Just a thought on election night for those who will be betting as the first results come in, the SNP vote is very evenly spread. With the exception of a couple of seats they were between 40 and 60% in every seat. In the Holyrood election they got between 36 and 48% in every regional list vote. I think that their vote is likely to go up or, much more likely, down by roughly the same amount across the country. If they look like they are doing about 8-10% worse in the first 2 or 3 seats to declare then it will probably indicate that they will vulnerable in any seat where they started with less than 50% of the vote. Sometimes though it will depend if there is a clear challenger to them for the other voters to rally round.
It was the eveness of the vote that gave them their landslide in 2015. I think they will be down 7-8% which will help but everything in Scotland depends on the willingness of Unionists to vote tactically. If I lived in Edinburgh West I would vote Lib Dem, Edinburgh SW Tory and Edinburgh North and Leith Labour (god help me). But not everyone feels like that. I was speaking to a Tory in Edinburgh West who can't bring himself to vote Lib Dem only yesterday (despite my urging).
I think that there are signs that it will happen in most places outside of Strathclyde. It is an indication though of how divided Scotland is becoming and it is not likely to get better any time soon.
The SLab candidate is quite anti Corbyn but I guess he's keeping his trap shut on that subject at the moment.
Not heard a single anti-Corbyn peep from any Labour MP on tw@tter in the last few weeks.
Surely they can't all have been opposed just because they were worried about their own seat and now it looks like he might not be so toxic after all, they're in favour ?
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Nope, I do all my booking online too, so I can often see a Doctor PDQ.
Exactly the same for me. My other, recent experiences of the NHS are equally good - blood tests (I am hypothyroid) are done immediately and with almost no queueing.
Maybe we are lucky.
A&E is still shit but it was always shit, thanks to idiots turning up with hayfever.
Or pissed
I went to A&E on the evening of October 29th last year (after falling when running and breaking a bunch of bones in my hand). It was entirely populated by pissed people and me. I really felt for the doctors.
Where Lab were 7000 ahead of Con last time? Some might switch in support and then tactical there if so (no Lab incumbent I guess).
To raise a favourite PB meme, a large proportion of Scotland's Jewish community lives in East Renfrewshire; I wonder if there'll be a Corbyn factor? The SLab candidate is quite anti Corbyn but I guess he's keeping his trap shut on that subject at the moment.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
No. I can see my GP same day by booking an appointment on my phone through emis. Its fantastic. I live on Tyneside.
Plus you don't have to deal with tactless receptionists who think they're proper medical professionals.
The SLab candidate is quite anti Corbyn but I guess he's keeping his trap shut on that subject at the moment.
Not heard a single anti-Corbyn peep from any Labour MP on tw@tter in the last few weeks.
Surely they can't all have been opposed just because they were worried about their own seat and now it looks like he might not be so toxic after all, they're in favour ?
I would imagine some will change their tune should Labour do very well, perhaps genuinely feeling they underestimated him.
Others will still be thinking he will lead them to disaster, but believe for the party and their own prospects they need to remain quiet for now, so they cannot be accused of undermining the party during a campaign. Woodcock had some real balls to do what he did, and he probably won't save himself. More should be confronted about what they think.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
No. I can see my GP same day by booking an appointment on my phone through emis. Its fantastic. I live on Tyneside.
There are always spaces kept free at my local surgery for 'on-the-day' urgent booking. If it isn't urgent, it's more pot-luck.
The SLab candidate is quite anti Corbyn but I guess he's keeping his trap shut on that subject at the moment.
Not heard a single anti-Corbyn peep from any Labour MP on tw@tter in the last few weeks.
Surely they can't all have been opposed just because they were worried about their own seat and now it looks like he might not be so toxic after all, they're in favour ?
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Nope, I do all my booking online too, so I can often see a Doctor PDQ.
Exactly the same for me. My other, recent experiences of the NHS are equally good - blood tests (I am hypothyroid) are done immediately and with almost no queueing.
Maybe we are lucky.
A&E is still shit but it was always shit, thanks to idiots turning up with hayfever.
Or pissed
I went to A&E on the evening of October 29th last year (after falling when running and breaking a bunch of bones in my hand). It was entirely populated by pissed people and me. I really felt for the doctors.
If you ever need to go, best place IMO is Finchley Memorial. It's really fast (had my knee X-rayed in 45 mins) and the staff are very friendly. The Royal Free is a nightmare hospital, I think it's probably the worst I've been to in London.
For all the talk about the BBC being full of "lefties", their coverage of May this campaign has been much kinder than the rather brutal treatment ITV and Sky have been giving her, from what I've seen.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
If it is true, it's an example of having a prepared retort without truly listening to the question and adjusting it as necessary eg 'I don't think they are, and I just get out there and campaign with my message, which is being well received' or something.
Where Lab were 7000 ahead of Con last time? Some might switch in support and then tactical there if so (no Lab incumbent I guess).
I'm not convinced either. I reckon SNP hold, although it's anyone's guess.
The Labour vote last time was seriously boosted by having Jim Murphy stand. On a good night for the Tories this is a gain but I wouldn't put the probability that high. Used to be the safest Tory seat in Scotland (or at least the Eastwood bit was).
True, but for tactical voting to work, electors have to believe only party X "can win here". The Conservatives were a poor third last time. To the extent they can peel off former Labour voters it weakens that party's prospects, allowing the SNP to come through by default.
I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
Ed West sounds like the candidate, not the constituency
The LDs did very well in the Scottish locals there last month, doubling their number of councillors in Edinburgh, and doing particularly well in the Almond ward which makes up the bulk of the Edinburgh West constituency.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
I have been asked via email to help out in Dunbartonshire E several times with a lot of high profile help coming along as well. Never been asked once to help in Edin West. I think that the local party there are reasonably confident of a gain especially after the results last month.
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
If it is true, it's an example of having a prepared retort without truly listening to the question and adjusting it as necessary eg 'I don't think they are, and I just get out there and campaign with my message, which is being well received' or something.
Or saying something along the lines of it being easy to entice people with giant freebies.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
Yeah, because they were so reliable last time. Tick tock...
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
The flaw in your argument is that Wales has very few "urban cores" in the way you're talking about -- it has only one core city, is generally very white working-class, voted for Brexit and has a higher average age than the UK as a whole.
Wales hasn't significantly diverged from Northern England in an election in decades, so it's not clear why that would suddenly change this election. (Admittedly the Midlands might be a bit different, some things to suggest there might be a structural trend away from Labour there.)
I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
Ed West sounds like the candidate, not the constituency
The LDs did very well in the Scottish locals there last month, doubling their number of councillors in Edinburgh, and doing particularly well in the Almond ward which makes up the bulk of the Edinburgh West constituency.
Also Michelle Thomson, the suspended former MP comprehensively queered the pitch for the SNP.
Which is fake news My wife became quite worryingly ill on a Saturday. This only became apparent when the gp surgery which is open on saturday had closed. She was able to go to the local out of hours service virtually immediately. Indeed so soon was the appointment that I was worried I would nor be able to drive her there in time. She was diagnosed and treated and recovered inside 3 - 4 days. My 90 year old mother in law was talen to the surgery, I took her, when taken ill and seen even though the official session was over. She has had all kinds of treatments for illnesses including a cancer and no where near has had to wait 3 weeks.
You know what, just shut the wotsit up with your propaganda peddling.
My experience of Devon Doctors - the local out-of-hours service - has been fantastic. Can't speak of them highly enough.
All of the experiences I cited are true: - usually can get an urgent appointment the same day (if I phone early enough & keep dialing until I get through) - out-of-hours service terrific - about 3 weeks wait if I need a non-urgent appointment
And what I didn't say was that my experience of A&E has been good too (long wait as it wasn't life-threatening, but I'm only too grateful I wasn't a high priority)
Which is fake news My wife became quite worryingly ill on a Saturday. This only became apparent when the gp surgery which is open on saturday had closed. She was able to go to the local out of hours service virtually immediately. Indeed so soon was the appointment that I was worried I would nor be able to drive her there in time. She was diagnosed and treated and recovered inside 3 - 4 days. My 90 year old mother in law was talen to the surgery, I took her, when taken ill and seen even though the official session was over. She has had all kinds of treatments for illnesses including a cancer and no where near has had to wait 3 weeks.
You know what, just shut the wotsit up with your propaganda peddling.
It's from the Daily Telegraph front page. That famous Corbynite propaganda sheet.
Online booking is convenient (and EMIS are the best NHS software providers. Their products work!) but does not create space. making room for urgents reduces space for routines.
The problem is - I've found in London at least - a lot of people don't bother signing up with a GP, they just use their nearest A&E like it's their GP. They choose to go, say, late at night on a Sunday when they think it will be less busy.
Also, these things work both ways. My other half works as an OT in the NHS and the number of people who no-show for their appointments is alarming. Often when they're tracked down by phone they reveal they decided to go out shopping instead....
The problem with a service being free is people don't respect it.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Last time I needed an appointment - just before Easter - the first available GP was over 3 weeks away. That included the 2 bank holidays, of course.
Then, judging by other experiences listed on here, your GP practice is simply a bit shit. This stuff can be seriously streamlined and finessed with online booking
My GP (in crowded central London) has got significantly better in this regard.
GP's are small business people. I am not surprised about London, it is the same here (leafy suburbia). It is a question, often of where they want to set up practice. For my ageing parents in an ex-mining area with low life expectancy it is FOUR weeks for an appointment.No wonder they go to A+E. As with most businesses, it is largely a supply and demand issue.
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
She shouldn't say "it's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land"! That's insulting voters' intelligence. She should say something like "That's not what our workers are hearing on the doorstep. It's always good that voters take a look at what the different parties are saying,"...and then "and I have faith in the British people" etc.
She gave that terrible answer because she was out of it.
Of course, her ability to get away with saying that she wants voters to listen to all the parties declines when she fails to turn up for debates. Will she even turn up for QT tomorrow?
Why the LDs are really confident in Edinburgh West:
1. In the Holyrood elections they increased their vote share by 14.4%, and got considerably more votes than in 2007 (which was before they comfortably won the seat in 2010).
2. In the locals last month, they got more than 50% in Almond ward, and topped the poll in the other two wards which make up the bulk of the west of the seat: Corstorphine/Murrayfield and Drum/Brae.
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
She shouldn't say "it's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land"! That's insulting voters' intelligence. She should say something like "That's not what our workers are hearing on the doorstep. It's always good that voters take a look at what the different parties are saying,"...and then "and I have faith in the British people" etc.
She gave that terrible answer because she was out of it.
Of course, her ability to get away with saying that she wants voters to listen to all the parties declines when she fails to turn up for debates. Will she even turn up for QT tomorrow?
She turned up for the Sky news debate and was fine in the Q/A portion. Not sure why she wouldn't turn up for the Question Time program.
The interesting constituency in Edinburgh is South West. It's the one the SNP are putting the most effort into. I think they reckon it is at severe risk of being lost - to the Conservatives.
Why the LDs are really confident in Edinburgh West:
1. In the Holyrood elections they increased their vote share by 14.4%, and got considerably more votes than in 2007 (which was before they comfortably won the seat in 2010).
2. In the locals last month, they got more than 50% in Almond ward, and topped the poll in the other two wards which make up the bulk of the west of the seat: Corstorphine/Murrayfield and Drum/Brae.
I'd be fairly astonished if they didn't take Edin West back. Other LD gains are trickier, though.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Last time I needed an appointment - just before Easter - the first available GP was over 3 weeks away. That included the 2 bank holidays, of course.
Then, judging by other experiences listed on here, your GP practice is simply a bit shit. This stuff can be seriously streamlined and finessed with online booking
My GP (in crowded central London) has got significantly better in this regard.
GP's are small business people. I am not surprised about London, it is the same here (leafy suburbia). It is a question, often of where they want to set up practice. For my ageing parents in an ex-mining area with low life expectancy it is FOUR weeks for an appointment.No wonder they go to A+E. As with most businesses, it is largely a supply and demand issue.
Probably isn't 4 weeks. You just have to ring up and tell the receptionist its urgent. If they ask why, don't tell them and don't take no for an answer. Used to work for me before I moved house.
Journalist: "Why do you think voters are warming to Corbyn?"
Theresa May: "I just get out there and campaign with my message"
If that's true it's a terrible answer. Literally an open goal to say "It's because Jeremy lives in a fantasy land and is pushing fantasy politics, it's not easy being the grown up but I have faith in the British people to see through his fantasy politics and vote for me on Thursday next week".
If it is true, it's an example of having a prepared retort without truly listening to the question and adjusting it as necessary eg 'I don't think they are, and I just get out there and campaign with my message, which is being well received' or something.
Or saying something along the lines of it being easy to entice people with giant freebies.
"It's always easy giving people what they want, but I'm Matron and if you vote for me I'll give you all what's REALLY good for you - a gigantic kick up the arse"
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
Yeah, because they were so reliable last time. Tick tock...
Sometimes they prove right, in 2015 definitely not, so they always come with a health warning and a recommendation to prefer proper poll evidence. But it's objectively true that the polls are *not* showing Labour piling up votes in London while getting slaughtered in the East Midlands. A problem in interpreting the polls is that East and West Midlands, which have radically different demographics and cultures, tend to be lumped together - sometimes evewn with Wales, which is wildly different to both.
My gut feeling fWIW is that the East Mids results will be close to the national average; I won't even try to guess the W Mids ones. Specifically, though, we expect to hold all the Nottingham seats.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Last time I needed an appointment - just before Easter - the first available GP was over 3 weeks away. That included the 2 bank holidays, of course.
Then, judging by other experiences listed on here, your GP practice is simply a bit shit. This stuff can be seriously streamlined and finessed with online booking
My GP (in crowded central London) has got significantly better in this regard.
I said up-thread that urgent appointments are available for on-the-day booking. If it isn't urgent, as this wasn't, you take the next available bookable slot. Usually 2 -3 weeks, unless you happen to get a cancellation.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
Other canvas reports are available - typically suggesting that meaningful proportions of Labour voters in less prosperous areas still nurse the same deep reservations about Jeremy Corbyn as they always have, and are preparing either to vote Tory or to sit on their hands.
As best as I can make out YouGov have decided to implement a completely new model a few days before the General Election, and one which appears to be based on (a) very bold turnout assumptions for traditionally low turnout demographics, and (b) some fancified pseudo-scientific system that claims to have shown a Leave lead throughout the EU referendum campaign, yet the results of which they oh-so-conveniently neglected to publicise at the time.
They might turn out to be right, but realistically if they are it's going to take a very substantial increase in turnout to make it so, *and* practically all of that increase will have to consist of voters barging each other out the way in their rush to register their enthusiasm for Team Corbyn. Put crudely, extra enthusiasts for socialism and enraged Remainers have to appear in large numbers, and all the previous non-voters who came out to vote Leave last year have to stay at home at the same time.
In order to boost turnout by just one percent, over 450,000 extra voters - a number equivalent to the entire population of Edinburgh - has to go out and vote. Are we going to see the necessary huge numbers of non-voters and young voters backing Labour, and even if we do are enough of them going to be concentrated in the seats that matter? I remain to be convinced.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
Yeah, because they were so reliable last time. Tick tock...
Sometimes they prove right, in 2015 definitely not, so they always come with a health warning and a recommendation to prefer proper poll evidence. But it's objectively true that the polls are *not* showing Labour piling up votes in London while getting slaughtered in the East Midlands. A problem in interpreting the polls is that East and West Midlands, which have radically different demographics and cultures, tend to be lumped together - sometimes evewn with Wales, which is wildly different to both.
My gut feeling fWIW is that the East Mids results will be close to the national average; I won't even try to guess the W Mids ones. Specifically, though, we expect to hold all the Nottingham seats.
Its 12/1 for Lab gain Broxtowe. I cannot see Soubry hoovering up the kippers.
The newspaper that includes its primary political position under its title on every issue is not a fan of obsession?
I am a fan of the newspaper tactic of 'X accused of Y' line, when it doesn't mention who is doing the accusing, a classic of the industry and truly non partisan.
I can see my GP - if I don't specify which doctor I want - in two or three days, and at a time of my choosing. I can see them tomorrow if I am prepared to queue for an hour.
I live in central London. Are we especially favoured over the rest of the UK?!
Last time I needed an appointment - just before Easter - the first available GP was over 3 weeks away. That included the 2 bank holidays, of course.
Then, judging by other experiences listed on here, your GP practice is simply a bit shit. This stuff can be seriously streamlined and finessed with online booking
My GP (in crowded central London) has got significantly better in this regard.
GP's are small business people. I am not surprised about London, it is the same here (leafy suburbia). It is a question, often of where they want to set up practice. For my ageing parents in an ex-mining area with low life expectancy it is FOUR weeks for an appointment.No wonder they go to A+E. As with most businesses, it is largely a supply and demand issue.
Probably isn't 4 weeks. You just have to ring up and tell the receptionist its urgent. If they ask why, don't tell them and don't take no for an answer. Used to work for me before I moved house.
It really is. And not everyone is that confident or assertive. Also, this was raised by the front page of the Telegraph...so, unless you think they are exaggerating a Health story to make the Tories look bad a week out from an election. I reckon Occam's Razor here.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Doesn't fit with @NickPalmer 's canvas reports though?
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
Yeah, because they were so reliable last time. Tick tock...
Sometimes they prove right, in 2015 definitely not, so they always come with a health warning and a recommendation to prefer proper poll evidence. But it's objectively true that the polls are *not* showing Labour piling up votes in London while getting slaughtered in the East Midlands. A problem in interpreting the polls is that East and West Midlands, which have radically different demographics and cultures, tend to be lumped together - sometimes evewn with Wales, which is wildly different to both.
My gut feeling fWIW is that the East Mids results will be close to the national average; I won't even try to guess the W Mids ones. Specifically, though, we expect to hold all the Nottingham seats.
Its 12/1 for Lab gain Broxtowe. I cannot see Soubry hoovering up the kippers.
Tempting?
I have a couple quid on Lab gaining Broxtowe, but I'm still not expecting it.
There is, of course, the matter of simple mathematics involved in the polls.
Given they've got to add up to 100%, if we assume the Conservatives are floating around 43%, and then assume that the other minor and nationalist parties are likewise going nowhere or even falling back (certainly not impossible) and say 2% Green, 4% UKIP, 7% Lib Dem and 4% Nationalist - this is only 60%. Assuming this is a GB wide poll, who is getting the other 40%? Well, it has to be Labour.
It may seem mad, but its simple maths. The percentages have to add to 100% (or 99% if they shout 'rounding') but it's that simple. Maybe the Labour 'surge' isn't there at all. It's simple the minor parties being drowned out as two party politics assets itself across GB and voters from the minor parties jumping one way or the other (but in this case - mostly Labour, except for some UKIP to Con switchers).
I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
Ed West sounds like the candidate, not the constituency
The LDs did very well in the Scottish locals there last month, doubling their number of councillors in Edinburgh, and doing particularly well in the Almond ward which makes up the bulk of the Edinburgh West constituency.
Also Michelle Thomson, the suspended former MP comprehensively queered the pitch for the SNP.
It is for a similar reason why Glasgow East might, just might, see an huge upset Labour win. The previous SNP MP, Natalie McGarry has been charged with fraud in relation to local party funds and the Women for Independence organisation. Considering that Labour got over 60% in 2010 it is not impossible that there will be a greater swing back to them there than in the other Glasgow seats.
Sturgeon vs Davidson is a serious contest between serious politicians compared to the tripe down here. Rennie has come across alot better than Farron too.
There is, of course, the matter of simple mathematics involved in the polls.
Given they've got to add up to 100%, if we assume the Conservatives are floating around 43%, and then assume that the other minor and nationalist parties are likewise going nowhere or even falling back (certainly not impossible) and say 2% Green, 4% UKIP, 7% Lib Dem and 4% Nationalist - this is only 60%. Assuming this is a GB wide poll, who is getting the other 40%? Well, it has to be Labour.
It may seem mad, but its simple maths. The percentages have to add to 100% (or 99% if they shout 'rounding') but it's that simple. Maybe the Labour 'surge' isn't there at all. It's simple the minor parties being drowned out as two party politics assets itself across GB and voters from the minor parties jumping one way or the other (but in this case - mostly Labour, except for some UKIP to Con switchers).
It could easily be 2% Green, 7% UKIP, 10% LD leaving Labour with 34%.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small.
Undoubtedly true. I was of the view he needed to stay above 200MPs to even have a shot of staying on, and some thought he'd do it with far less, but if it is close to 210-220 as some have it, then he's safe as houses.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
The flaw in your argument is that Wales has very few "urban cores" in the way you're talking about -- it has only one core city, is generally very white working-class, voted for Brexit and has a higher average age than the UK as a whole.
Wales hasn't significantly diverged from Northern England in an election in decades, so it's not clear why that would suddenly change this election. (Admittedly the Midlands might be a bit different, some things to suggest there might be a structural trend away from Labour there.)
Nah, I'm treating Wales as a separate phenomenon to the urban centres.
Welsh Labour has its own brand identity, which it's been furiously peddling as an antidote to negative attitudes to the Westminster leadership, and the evidence from the local elections - where its reversals weren't that bad for what is, after all, the long-term party of Government over there - isn't suggestive of impending disaster. There's also been a violent swing back to Labour in the more recent Welsh Barometer polls, although frankly (a) this was implausibly big, and (b) it was done by YouGov, so I have my doubts as to the extent of the movement of public opinion.
Basically, I think Labour will go backwards in Wales - and a wipeout in North Wales certainly remains possible - but a drubbing on the scale we might've been contemplating prior to the local elections probably isn't on the cards.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
Actually, yes.
If the Corbynistas stuck with the party and didn't undermine him, then yes.
Owen Smith would, more likely than not, have become PM in 2020.
It's a different history. TM would have made different decisions.
It's quite possible, had Corbyn not won in 2015, brexit wouldn't have happened.
So, if you're Labour what do you do? Some people are about to think for the first time 'maybe'. How do they handle that? In the past, Labour has not handled that moment well. How would you play it?
1. Hope. You want better for you and yours than you have now? As the 6th richest economy we don't have to cut everything and everything. We can't afford NOT to invest in our children 2. Decency. This is Britain. My grandfather didn't fight to secure our freedom in order to have veteran soldiers starved to death, the disabled left to lie in their own filth and children going to school hungry because their working parents can't afford food. We are better than this. What the Tories are doing to people is wrong at a very basic moral level, your neighbour is your friend not your enemy if we all pull together
Having spoken to so may people in this campaign my gut feel as to the mad swing is this. The Tory manifesto broke the TINA narrative. People have said "that isn't right" and are willing to vote accordingly. Because whatever your views on the economy these are human beings and our friends family and neighbours being treated by the Tories like scum. And the Tories excuses for working people reliant on foodbanks just doesn't wash any more.
People voted Brexit because they want a better future. Only one party offering details about what that means to them.
Tories are scum. Tories are morally wrong. Tories aren't decent.
Nothing changes from the Labour hymnsheet, does it?
I burst out laughing at the idea that a supporter of a party putting forward Corbyn and McDonnell as its two most senior people could with a straight face cite 'Decency' as a reason to vote for them.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour are explicitly promising to get rid of sanctions no matter any article in the Guardian says.
Drop the scales and really look at what he's saying. The uncomfortable truth, you will find, is that this is not a bold and redistributive manifesto that will remake Britain's economy in a fair form, but a series of ill-written bribes based on naked greed and hatred to appeal to certain client groups and bugger the rest - including welfare claimants (remember as an aside that Corbyn is from a wealthy background, has never been unemployed and never had to apply for a job. He really has no clue what life is like on welfare).
Which is why I will not be voting for him. He is singularly fortunate in the campaign his two principal opponents are running.
benefits sanctions save £132 million a year. In the context of total government expenditure of around £722 billion a year it's a rounding error. We can afford to do this one thing.
Yes he has terrible policies on many other issues. But so does Theresa May. She thinks that a hard Brexit is a viable option. Most of Conservative candidates would go along with this.
On the other hand, most Labour candidates aren't Corbynites and my impression is that they would restrain Corbyn from his worst impulses.
Even if thousands of young people who normally don't vote do vote for Corbyn, they probably wont vote tactically. They'll just vote Labour. The Tories therefore might hold seats they might not have done otherwise?
Just a theory. Dont know how many seats this might apply to.
Labour are explicitly promising to get rid of sanctions no matter any article in the Guardian says.
Drop the scales and really look at what he's saying. The uncomfortable truth, you will find, is that this is not a bold and redistributive manifesto that will remake Britain's economy in a fair form, but a series of ill-written bribes based on naked greed and hatred to appeal to certain client groups and bugger the rest - including welfare claimants (remember as an aside that Corbyn is from a wealthy background, has never been unemployed and never had to apply for a job. He really has no clue what life is like on welfare).
Which is why I will not be voting for him. He is singularly fortunate in the campaign his two principal opponents are running.
benefits sanctions save £132 million a year. In the context of total government expenditure of around £722 billion a year it's a rounding error. We can afford to do this one thing.
Yes he has terrible policies on many other issues. But so does Theresa May. She thinks that a hard Brexit is a viable option. Most of Conservative candidates would go along with this.
On the other hand, most Labour candidates aren't Corbynites and my impression is that they would restrain Corbyn from his worst impulses.
So they are spending £0.1bn on reversing benefits cuts, yet spending a hundred times that on a bung for middle class students. Very progressive.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Labour was doing very well in a number of the urban cores. This would be entirely consistent with the notion that it is stacking up votes where it doesn't need them, whilst actually going backwards in all those Brexity marginals where the Tories are already hoping to profit by squeezing Ukip in a vice.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
The flaw in your argument is that Wales has very few "urban cores" in the way you're talking about -- it has only one core city, is generally very white working-class, voted for Brexit and has a higher average age than the UK as a whole.
Wales hasn't significantly diverged from Northern England in an election in decades, so it's not clear why that would suddenly change this election. (Admittedly the Midlands might be a bit different, some things to suggest there might be a structural trend away from Labour there.)
Nah, I'm treating Wales as a separate phenomenon to the urban centres.
Welsh Labour has its own brand identity, which it's been furiously peddling as an antidote to negative attitudes to the Westminster leadership, and the evidence from the local elections - where its reversals weren't that bad for what is, after all, the long-term party of Government over there - isn't suggestive of impending disaster. There's also been a violent swing back to Labour in the more recent Welsh Barometer polls, although frankly (a) this was implausibly big, and (b) it was done by YouGov, so I have my doubts as to the extent of the movement of public opinion.
Basically, I think Labour will go backwards in Wales - and a wipeout in North Wales certainly remains possible - but a drubbing on the scale we might've been contemplating prior to the local elections probably isn't on the cards.
But if Wales had separate phenomenons, and Welsh Labour had such a particularly strong brand, then why didn't those factors deliver Labour better results in Wales than in England in any of the last few general elections? Why would Welsh exceptionalism only suddenly be kicking in with this GE?
I do not mean to belittle the emotional loss to the princes, I lost my mum at a young age too, but is there really still such a big market for Diana focused stories in the tabloids?
Comments
Surely they can't all have been opposed just because they were worried about their own seat and now it looks like he might not be so toxic after all, they're in favour ?
Others will still be thinking he will lead them to disaster, but believe for the party and their own prospects they need to remain quiet for now, so they cannot be accused of undermining the party during a campaign. Woodcock had some real balls to do what he did, and he probably won't save himself. More should be confronted about what they think.
My guess, especially following the evidence from the local elections, is that Labour may well end up doing better than two years ago in inner London, Liverpool and Manchester, and better than originally expected in Wales, whilst going backwards at a rate of knots in some other parts of the country. Serious reverses in the West Midlands and in parts of Yorkshire and the North East still seem quite plausible.
Also surely YouGov are accounting for this?
I think that the local party there are reasonably confident of a gain especially after the results last month.
Wales hasn't significantly diverged from Northern England in an election in decades, so it's not clear why that would suddenly change this election. (Admittedly the Midlands might be a bit different, some things to suggest there might be a structural trend away from Labour there.)
All of the experiences I cited are true:
- usually can get an urgent appointment the same day (if I phone early enough & keep dialing until I get through)
- out-of-hours service terrific
- about 3 weeks wait if I need a non-urgent appointment
And what I didn't say was that my experience of A&E has been good too (long wait as it wasn't life-threatening, but I'm only too grateful I wasn't a high priority)
Online booking is convenient (and EMIS are the best NHS software providers. Their products work!) but does not create space. making room for urgents reduces space for routines.
So you polling junkies brace yourself for cold turkey as your next fixes will come on Saturday.
Also, these things work both ways. My other half works as an OT in the NHS and the number of people who no-show for their appointments is alarming. Often when they're tracked down by phone they reveal they decided to go out shopping instead....
The problem with a service being free is people don't respect it.
I'd even settle for a YouGov... *shame*
By the way, what time did the Panelbase come out today? Did I miss the freaking out here, or did it just not happen for some reason?
She gave that terrible answer because she was out of it.
Of course, her ability to get away with saying that she wants voters to listen to all the parties declines when she fails to turn up for debates. Will she even turn up for QT tomorrow?
1. In the Holyrood elections they increased their vote share by 14.4%, and got considerably more votes than in 2007 (which was before they comfortably won the seat in 2010).
2. In the locals last month, they got more than 50% in Almond ward, and topped the poll in the other two wards which make up the bulk of the west of the seat: Corstorphine/Murrayfield and Drum/Brae.
She is worried about the SW.
'Theresa May defends Tory candidate who made 'shocking' comments about rape'
http://tinyurl.com/yc62y55x
#MegaPollingSaturday
We might get a couple of Scottish polls too (but they might just be for private clients)
https://twitter.com/AdrianEdmondson/status/870023912901537792
My gut feeling fWIW is that the East Mids results will be close to the national average; I won't even try to guess the W Mids ones. Specifically, though, we expect to hold all the Nottingham seats.
As best as I can make out YouGov have decided to implement a completely new model a few days before the General Election, and one which appears to be based on (a) very bold turnout assumptions for traditionally low turnout demographics, and (b) some fancified pseudo-scientific system that claims to have shown a Leave lead throughout the EU referendum campaign, yet the results of which they oh-so-conveniently neglected to publicise at the time.
They might turn out to be right, but realistically if they are it's going to take a very substantial increase in turnout to make it so, *and* practically all of that increase will have to consist of voters barging each other out the way in their rush to register their enthusiasm for Team Corbyn. Put crudely, extra enthusiasts for socialism and enraged Remainers have to appear in large numbers, and all the previous non-voters who came out to vote Leave last year have to stay at home at the same time.
In order to boost turnout by just one percent, over 450,000 extra voters - a number equivalent to the entire population of Edinburgh - has to go out and vote. Are we going to see the necessary huge numbers of non-voters and young voters backing Labour, and even if we do are enough of them going to be concentrated in the seats that matter? I remain to be convinced.
Tempting?
I am a fan of the newspaper tactic of 'X accused of Y' line, when it doesn't mention who is doing the accusing, a classic of the industry and truly non partisan.
Given they've got to add up to 100%, if we assume the Conservatives are floating around 43%, and then assume that the other minor and nationalist parties are likewise going nowhere or even falling back (certainly not impossible) and say 2% Green, 4% UKIP, 7% Lib Dem and 4% Nationalist - this is only 60%. Assuming this is a GB wide poll, who is getting the other 40%? Well, it has to be Labour.
It may seem mad, but its simple maths. The percentages have to add to 100% (or 99% if they shout 'rounding') but it's that simple. Maybe the Labour 'surge' isn't there at all. It's simple the minor parties being drowned out as two party politics assets itself across GB and voters from the minor parties jumping one way or the other (but in this case - mostly Labour, except for some UKIP to Con switchers).
Make of that what you will (if anything).
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
Labour share: up 3%
Labour seats: down 20
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
Looks plausible to me.
Welsh Labour has its own brand identity, which it's been furiously peddling as an antidote to negative attitudes to the Westminster leadership, and the evidence from the local elections - where its reversals weren't that bad for what is, after all, the long-term party of Government over there - isn't suggestive of impending disaster. There's also been a violent swing back to Labour in the more recent Welsh Barometer polls, although frankly (a) this was implausibly big, and (b) it was done by YouGov, so I have my doubts as to the extent of the movement of public opinion.
Basically, I think Labour will go backwards in Wales - and a wipeout in North Wales certainly remains possible - but a drubbing on the scale we might've been contemplating prior to the local elections probably isn't on the cards.
If the Corbynistas stuck with the party and didn't undermine him, then yes.
Owen Smith would, more likely than not, have become PM in 2020.
It's a different history. TM would have made different decisions.
It's quite possible, had Corbyn not won in 2015, brexit wouldn't have happened.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
benefits sanctions save £132 million a year. In the context of total government expenditure of around £722 billion a year it's a rounding error. We can afford to do this one thing.
Yes he has terrible policies on many other issues. But so does Theresa May. She thinks that a
hard Brexit is a viable option. Most of Conservative candidates would go along with this.
On the other hand, most Labour candidates aren't Corbynites and my impression is that they would restrain Corbyn from his worst impulses.
Just a theory. Dont know how many seats this might apply to.