather have sensible rents and stable house prices @ 3x earnings. Screw our generation's inheritances, based on luck of the genes.
She's worse than Gordon Brown, at least he wasn't stupid enough to actually call an early election.
This site is absolute comedy tonight.
I'm loving it!
Total blind panic!! It's hilarious. There'll be much rowing back when the results are announced.
I don't row back, I just admit to being a fool with a spine like a jacob's cream cracker when it comes to the strength of my convictions.
I truly have tried not to over estimate Labour this time, like I always do, but it is proving very hard when they are regularly polling in the mid 30s, making beating Ed M in vote share at least looking a given at this stage.
I do wonder what Corbyn's survival-level result is. Both in terms of preventing the PLP moving against him, and in retaining support among the grass-roots. Beating EdM's vote share may be enough for the latter, not the former. Beating EdM on seats likewise. I think he'd at least have to reduce the size of the Tory majority to stand any chance of preventing a challenge from the PLP, and possibly do more than that.
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP0brMrR_QE
You mean Weyoun?
"Time to start packing!"
It's a great line, but no, I mean Dukat - watch to the end!
It is an absolutely dreadful poll for us but we had this in 1983, 1987 and 1992. Labour have not got 38% since 2001 and won't get it thus time. The maximum they will get is 33%.
As a poster said earlier on this thread I projected previously a maj of 50. I think now it will be around maj 20 because of an incompetent campaign but we will still win
Can it really all be down to social care proposals?
Older voters vote Tory, they also are the largest demographic.
They also like to leave their houses to their kids tax free.
Since Thatcher, every Tory leader has pushed the home owning democracy policy and raised IHT to ensure they don't get taxed on their houses.
Mrs May has just shat all over 40 years worth Tory orthodoxy.
So where does increasing the minimum amount to be left from 24k to 100k fit in with this analysis? Or does analysys fail you when discussing Mrs May? I am left thinking you prefer Abbotts way with figures.
Then your thinking is deficient.
You have a funny way of showing it. You mention inheritance tax. Is it not labour who propose to raise IHT. Their Manifesto clearly shows that they would lower IHT threshold - ie collect more money of yoy when you are safely dead. And they make no suggestion that they make any allowance for inflation. But you seek to tar Mrs May with this brush wheras she and the Tories actually plan to inclrease the threshold so a couples allowance would be £1 million. Are you sure about your mathemetical abilities?
It's all about PERCEPTIONS.
You know it was a crap idea, because of the u-turn.
As Sir David Butler pointed out, when was the last time a party u-turned on their manifesto during a campaign.
As I pointed several times last week, I was quite supportive of principles behind the social care changes, they needed some refinement.
Worse still, she tried to pretend that it WASN'T a u-turn which everyone knew most assuredly that it was. She should count herself very fortunate that Brillo didn't ask her why it was that the English & Welsh faced this financial penalty whilst the Scots don't pay a penny piece towards their social care.
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP0brMrR_QE
You mean Weyoun?
"Time to start packing!"
It's a great line, but no, I mean Dukat - watch to the end!
She's worse than Gordon Brown, at least he wasn't stupid enough to actually call an early election.
This site is absolute comedy tonight.
I'm loving it!
Total blind panic!! It's hilarious. There'll be much rowing back when the results are announced.
I don't row back, I just admit to being a fool with a spine like a jacob's cream cracker when it comes to the strength of my convictions.
I truly have tried not to over estimate Labour this time, like I always do, but it is proving very hard when they are regularly polling in the mid 30s, making beating Ed M in vote share at least looking a given at this stage.
I do wonder what Corbyn's survival-level result is. Both in terms of preventing the PLP moving against him, and in retaining support among the grass-roots. Beating EdM's vote share may be enough for the latter, not the former. Beating EdM on seats likewise. I think he'd at least have to reduce the size of the Tory majority to stand any chance of preventing a challenge from the PLP, and possibly do more than that.
He was being confronted with the possibility of Lab close to 150 a month ago. If they get over 200 he's safe as houses if he wants, he would legitimately say he might have done even better if he didn't have people like Woodcock coming out at the start saying he was terrible.
Of course this might be the election in which they vote, and the observation earlier that the Labour movement in TNS comes from those who didn't vote in the Referendum might be a leading indicator in the opposite direction than what you might think: "those older bastards did me over Brexit, I'm voting this time". But I wouldn't bet on it (literally).
I would, but not very much. Although Labour are committed to Leaving, so it'd be weird for that to be the motivator.
Well maybe just enough to hedge.....
We know they are committed to leaving but does the average student? Or might they be projecting things they want but he isn't promising onto him, having seen stuff like the student loans promise? Either way if more of them voted Nick Clegg would have had 90 seats in 2010. And he didn't.
It'd be hilarious if Labour won but the PLP asked the Queen to send for Benn or Cooper.
Labour have a stonking lead with 18-24-year-olds, but also a healthy 17-point lead with 25-49-year-olds (a HUGE swing with that age bracket since the start of the election). The Tories are still pretty much as strong as ever with the 65+ age bracket, a 48-point lead.
25-49 year olds ... many of whose only chance to own a house will be to inherit it from their elderly parents. A chance May (in perception at least) just torpedoed. We're doomed.
Their parents can downsize and transfer some of the money from the sale to help their children get a house, plus May has at least introduced a cap now on care costs
Watching Theresa May's election campaign, it is awfully like watching the England cricket team in the 90s, those collapses. Like when England collapsed from 147/4 to 150 a/o, thanks largely due to a gritty single from Devon Malcolm
She's worse than Gordon Brown, at least he wasn't stupid enough to actually call an early election.
This site is absolute comedy tonight.
I'm loving it!
Total blind panic!! It's hilarious. There'll be much rowing back when the results are announced.
I don't row back, I just admit to being a fool with a spine like a jacob's cream cracker when it comes to the strength of my convictions.
I truly have tried not to over estimate Labour this time, like I always do, but it is proving very hard when they are regularly polling in the mid 30s, making beating Ed M in vote share at least looking a given at this stage.
I do wonder what Corbyn's survival-level result is. Both in terms of preventing the PLP moving against him, and in retaining support among the grass-roots. Beating EdM's vote share may be enough for the latter, not the former. Beating EdM on seats likewise. I think he'd at least have to reduce the size of the Tory majority to stand any chance of preventing a challenge from the PLP, and possibly do more than that.
He was being confronted with the possibility of Lab close to 150 a month ago. If they get over 200 he's safe as houses if he wants, he would legitimately say he might have done even better if he didn't have people like Woodcock coming out at the start saying he was terrible.
I think I might have mentioned this the other day, but he has a decent chance of beating Blair '05 for vote share, and certain Brown '10. If he can say he did better than Blair, I can't see the membership kicking him out...
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP0brMrR_QE
You mean Weyoun?
"Time to start packing!"
It's a great line, but no, I mean Dukat - watch to the end!
I know there are some Star Trek fans on here, so I'll just leave this here in case it all goes pear-shaped, the Tories snatch a devastating defeat from the jaws of certain victory... and Theresa May becomes Gul Dukat.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP0brMrR_QE
You mean Weyoun?
"Time to start packing!"
It's a great line, but no, I mean Dukat - watch to the end!
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Wakefield or Hemsworth if I may ask ?
As a minor anecdote nobody where I work has mentioned social care.
Wakefield. An ex-council estate in Horbury to be precise.
Watching Theresa May's election campaign, it is awfully like watching the England cricket team in the 90s, those collapses. Like when England collapsed from 147/4 to 150 a/o, thanks largely due to a gritty single from Devon Malcolm
Is Boris going to come in like Goughy, hit two morale raising sixes then give an easy catch?
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Leads of 8 and 9 aren't that out of line with one of 5, albeit the Lab figure is very high.
There are all sorts of iffy numbers in the subsamples. Now, it might be that they're right. It might be that the imbalances cancel each other out. But Labour at 30% across the South of England outside London? Seems extremely high.
May I profer some speculation? It's the economy, stupid! Many regular posters are retired, self-employed, or in stable, well-paid employment. (I know not all are of course!). Meanwhile, real wages are falling again, productivity is below 2008 levels. Low unemployment is masking these very basic facts. Many are in self-employment, on precarious short-term contracts, or on public sector pay freezes. Simply saying 5 more years, I am not Jeremy Corbyn, is not a very attractive message. Corbyn is at least addressing these concerns, rather as Trump did. It does not really matter if his solutions are not coherent. He is change. Pro-Leave people ought to get that. Still think majority of 100 for May. However, as was said on the night of Macron/Le Pen...that c.1/3rd of the vote are not going anywhere.
Quite right. This is not the Brexit election. This is the Austerity election, and after 10 years people are sick of it.
May is selling misery, Corbyn is selling hope.
Brexit sold change, Remain sold more of the same. Trump sold change, Clinton sold more of the same. Corbyn sells change, May sells more of the same.
Sometimes some people get sick of bran flakes and buy coco pops for a change.
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
If I were May I would hold a rally in the north on Monday and announce an absolute travel ban on all travel to and from Libya and Syria until those nations are returned to stability and freed from ISIS, exceptions only for the media and aid agencies
Watching Theresa May's election campaign, it is awfully like watching the England cricket team in the 90s, those collapses. Like when England collapsed from 147/4 to 150 a/o, thanks largely due to a gritty single from Devon Malcolm
Absolutely. I gave a golf analogy the other night - using a driver to smash the ball into a lake when all she face to win was a short putt - but the cricket parallel is just as good. She refused to force the follow on, thinking a huge victory was certain, and is now 35 for 8 in her second innings, just 255 ahead .
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
If I were May I would hold a rally in the north on Monday and announce an absolute travel ban on all travel to and from Libya and Syria until those nations are returned to stability and freed from ISIS, exceptions only for the media and aid agencies
On the basis of one subsample? Not to mention that would be a hugely controversial move which would alienate far more voters than it attracts. It'd be social care x100.
Credit where it is due.This bomber was shopped by friends and by mosque.
It was not them who turned a blind eye.
Do we actually know that?
I think the phrase 'a blind eye' is a bit offensive, actually. Anyone who has to make a medical diagnosis should know how difficult this.
Medical tests do not diagnose with 100 per cent efficiency. If there is a false negative is that called 'turning a blind eye'.
The Manchester suicide bomber was repeatedly flagged to the authorities over his extremist views, but was not stopped by officers, it emerged Wednesday night.
Counter Terrorism agencies were facing questions after it emerged Salman Abedi told friends that “being a suicide bomber was okay”, prompting them to call the Government’s anti-terrorism hotline.
Sources suggest that authorities were informed of the danger posed by Abedi on at least five separate occasions in the five years prior to the attack on Monday night. .....
.....The missed opportunities to catch Abedi were beginning to mount up last night. The Telegraph has spoken to a community leader who said that Abedi was reported two years ago “because he thought he was involved in extremism and terrorism”.
Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: “People in the community expressed concerns about the way this man was behaving and reported it in the right way using the right channels.
“They did not hear anything since.”
Two friends of Abedi also became so worried they separately telephoned the police counter-terrorism hotline five years ago and again last year.
“They had been worried that ‘he was supporting terrorism’ and had expressed the view that ‘being a suicide bomber was ok’,” a source told the BBC.
Akram Ramadan, 49, part of the close-knit Libyan community in south Manchester, said Abedi had been banned from Didsbury Mosque after he had confronted the Imam who was delivering an anti-extremist sermon.
Mr Ramadan said he understood that Abedi had been placed on a “watch list” because the mosque reported him to the authorities for his extremist views.
A well-placed source at Didsbury Mosque confirmed it had contacted the Home Office’s Prevent anti-radicalisation programme as a result.
A US official also briefed that members of Abedi’s own family had contacted British police saying that he was “dangerous”, but again the information does not appear to have been acted upon.
Watching Theresa May's election campaign, it is awfully like watching the England cricket team in the 90s, those collapses. Like when England collapsed from 147/4 to 150 a/o, thanks largely due to a gritty single from Devon Malcolm
Is Boris going to come in like Goughy, hit two morale raising sixes then give an easy catch?
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
He will pile up votes in Lab areas
Will not appeal as much elsewhere and
TMICIPM with a comfortable majority.
That does seem to be a reasonable hypothesis.
An interesting question, for those familiar with the inner workings of the Tory party, is whether she will be able to stick with using just her two advisers after the election? Is Timothy now untenable? One would think that a certain number of representations from senior MPs would have to weigh heavily on her mind.
Credit where it is due.This bomber was shopped by friends and by mosque.
It was not them who turned a blind eye.
Do we actually know that?
I think the phrase 'a blind eye' is a bit offensive, actually. Anyone who has to make a medical diagnosis should know how difficult this.
Medical tests do not diagnose with 100 per cent efficiency. If there is a false negative is that called 'turning a blind eye'.
The Manchester suicide bomber was repeatedly flagged to the authorities over his extremist views, but was not stopped by officers, it emerged Wednesday night.
Counter Terrorism agencies were facing questions after it emerged Salman Abedi told friends that “being a suicide bomber was okay”, prompting them to call the Government’s anti-terrorism hotline.
Sources suggest that authorities were informed of the danger posed by Abedi on at least five separate occasions in the five years prior to the attack on Monday night. .....
.....The missed opportunities to catch Abedi were beginning to mount up last night. The Telegraph has spoken to a community leader who said that Abedi was reported two years ago “because he thought he was involved in extremism and terrorism”.
Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: “People in the community expressed concerns about the way this man was behaving and reported it in the right way using the right channels.
“They did not hear anything since.”
Two friends of Abedi also became so worried they separately telephoned the police counter-terrorism hotline five years ago and again last year.
“They had been worried that ‘he was supporting terrorism’ and had expressed the view that ‘being a suicide bomber was ok’,” a source told the BBC.
Akram Ramadan, 49, part of the close-knit Libyan community in south Manchester, said Abedi had been banned from Didsbury Mosque after he had confronted the Imam who was delivering an anti-extremist sermon.
Mr Ramadan said he understood that Abedi had been placed on a “watch list” because the mosque reported him to the authorities for his extremist views.
A well-placed source at Didsbury Mosque confirmed it had contacted the Home Office’s Prevent anti-radicalisation programme as a result.
A US official also briefed that members of Abedi’s own family had contacted British police saying that he was “dangerous”, but again the information does not appear to have been acted upon.
Just seen the YouGov. Doesn't tally at all with canvassing tonight. Pre-Manchester, the social care proposals genuinely were an issue; today, I didn't get anything of the sort.
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
Wakefield or Hemsworth if I may ask ?
As a minor anecdote nobody where I work has mentioned social care.
Wakefield. An ex-council estate in Horbury to be precise.
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
Could we be seeing an unholy alliance of the hard left, plus Remainers, plus students and the elderly wanting free stuff? Very little in common between them, but enough to form an electoral coalition almost by chance?
If so, they'll be very surprised at what they enabled after election day.
Very good point. I have been thinking that all week. Plus public sector workers, all of whom have been promised big pay rises. Look at the adulatory reception for Corbyn a fortnight ago when he addressed the Headteachers' Conference.
Jezza does have an appeal Brown and Ed lacked
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
He will pile up votes in Lab areas
Will not appeal as much elsewhere and
TMICIPM with a comfortable majority.
That does seem to be a reasonable hypothesis.
An interesting question, for those familiar with the inner workings of the Tory party, is whether she will be able to stick with using just her two advisers after the election? Is Timothy now untenable? One would think that a certain number of representations from senior MPs would have to weigh heavily on her mind.
He's clearly a liability, and he's embroiled in the Thanet South stuff. Hopefully he'll go, and May will involve the wider cabinet in the decision making process.
Comments
The trick is going to be figuring out which one.
...I'll get my coat.
Clown_Crash_HQ and myself -- both of whom have had recent experience of the social care system -- have been trying to explain how the present system works,
No-one is interested.
If they are on the right, they want to scream 'Dementia Tax" because they believe there shouldn't be a social care system. If they are on the left, they want to scream 'Dementia Tax' because they see it can damage the Tories.
Does anyone know what he's doing these days.
800,000 sounds impressive but the actual number of respondents will be very low and has been trending lower over time because people are less inclined to do surveys etc. The polling companies have to get a certain number of people to respond to make the poll "credible" so they will poll until they do. As I said before, standards in the industry have been cut because margins are under pressure as ad hoc research is seen as less valuable. Thus, it is likely that the polling companies are becoming reliant on a smaller number of active respondents.
The key is what I said about they need to get the numbers up to make a survey credible. For all the talk about random samples and high standards etc, if you are under time pressure and your response rate is dropping, you start relying on a smaller number of respondents, which makes it easier to influence.
IF - and let's make that a big IF for now - YouGov gets the final result seriously wrong, then their entire business model is stuffed.
If we start seeing lots of polls at 41-43%, I'll naturally revisit this. No reason to do so yet, though.
DYOR.
Theresa May arselicker 1 ?
As you may all have noticed I am neither an admirer of Corbyn nor a Labour supporter. I do not think that Corbyn can win this election or even draw it.
However I would be cheering from the rafters if yet another Lynton Crosby smear campaign comes unstuck.
https://data.cdrc.ac.uk/dataset/yougov-survey-data
At the very least, we should exercise considerable scepticism about a poll which at the moment is well out of line with the rest of the industry.
House theft for most still likely when TMICIPM
Of course this might be the election in which they vote, and the observation earlier that the Labour movement in TNS comes from those who didn't vote in the Referendum might be a leading indicator in the opposite direction than what you might think: "those older bastards did me over Brexit, I'm voting this time". But I wouldn't bet on it (literally).
Anyway... its getting late.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bP0brMrR_QE
As a minor anecdote nobody where I work has mentioned social care.
Gradually the gap will start to widen next week.
I'm not sure people have really focused on the general election at all yet (seems mad to say just two weeks from polling day)
I think the final week or so will see a strong swing back to the Tories...
"Time to start packing!"
Its probably the biggest electoral bribe offered in modern British history.
That half the universities will consequently go bankrupt hasn't occurred to them.
As a poster said earlier on this thread I projected previously a maj of 50. I think now it will be around maj 20 because of an incompetent campaign but we will still win
See you tomorrow!
It was not them who turned a blind eye.
We know they are committed to leaving but does the average student? Or might they be projecting things they want but he isn't promising onto him, having seen stuff like the student loans promise? Either way if more of them voted Nick Clegg would have had 90 seats in 2010. And he didn't.
It'd be hilarious if Labour won but the PLP asked the Queen to send for Benn or Cooper.
https://twitter.com/maggienyt/status/867873897454206976
I think the phrase 'a blind eye' is a bit offensive, actually. Anyone who has to make a medical diagnosis should know how difficult this.
Medical tests do not diagnose with 100 per cent efficiency. If there is a false negative is that called 'turning a blind eye'.
Trump sold change, Clinton sold more of the same.
Corbyn sells change, May sells more of the same.
Sometimes some people get sick of bran flakes and buy coco pops for a change.
He is radical appears to be genuine and not awkward
He will pile up votes in Lab areas
Will not appeal as much elsewhere and
TMICIPM with a comfortable majority.
Corbyn's offering an immediate effect to people who have little.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/24/security-services-missed-five-opportunities-stop-manchester/
If he was not picked up, it was not because of lack of action by the community.
Counter Terrorism agencies were facing questions after it emerged Salman Abedi told friends that “being a suicide bomber was okay”, prompting them to call the Government’s anti-terrorism hotline.
Sources suggest that authorities were informed of the danger posed by Abedi on at least five separate occasions in the five years prior to the attack on Monday night. .....
.....The missed opportunities to catch Abedi were beginning to mount up last night. The Telegraph has spoken to a community leader who said that Abedi was reported two years ago “because he thought he was involved in extremism and terrorism”.
Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, said: “People in the community expressed concerns about the way this man was behaving and reported it in the right way using the right channels.
“They did not hear anything since.”
Two friends of Abedi also became so worried they separately telephoned the police counter-terrorism hotline five years ago and again last year.
“They had been worried that ‘he was supporting terrorism’ and had expressed the view that ‘being a suicide bomber was ok’,” a source told the BBC.
Akram Ramadan, 49, part of the close-knit Libyan community in south Manchester, said Abedi had been banned from Didsbury Mosque after he had confronted the Imam who was delivering an anti-extremist sermon.
Mr Ramadan said he understood that Abedi had been placed on a “watch list” because the mosque reported him to the authorities for his extremist views.
A well-placed source at Didsbury Mosque confirmed it had contacted the Home Office’s Prevent anti-radicalisation programme as a result.
A US official also briefed that members of Abedi’s own family had contacted British police saying that he was “dangerous”, but again the information does not appear to have been acted upon.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/05/24/security-services-missed-five-opportunities-stop-manchester/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Ind 886
Con 830
Lab 381
UKIP 121
LDem 119
Green 48
I am asking whether that has been confirmed by the police & security services.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-40045122