I really can't be bothered to read all the right-wing trash on here but someone downthread was mentionining his links with the Palestinians. Is it a crime to be associated with Palestian freedom fighters?
You think commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
How come terrorism committed by the state of Israel is never condemned by the right-wing fruitcakes on here? As ever double standards...
I said nothing about what Israel has done. So put aside things Israel has done for a moment, do you really believe that commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
I have no view of that. Let me read about it from a neutral source (not from the rascist xenophobic source that was quoted downthread) and get back to you.
I can see the usual right-wing / extreme right-wing suspects are trying to smear JC with just about anything.
By 'just about anything' you mean 'his own words'?
I really can't be bothered to read all the right-wing trash on here but someone downthread was mentionining his links with the Palestinians. Is it a crime to be associated with Palestian freedom fighters?
One person's freedom fighter is another person's terrorist.
Both during the course of one person's lifetime. That person being our own dear Queen.
I really can't be bothered to read all the right-wing trash on here but someone downthread was mentionining his links with the Palestinians. Is it a crime to be associated with Palestian freedom fighters?
You think commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
How come terrorism committed by the state of Israel is never condemned by the right-wing fruitcakes on here? As ever double standards...
I said nothing about what Israel has done. So put aside things Israel has done for a moment, do you really believe that commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
I have no view of that. Let me read about it from a neutral source (not from the rascist xenophobic source that was quoted downthread) and get back to you.
How about answering in principle then, is it wrong?
The Gold Standard ICM, or the others? Labour under Corbyn on 38%? Only 2% off Blair's 2001 landslide?
Really?
I really don't believe Lab are anywhere near that.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
My great mistake for the American election was assuming that Hillary was campaigning in rational locations.
She was in California & New York for a good deal of it wasn't she ?
That was fund raising, Trump also spent a lot of time there and Texas.
It was things like the Arizona trips or the completely fucking lack of Midwestern rust belt stops that lead me totally astray.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
The Gold Standard ICM, or the others? Labour under Corbyn on 38%? Only 2% off Blair's 2001 landslide?
Really?
I really don't believe Lab are anywhere near that.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
If May hits 45 to 46on June 8 she has her landslide, simple as that. Polling suggests she will or perilously close so majority under 50 looks out of the question. As it stands.
I see the Lib Dems are revealing their true colours today, which is they are the real nasty party. They are normally quite good at keeping it hidden, but there is a real "air of desperation now."
Labour have included some Youtube/MSM Party Election Broadcast videos in their FB list - e.g. the 1.4million viewer video, and that's why it has had far fewer likes and shares.
I can't find the original source of that second one but it got A LOT of shares a couple of weeks ago.
Much like Vote Leave was the official campaign with Leave.EU being the unofficial dog whistle, the unofficial Corbyn campaign is doing a lot of the groundwork that Labour aren't.
I wouldn't be comparing Tory attack ads to _just_ the official Labour ones and saying the Tories have won the battle.
There is no Kevin Pringle in the Palace of Sturgeon. The First Minister reigns over a lonely court, attended only by consort Peter Murrell, her husband and SNP chief executive, and deputy first minister John Swinney, an ex party leader and veteran Nationalist. Mr Swinney knows where the bodies are buried and he has the shovel to prove it. But there is no one with the courage to tell her she’s lost touch or the nous to help her get it back.
The smell of desperation thickens the air. Yesterday, a Sunday newspaper which functions as the Murrell Family Round Robin splashed across its front page Miss Sturgeon’s dire warning: ‘Just ten days to save Scotland from the Tories’. Save us from what? Are they going to make Jackson Carlaw Sings the Best of Gilbert and Sullivan a mandatory unit in the Curriculum for Excellence? Or send Murdo Fraser round to rearrange everyone’s flower bed into the pattern of a Union Jack?
The SNP has nothing left and so it is falling back on that old classic, The Tories Are Coming To Get You. We will find out on June 8 how much that dread tale still scares Scotland. Going around talking to voters, this does not feel like a frightened country. In the pubs and front rooms and work canteens of Scotland, fear is not the foremost emotion; in truth, it’s not even anger. It’s exasperation. Scots are fed up with a government that has the power to do almost anything but the will to do almost nothing. If it’s not independence, the First Minister doesn’t care and the voters are starting to catch on. The whole country is now Govanhill, a place Nicola Sturgeon vaguely knows, seldom visits, and no longer understands.
I really can't be bothered to read all the right-wing trash on here but someone downthread was mentionining his links with the Palestinians. Is it a crime to be associated with Palestian freedom fighters?
You think commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
How come terrorism committed by the state of Israel is never condemned by the right-wing fruitcakes on here? As ever double standards...
I said nothing about what Israel has done. So put aside things Israel has done for a moment, do you really believe that commemorating the killers responsible for Munich is okay?
I have no view of that. Let me read about it from a neutral source (not from the rascist xenophobic source that was quoted downthread) and get back to you.
How about answering in principle then, is it wrong?
The question is asymmetrical anyway: it should be "how come the PB tories never mention the fact that Theresa May laid a wreath on the grave of a specific Mossad assassin or Israeli artilleryman who was known beyond doubt to have deliberately killed innocent civilians?" There is a very good reason why this fact is not mentioned.
I see the Lib Dems are revealing their true colours today, which is they are the real nasty party. They are normally quite good at keeping it hidden, but there is a real "air of desperation now."
The Gold Standard ICM, or the others? Labour under Corbyn on 38%? Only 2% off Blair's 2001 landslide?
Really?
I really don't believe Lab are anywhere near that.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
Corbyn PM then?
Honestly, I just don't know now. My head tells me the polls are broadly correct and May on around 40-45% will trounce Labour. My waters are telling me different. When Trump was running I got same feeling but followed my head and nearly lost a bundle of cash on Clinton (got out pretty much on the night at around 3am thx to following PB!).
Non election related but with the comments and statements being made by both sides of the Atlantic I can see NATO collapsing in the next year or two.
About time. Since the end of the Warsaw Treaty Organisation nearly 30 years ago (which itself was set up six years after NATO), the idea that NATO has been about "defence" has become even more laughable.
The Gold Standard ICM, or the others? Labour under Corbyn on 38%? Only 2% off Blair's 2001 landslide?
Really?
I really don't believe Lab are anywhere near that.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
Corbyn PM then?
Honestly, I just don't know now. My head tells me the polls are broadly correct and May on around 40-45% will trounce Labour. My waters are telling me different. When Trump was running I got same feeling but followed my head and nearly lost a bundle of cash on Clinton (got out pretty much on the night at around 3am thx to following PB!).
Head says Con majority, heart says uh-oh...
Everything about this campaign smells like an upset. I think in this case an 'upset' is likely to be a Con majority of around 30 seats and a weakened Theresa May lumbering on for another couple of years handing over the reins, but who knows.
Our assumption of a Con majority is based largely on the fact that oldies vote and young'uns don't, but something in my bones tells me this time will be different.
I really think Brexit was a blow for the under 35s and they know it's because they didn't turn out to vote. They've had a year of protest marches and sharing 'it was the oldies wot ruined the country' memes, along with a lot of bungs, e.g. tuition fees, from Labour.
If they do vote this time around we could be in for a big upset.
Brexit was about kicking the establishment. Theresa May is the establishment. There may be trouble ahead.
Labour have included some Youtube/MSM Party Election Broadcast videos in their FB list - e.g. the 1.4million viewer video, and that's why it has had far fewer likes and shares.
I can't find the original source of that second one but it got A LOT of shares a couple of weeks ago.
Much like Vote Leave was the official campaign with Leave.EU being the unofficial dog whistle, the unofficial Corbyn campaign is doing a lot of the groundwork that Labour aren't.
I wouldn't be comparing Tory attack ads to _just_ the official Labour ones and saying the Tories have won the battle.
Labour have included some Youtube/MSM Party Election Broadcast videos in their FB list - e.g. the 1.4million viewer video, and that's why it has had far fewer likes and shares.
I can't find the original source of that second one but it got A LOT of shares a couple of weeks ago.
Much like Vote Leave was the official campaign with Leave.EU being the unofficial dog whistle, the unofficial Corbyn campaign is doing a lot of the groundwork that Labour aren't.
I wouldn't be comparing Tory attack ads to _just_ the official Labour ones and saying the Tories have won the battle.
Numbers. Show me the numbers.
The Tory FB Corbyn ad now has 2,807,000. It'll probably hit 3m in about an hour. It could do 4m. 5.
The Abbot ad is closing on 500,000 - averaging 25,000/hour since it went up yesterday evening (so it's had 8 hours of overnight with limited viewership).
The most entertaining rebuttal of the success of the Corbyn ad I've seen is its 'because people like Jeremy'.....
The Gold Standard ICM, or the others? Labour under Corbyn on 38%? Only 2% off Blair's 2001 landslide?
Really?
I really don't believe Lab are anywhere near that.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
Corbyn PM then?
Honestly, I just don't know now. My head tells me the polls are broadly correct and May on around 40-45% will trounce Labour. My waters are telling me different. When Trump was running I got same feeling but followed my head and nearly lost a bundle of cash on Clinton (got out pretty much on the night at around 3am thx to following PB!).
So you seriously think Labour will gain seats in this election? Would take a 50 odd seat gain for them to be largest party.
I'd prefer the polls to reflect that people notice and care.
It seems priced in. Bullying by the Tory press, and ancient history to Fox jr. It only matters to those that vote Tory.
Highlighting Jezzas opposition to Mid East wars just vindicates his position in many eyes.
These attacks aren't unprecedented either.
Remember Sadiq Khan had links with terrorist sympathisers and terrorists? (David Cameron, Michael Fallon, Zac Goldsmith) Or Ed Miliband gave succour' to Assad? (Hammond/No. 10) Or Tony Blair + Good Friday Agreement a 'capitulation to violence' (Michael Gove)
Which has probably been said about every Conservative campaign from 1987 onwards.
The lead is down from 20% plus to single figures, despite pitiful opposition. I can't think offhand of a similar performance, from 1987 onwards.
Didn't John Major do rather well, against vastly superior opposition to that faced by today's Conservatives?
One might be partially a function of the other: in other words, it's precisely those mammoth Tory leads that has led to a rallying around Labour to mitigate it.
But, that said, the Tory campaign has still been poor. The Labour campaign hasn't been brilliant either, but they did get 3-4 days full media coverage (largely unchallenged by the Tories) to trail their very left-wing manifesto.
The Tory hope probably was that people would be terrified by it whereas, actually, many seemed to quite like it.
the attempt to depict Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser hasn't resonated.
The video has been seen by approaching 2.75 million - roughly ten times what a successful one of these typically gets...
It probably makes no difference with people who intend to vote Labour.
It resonates strongly with the 47-51%, who intend voting Conservative or UKIP.
The video is STILL getting another 1000-2000 views every minute. It's perfectly timed over the Bank Holiday weekend, when most people have a chance to catch up with Facebook.
It will surely hit 3m today. Making it the most successful piece of social media campaigning in UK election history?
Depends whether it's changing minds or simply preaching to the converted. 15 million people voted either Tory or UKIP in 2015.
It's first job is to make sure those 43-46% of promised Tory supporters get off their arses and vote on June 8. It's second, less important but still vital task is to maybe nab 1-2% of undecideds from Labour, and squeeze the last of the Kippers.
If it is successful, it will deliver TMay a 100+ seat majority.
The Cambornites on here will still be dreadfully disappointed.
Met up with Kevin Foster in Torbay this morning. Fairly chipper about the Ashcroft polling - gives him a 98% chance of holding his seat, suggesting a 11,500 majority!
The LibDems are clearly rattled. They tried to kick up a bit of a social media storm after they found a Polish guy delivering leaflets for Kevin. "Must be paying his deliverers....he better declare it..." they ranted.
Turns out the guy is totally dedicated, loves what Theresa May is doing on Brexit and on NATO - and wanted to help. Gratis, of course. As are we all. Kevin has put up a lovely interview with the chap.
LibDems. They really love being down in that gutter.
You can't really compare numbers for viral videos and paid advertising anyway, viral videos spread amongst the social circle of the users, paid advertising goes where it is paid to go.
It was bad question though worthy of a Yes Minister sketch, I do wonder what the result would be if the explanations of the positions had been asked the other way round.
Labour have included some Youtube/MSM Party Election Broadcast videos in their FB list - e.g. the 1.4million viewer video, and that's why it has had far fewer likes and shares.
I can't find the original source of that second one but it got A LOT of shares a couple of weeks ago.
Much like Vote Leave was the official campaign with Leave.EU being the unofficial dog whistle, the unofficial Corbyn campaign is doing a lot of the groundwork that Labour aren't.
I wouldn't be comparing Tory attack ads to _just_ the official Labour ones and saying the Tories have won the battle.
In the latest ICM only 6% even mentioned nationalising the railways as one of their top 3 issues.
In fact all those questions in the ICM poll are fascinating.
I don't think that's the original source - I have a suspicion the original was taken down at the request of a certain R Branson.
Ditto the 'dementia tax' one from yesterday, official Labour wouldn't run it because it would fall foul of ASA 'passing off' rules (pretending to be another brand).
You can't really compare numbers for viral videos and paid advertising anyway, viral videos spread amongst the social circle of the users, paid advertising goes where it is paid to go.
1,477 views and 22 likes is appalling and in no way viral....
Met up with Kevin Foster in Torbay this morning. Fairly chipper about the Ashcroft polling - gives him a 98% chance of holding his seat, suggesting a 11,500 majority!
The LibDems are clearly rattled. They tried to kick up a bit of a social media storm after they found a Polish guy delivering leaflets for Kevin. "Must be paying his deliverers....he better declare it..." they ranted.
Turns out the guy is totally dedicated, loves what Theresa May is doing on Brexit and on NATO - and wanted to help. Gratis, of course. As are we all. Kevin has put up a lovely interview with the chap.
LibDems. They really love being down in that gutter.
That really is awful. Stereotyping and politicking of the worst kind. Glad Kevin has cleared it up so positively and shone a light on the downright nasty.
Met up with Kevin Foster in Torbay this morning. Fairly chipper about the Ashcroft polling - gives him a 98% chance of holding his seat, suggesting a 11,500 majority!
Whatever happened to Marcus Wood (formally of this Parish) ?
You can't really compare numbers for viral videos and paid advertising anyway, viral videos spread amongst the social circle of the users, paid advertising goes where it is paid to go.
I don't know the details of how fb advertising works, but I think your paid/viral dichotomy is a false one. On the face of it the Con video is simply a video on the Con facebook page which can be shared/embedded by anyone interested in it. I don't know if tories are paying for it to show up as paid advertising, but if they are that is not the only way it's being disseminated.
My great mistake for the American election was assuming that Hillary was campaigning in rational locations.
She was in California & New York for a good deal of it wasn't she ?
That was fund raising, Trump also spent a lot of time there and Texas.
It was things like the Arizona trips or the completely fucking lack of Midwestern rust belt stops that lead me totally astray.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
Looking at tke weather forecast for Election Day it looks like a cool cloudy with rain in places - would that help any party? Rather than it being hot (of course the forecast can change by then)
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I hadn't realised ICM were lying scum. Corbyn never had any links with the IRA.
Well why not? Gallant freedom fighters struggling against the fascist hegemony of the international arms trade, fronted by the so-called UK armed forces, and he, an MP, did nothing? How on earth do you justify that? A "Though cowards flinch" situation, if you ask me.
I think ICM are basically right on the turnout of previous non-voters. When I get time I'll write a thread header on this.
The interesting question is how they don't seem to have this problem in France? Or the US where, as Silver recently highlighted, their polling accuracy is significantly better than ours?
It may be as simple as most Brits don't like to talk about politics.
Driving around my consituency yesterday (Warwick and Leamington) the only posters in windows and on. boards you could see were Labour ones. But the Tories are going to increase their majority here by many thousands.
Apart from Tory posters in fields and a few boards outside members houses Labour and the LDs always have more posters, it tells you nothing
She was in California & New York for a good deal of it wasn't she ?
That was fund raising, Trump also spent a lot of time there and Texas.
It was things like the Arizona trips or the completely fucking lack of Midwestern rust belt stops that lead me totally astray.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
Can the Tories achieve what they did in 1992 and especially in 1983, by throwing whatever lies and contempt they can at the leader of the opposition?
"Don't vote for the scruffy, terrorist, North Korea-supporting, wet, traitorous communist! Vote for proper politicians in well-cut suits! We're the party of the family and being well-off! Never mind about other people!"
I am not at all sure they can. People see those containers in supermarkets for donated food for the hungry. They know their children face being in tens of thousands of pounds of debt before they start their first job. They know their children face a lifetime in private rented accommodation. They know the wide boys are after their money when they get old. Is that the kind of country people want? And if you want to do something about all of this, who do you vote for? Do you vote for pearl-clad and other arrogant Tories who called an election so that they could get more power?
Talk about taking people for granted! And most of us don't like being taken for granted.
People were stirred up by the Brexit referendum. They gave vent to several decades of ignored feelings about immigration. Turnout was very high.
Contrary to what the great Tory minds all thought, Brexit is no longer an issue for most people.
And even if for some people it is, what passes for a Tory "policy" on it has little substance or credibility.
The feeling of "we'll show those politician a*seholes*" that motivated voting for UKIP in EU elections and for Leave in the EU referendum may now get expressed in voting Labour. It could be that the Tories won't know what hit them, and that the falling apart of the Tories will be what people talk about after the election, not troubles in the Labour party.
It appears that political video adverts of Facebook, and other social media are playing a bigger part in the political battles than before. I don't feel I have a deep grasp of how this works so I'm putting out a few thoughts to the good people on PB and hoping somebody can help fill in the gaps.
I think that views of the videos can be broken in to 3 groups:
1) People who have 'liked' the party's page on FB and therefor have the videos in there feed. who may go on to like and share the video. 2) Friends of the above who because of the FB algorithm will see it if some of there friends have liked/shared or commented on the video 3) Fargeted people who the party has paid FB to put in there feed, based on geography demographics or something else.
Looking at the top conservative and labour video, we have the con attack on JC and the Lab Party political broadcast.
For the Cons, there have been:
Views: 2.7 Million Likes: 16 K Shares:39 K Comments: 8,707
For Lab:
Views 1.4 Million Likes: 3.2 K Shares: 2.2 K Comments: 107
What does any of this mean? I don't know, but its PB so I'm going to speculate and then probably get shot down by somebody who actually know stuff about this sort of thing.
The differences in views 2 to1 is much smaller than the ratios of Likes shares and comment. It looks like, contrary to some commentators that the Conservative effort is being boosted noticeably by a big(ish) activist effort on social media platform, while the lab effort is being pushed by money, this is the not what I was expecting so I am a bit confused, any thoughts?
And what counts as a view? does somebody have to watch the whole video? in which case it helps if it is short, do they have to unclick the mute button? and when the party's 'buy' advert slots how much do they have to pay?
Labour have included some Youtube/MSM Party Election Broadcast videos in their FB list - e.g. the 1.4million viewer video, and that's why it has had far fewer likes and shares.
You''re comparing apples and oranges, or one apple on sale in one shop, and a special selection of fruit available in different shops.
The better comparison is with Labour's FB election videos, and the best they've done there is 500,000 views, at most.
So that gives you a sense of the virality and impact of the Tory Corbyn attack vid. Six times more viewers, and growing every minute.
Thanks Sean,
I get that that video may not be a the best comparison. But how can labour link there view counter in FB to videos watched in youtube? and if it is possible have the conservatives also done the same?
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I don't doubt that you're right.
But - if you pay you can target floating voters who could be influenced? If it's organic... It may well be watched - but maybe just by all the people who love Corbyn and want to vote for him anyway?
My great mistake for the American election was assuming that Hillary was campaigning in rational locations.
She was in California & New York for a good deal of it wasn't she ?
That was fund raising, Trump also spent a lot of time there and Texas.
It was things like the Arizona trips or the completely fucking lack of Midwestern rust belt stops that lead me totally astray.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
She was in California & New York for a good deal of it wasn't she ?
That was fund raising, Trump also spent a lot of time there and Texas.
It was things like the Arizona trips or the completely fucking lack of Midwestern rust belt stops that lead me totally astray.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I know a lot about social media publicity, and exactly how it works, because I've been taught by the amazing team at HarperCollins social media publicity, in regard to the selling of thrillers.
The Tory ad is clearly viral.
Yes, it definitely is. No argument there.
But I can state that with certainty because of the number of people on my feeds who have been sharing it and talking about it organically. Those are the metrics I look at, rather than simply number of views, which often flatter to decieve.
There is a buzz about the Tory attack ad, people are talking about it, people are sharing it.
But my original point was that comparing the success of that ad to just the official Labour ones was a bad comparison because of the virality and effectiveness of some of the unofficial Momentum ones.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
Can the Tories achieve what they did in 1992 and especially in 1983, by throwing whatever lies and contempt they can at the leader of the opposition?
"Don't vote for the scruffy, terrorist, North Korea-supporting, wet, traitorous communist! Vote for proper politicians in well-cut suits! We're the party of the family and being well-off! Never mind about other people!"
I am not at all sure they can. People see those containers in supermarkets for donated food for the hungry. They know their children face being in tens of thousands of pounds of debt before they start their first job. They know their children face a lifetime in private rented accommodation. They know the wide boys are after their money when they get old. Is that the kind of country people want? And if you want to do something about all of this, who do you vote for? Do you vote for pearl-clad and other arrogant Tories who called an election so that they could get more power?
Talk about taking people for granted! And most of us don't like being taken for granted.
People were stirred up by the Brexit referendum. They gave vent to several decades of ignored feelings about immigration. Turnout was very high.
Contrary to what the great Tory minds all thought, Brexit is no longer an issue for most people.
And even if for some people it is, what passes for a Tory "policy" on it has little substance or credibility.
The feeling of "we'll show those politician a*seholes*" that motivated voting for UKIP in EU elections and for Leave in the EU referendum may now get expressed in voting Labour. It could be that the Tories won't know what hit them, and that the falling apart of the Tories will be what people talk about after the election, not troubles in the Labour party.
The Tories are still well up on 2015 even if Labour are too, there is no net movement from Tory to Labour just both parties are squeezing the LDs and UKIP
EU position papers on money and people have been published.
They want the scope of acquired rights to apply to anyone who has resided (plus family members) or worked in the UK or EU27 respectively at any time prior to withdrawal.
Contrary to what Paul Staines ("Guido Fawkes") says, Hamas is NOT a proscribed organisation in Britain. Its al-Qassam brigades are, but it itself is not. (Source: the official Home Office list of proscribed organisations.) The PFLP is not banned either. (The PFLP-GC is banned, but that's a different organisation.) It is perfectly legal in Britain to work for either Hamas or the PFLP.
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I know a lot about social media publicity, and exactly how it works, because I've been taught by the amazing team at HarperCollins social media publicity, in regard to the selling of thrillers.
The Tory ad is clearly viral.
Yes, it definitely is. No argument there.
But I can state that with certainty because of the number of people on my feeds who have been sharing it and talking about it organically. Those are the metrics I look at, rather than simply number of views, which often flatter to decieve.
There is a buzz about the Tory attack ad, people are talking about it, people are sharing it.
But my original point was that comparing the success of that ad to just the official Labour ones was a bad comparison because of the virality and effectiveness of some of the unofficial Momentum ones.
It's much more difficult to get a viral video amongst the Tory core ( hard workers and pensioners ) than Labour's layabout base of teenagers and the workshy.
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I know a lot about social media publicity, and exactly how it works, because I've been taught by the amazing team at HarperCollins social media publicity, in regard to the selling of thrillers.
The Tory ad is clearly viral.
Yes, it definitely is. No argument there.
But I can state that with certainty because of the number of people on my feeds who have been sharing it and talking about it organically. Those are the metrics I look at, rather than simply number of views, which often flatter to decieve.
There is a buzz about the Tory attack ad, people are talking about it, people are sharing it.
But my original point was that comparing the success of that ad to just the official Labour ones was a bad comparison because of the virality and effectiveness of some of the unofficial Momentum ones.
And are there official data on virality or is personal experience as good as it gets?
I had an awful Easyjet flight back from Portugal. Didn't get home until nearly 3am after being delayed by well over 2 hours and treated like cattle the whole time.
To be honest, such is the woeful customer service, and awful facilities and amenities, that it's just put me off flying altogether. And it isn't even that cheap anymore to compensate.
My wife and I will be taking the ferry to Jersey for our late Summer break.
Easyjet have always had that problem, plus they get the worst slots. Arriving into Gatwick at 11pm is a nightmare, especially if there is even a slight delay. I don't get why anyone bothers with it when BA is similarly priced, goes from Heathrow or City and you get the best take off and landing slot times.
LOL, were you abducted by aliens over the weekend and just got back. He would still be in Portugal sleeping in airport if he had been with BA
That's very impressive. Momentum have done some clever social media stuff, judging by that page.
Nonetheless the Tory Corbyn ad is the single most successful, by a distance - the way it is going it will probably reach 4m this week, which is pretty much unprecedented, I think.
Ah, well done, thank you!
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
I don't doubt that you're right.
But - if you pay you can target floating voters who could be influenced? If it's organic... It may well be watched - but maybe just by all the people who love Corbyn and want to vote for him anyway?
Yes, if you pay you can drill down and target voters by constituency, by age, by the newspapers they read. But while you can lead a horse to water, you can't make it drink. Most people see a paid ad in their feed and just keep on walking by - my point was that Facebook counts the first 3 seconds of a video as a 'view' so figures on who's actually seen it should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Also, 2m views is NOTHING.
My turn for a SeanT style humblebrag here - last year I was dating a model who posted a video on Facebook that went viral and it got about 60m views in two days! It's literally just her dancing to a song that was in the charts at the time.
I took her out for dinner that weekend and people were looking down at their phones and pointing at her. That's fame, that's viral.
Contrary to what Paul Staines ("Guido Fawkes") says, Hamas is NOT a proscribed organisation in Britain. Its al-Qassam brigades are, but it itself is not. (Source: the official Home Office list of proscribed organisations.) The PFLP is not banned either. (The PFLP-GC is banned, but that's a different organisation.) It is perfectly legal in Britain to work for either Hamas or the PFLP.
Or the English Defence League. "not banned" is not a high bar.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
This Alex Cruz has turned flying with BA from mildly pleasurable to absolutely horrendous. He came from Vueling which has to be the worst airline I have ever flown with. He must go he"a a disaster!
Yep - BA staff are a cut above. But they are treated like crap by management, too. The club class service has definitely declined. People notice these things. What BA does have going for it - for now, at least - is a relatively generous Points package. I reckon it's that which keeps a lot of the premium customers coming back.
I had an awful Easyjet flight back from Portugal. Didn't get home until nearly 3am after being delayed by well over 2 hours and treated like cattle the whole time.
To be honest, such is the woeful customer service, and awful facilities and amenities, that it's just put me off flying altogether. And it isn't even that cheap anymore to compensate.
My wife and I will be taking the ferry to Jersey for our late Summer break.
We're getting the ferry to Spain in the summer and then driving up to our rental in France. Cheaper and more pleasant than flying and then hiring a car.
Good plan. Hope you enjoy it.
I normally go ferry nowadays , Newcastle - Amsterdam. You can fill the car up with as much luggage as you want and far less hassle, nice night on the ferry, good foood, drink etc and waken up fresh next day.
Old Ma Dura_Ace is a one woman focus group and political bellwether - she has voted for the winning party in every general election since 1955. Her comment on May today was, "She's gone Maggie Arrogant without actually achieving anything.
So who has she said is going to win?
She switched from Con to Lab over the Dementia Tax..
In which case she clearly doesn't understand it and neither do you. I would suggest her bellwether status is about to end in a quite dramatic manner.
If she has or is likely to have dementia, it is in her interests to get the present system changed asap.
Or more accurately in Master Dura Ace’s interests, as it is his inheritance that May will be protecting
typical tory mantra, robbing poor people is "protecting", is it any wonder this country is a sh**hole when the sheeple cannot even see through blatant Tory lies.
youre really worried Salmonds toast arent you ?
LOL, you are getting desperate Alan. Get that pocket money in teh jsr you are going to need it.
Doubtless this would be welcomed by Brexiteers who have long said pound is due a devaluation and that this will help our exports?
Sterling’s Brexit-fuelled decline over the past year has been Britain’s “least successful” currency devaluation in history, an analysis of the latest growth figures has revealed.
The UK’s trade balance has worsened by 1.8% of GDP since the final quarter of 2015 — before worries over the EU referendum began to hurt the pound. Rising exports have been outstripped by an even faster rise in imports, according to Samuel Tombs of consultancy Pantheon Macroeconomics.
The figures show that booming exports have so far failed to provide a silver lining to the pound’s slump, which has also driven up inflation and squeezed household spending.
In a forced choice it looks like they would opt for Corbyn, along with Headingley. Adel (and Wharfedale) and Weetwood would go for May. But it is not a forced choice, as Mulholland is still on the ballot paper. Admittedly not an accurate yardstick, but the number of Labour posters and signs in the town far exceeds previous elections. There are NO Tory signs anywhere.
Contrary to what Paul Staines ("Guido Fawkes") says, Hamas is NOT a proscribed organisation in Britain. Its al-Qassam brigades are, but it itself is not. (Source: the official Home Office list of proscribed organisations.) The PFLP is not banned either. (The PFLP-GC is banned, but that's a different organisation.) It is perfectly legal in Britain to work for either Hamas or the PFLP.
There'd be plenty more to work with if Diane is Home Sec
I normally go ferry nowadays , Newcastle - Amsterdam. You can fill the car up with as much luggage as you want and far less hassle, nice night on the ferry, good foood, drink etc and waken up fresh next day.
Sturgeon's quandary is that whereas her administration can get its hands on a lot more dosh if they form a coalition with Labour, that would require giving up the idea of a referendum in the near future. Which would make sense, because Corbyn promises to keep Britain in the single market and customs union, therefore the ostensible need for another referendum so that Scotland can support anyone who isn't England, thereby demonstrating internationalism would be obviated.
BUT once she has stirred up rabid xenophobia in her supporters she can't wind it back down again with a snap of the fingers. So she can't say she'd form a coalition with Labour but not with the Tories. At least I will be very surprised if she says before the election that a Labour government and continued British membership of the SM would mean no need for a referendum. Of course she can easily say that after the election, wrapping it in "Look how much money and power we've won for our party Scotland".
Complete bollox, she would be finished and people are not some kind of idiots to be whipped up by your hysterical "rabid xenophobia", this is not England and she is not Farage.
However, in 2015 the Tories were campaigning in Colchester, a seat I thought rock-solid. It was a Con Gain.
Granted, but we knew the LDs were taking a hammering from the polls, it was just expected in the seats they held they would do better, but they were clearly still worth going for. If the polls are right, and it is a big if, then Labour are surging, not collapsing, so expecting rock solid seats to switch makes less sense to focus on.
But the surge, if real, is largely coming from 18-24. Unless those safe seats have a large proportion of 18-24 then they are vulnerable to a swing to the Conservatives. Bolsover doesn't have a particularly young demographic IIRC.
If the surge is comeing from 18 to 24 year olds, then surely Clegg and Mulholland are toast.
Have backed Labour in Leeds NW. If the youth are heading to the polls, he's gone.
The turnout in the four Leeds NW wards in 2015 was:
I think that Labour would need to squeeze the Green vote more as well as increase turnout in the student parts of Headingly and Weetwood.
But what should also worry Mulholland is that he's unlikely to get the 3000 Conservative tactical votes which he did in 2015.
While if Otley returns to its traditional voting patterns, ie not dissimilar to the other commuter towns north of Leeds and Bradford, they'll be a big boost for the Conservatives.
Its clear though that Clegg's betrayal on tuition fees has really damaged the LibDems.
The more I think of it the more I think Mulholland's in deep trouble.
Lab 9/2 Bet365 Con 12/1 Betfair
are both good value IMO.
I have £25 on Labour and a fiver on the Tories both at 10-1. A Labour surge in the more urban parts combined with a few more Tories in the leafier parts should see Labour over the line I think.
Contrary to what Paul Staines ("Guido Fawkes") says, Hamas is NOT a proscribed organisation in Britain. Its al-Qassam brigades are, but it itself is not. (Source: the official Home Office list of proscribed organisations.) The PFLP is not banned either. (The PFLP-GC is banned, but that's a different organisation.) It is perfectly legal in Britain to work for either Hamas or the PFLP.
Or the English Defence League. "not banned" is not a high bar.
Staines calls Hamas "a proscribed terrorist organisation". His supposed statement of fact is false. That's very different from saying that Hamas are dirty scoundrels to resist Zionist terrorism, which is a matter of (sick) opinion.
Which has probably been said about every Conservative campaign from 1987 onwards.
The lead is down from 20% plus to single figures, despite pitiful opposition. I can't think offhand of a similar performance, from 1987 onwards.
Didn't John Major do rather well, against vastly superior opposition to that faced by today's Conservatives?
One might be partially a function of the other: in other words, it's precisely those mammoth Tory leads that has led to a rallying around Labour to mitigate it.
But, that said, the Tory campaign has still been poor. The Labour campaign hasn't been brilliant either, but they did get 3-4 days full media coverage (largely unchallenged by the Tories) to trail their very left-wing manifesto.
The Tory hope probably was that people would be terrified by it whereas, actually, many seemed to quite like it.
the attempt to depict Corbyn as a terrorist sympathiser hasn't resonated.
The video has been seen by approaching 2.75 million - roughly ten times what a successful one of these typically gets...
It probably makes no difference with people who intend to vote Labour.
It resonates strongly with the 47-51%, who intend voting Conservative or UKIP.
The video is STILL getting another 1000-2000 views every minute. It's perfectly timed over the Bank Holiday weekend, when most people have a chance to catch up with Facebook.
It will surely hit 3m today. Making it the most successful piece of social media campaigning in UK election history?
Depends whether it's changing minds or simply preaching to the converted. 15 million people voted either Tory or UKIP in 2015.
It's first job is to make sure those 43-46% of promised Tory supporters get off their arses and vote on June 8. It's second, less important but still vital task is to maybe nab 1-2% of undecideds from Labour, and squeeze the last of the Kippers.
If it is successful, it will deliver TMay a 100+ seat majority.
In a forced choice it looks like they would opt for Corbyn, along with Headingley. Adel (and Wharfedale) and Weetwood would go for May. But it is not a forced choice, as Mulholland is still on the ballot paper. Admittedly not an accurate yardstick, but the number of Labour posters and signs in the town far exceeds previous elections. There are NO Tory signs anywhere.
From parish council results you now shift to poster counting.
Double LOL
And few people who have been to Otley will think that it would chose Corbyn over May.
people are not some kind of idiots to be whipped up by your hysterical "rabid xenophobia"
Earlier this week, an SNP activist in Cowie, Stirling filmed herself following Tory campaigners as they delivered leaflets to voters. The Nationalist stalked them from her car, blasting music, and shouting ‘get out of Scotland’ and warned she would be ‘coming after’ them if they returned to the village. Another SNP leading light attacked Christine Jardine, the Lib Dem candidate in Edinburgh West, in a cruel and callous Twitter rant. This troll, a Nationalist council candidate just last month, accused Jardine of campaigning during the post-Manchester election truce. In fact, she was burying her husband that day but her pleas for decency went unheeded by Nicola Sturgeon’s boot boy.
Comments
I'd guess that at least 30% of my friends would be conservative voters but they almost never post anything political.
Definitely feels like less politics stuff than for the EU referendum.
The only consistent theme I see is friends encouraging others to register to vote.
But every time I catch myself thinking that, I am reminded of Hilary Clinton. The Tory campaign is beginning to smell a little bit like the Democrat one. Up to and including campaigning in Bolsover (or Texas).
As it stands.
https://twitter.com/brtnelexben/status/869145497294036992
Aren't I witty?
On the dementia tax:
https://twitter.com/JeremyCorbyn4PM/status/868931309909012480
On railway renationalisation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CE-KNJOjtE
I can't find the original source of that second one but it got A LOT of shares a couple of weeks ago.
Much like Vote Leave was the official campaign with Leave.EU being the unofficial dog whistle, the unofficial Corbyn campaign is doing a lot of the groundwork that Labour aren't.
I wouldn't be comparing Tory attack ads to _just_ the official Labour ones and saying the Tories have won the battle.
The smell of desperation thickens the air. Yesterday, a Sunday newspaper which functions as the Murrell Family Round Robin splashed across its front page Miss Sturgeon’s dire warning: ‘Just ten days to save Scotland from the Tories’. Save us from what? Are they going to make Jackson Carlaw Sings the Best of Gilbert and Sullivan a mandatory unit in the Curriculum for Excellence? Or send Murdo Fraser round to rearrange everyone’s flower bed into the pattern of a Union Jack?
The SNP has nothing left and so it is falling back on that old classic, The Tories Are Coming To Get You. We will find out on June 8 how much that dread tale still scares Scotland. Going around talking to voters, this does not feel like a frightened country. In the pubs and front rooms and work canteens of Scotland, fear is not the foremost emotion; in truth, it’s not even anger. It’s exasperation. Scots are fed up with a government that has the power to do almost anything but the will to do almost nothing. If it’s not independence, the First Minister doesn’t care and the voters are starting to catch on. The whole country is now Govanhill, a place Nicola Sturgeon vaguely knows, seldom visits, and no longer understands.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/05/29/the-snp-is-on-the-attack-because-it-has-nothing-to-defend/
Scotland is a local country for local people.
Everything about this campaign smells like an upset. I think in this case an 'upset' is likely to be a Con majority of around 30 seats and a weakened Theresa May lumbering on for another couple of years handing over the reins, but who knows.
Our assumption of a Con majority is based largely on the fact that oldies vote and young'uns don't, but something in my bones tells me this time will be different.
I really think Brexit was a blow for the under 35s and they know it's because they didn't turn out to vote. They've had a year of protest marches and sharing 'it was the oldies wot ruined the country' memes, along with a lot of bungs, e.g. tuition fees, from Labour.
If they do vote this time around we could be in for a big upset.
Brexit was about kicking the establishment. Theresa May is the establishment. There may be trouble ahead.
In fact all those questions in the ICM poll are fascinating.
The most entertaining rebuttal of the success of the Corbyn ad I've seen is its 'because people like Jeremy'.....
I thought I had a wobble a few days ago!!
Remember Sadiq Khan had links with terrorist sympathisers and terrorists? (David Cameron, Michael Fallon, Zac Goldsmith)
Or Ed Miliband gave succour' to Assad? (Hammond/No. 10)
Or Tony Blair + Good Friday Agreement a 'capitulation to violence' (Michael Gove)
I'm thinking 2.15 or so
The LibDems are clearly rattled. They tried to kick up a bit of a social media storm after they found a Polish guy delivering leaflets for Kevin. "Must be paying his deliverers....he better declare it..." they ranted.
Turns out the guy is totally dedicated, loves what Theresa May is doing on Brexit and on NATO - and wanted to help. Gratis, of course. As are we all. Kevin has put up a lovely interview with the chap.
LibDems. They really love being down in that gutter.
As has been pointed out - Its not about changing the minds of 18-24 year olds - its about getting the 65+ crowd to the polling station
Ditto the 'dementia tax' one from yesterday, official Labour wouldn't run it because it would fall foul of ASA 'passing off' rules (pretending to be another brand).
https://www.otleytowncouncil.gov.uk/news/otley-town-council-election-results/
I was trying to find it but wanted to put a link up before the comment became old and irrelevant to the thread.
A big word of warning about paid views vs organic shares.
Paid views hardly count vs organic shares.
A "view" on Facebook can be as little as 3 seconds before it is counted, so if the Conservatives have paid to run their attack ad and receive a million impressions for all we know 990,000 of them were for a total of 3 seconds.
Whereas if your friend John chooses to share a video and it comes from him "hey, check out this spoof video about Richard Branson!" you are far more likely to watch it to completion.
Stats for online paid media usually reek of bullshit - if you're interested in such things have a google about what Marc Pritchard of P&G and ad industry figures like Bob Hoffman have to say about it.
In short, if it's paid for in your feed 99% of the time it doesn't get watched past 3 seconds. If your mate John shares it with a few words of his own recommending it, then it gets watched to completion.
Now have a think about whether the residents of Otley would chose May or Corbyn if forced to make a choice.
"Don't vote for the scruffy, terrorist, North Korea-supporting, wet, traitorous communist! Vote for proper politicians in well-cut suits! We're the party of the family and being well-off! Never mind about other people!"
I am not at all sure they can. People see those containers in supermarkets for donated food for the hungry. They know their children face being in tens of thousands of pounds of debt before they start their first job. They know their children face a lifetime in private rented accommodation. They know the wide boys are after their money when they get old. Is that the kind of country people want? And if you want to do something about all of this, who do you vote for? Do you vote for pearl-clad and other arrogant Tories who called an election so that they could get more power?
Talk about taking people for granted! And most of us don't like being taken for granted.
People were stirred up by the Brexit referendum. They gave vent to several decades of ignored feelings about immigration. Turnout was very high.
Contrary to what the great Tory minds all thought, Brexit is no longer an issue for most people.
And even if for some people it is, what passes for a Tory "policy" on it has little substance or credibility.
The feeling of "we'll show those politician a*seholes*" that motivated voting for UKIP in EU elections and for Leave in the EU referendum may now get expressed in voting Labour. It could be that the Tories won't know what hit them, and that the falling apart of the Tories will be what people talk about after the election, not troubles in the Labour party.
I get that that video may not be a the best comparison. But how can labour link there view counter in FB to videos watched in youtube? and if it is possible have the conservatives also done the same?
https://twitter.com/willie_rennie/status/869133527174057985
But - if you pay you can target floating voters who could be influenced?
If it's organic... It may well be watched - but maybe just by all the people who love Corbyn and want to vote for him anyway?
Leeds CC elections still produce a LD result: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds_City_Council_election,_2016
But I can state that with certainty because of the number of people on my feeds who have been sharing it and talking about it organically. Those are the metrics I look at, rather than simply number of views, which often flatter to decieve.
There is a buzz about the Tory attack ad, people are talking about it, people are sharing it.
But my original point was that comparing the success of that ad to just the official Labour ones was a bad comparison because of the virality and effectiveness of some of the unofficial Momentum ones.
Its May or Corbyn.
Now who do the residents of Otley go for ?
They want the scope of acquired rights to apply to anyone who has resided (plus family members) or worked in the UK or EU27 respectively at any time prior to withdrawal.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/draft-eu-position-papers-article-50-negotiations_en
French Open on ITV4 (reg. required):
https://www.itv.com/hub/itv4
Also, 2m views is NOTHING.
My turn for a SeanT style humblebrag here - last year I was dating a model who posted a video on Facebook that went viral and it got about 60m views in two days! It's literally just her dancing to a song that was in the charts at the time.
I took her out for dinner that weekend and people were looking down at their phones and pointing at her. That's fame, that's viral.
Lab 9/2 Bet365
Con 12/1 Betfair
are both good value IMO.
The UK’s trade balance has worsened by 1.8% of GDP since the final quarter of 2015 — before worries over the EU referendum began to hurt the pound. Rising exports have been outstripped by an even faster rise in imports, according to Samuel Tombs of consultancy Pantheon Macroeconomics.
The figures show that booming exports have so far failed to provide a silver lining to the pound’s slump, which has also driven up inflation and squeezed household spending.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pounds-fall-the-worst-devaluation-in-history-czkfwhznc
The choice is narrowing by the day.
Its May or Corbyn.
Now who do the residents of Otley go for ?
In a forced choice it looks like they would opt for Corbyn, along with Headingley. Adel (and Wharfedale) and Weetwood would go for May. But it is not a forced choice, as Mulholland is still on the ballot paper. Admittedly not an accurate yardstick, but the number of Labour posters and signs in the town far exceeds previous elections. There are NO Tory signs anywhere.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/810261/Diane-Abbott-Jeremy-Corbyn-Manchester-bombing-terror-attack-Theresa-May-Andrew-Marr-show
Amazing to think there were you tube compilations of her media gaffes BEFORE this campaign started
Perfect timing for tonight's debates. Theresa May's coalition of chaos just became real
Double LOL
And few people who have been to Otley will think that it would chose Corbyn over May.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/05/29/the-snp-is-on-the-attack-because-it-has-nothing-to-defend/