Hmmm isn't that where YouGov are predicting an Independent GAIN?......
That cannot be anything more than a guess on their part.
I don't undrstand how they are predicting that? Their polls must be *very* skewed to be predicting that, i.e. only the very politically engaged are doing thier polls.
They may have a handful of people from east devon (50k/650 = 80 people/constituency), but the error bars would be enormous (and so is their prediction, to be fair).
Welcome to Drutt with his interesting post and kind personal note - please tell your parents that Greg Marshall is nicer than me!
HYUFD's post is interesting for its identification of CCHQ phone canvass targets. All the seats he mentions look to be in the 2-4% Tory swing needed range (I would guess he was calling Walsall N, not the safer Walsall S), which looks a lot more sensible than the wild stuff about Bolsover etc. That's about where I'd expect them to be hunting if their polling has them 7% ahead with a modest regional Midlands/North edge.
I wouldn't put great weight on his personal calls, with all due respect, as we don't know anything about the sample - at least, if it's like Labour phone canvasses, they select for demography and past voting rather than look for a balanced sample.
I see Broxtowe is now "Lean Labour" with YouGov's model. It's difficult to read the bar chart accurately but the central forecast looks something like Lab 47%, Con 45%, LD 3%, UKIP 3%, Greens 2%.
I see Broxtowe is now "Lean Labour" with YouGov's model. It's difficult to read the bar chart accurately but the central forecast looks something like Lab 47%, Con 45%, LD 3%, UKIP 3%, Greens 2%.
What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!
Tories 40% +20%
SNP 38% -11%
Labour 21% -6%
Others down 3%.
I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.
Nigel Marriott has it down as a close SNP hold:
SNP: 36 Con: 34 Lab: 16 Lib: 4
I would dearly love the MP for Gordon to add another pension to the multiple ones he already collects - but Marriott also has this as a comfortable SNP hold:
What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!
Tories 40% +20%
SNP 38% -11%
Labour 21% -6%
Others down 3%.
I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.
Nigel Marriott has it down as a close SNP hold:
SNP: 36 Con: 34 Lab: 16 Lib: 4
I would dearly love the MP for Gordon to add another pension to the multiple ones he already collects - but Marriott also has this as a comfortable SNP hold:
SNP: 35 Con: 29 Lab: 13 Lib: 23
SCON and SLAB should have given SLD an easy ride in Gordon.
What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!
Tories 40% +20%
SNP 38% -11%
Labour 21% -6%
Others down 3%.
I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.
Nigel Marriott has it down as a close SNP hold:
SNP: 36 Con: 34 Lab: 16 Lib: 4
I would dearly love the MP for Gordon to add another pension to the multiple ones he already collects - but Marriott also has this as a comfortable SNP hold:
SNP: 35 Con: 29 Lab: 13 Lib: 23
SCON and SLAB should have given SLD an easy ride in Gordon.
It's hardly their fault that if anyone has run a more ineffective campaign than the Tories its the Lib Dems.....
Nicola Sturgeon has been accused of lying after she said that the Scottish Labour leader, Kezia Dugdale, privately told her Labour needed to embrace a second independence vote after Brexit.
Sturgeon told STV’s Scotland Debates programme that the two leaders spoke one-to-one after Scotland voted to remain in the EU but was outvoted by England and Wales. She said Dugdale had told her “she thought Brexit changed everything and she didn’t think Labour could go on opposing a second referendum”.
Dugdale shook her head vigorously as Sturgeon repeated that claim after she was challenged to do so by Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader. The first minister chastised Dugdale, saying she was entitled to change her mind but not to attack others who sincerely believed in independence.
What is everyone's biggest shock result that could possibly come off (but probably won't)? For me:
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!
Tories 40% +20%
SNP 38% -11%
Labour 21% -6%
Others down 3%.
I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.
I spent a lot of time looking at this seat. Despite living 18,000 kms ago now It's my home town. I just can't see it as value at the current 4.5 on offer.
The boundaries are drawn in a way that cuts communities in half. Putting everything north of heathfield road into central ayrshire cuts out large numbers of potential tory voters.
The Scot Parl Ayr seat is a natural tory seat, but the addition of Cumnock makes this impossible
Current Conservative Bedwetting Index stands at Con Maj 104.
I'll not update it until I publish the "JackW Contacts Report" later today. I'm waiting on 3 replies of the 15 sent out. 2 other no shows because of illness and holiday.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
I still have LDs on 9,Ceredgion,East Dumbartonshire,Edinburgh West,Kingston and Surbiton,Orkney and Shetland,Sheffield Hallam,Twickenham,Westmoreland and Londsdale and ,just,Leeds NE.
I still have LDs on 9,Ceredgion,East Dumbartonshire,Edinburgh West,Kingston and Surbiton,Orkney and Shetland,Sheffield Hallam,Twickenham,Westmoreland and Londsdale and ,just,Leeds NE.
As I've got one particularly nice <9.5 slip I'm really hoping you've nailed that!
I still have LDs on 9,Ceredgion,East Dumbartonshire,Edinburgh West,Kingston and Surbiton,Orkney and Shetland,Sheffield Hallam,Twickenham,Westmoreland and Londsdale and ,just,Leeds NE.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?
Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......
He's not alone in that.
Back to the 70’s, I don’t remember Thatcher arousing such strong feelings of dislike then, although as Education Minister she was known as the Milk Snatcher.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......
He's not alone in that.
Back to the 70’s, I don’t remember Thatcher arousing such strong feelings of dislike then, although as Education Minister she was known as the Milk Snatcher.
She was the reason I resigned my FCS membership and joined the liberals.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?
I still have LDs on 9,Ceredgion,East Dumbartonshire,Edinburgh West,Kingston and Surbiton,Orkney and Shetland,Sheffield Hallam,Twickenham,Westmoreland and Londsdale and ,just,Leeds NE.
Plaid Cymru reckons they’re close in Ceredigion.
Reading the twitter tea leaves I think Nicolson will hold on in E Dunbartonshire. The Tories having very strong locals there have mixed up the tactical message for the LDs. He also appears to be a diligent MP.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is prepared to make that plain.
Amazed the 1/4 on Con Maj is still available. Just put £119.17 on it, which is about the most a small-timer like me would bet.
It briefly touched 1.31 on Betfair yesterday, which is a great price for what looks like free money.
1.1 for Con most seats is IMO bet-your-mortgage value, not that it should be encouraged to put irresponsibly large sums of money at stake of course.
Well, I've bet one month's mortgage payment on it. Does that count?
I've got £1k at 1.25 on the majority, and although I did get a little nervous when that 1% lead came up the other day I still think it's safe.
I think the result will be something like 44-35 and Lab will pile up votes in London and Surrey where they're no use, while Theresa May piles them up in the WM and NE marginals.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.
Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.
Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...
I suspect now Gove has burnt his fingers (right up to the elbow) over the leadership he could get back to long-term strategy. He wasn’t a wild success at Education, of course!
I've heard a theory that the average of the polls three months before a campaign starts is the best indicator of the final outcome. Ukip will obviously get less but what was this average?
There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Or she.
I agree, and you can extend the lesson.
If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.
Right idea that Mays needs an advisor with imagination but Gove is the wrong person as he is exposed as someone who cannot see where the bullets are. He was an extreme neo-con who fanatically supported the Iraq war and the way he chose to stand in the leadership contest was that of an ostrich who could not see that everybody else would see him as stabbing Boris in the back
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.
Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...
It also depends on having a PM who is able to hear views he/she does not like. Thatcher had that intellectual self-confidence, May does not seem to. Look at the cabinet she put together.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
TBH, no. But May’s no Thatcher either, and as others have pointed out there’s neither a Willie or a Keith Joseph,, much as I disliked his policies. With all his faults, too, Thorpe was much more charismatic than Farron, as was Steel.
If May wins, who do you think would be best placed to be her Willie & Keith?
Good question, as in the thread header. I strongly suspect, sadly, that there isn’t anyone thinking things through, nor is there anyone senior who isn’t interested in the leadership themselves anymore, and is properaed to make that plain.
Yes - you need someone who could have been PM, but lacked the killer instinct, but is widely respected in the party who can sit the PM down and say "cut it out" (Willie) and someone whose very bright, but also bright enough to know their own limitations (Keith) - could Gove fill that role? She still needs a Willie...
It also depends on having a PM who is able to hear views he/she does not like. Thatcher had that intellectual self-confidence, May does not seem to. Look at the cabinet she put together.
Mr. Observer, not a Guardian reader. Are they taking a similar line on Corbyn?
Miss Vance, if Clegg and Miliband lost their seats, they and Cameron should become the new Top Gear hosts. Assuming Top Gear still exists.
On-topic: I agree. Timothy's contribution has been to seriously harm a seemingly unassailable lead and turn potentially the largest victory since WWII into an unknown result, anywhere from losing to a landslide (albeit one half the size it might have been).
F1: Canada soon. May give the markets a look. Also, some very good news. Kubica's been testing an F1 car (2012 model), the first time he's been in one since his rallying accident. If he could return, it'd be great. He's an extremely good driver. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/40179662
"The team are considering whether to replace the Englishman later in the season, with former F1 driver Sebastien Buemi and Sirotkin among the possible candidates."
Buemi's a former Toro Rosso driver (when they operated their brief 'Sebastiens only' driver policy), and Sirotkin was pencilled in for a seat with someone (maybe Sauber?) a couple of years ago but was thought too young.
There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Or she.
I agree, and you can extend the lesson.
If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.
What about a compromise between the two? Make student loan repayments tax deductible?
Amazed the 1/4 on Con Maj is still available. Just put £119.17 on it, which is about the most a small-timer like me would bet.
It briefly touched 1.31 on Betfair yesterday, which is a great price for what looks like free money.
1.1 for Con most seats is IMO bet-your-mortgage value, not that it should be encouraged to put irresponsibly large sums of money at stake of course.
Well, I've bet one month's mortgage payment on it. Does that count?
I've got £1k at 1.25 on the majority, and although I did get a little nervous when that 1% lead came up the other day I still think it's safe.
I think the result will be something like 44-35 and Lab will pile up votes in London and Surrey where they're no use, while Theresa May piles them up in the WM and NE marginals.
Labour will pile up votes in Surrey ? Better chance, on the Moon.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?
@Morris_Dancer great news about Kubica, he was seen of as potential world champion until his very unfortunate rallying accident. Would be fantastic to see him again driving an F1 car.
Call your grandfolks - and get an earful from them about what the 1970s were really like the last time we let the lunatics run the asylum?
I'm not certain we should call Ted Heath a lunatic, but this just seems to be replay of what Obama did first time round.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Things did go wrong 78/9 for the Labour Government but TBH they were exacerbated by what had happened 70-74 under Heath. Wilson steadied the ship, especially after Oct 74. His resignation seemed, in retrospect, to upset things. What did throw everything of course were the oil crises and problems in the Middle East.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
PS. Plus of course, Northern Ireland. Which could be put down to 40+ years of ignoring Civil Rights by the Unionists.
Do you see Corbyn and Abbott as of the same calibre as Callaghan & Rees? Or McDonald, Healey?
Why do you think Abbott will be the Home Secretary or even be in the cabinet ?
Amazed the 1/4 on Con Maj is still available. Just put £119.17 on it, which is about the most a small-timer like me would bet.
It briefly touched 1.31 on Betfair yesterday, which is a great price for what looks like free money.
1.1 for Con most seats is IMO bet-your-mortgage value, not that it should be encouraged to put irresponsibly large sums of money at stake of course.
Well, I've bet one month's mortgage payment on it. Does that count?
I've got £1k at 1.25 on the majority, and although I did get a little nervous when that 1% lead came up the other day I still think it's safe.
I think the result will be something like 44-35 and Lab will pile up votes in London and Surrey where they're no use, while Theresa May piles them up in the WM and NE marginals.
Labour will pile up votes in Surrey ? Better chance, on the Moon.
Was shorthand for safe Tory seats in the south and the shires, where Labour will attract more votes than usual from middle class youngsters, but not gain any seats for their efforts.
I'm still not quite as bullish of the Tories chances as some on here. I do fear, sadly, that Corbyn has cut through with some voters. That said, I still think the Yougov estimates are rubbish.
I suspect Labour will have a good night in London and even pick several seats off the Tories there. However, the Tories will do well in the North West, Midlands and Scotland which will offset this and boost their majority.
I'm going to go for a majority of 54 at this stage. I think TM will win a workeable majority and a clear 5 year term, but I'm not sure I see evidence that she will sweep all before her either.
Amazed the 1/4 on Con Maj is still available. Just put £119.17 on it, which is about the most a small-timer like me would bet.
It briefly touched 1.31 on Betfair yesterday, which is a great price for what looks like free money.
1.1 for Con most seats is IMO bet-your-mortgage value, not that it should be encouraged to put irresponsibly large sums of money at stake of course.
Well, I've bet one month's mortgage payment on it. Does that count?
I've got £1k at 1.25 on the majority, and although I did get a little nervous when that 1% lead came up the other day I still think it's safe.
I think the result will be something like 44-35 and Lab will pile up votes in London and Surrey where they're no use, while Theresa May piles them up in the WM and NE marginals.
I'm tempted to put that kind of money on it - it's not like I'd starve if a surprise happened but I'd be kicking myself for years.
There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
Or she.
I agree, and you can extend the lesson.
If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.
What about a compromise between the two? Make student loan repayments tax deductible?
Comments
Most likely LD gains: Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, Cambridge, Burnley, B’ham Yardley, Twickenham. Losses: Southport, Norfolk North.
SNP losses: Dumfries, Berwickshire, Stirling (not so likely), Edinburgh SW, Perth, Ochil, Moray, Angus, Aberdeenshire West, Aberdeen South, Banff & Buchan, Caithness, Fife NE, Edinburgh West, Dunbartonshire East, East Lothian.
HYUFD's post is interesting for its identification of CCHQ phone canvass targets. All the seats he mentions look to be in the 2-4% Tory swing needed range (I would guess he was calling Walsall N, not the safer Walsall S), which looks a lot more sensible than the wild stuff about Bolsover etc. That's about where I'd expect them to be hunting if their polling has them 7% ahead with a modest regional Midlands/North edge.
I wouldn't put great weight on his personal calls, with all due respect, as we don't know anything about the sample - at least, if it's like Labour phone canvasses, they select for demography and past voting rather than look for a balanced sample.
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2017/
I fear you may be optimistic on both sets, 16 SNP losses would be about double where I'd be and 6 net Lib Dem gains would be striking!
We'll know soon enough!
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock. SCon GAIN!
Tories 40% +20%
SNP 38% -11%
Labour 21% -6%
Others down 3%.
I think Nicola's bombshell will mean the Union vote rallies round the Tories, even if they don't take this.
SNP: 36
Con: 34
Lab: 16
Lib: 4
I would dearly love the MP for Gordon to add another pension to the multiple ones he already collects - but Marriott also has this as a comfortable SNP hold:
SNP: 35
Con: 29
Lab: 13
Lib: 23
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872295533569859586
While Turkey sides with Qatar:
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/872297248008400897
Nicola Sturgeon has been accused of lying after she said that the Scottish Labour leader, Kezia Dugdale, privately told her Labour needed to embrace a second independence vote after Brexit.
Sturgeon told STV’s Scotland Debates programme that the two leaders spoke one-to-one after Scotland voted to remain in the EU but was outvoted by England and Wales. She said Dugdale had told her “she thought Brexit changed everything and she didn’t think Labour could go on opposing a second referendum”.
Dugdale shook her head vigorously as Sturgeon repeated that claim after she was challenged to do so by Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader. The first minister chastised Dugdale, saying she was entitled to change her mind but not to attack others who sincerely believed in independence.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/06/scottish-labour-accuses-nicola-sturgeon-of-lying-over-second-independence-vote
SNP: 41
SCon: 43
Lab: 12
LibD: 4
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/06/play-good-natured-battle-perth-north-perthshire/
Lab: 44
SNP: 27
Con: 22
Lib: 6
But as you say given the side Turkey is taking this is about Iran
The boundaries are drawn in a way that cuts communities in half. Putting everything north of heathfield road into central ayrshire cuts out large numbers of potential tory voters.
The Scot Parl Ayr seat is a natural tory seat, but the addition of Cumnock makes this impossible
http://www.straitstimes.com/world/middle-east/14b-hostage-deal-the-straw-that-broke-the-camels-back-report
Also Qatar's Al-Jazeera has no fans among the Middle Easts' despots.....
https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/872314207542398976
https://twitter.com/PeoplesMomentum/status/872220735376326656
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/election-2010/7616323/General-Election-2010-Billy-Bragg-pledges-to-support-Liberal-Democrats.html
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/apr/19/politics.election2001
I'll not update it until I publish the "JackW Contacts Report" later today. I'm waiting on 3 replies of the 15 sent out. 2 other no shows because of illness and holiday.
There's no real downside to this for Labour, it's unlikely to cost them any votes and any gain is better than nothing.
In the big picture, it's too little, too late. You can't do this 48 hours prior to polling and expect it to work. There's a lesson for the next Labour leader though, from day 1 he should be putting vast energies into reaching to the 65+ demographics. Policy should be focused grouped at Saga, not at University. It's the vital election winning demographic they are failing with.
That’s my memory of those times, and I was 40 during the decade.
But as we all know, Britain has had enough of experts.
Nicola really screwed herself last night
"Can I be in the Brexit negotiations?"
"Will you leak confidential discussions on live TV?"
Ummmm
"Like, the British government?"
Nick Clegg on fire on the Today programme. He really does not like Mrs May......
1.1 for Con most seats is IMO bet-your-mortgage value, not that it should be encouraged to put irresponsibly large sums of money at stake of course.
Is there a greater-or-lesser-than 10% chance of one normal-sized polling error in labours favour?
Personally, I wouldn't bet a large amount either on it or against it.
IMO, the seats bell-curve is fatter and flatter than many models (+betfair) have it.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/jeremy-corbyn/news/86384/jeremy-corbyn-abbott-mcdonnell-and
He also appears to be a diligent MP.
Edited for spelling!
I think the result will be something like 44-35 and Lab will pile up votes in London and Surrey where they're no use, while Theresa May piles them up in the WM and NE marginals.
https://twitter.com/champagne_lefty/status/872341289228013569
I agree, and you can extend the lesson.
If you want to put roughly 1/4 of your entire current spending pledges into one headline policy, it's better to make the main beneficiaries those who are old enough to vote. So focus on writing off a large amount of tuition fee debt of those in their late 20s and 30s as well as reducing the additional 9% income tax rate that all basic rate taxpaying graduates this millenia effectively pay, rather than putting all your eggs into abolishing tuition fees for a new generation of future voters aged 18 or less.
He was an extreme neo-con who fanatically supported the Iraq war and the way he chose to stand in the leadership contest was that of an ostrich who could not see that everybody else would see him as stabbing Boris in the back
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/election-tory-strong-stable-van-overturns-conservatives-theresa-may-advert-a7776136.html
Mr. Observer, not a Guardian reader. Are they taking a similar line on Corbyn?
Miss Vance, if Clegg and Miliband lost their seats, they and Cameron should become the new Top Gear hosts. Assuming Top Gear still exists.
On-topic: I agree. Timothy's contribution has been to seriously harm a seemingly unassailable lead and turn potentially the largest victory since WWII into an unknown result, anywhere from losing to a landslide (albeit one half the size it might have been).
F1: Canada soon. May give the markets a look. Also, some very good news. Kubica's been testing an F1 car (2012 model), the first time he's been in one since his rallying accident. If he could return, it'd be great. He's an extremely good driver.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/40179662
"The team are considering whether to replace the Englishman later in the season, with former F1 driver Sebastien Buemi and Sirotkin among the possible candidates."
Buemi's a former Toro Rosso driver (when they operated their brief 'Sebastiens only' driver policy), and Sirotkin was pencilled in for a seat with someone (maybe Sauber?) a couple of years ago but was thought too young.
2016:IFS BAAAAAAD
2017: IFS GOOOOOOOD
he could stand for labour
http://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-refuses-to-say-abbott-will-keep-job-if-labour-wins-10906460
I'm still not quite as bullish of the Tories chances as some on here. I do fear, sadly, that Corbyn has cut through with some voters. That said, I still think the Yougov estimates are rubbish.
I suspect Labour will have a good night in London and even pick several seats off the Tories there. However, the Tories will do well in the North West, Midlands and Scotland which will offset this and boost their majority.
I'm going to go for a majority of 54 at this stage. I think TM will win a workeable majority and a clear 5 year term, but I'm not sure I see evidence that she will sweep all before her either.
http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/strategiepier-eu-kommission-europa-kann-militaerische-macht-werden-15050161.html
looks like Trump got his way