The Tories have dispatched Theresa May fairly consistently to the same sorts of seats since the campaign began: largely Labour-held seats which would require fairly big swings to take.
So either they don't believe the polls as they have changed, or they might but don't want to appear spooked.
It is, in particular, hard to make sense of Mr Corbyn's alternating visits to Tory-held marginals and then very safe Labour seats. I have written about this pattern before - but it is possible that Mr Corbyn keeps going to safe seats where he can hold big events, which look much better on television than Ms May's. And remember: local TV news matters.
Apparently it works - even on here people wow about the enthusiasm of Corbyn's crowds.
I will return to this later to see if this experiment has yielded useful information. Maybe the lesson will be that the parties know nothing
That's my bet. Particularly for the Tories their campaigning worked last time, and this time they are assuming it will again even as the fundamentals shift by so much it does seem more than just noise.
I would be flabbergasted if the Tories haven't got a scubby. Now they might not be winning anywhere near as many marginals as they hoped, but I just can't believe Messina is sitting there with his massive data and complex models with no clue where May should be going.
Also, they aren't repeating last time, Cameron was down in the south west all the time for instance. They are targeting quite different seats this time.
Corbyn is all about getting a Maomentum crowd. Remember in the early days of the campaign he went to some super safe Tory seat and got a decent crowd (albeit facing the wrong way when he tried to address them).
Question is. Does sending May to a marginal help or hinder the Tory cause. Polls suggest maybe the latter.
Messina might be sending her where she can do least harm.
Except they don't. The gap in best leader etc has closed, but May's numbers have only gone down a tiny bit. It is the Corbgasm among the young that has changed the numbers.
Also, it seems she is popular among parts of the electorate that don't like Tories much. Bugger me why that is.
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
Isn't it a mistake putting Boris in front of the cameras talking bout terrorism? Apart from sounding typically insincere everyone knows the Saudis are the chief sponsors of terrorism and Boris is in their pocket.
What interests the Labour membership most is the redistributive economics that Corbyn talks about, not his views on policing and anti-terrorism.
I'm afraid that you're right. The problem, however, with radical redistribution is that it won't work - and especially not in the British context.
First you go after the rich, who run away and/or hide their money abroad. Then you've no choice but to soak the middle classes, and that's when the problems really begin - because the UK can't support Scandinavian levels of welfare provision based on high personal taxation. Our chronically overpriced housing market means that the cost of living for most people with expensive mortgages or steep rents to pay is too high to make "progressive" taxation bearable. And even if you could attempt to use policy levers to engineer a house price crash, that would simply cripple the banking system and bankrupt a not-insignificant portion of the electorate.
In point of fact, things probably wouldn't turn out that well. The first thing an incoming socialist Government would do would be to tax the crap out of businesses, leading in pretty short order to a spiralling vortex of low investment, high unemployment, high taxation for those still in jobs, and substantially higher inflation, interest rates and Government debt as well.
I still think that May will get a healthy majority, but the chances of the above coming to pass after GE2022 are significant. Personally, I'm going to be trying to put away plenty of money in the next five years, and also considering how to hedge against inflation and protect at least some of it from the taxman.
The Labour membership is well to the left of me on economics, but I am a supporter of redistributive policies. They work, in my view and experience. I would vote for a Labour party led by someone to the left of me economically. I would not - will not - vote for a Labour party with someone who has the security and defence back story that Corbyn has. I think if Labour takes its time to understand just how important defence and security (and patriotism) are to most voters, they can and will find a leader who gives the membership the economic stuff it wants, while being able to reassure the electorate generally about having their protection as his/her number one priority.
Chuka's the man for Labour
I'd go for Lisa Nandy myself. Though I like Chuka, I think Labour needs a leader based a long way from London.
+1. I also like Chuka too, but they need someone who is not from London - Midlands/North-East would be good.
The Tories have dispatched Theresa May fairly consistently to the same sorts of seats since the campaign began: largely Labour-held seats which would require fairly big swings to take.
So either they don't believe the polls as they have changed, or they might but don't want to appear spooked.
It is, in particular, hard to make sense of Mr Corbyn's alternating visits to Tory-held marginals and then very safe Labour seats. I have written about this pattern before - but it is possible that Mr Corbyn keeps going to safe seats where he can hold big events, which look much better on television than Ms May's. And remember: local TV news matters.
Apparently it works - even on here people wow about the enthusiasm of Corbyn's crowds.
I will return to this later to see if this experiment has yielded useful information. Maybe the lesson will be that the parties know nothing
That's my bet. Particularly for the Tories their campaigning worked last time, and this time they are assuming it will again even as the fundamentals shift by so much it does seem more than just noise.
I thought that some commentators couldn't quite grasp why Cameron was spending so much time in The West during the last couple of days of the 2015 election. Then the results came in.
And maybe they'll be proved right in their focus this time. Or they may be so buoyed by how well they did last time that they assume it is working even if it isn't - they started the campaign talking about 10000 labour majorities under pressure, but that's just laughable if the Labour surge is even half true, and given May's ratings drop as well, I doubt it is entirely imaginary.
The 10,000 stuff probably just spin. It does seem she keeps going to labour marginals.
Remember last time, when the Tories got the wobbles they sent Cameron to sure up all sorts of places.
Messina / Textor might have this totally wrong, but I don't think it is they haven't got a clue what they are doing. I am absolutely sure there is a plan based upon the polling numbers they have.
As I said previous few days, the lack of panic says to me they think they are fine and YouGov are wrong*. Now the brain trust have made the big mistake of their whole careers, we will know in a few days.
* I am sure there has been a surge, but their data could be saying it isn't anywhere near as big and / or in the wrong places.
If May wins a big majority I'd keep Corbyn where he is for a year or two. Promote a range of talent to the shadow cabinet from across the party and see who has got it. Ie what Howard did.
World Corbyn (or his puppeteers) wear that? You have insider insight so assume that it could happen but from what I've seen and read, I'm not sure.
It has been a terrible campaign... But in the end winning is all that counts... And Theresa is increasingly looking like a winner - So ultimately who care what the campaign was like?
The 1987 Con campaign was terrible as well but people only remember the Thatcher landslide victory,,,
She was gone three years later. That will be May's fate, I'd have thought. The Tory challenge is to find a Major. The cupboard looks pretty bare right now.
Amber Rudd.
Ruth Davidson...if they can get her into parliament
She might be the leader but one... I.E. the one that takes over as LOTO after 2022 defeat.
Then again, wouldn't it be good if she stayed in Scotland and over-saw a Con revival...
Davidson can't leave Scotland without the total defeat of the SNP as that is her Unique Selling Point.
If she runs away before the job is done her entire self image is destroyed.
Oh, Corbyn in an extremely safe seat in Birmingham and May in Slough of all places.
At the start of the campaign the Tories might have contemplated a near clean sweep of the South East (or at least of Labour there, given there is also the Green and Speaker seats), which includes Slough. Now I'd think they'd only pick up one of the four.
I always find the sort of logic fail that JJ is demonstrating to be particularly annoying. It is neigh on impossible to get through to them why it is a failure even though it should be blindingly obvious. The 24 seats Cameron won in 2015 are miles more impressive than the 97 he won in 2010. The 38 that Maggie won in 1983 are outstanding.
No logic fail, and if you actually read my post, you'll see I said ('albeit from a lower base'), hence addressing your point (and I also gave the original seat numbers pre Thatcher and Cameron).
I know your dislike of Cameron is almost as strong as your dislike of the EU, but the 2010 result was excellent, and I doubt anyone else (e.g. Davis) would have done as well. The Conservatives had a massive credibility deficit to bridge, and Cameron managed to do it. No, he wasn't perfect, but he did bloody well, sometimes despite the Europhobic fanatics within his party.
Cameron threw away a lead that would have got him a large working majority and he did it through his own idiocy. Now it may well be that May does the same thing here but that in no way excuses Cameron. He was in the end a third rate politician unfit for high office.
LOL. No. I mean, 'third rate politician unfit for high office.'
Really? In that case Davis, Boris, Fox and Gove must be fiftieth-rate politicians unsuitable for a Janitor's office.
Exactly...the man made his party electable again and then managed a majority in 2015 based almost entirely on his personal popularity which was miles ahead of that of the Tory party. And then got crapped on by the headbangers at the first available opportunity. Which is why, although I hope the Tories win, many people won't be able to resist a secret smile if the right wing got outcrazied by Corbyn.
an interesting view
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
If May wins a big majority I'd keep Corbyn where he is for a year or two. Promote a range of talent to the shadow cabinet from across the party and see who has got it. Ie what Howard did.
World Corbyn (or his puppeteers) wear that? You have insider insight so assume that it could happen but from what I've seen and read, I'm not sure.
The left would be happy for Corbyn to stay whilst they regroup . There will be shadow cabinet vacancies. Corbyn has already shown a willingness to appoint those on the right.
It could happen. The big question is what does Corbyn want. He might have had enough and after this campaign he can claim some achievements.
I've just realised (one of) the reasons I'd make a terrible party leader:
When faced with a map of blue with an island of red, I'd focus on gaining that island of red regardless of the situation on the ground, just to make the map look neater.
Likewise, I'd quite like to have many strips coast-to-coast.
Basically I'd develop a strategy to make a map look good ...
The problem on here is that you analyse things to death which is not what the voting population do. They make their minds up on one ore two issues which are important to them, if your lucky. The rest will vote on gut feel and be happy with their personal justification of their vote. If you want to make money try and put yourself into the skin of the average voter, think what they are going to do and bet accordingly. I've now had four bets lreading this thread, the best is 3/1. I will lose them all but it's only £30 but will make Friday more interesting.
Good luck with your bets. Why are you so sure they won't come in?
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
the LDs have totally miscalled what voters want
the tragedy is they could have been replacing Labour, instead the greens will be replacing them
Has anyone got any ideas of what could be the 'Portillo Moment' of this election?
I think Norfolk North could be entertaining at 5am (estimated) but with a Tory landslide or a Labour surge who could we be remembering fondly for the next 20 years?
I always find the sort of logic fail that JJ is demonstrating to be particularly annoying. It is neigh on impossible to get through to them why it is a failure even though it should be blindingly obvious. The 24 seats Cameron won in 2015 are miles more impressive than the 97 he won in 2010. The 38 that Maggie won in 1983 are outstanding.
No logic fail, and if you actually read my post, you'll see I said ('albeit from a lower base'), hence addressing your point (and I also gave the original seat numbers pre Thatcher and Cameron).
I know your dislike of Cameron is almost as strong as your dislike of the EU, but the 2010 result was excellent, and I doubt anyone else (e.g. Davis) would have done as well. The Conservatives had a massive credibility deficit to bridge, and Cameron managed to do it. No, he wasn't perfect, but he did bloody well, sometimes despite the Europhobic fanatics within his party.
Cameron threw away a lead that would have got him a large working majority and he did it through his own idiocy. Now it may well be that May does the same thing here but that in no way excuses Cameron. He was in the end a third rate politician unfit for high office.
LOL. No. I mean, 'third rate politician unfit for high office.'
Really? In that case Davis, Boris, Fox and Gove must be fiftieth-rate politicians unsuitable for a Janitor's office.
Exactly...the man made his party electable again and then managed a majority in 2015 based almost entirely on his personal popularity which was miles ahead of that of the Tory party. And then got crapped on by the headbangers at the first available opportunity. Which is why, although I hope the Tories win, many people won't be able to resist a secret smile if the right wing got outcrazied by Corbyn.
an interesting view
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
I fail to see who else caused his downfall
You think he wasn't significantly more popular than the Tory party in 2010 and 2015? Interested to hear who could have done better in either election...Anyway it's all irrelevant now.
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
the LDs have totally miscalled what voters want
the tragedy is they could have been replacing Labour, instead the greens will be replacing them
It does seem that the public are democrats and now just want the government to get on with doing a deal. If they had gone with that and Tiny Tim hadn't got in a mess over the gays, the rest of the manifesto is perfectly fine.
They should be winning sensible centre left types in droves, but everytime Tim is on the media he is either ranting about us starting war with Spain or unable just to say no, not a sin.
I am going to guess it is also hard when you don't have a pool of well known MPs to go around and with the old student tuition fees / Corbgasm, they won't have many students to help.
I always find the sort of logic fail that JJ is demonstrating to be particularly annoying. It is neigh on impossible to get through to them why it is a failure even though it should be blindingly obvious. The 24 seats Cameron won in 2015 are miles more impressive than the 97 he won in 2010. The 38 that Maggie won in 1983 are outstanding.
No logic fail, and if you actually read my post, you'll see I said ('albeit from a lower base'), hence addressing your point (and I also gave the original seat numbers pre Thatcher and Cameron).
I know your dislike of Cameron is almost as strong as your dislike of the EU, but the 2010 result was excellent, and I doubt anyone else (e.g. Davis) would have done as well. The Conservatives had a massive credibility deficit to bridge, and Cameron managed to do it. No, he wasn't perfect, but he did bloody well, sometimes despite the Europhobic fanatics within his party.
Cameron threw away a lead that would have got him a large working majority and he did it through his own idiocy. Now it may well be that May does the same thing here but that in no way excuses Cameron. He was in the end a third rate politician unfit for high office.
LOL. No. I mean, 'third rate politician unfit for high office.'
Really? In that case Davis, Boris, Fox and Gove must be fiftieth-rate politicians unsuitable for a Janitor's office.
Exactly...the man made his party electable again and then managed a majority in 2015 based almost entirely on his personal popularity which was miles ahead of that of the Tory party. And then got crapped on by the headbangers at the first available opportunity. Which is why, although I hope the Tories win, many people won't be able to resist a secret smile if the right wing got outcrazied by Corbyn.
an interesting view
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
I fail to see who else caused his downfall
He had to call the referendum: the europhobes in his own party would have slaughtered him if he had not. The coalition gave him an excuse to delay it from the 2010 parliament; he had no such excuse in the 2015 parliament.
Can you see a route by which Cameron could have not held a referendum in the 2015 parliament without splintering the party?
I've just realised (one of) the reasons I'd make a terrible party leader:
When faced with a map of blue with an island of red, I'd focus on gaining that island of red regardless of the situation on the ground, just to make the map look neater.
Likewise, I'd quite like to have many strips coast-to-coast.
Basically I'd develop a strategy to make a map look good ...
The Tories have dispatched Theresa May fairly consistently to the same sorts of seats since the campaign began: largely Labour-held seats which would require fairly big swings to take.
So either they don't believe the polls as they have changed, or they might but don't want to appear spooked.
It is, in particular, hard to make sense of Mr Corbyn's alternating visits to Tory-held marginals and then very safe Labour seats. I have written about this pattern before - but it is possible that Mr Corbyn keeps going to safe seats where he can hold big events, which look much better on television than Ms May's. And remember: local TV news matters.
Apparently it works - even on here people wow about the enthusiasm of Corbyn's crowds.
I will return to this later to see if this experiment has yielded useful information. Maybe the lesson will be that the parties know nothing
That's my bet. Particularly for the Tories their campaigning worked last time, and this time they are assuming it will again even as the fundamentals shift by so much it does seem more than just noise.
I thought that some commentators couldn't quite grasp why Cameron was spending so much time in The West during the last couple of days of the 2015 election. Then the results came in.
So the author of that blog post recones that a visit by a party leader adds 1.5% to a party's vote share, possible but I would be surprised if it was that big. If the party leader is visiting then the party thinks it is worth spending resorses there and will have put money in to mail shots posters and the like, the blog post does not shay haw these things have been separated out, suggesting that they have not considered them.
Ed Miliband was bullied near the end of the 2015 campaign. The truth is though sympathy is the worst of all political looks. Bullying Works in politics
Miliband was bullied over his appearance, voice and way he ate (!)
Abbott has been criticised for being spectacularly incompetent. Thornberry is a woman and hasn't got stick, Chuka is black and hasn't got stick. I feel sorry for her because she has been humiliated, but she hasn't been bullied
Yes. Politics can be brutal as hell, it can be unfair. Being mocked and criticised for demonstrable failings is not bullying.
That's the thing with Abbott. It's hardly as if she does not have a reasonably sharp mind - she held her own on this week although Andrew Neil was not necessarily in seek and destroy mode.
It is very disappointing that this gets made out to be a bullying thing. We expect our politicians to be well briefed on their area. This is the weakness of Corbyn his team does not reflect the best of labour, but the rump of willing to serve for him.
The one that gets me is Angela Rayner - I've heard her use ickle for little in a news interview. This is the person who wants to be responsible for education standards.
Back in the days when Militant ran Liverpool City Council, they put a school janitor in charge of the Education Dept. He famously said he would make education in the city "more better".
Isn't it a mistake putting Boris in front of the cameras talking bout terrorism? Apart from sounding typically insincere everyone knows the Saudis are the chief sponsors of terrorism and Boris is in their pocket.
"Everyone" doesn't know that and Boris is very popular.
Its clear you live abroad, you have a very poor understanding of the British electorate.
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
As popular as Flat Earthers. Brexit will be reality by the time we get another election and we may even be able to see it as positive or negative by then. What people won't be discussing is whether it should've happened or not.
I always find the sort of logic fail that JJ is demonstrating to be particularly annoying. It is neigh on impossible to get through to them why it is a failure even though it should be blindingly obvious. The 24 seats Cameron won in 2015 are miles more impressive than the 97 he won in 2010. The 38 that Maggie won in 1983 are outstanding.
No logic fail, and if you actually read my post, you'll see I said ('albeit from a lower base'), hence addressing your point (and I also gave the original seat numbers pre Thatcher and Cameron).
I know your dislike of Cameron is almost as strong as your dislike of the EU, but the 2010 result was excellent, and I doubt anyone else (e.g. Davis) would have done as well. The Conservatives had a massive credibility deficit to bridge, and Cameron managed to do it. No, he wasn't perfect, but he did bloody well, sometimes despite the Europhobic fanatics within his party.
Cameron threw away a lead that would have got him a large working majority and he did it through his own idiocy. Now it may well be that May does the same thing here but that in no way excuses Cameron. He was in the end a third rate politician unfit for high office.
LOL. No. I mean, 'third rate politician unfit for high office.'
Really? In that case Davis, Boris, Fox and Gove must be fiftieth-rate politicians unsuitable for a Janitor's office.
Exactly...the man made his party electable again and then managed a majority in 2015 based almost entirely on his personal popularity which was miles ahead of that of the Tory party. And then got crapped on by the headbangers at the first available opportunity. Which is why, although I hope the Tories win, many people won't be able to resist a secret smile if the right wing got outcrazied by Corbyn.
an interesting view
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
I fail to see who else caused his downfall
He had to call the referendum: the europhobes in his own party would have slaughtered him if he had not. The coalition gave him an excuse to delay it from the 2010 parliament; he had no such excuse in the 2015 parliament.
Can you see a route by which Cameron could have not held a referendum in the 2015 parliament without splintering the party?
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
The Tories have dispatched Theresa May fairly consistently to the same sorts of seats since the campaign began: largely Labour-held seats which would require fairly big swings to take.
So either they don't believe the polls as they have changed, or they might but don't want to appear spooked.
It is, in particular, hard to make sense of Mr Corbyn's alternating visits to Tory-held marginals and then very safe Labour seats. I have written about this pattern before - but it is possible that Mr Corbyn keeps going to safe seats where he can hold big events, which look much better on television than Ms May's. And remember: local TV news matters.
Apparently it works - even on here people wow about the enthusiasm of Corbyn's crowds.
I will return to this later to see if this experiment has yielded useful information. Maybe the lesson will be that the parties know nothing
That's my bet. Particularly for the Tories their campaigning worked last time, and this time they are assuming it will again even as the fundamentals shift by so much it does seem more than just noise.
I thought that some commentators couldn't quite grasp why Cameron was spending so much time in The West during the last couple of days of the 2015 election. Then the results came in.
So the author of that blog post recones that a visit by a party leader adds 1.5% to a party's vote share, possible but I would be surprised if it was that big. If the party leader is visiting then the party thinks it is worth spending resorses there and will have put money in to mail shots posters and the like, the blog post does not shay haw these things have been separated out, suggesting that they have not considered them.
Classic causality vs causation....No way a leader turning up on its own adds that much. If it was that easy, you would just have the leader visit every seat.
Oh, Corbyn in an extremely safe seat in Birmingham and May in Slough of all places.
At the start of the campaign the Tories might have contemplated a near clean sweep of the South East (or at least of Labour there, given there is also the Green and Speaker seats), which includes Slough. Now I'd think they'd only pick up one of the four.
No chance in Hove now..the Tory candidate is rather interesting, really can't see Slough demographically and Oxford East is out of reach which leaves Test hopefully!
I've just realised (one of) the reasons I'd make a terrible party leader:
When faced with a map of blue with an island of red, I'd focus on gaining that island of red regardless of the situation on the ground, just to make the map look neater.
Likewise, I'd quite like to have many strips coast-to-coast.
Basically I'd develop a strategy to make a map look good ...
Cameron did his best to clean up all the yellow in the South last time.
If this place is filled with PBTories, then UKPR comments' section is basically a left-wing echo chamber.
Hardly you obviously not be reading it properly .More evenly balanced I grant you than here.
No, I'd disagree.
Neither PB nor UKPR are 'balanced' per se - this place leans right, and there it leans left.
It might at the moment but outside of a GE it has regular right wing commentators .The owner tries to keep them in check with his comments policy on polls but not easy .
What interests the Labour membership most is the redistributive economics that Corbyn talks about, not his views on policing and anti-terrorism.
I'm afraid that you're right. The problem, however, with radical redistribution is that it won't work - and especially not in the British context.
First you go after the rich, who run away and/or hide their money abroad. Then you've no choice but to soak the middle classes, and that's when the problems really begin - because the UK can't support Scandinavian levels of welfare provision based on high personal taxation. Our chronically overpriced housing market means that the cost of living for most people with expensive mortgages or steep rents to pay is too high to make "progressive" taxation bearable. And even if you could attempt to use policy levers to engineer a house price crash, that would simply cripple the banking system and bankrupt a not-insignificant portion of the electorate.
In point of fact, things probably wouldn't turn out that well. The first thing an incoming socialist Government would do would be to tax the crap out of businesses, leading in pretty short order to a spiralling vortex of low investment, high unemployment, high taxation for those still in jobs, and substantially higher inflation, interest rates and Government debt as well.
I still think that May will get a healthy majority, but the chances of the above coming to pass after GE2022 are significant. Personally, I'm going to be trying to put away plenty of money in the next five years, and also considering how to hedge against inflation and protect at least some of it from the taxman.
The Labour membership is well to the left of me on economics, but I am a supporter of redistributive policies. They work, in my view and experience. I would vote for a Labour party led by someone to the left of me economically. I would not - will not - vote for a Labour party with someone who has the security and defence back story that Corbyn has. I think if Labour takes its time to understand just how important defence and security (and patriotism) are to most voters, they can and will find a leader who gives the membership the economic stuff it wants, while being able to reassure the electorate generally about having their protection as his/her number one priority.
Chuka's the man for Labour
Nah.
Who is?
Dunno. Far too early to say. Boris or Rudd to replace May?
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes Are you really interested in other peoples views abou what they think is happening? No Back in 2008 and onwards it was civilized and respectful and showed insight into what people thought other people were thinking. Maybe on the 9th we can return to how it was but I'm afraid telling me farron is crap, Corbyn is a terrorist etc does not add to the advancement of human knowledge. Maybe I'm old fashioned but it's not asking too much to respect other people's point of view.
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
the LDs have totally miscalled what voters want
the tragedy is they could have been replacing Labour, instead the greens will be replacing them
It does seem that the public are democrats and now just want the government to get on with doing a deal. If they had gone with that and Tiny Tim hadn't got in a mess over the gays, the rest of the manifesto is perfectly fine.
They should be winning sensible centre left types in droves, but everytime Tim is on the media he is either ranting about us starting war with Spain or unable just to say no, not a sin.
I am going to guess it is also hard when you don't have a pool of well known MPs to go around and with the old student tuition fees / Corbgasm, they won't have many students to help.
I don't think legalising cannabis is a sensible idea particularly from a party that made a good impact in regards of mental health through Norman Lamb. That policy repelled me, the legalisation of Cannabis and I might have voted Lib Dem due to their position on Brexit.
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
Why? They've been hopeless. Their denial of the referendum result has gone down like a bucket of cold sick and left them looking even less grounded than usual. It really really hasn't worked for them.
yup
the LDs and UKIP have been the losers in this election
Maybe, but the LDs will have laid the ground for the next election.
you mean Farron is for the sack ?
Farron may or may not still be leader, but amid the chaos and disappointment of Brexit, people will remember which party tried to prevent it. This will boost their popularity in the coming years, much as the opposition of the LDs to the Iraq invasion increased their popularity in the years that followed that disaster.
the LDs have totally miscalled what voters want
the tragedy is they could have been replacing Labour, instead the greens will be replacing them
It does seem that the public are democrats and now just want the government to get on with doing a deal. If they had gone with that and Tiny Tim hadn't got in a mess over the gays, the rest of the manifesto is perfectly fine.
They should be winning sensible centre left types in droves, but everytime Tim is on the media he is either ranting about us starting war with Spain or unable just to say no, not a sin.
I am going to guess it is also hard when you don't have a pool of well known MPs to go around and with the old student tuition fees / Corbgasm, they won't have many students to help.
I don't think legalising cannabis is a sensible idea particularly from a party that made a good impact in regards of mental health through Norman Lamb. That policy repelled me; the legalisation of Cannabis and I might have voted Lib Dem due to their position on Brexit.
I've just realised (one of) the reasons I'd make a terrible party leader:
When faced with a map of blue with an island of red, I'd focus on gaining that island of red regardless of the situation on the ground, just to make the map look neater.
Likewise, I'd quite like to have many strips coast-to-coast.
Basically I'd develop a strategy to make a map look good ...
Cameron did his best to clean up all the yellow in the South last time.
I strongly dislike Chuka Umunna. Reminds me of Blair in all the bad ways, smarmy and slimy. I can't see the membership going for him after his behaviour during the 2015 leadership campaign either.
This campaign has been too dominated by McDonnell (who has all the same baggage as Corbyn plus a bit more) and Abbott (whose deficiencies have been on display for all to see this past fortnight) to make judgement of the real candidates possible.
Previously I've found it hard to see past Clive Lewis, but he hasn't been prominent at all - presumably by design, and likely partly because he's had to focus on his local campaign.
The one (!) other Shadow Cabinet member I've seen anything notable from is Barry Gardiner, who had a couple of impressive (though relatively minor) media appearances. His support for the Iraq War might well work against him, but if he can convince the members that he has learned from the party's mistakes in the early 2000s he just may be a dark horse contender.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes Are you really interested in other peoples views abou what they think is happening? No Back in 2008 and onwards it was civilized and respectful and showed insight into what people thought other people were thinking. Maybe on the 9th we can return to how it was but I'm afraid telling me farron is crap, Corbyn is a terrorist etc does not add to the advancement of human knowledge. Maybe I'm old fashioned but it's not asking too much to respect other people's point of view.
I'm not tired of it but I'm constantly amazed at the time people spend on here and the narrow circles people appear to move in. Some have absolutely no comprehension of why others vote the way they do.
A regular poster proclaimed a few days ago that:
"The people are crying out for a socialist brexit."
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
The 10,000 stuff probably just spin. It does seem she keeps going to labour marginals.
Remember last time, when the Tories got the wobbles they sent Cameron to sure up all sorts of places.
Messina / Textor might have this totally wrong, but I don't think it is they haven't got a clue what they are doing. I am absolutely sure there is a plan based upon the polling numbers they have.
As I said previous few days, the lack of panic says to me they think they are fine and YouGov are wrong*. Now the brain trust have made the big mistake of their whole careers, we will know in a few days.
It's worth considering what information they have that we don't. Their pollsters are no better than the public pollsters (indeed normally they use public pollsters), though they can use them to probe the effectiveness of specific messages (which at this point is more or less irrelevant - no time to launch a new message). They will have reports from the postal votes (yes, illegal and difficult, but now part of the normal landscape). That will give a fair idea...of the postal votes (20% of the total, mostly from 2 weeks ago). And they'll have impressions from canvassers, which I would not think would be very reliable guides.
So they're a bit better off than we are in terms of information, but not magicians. My guess is that the PVs are telling them not to worry too much about losing many seats (which all the polls suggest is more or less correct), and also that sallies into places like Bolsover are just for publicity and to rattle opponents. That leaves the moderately achievable Labour marginals, which is where they're sending the troops.
So it's not that mysterious really. They are taking a risk that the polls are overcompensating for lower Labour turnout and their marginals are more vulnerable than they think.They are fighting hard in the super-marginals like Croydon Central but relatively neglecting the ones needing a Labour swing of 3-4%. I think they'll feel that's an acceptable risk. In any case the die is now pretty much cast.
On the Labour side, the organisation is still playing defence for the most part, but because the membership is much larger and Momentum has successfully mobilised a lot of their people, there are also enthusiastic local efforts going on in the Tory marginals. If Labour gets lucky with turnout, those could catch the Tories out in a string of fairly close seats. If we don't, well, it keeps the seats in play for next time. Meanwhile, Corbyn is best deployed speaking to big enthusiastic rallies with a fair chance of TV coverage - it's a waste to have him turning up to meet small random groups. I think he came to Broxtowe because the seat is basically Guardian vs Telegraph (indeed Sainsbury stocks more Morning Stars than Daily Expresses) so there are a lot of big fans and we were able to get a huge crowd.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes Are you really interested in other peoples views abou what they think is happening? No Back in 2008 and onwards it was civilized and respectful and showed insight into what people thought other people were thinking. Maybe on the 9th we can return to how it was but I'm afraid telling me farron is crap, Corbyn is a terrorist etc does not add to the advancement of human knowledge. Maybe I'm old fashioned but it's not asking too much to respect other people's point of view.
There can be another problem which is astroturfers desperately spinning the party line for an hour or so, presumably in an attempt to influence any lurking journalists.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No
I heartily endorse your comments on respecting others point of view, but I think you may have a misconception about why most people engage in political debate online - it certainly has little to do with believing they can shift opinion or, in all honesty, engaging in actual political debate.
It's relaxing (outside GE time), to get into the cut and thrust of things, but few opinions are changed, and few are even trying to make that happen.
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
When had he 'ignored them' ? The coalition made an EU referendum in the 2010 parliament impossible. He held one a little over a year after getting a working majority. Even then, europhobes on here were complaining that that was too long.
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
I strongly dislike Chuka Umunna. Reminds me of Blair in all the bad ways, smarmy and slimy. I can't see the membership going for him after his behaviour during the 2015 leadership campaign either.
This campaign has been too dominated by McDonnell (who has all the same baggage as Corbyn plus a bit more) and Abbott (whose deficiencies have been on display for all to see this past fortnight) to make judgement of the real candidates possible.
Previously I've found it hard to see past Clive Lewis, but he hasn't been prominent at all - presumably by design, and likely partly because he's had to focus on his local campaign.
The one (!) other Shadow Cabinet member I've seen anything notable from is Barry Gardiner, who had a couple of impressive (though relatively minor) media appearances. His support for the Iraq War might well work against him, but if he can convince the members that he has learned from the party's mistakes in the early 2000s he just may be a dark horse contender.
Interesting thing about Chuka is that he supported Ed's bid for the leadership back in 2010. He's always characterised as a Blairite, but I'd have thought if he was that to the right of the party he would have supported David instead.
I also like Clive Lewis too. Would give the left of the party what they want in terms of socio-economic policies but none of the baggage of McDonnell and Corbyn. I'm not to the left as Lewis, but I'd happily vote for a Labour party under him.
And no to Barry Gardiner. He's a great addition to the Shadow Cabinet though.
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
PMQs might not be the same
*If* Corbyn avoids a trouncing, expect his MPs to show much more support than they have done.
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
When had he 'ignored them' ? The coalition made an EU referendum in the 2010 parliament impossible. He held one a little over a year after getting a working majority. Even then, europhobes on here were complaining that that was too long.
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
people always agitate within parties, Cameron had been ignoring his right wing since 2008 and there wasnt much they could do about it.
he called the referendum simply because he thought he win it. The timing, agenda and rules were all to his choosing
Horrible PPB for the Tories. Sounds like it could have been written by Nigel farage. A call to arms for the Remainers to vote against her. She mentioned how wonderful Brexit was about 10 times.
If she didn't vote Leave she's an accomplished hypocrite
The really good news is all the shouting and campaigning will be over in 24 hours or so and then we can look forward to a non political thursday and then the 10.00pm exit poll
I strongly dislike Chuka Umunna. Reminds me of Blair in all the bad ways, smarmy and slimy. I can't see the membership going for him after his behaviour during the 2015 leadership campaign either.
This campaign has been too dominated by McDonnell (who has all the same baggage as Corbyn plus a bit more) and Abbott (whose deficiencies have been on display for all to see this past fortnight) to make judgement of the real candidates possible.
Previously I've found it hard to see past Clive Lewis, but he hasn't been prominent at all - presumably by design, and likely partly because he's had to focus on his local campaign.
The one (!) other Shadow Cabinet member I've seen anything notable from is Barry Gardiner, who had a couple of impressive (though relatively minor) media appearances. His support for the Iraq War might well work against him, but if he can convince the members that he has learned from the party's mistakes in the early 2000s he just may be a dark horse contender.
Go down the pub or wherever and listen quietly to what people say, don't challenge the and see who agrees, don't put them in a position they have to choose. You'll learn more by listening or if you really insist on defending a particular line who else supports you. Silence, as I've learnt over the years mean they disagree with you but for what ever reason they won't argue. You learn more by listening than preaching?wrong post but whatever it's still relevant
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
When had he 'ignored them' ? The coalition made an EU referendum in the 2010 parliament impossible. He held one a little over a year after getting a working majority. Even then, europhobes on here were complaining that that was too long.
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
He couldn't ignore them anyway before 2015. He'd already lost Reckless and Carswell
U have to think these rallies are a sign of enthusiasm. Like Trump's. There will be an increase of labour share on thursday and noth just amongst the young.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes Are you really interested in other peoples views abou what they think is happening? No Back in 2008 and onwards it was civilized and respectful and showed insight into what people thought other people were thinking. Maybe on the 9th we can return to how it was but I'm afraid telling me farron is crap, Corbyn is a terrorist etc does not add to the advancement of human knowledge. Maybe I'm old fashioned but it's not asking too much to respect other people's point of view.
It wasn't much more civilised back then. Lots of name calling at Brown (McDoom etc) and the Tim/Plato handbags
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
When had he 'ignored them' ? The coalition made an EU referendum in the 2010 parliament impossible. He held one a little over a year after getting a working majority. Even then, europhobes on here were complaining that that was too long.
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
people always agitate within parties, Cameron had been ignoring his right wing since 2008 and there wasnt much they could do about it.
he called the referendum simply because he thought he win it. The timing, agenda and rules were all to his choosing
Rubbish. If he hadn't called the EU referendum he'd have been deposed by the Europhobes within his own party. There were many mechanisms by which they could have done it: moving to UKIP and putting pressure on that way being one.
U have to think these rallies are a sign of enthusiasm. Like Trump's. There will be an increase of labour share on thursday and noth just amongst the young.
These are nothing like the same scale or size or marginality of Trump's rallies.
The 10,000 stuff probably just spin. It does seem she keeps going to labour marginals.
Remember last time, when the Tories got the wobbles they sent Cameron to sure up all sorts of places.
Messina / Textor might have this totally wrong, but I don't think it is they haven't got a clue what they are doing. I am absolutely sure there is a plan based upon the polling numbers they have.
As I said previous few days, the lack of panic says to me they think they are fine and YouGov are wrong*. Now the brain trust have made the big mistake of their whole careers, we will know in a few days.
It's worth considering what information they have that we don't. Their pollsters are no better than the public pollsters (indeed normally they use public pollsters), though they can use them to probe the effectiveness of specific messages (which at this point is more or less irrelevant - no time to launch a new message). They will have reports from the postal votes (yes, illegal and difficult, but now part of the normal landscape). That will give a fair idea...of the postal votes (20% of the total, mostly from 2 weeks ago). And they'll have impressions from canvassers, which I would not think would be very reliable guides.
So they're a bit better off than we are in terms of information, but not magicians. My guess is that the PVs are telling them not to worry too much about losing many seats (which all the polls suggest is more or less correct), and also that sallies into places like Bolsover are just for publicity and to rattle opponents. That leaves the moderately achievable Labour marginals, which is where they're sending the troops. ..
Nick do you know if they get clickthrough / video feed information for heir digital efforts? I'm not sure labour are following the same methods.
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
Even if she wins big. Let's suppose there is a Tory landslide: who will credit Theresa May? What will she have a mandate for? Brexit means Brexit is a slogan, not a policy. Is anyone -- MP or voter -- any the wiser as to her vision, her programme, what Mayism is?
No. Even if there is a landslide, Theresa May is toast and Crosby and Messina will be given as much loot and as many baubles as they wish for.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No
I heartily endorse your comments on respecting others point of view, but I think you may have a misconception about why most people engage in political debate online - it certainly has little to do with believing they can shift opinion or, in all honesty, engaging in actual political debate.
It's relaxing (outside GE time), to get into the cut and thrust of things, but few opinions are changed, and few are even trying to make that happen.
Some are trying to change opinion, not me of course. Yes you are wasting your time on here trying to change opinions. It has been an unpleasant forum recently but normal service will be resumed.
I always find the sort of logic fail that JJ is demonstrating to be particularly annoying. It is neigh on impossible to get through to them why it is a failure even though it should be blindingly obvious. The 24 seats Cameron won in 2015 are miles more impressive than the 97 he won in 2010. The 38 that Maggie won in 1983 are outstanding.
No logic fail, and if you actually read my post, you'll see I said ('albeit from a lower base'), hence addressing your point (and I also gave the original seat numbers pre Thatcher and Cameron).
I know your dislike of Cameron is almost as strong as your dislike of the EU, but the 2010 result was excellent, and I doubt anyone else (e.g. Davis) would have done as well. The Conservatives had a massive credibility deficit to bridge, and Cameron managed to do it. No, he wasn't perfect, but he did bloody well, sometimes despite the Europhobic fanatics within his party.
Cameron threw away a lead that would have got him a large working majority and he did it through his own idiocy. Now it may well be that May does the same thing here but that in no way excuses Cameron. He was in the end a third rate politician unfit for high office.
LOL. No. I mean, 'third rate politician unfit for high office.'
Really? In that case Davis, Boris, Fox and Gove must be fiftieth-rate politicians unsuitable for a Janitor's office.
Exactly...the man made his party electable again and then managed a majority in 2015 based almost entirely on his personal popularity which was miles ahead of that of the Tory party. And then got crapped on by the headbangers at the first available opportunity. Which is why, although I hope the Tories win, many people won't be able to resist a secret smile if the right wing got outcrazied by Corbyn.
an interesting view
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
I fail to see who else caused his downfall
It was politically unsustainable for all three major parties to resist calls for significant reform of our EU membership, if they all wished to continue to remain as major parties.
Hello! After a hiatus of nearly 11 months, I think it's finally time to make a comeback.
What a shower of an election campaign! The pitiful lack of political talent on display in all parties this election has been plain for all to see. Still it makes life interesting for political cognoscenti like ourselves on here.
And I think we have an equal lack of talent amongst some opinion pollsters! YouGov's absolute nonsense of a seat like Canterbury being in play and the 18-24's turning out in numbers equivalent to the over 65's, plus all other constituency implausibilities has been unbelievably amateurish. Survation's sample in its last poll showing that 40% of the sample watched the QT debate last Friday, when we know it was about 10% of the electorate shows the dangers of a self selecting sample. And just how representative are you if you have the time (and inclination) to fill in all of YouGov's questions.
I strongly dislike Chuka Umunna. Reminds me of Blair in all the bad ways, smarmy and slimy. I can't see the membership going for him after his behaviour during the 2015 leadership campaign either.
This campaign has been too dominated by McDonnell (who has all the same baggage as Corbyn plus a bit more) and Abbott (whose deficiencies have been on display for all to see this past fortnight) to make judgement of the real candidates possible.
Previously I've found it hard to see past Clive Lewis, but he hasn't been prominent at all - presumably by design, and likely partly because he's had to focus on his local campaign.
The one (!) other Shadow Cabinet member I've seen anything notable from is Barry Gardiner, who had a couple of impressive (though relatively minor) media appearances. His support for the Iraq War might well work against him, but if he can convince the members that he has learned from the party's mistakes in the early 2000s he just may be a dark horse contender.
Interesting thing about Chuka is that he supported Ed's bid for the leadership back in 2010. He's always characterised as a Blairite, but I'd have thought if he was that to the right of the party he would have supported David instead.
I also like Clive Lewis too. Would give the left of the party what they want in terms of socio-economic policies but none of the baggage of McDonnell and Corbyn. I'm not to the left as Lewis, but I'd happily vote for a Labour party under him.
And no to Barry Gardiner. He's a great addition to the Shadow Cabinet though.
I was all on the Clive Lewis train until he made an idiot of himself with the Article 50 nonsense.
As I said previous few days, the lack of panic says to me they think they are fine and YouGov are wrong*. Now the brain trust have made the big mistake of their whole careers, we will know in a few days.
It's worth considering what information they have that we don't. Their pollsters are no better than the public pollsters (indeed normally they use public pollsters), though they can use them to probe the effectiveness of specific messages (which at this point is more or less irrelevant - no time to launch a new message). They will have reports from the postal votes (yes, illegal and difficult, but now part of the normal landscape). That will give a fair idea...of the postal votes (20% of the total, mostly from 2 weeks ago). And they'll have impressions from canvassers, which I would not think would be very reliable guides.
So they're a bit better off than we are in terms of information, but not magicians. My guess is that the PVs are telling them not to worry too much about losing many seats (which all the polls suggest is more or less correct), and also that sallies into places like Bolsover are just for publicity and to rattle opponents. That leaves the moderately achievable Labour marginals, which is where they're sending the troops.
So it's not that mysterious really. They are taking a risk that the polls are overcompensating for lower Labour turnout and their marginals are more vulnerable than they think.They are fighting hard in the super-marginals like Croydon Central but relatively neglecting the ones needing a Labour swing of 3-4%. I think they'll feel that's an acceptable risk. In any case the die is now pretty much cast.
On the Labour side, the organisation is still playing defence for the most part, but because the membership is much larger and Momentum has successfully mobilised a lot of their people, there are also enthusiastic local efforts going on in the Tory marginals. If Labour gets lucky with turnout, those could catch the Tories out in a string of fairly close seats. If we don't, well, it keeps the seats in play for next time. Meanwhile, Corbyn is best deployed speaking to big enthusiastic rallies with a fair chance of TV coverage - it's a waste to have him turning up to meet small random groups. I think he came to Broxtowe because the seat is basically Guardian vs Telegraph (indeed Sainsbury stocks more Morning Stars than Daily Expresses) so there are a lot of big fans and we were able to get a huge crowd.
You mention the increased number of Labour party (momentum) activists, which may be accurate, but do you know haw big, at the last election a lot was made of the 4 million conversations with voters that turned in to 5 million. I haven't heard or seen any equivalent this time.
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No
I heartily endorse your comments on respecting others point of view, but I think you may have a misconception about why most people engage in political debate online - it certainly has little to do with believing they can shift opinion or, in all honesty, engaging in actual political debate.
It's relaxing (outside GE time), to get into the cut and thrust of things, but few opinions are changed, and few are even trying to make that happen.
Some are trying to change opinion, not me of course. Yes you are wasting your time on here trying to change opinions. It has been an unpleasant forum recently but normal service will be resumed.
An outbreak of harmony yesterday discussing musical tastes. Storing up antipathy for the final days.
The really good news is all the shouting and campaigning will be over in 24 hours or so and then we can look forward to a non political thursday and then the 10.00pm exit poll
No we bloody can't. Thursday is a day for punting, during the day and all through the night.
And I think we have an equal lack of talent amongst some opinion pollsters! YouGov's absolute nonsense of ... the 18-24's turning out in numbers equivalent to the over 65's
I'm afraid I'm getting tired of this site does anyone believe they can shift opinion by posting their party view on here? No If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes...
That is a very insensitive question. Please remember that many Remainers read this site.
This campaign may have longstanding consequences. Corbyn has performed much better than expected; unless he goes down to an absolute trouncing then he'll survive; if he gets a higher percentage vote than Brown or Miliband then he's safe.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
Even if she wins big. Let's suppose there is a Tory landslide: who will credit Theresa May? What will she have a mandate for? Brexit means Brexit is a slogan, not a policy. Is anyone -- MP or voter -- any the wiser as to her vision, her programme, what Mayism is?
No. Even if there is a landslide, Theresa May is toast and Crosby and Messina will be given as much loot and as many baubles as they wish for.
The Tories are ruthless with their leaders but they do give them time even if they snatch mediocraty from the jaws of a landslide. It'll be the brexit deal that decides whether TM gets another election.
as for JC he'll probably stay until he wants to leave if he gets more votes than GB or EM.
he could just have ignored them like he had for many years previous
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
When had he 'ignored them' ? The coalition made an EU referendum in the 2010 parliament impossible. He held one a little over a year after getting a working majority. Even then, europhobes on here were complaining that that was too long.
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
people always agitate within parties, Cameron had been ignoring his right wing since 2008 and there wasnt much they could do about it.
he called the referendum simply because he thought he win it. The timing, agenda and rules were all to his choosing
Rubbish. If he hadn't called the EU referendum he'd have been deposed by the Europhobes within his own party. There were many mechanisms by which they could have done it: moving to UKIP and putting pressure on that way being one.
As the referendum showed the eurosceptics were in the minority. You constantly overestimate their pull and the desire of the conservatives to stick in government. Most of the defections had taken place over a long period of time. Even when carswell left there was no great movement to UKIP.
The issue Cameron had is that he spent to much time on "detox" and drove away lots of his core supporters. That's why he failed to break 40% in any election, something Mrs May looks likelyto do.
I've had eight full responses from the 15. Sadly one is poorly and another on holiday !! ... so five to come.
Hoping to publish late tomorrow.
Putting your hand on your ARSE and giving it a really good rub do you still think the landslide is on?
Cheeky ....
The Conservative Bedwetting Index from this morning was Con Maj 104.
It may or may not be amended after publication tomorrow evening ....
Your esteemed ARSE was unfairly scapegoated and prematurely retired for the hot and mad schoolgirlish pash of yourself for Mrs. Clinton. This egregious bum ban must cease.
Comments
Also, it seems she is popular among parts of the electorate that don't like Tories much. Bugger me why that is.
Feels a bit of an inefficient method of conversion, but the PB Tories are patient.
Will it be as reliable as the Ave_it final forecast?!!! Coming Thursday before 10pm!!!
Remember last time, when the Tories got the wobbles they sent Cameron to sure up all sorts of places.
Messina / Textor might have this totally wrong, but I don't think it is they haven't got a clue what they are doing. I am absolutely sure there is a plan based upon the polling numbers they have.
As I said previous few days, the lack of panic says to me they think they are fine and YouGov are wrong*. Now the brain trust have made the big mistake of their whole careers, we will know in a few days.
* I am sure there has been a surge, but their data could be saying it isn't anywhere near as big and / or in the wrong places.
If she runs away before the job is done her entire self image is destroyed.
No I better not ....
I rather thought Cameron crapped in his own nest
he called a referendum he didnt need to call, lost it and then legged it
I fail to see who else caused his downfall
It could happen. The big question is what does Corbyn want. He might have had enough and after this campaign he can claim some achievements.
Clegg did this to a lesser extent when there was the Cleggasm, daily events packed with fresh faced students all excitedly saying "I agree with Nick".
When faced with a map of blue with an island of red, I'd focus on gaining that island of red regardless of the situation on the ground, just to make the map look neater.
Likewise, I'd quite like to have many strips coast-to-coast.
Basically I'd develop a strategy to make a map look good ...
the tragedy is they could have been replacing Labour, instead the greens will be replacing them
I think Norfolk North could be entertaining at 5am (estimated) but with a Tory landslide or a Labour surge who could we be remembering fondly for the next 20 years?
They should be winning sensible centre left types in droves, but everytime Tim is on the media he is either ranting about us starting war with Spain or unable just to say no, not a sin.
I am going to guess it is also hard when you don't have a pool of well known MPs to go around and with the old student tuition fees / Corbgasm, they won't have many students to help.
Can you see a route by which Cameron could have not held a referendum in the 2015 parliament without splintering the party?
Its clear you live abroad, you have a very poor understanding of the British electorate.
the Tories had lost most of the so called headbangers over the years
https://twitter.com/wallaceme/status/872140609137631233
https://twitter.com/dizzy_thinks/status/872146992004300801
If you really were that committed should you not be out on the street or on a phone bank? Yes
Are you really interested in other peoples views abou what they think is happening? No
Back in 2008 and onwards it was civilized and respectful and showed insight into what people thought other people were thinking. Maybe on the 9th we can return to how it was but I'm afraid telling me farron is crap, Corbyn is a terrorist etc does not add to the advancement of human knowledge. Maybe I'm old fashioned but it's not asking too much to respect other people's point of view.
Conversely, the perception (real, IMO) that May's performed badly in this campaign will have long-term repercussions. Unless she get a mahoosive majority, her MPs will be looking at her and wondering if she will be the person to lead them into another campaign in five years.
So Corbyn's probably safe (unless he loses massively), whilst May's probably damaged (unless she wins big).
That seems a terrific value loser to me.
This campaign has been too dominated by McDonnell (who has all the same baggage as Corbyn plus a bit more) and Abbott (whose deficiencies have been on display for all to see this past fortnight) to make judgement of the real candidates possible.
Previously I've found it hard to see past Clive Lewis, but he hasn't been prominent at all - presumably by design, and likely partly because he's had to focus on his local campaign.
The one (!) other Shadow Cabinet member I've seen anything notable from is Barry Gardiner, who had a couple of impressive (though relatively minor) media appearances. His support for the Iraq War might well work against him, but if he can convince the members that he has learned from the party's mistakes in the early 2000s he just may be a dark horse contender.
A regular poster proclaimed a few days ago that:
"The people are crying out for a socialist brexit."
WTF?
Uniform Swing projection
Hung Parliament. Conservatives short by 1
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/ukpr-projection-2
So they're a bit better off than we are in terms of information, but not magicians. My guess is that the PVs are telling them not to worry too much about losing many seats (which all the polls suggest is more or less correct), and also that sallies into places like Bolsover are just for publicity and to rattle opponents. That leaves the moderately achievable Labour marginals, which is where they're sending the troops.
So it's not that mysterious really. They are taking a risk that the polls are overcompensating for lower Labour turnout and their marginals are more vulnerable than they think.They are fighting hard in the super-marginals like Croydon Central but relatively neglecting the ones needing a Labour swing of 3-4%. I think they'll feel that's an acceptable risk. In any case the die is now pretty much cast.
On the Labour side, the organisation is still playing defence for the most part, but because the membership is much larger and Momentum has successfully mobilised a lot of their people, there are also enthusiastic local efforts going on in the Tory marginals. If Labour gets lucky with turnout, those could catch the Tories out in a string of fairly close seats. If we don't, well, it keeps the seats in play for next time. Meanwhile, Corbyn is best deployed speaking to big enthusiastic rallies with a fair chance of TV coverage - it's a waste to have him turning up to meet small random groups. I think he came to Broxtowe because the seat is basically Guardian vs Telegraph (indeed Sainsbury stocks more Morning Stars than Daily Expresses) so there are a lot of big fans and we were able to get a huge crowd.
It's relaxing (outside GE time), to get into the cut and thrust of things, but few opinions are changed, and few are even trying to make that happen.
The Conservative Bedwetting Index from this morning was Con Maj 104.
It may or may not be amended after publication tomorrow evening ....
And the headbangers like IDS, Fox, Jackson and others were still firmly agitating within the party.
I also like Clive Lewis too. Would give the left of the party what they want in terms of socio-economic policies but none of the baggage of McDonnell and Corbyn. I'm not to the left as Lewis, but I'd happily vote for a Labour party under him.
And no to Barry Gardiner. He's a great addition to the Shadow Cabinet though.
The Ave_it projection will also be updated after meetings with my contacts tomorrow.
That is beers somewhere in London with my Labour best friend and a possibly centrist person
he called the referendum simply because he thought he win it. The timing, agenda and rules were all to his choosing
If she didn't vote Leave she's an accomplished hypocrite
No. Even if there is a landslide, Theresa May is toast and Crosby and Messina will be given as much loot and as many baubles as they wish for.
Yes you are wasting your time on here trying to change opinions. It has been an unpleasant forum recently but normal service will be resumed.
What a shower of an election campaign! The pitiful lack of political talent on display in all parties this election has been plain for all to see. Still it makes life interesting for political cognoscenti like ourselves on here.
And I think we have an equal lack of talent amongst some opinion pollsters! YouGov's absolute nonsense of a seat like Canterbury being in play and the 18-24's turning out in numbers equivalent to the over 65's, plus all other constituency implausibilities has been unbelievably amateurish. Survation's sample in its last poll showing that 40% of the sample watched the QT debate last Friday, when we know it was about 10% of the electorate shows the dangers of a self selecting sample. And just how representative are you if you have the time (and inclination) to fill in all of YouGov's questions.
as for JC he'll probably stay until he wants to leave if he gets more votes than GB or EM.
The issue Cameron had is that he spent to much time on "detox" and drove away lots of his core supporters. That's why he failed to break 40% in any election, something Mrs May looks likelyto do.