Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The big picture from the turnout figures so far annouced is th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The big picture from the turnout figures so far annouced is that the more an area was for Remain the more people voted yesterday
The results have been verified. 28,438 votes were counted with a turnout of 30.5% in Ashfield pic.twitter.com/BEKjlq1ojZ
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Anyway, I have meetings to get to tomorrow (thankfully in the afternoon), so it is time to rest. Turnout seems to be decent, but not amazing in either direction, which is a bit frustrating given it really is quite important.
> I refuse to be careful in rushing to judgement. Remain landslide!
>
> Anyway, I have meetings to get to tomorrow (thankfully in the afternoon), so it is time to rest. Turnout seems to be decent, but not amazing in either direction, which is a bit frustrating given it really is quite important.
Agreed but I am a gambler and I like backing my judgement on my analysis of limited information. If you wait till everything becomes clear then you can't get decent odds.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1131728912835383300
Turnout in St. Alban's was 43% in 2014, so it's a rise, but not a huge one.
In remain areas the remain parties will do well, but the higher turnout also suggest that both leavers and remainers might have been motivated, so I would caution against calling too much for the remain parties just yet.
Bloodbath for CON and particularly LAB (versus expectation).
LDEMS will benefit most for coalescence around remain, but I suspect Green will have a good result too. Change UK should change their name to Continuity Blair/Cameron, because there is about as much appetite for that.
I believe that 7/2 for LDEM to beat LAB in London will be one of the bets of the decade. OK, we seen better odds punts come in, but I reckon the result will show that this was a complete licence to print money,
> > @kle4 said:
> > I refuse to be careful in rushing to judgement. Remain landslide!
> >
> > Anyway, I have meetings to get to tomorrow (thankfully in the afternoon), so it is time to rest. Turnout seems to be decent, but not amazing in either direction, which is a bit frustrating given it really is quite important.
>
> Agreed but I am a gambler and I like backing my judgement on my analysis of limited information. If you wait till everything becomes clear then you can't get decent odds.
Maybe time to lay off your bet on the turnout, Mike?
Edit/ and I put my hands up to being wrong that we wouldn’t be getting such data as we are.
https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/1131762386401030144
> The Twitter account linked to by the lead appears to be blocked?
He appears to be taking a pop at OGH
> https://twitter.com/bpolitics/status/1131771843310960640
They were like 3% out or something? They should run opinion polls, but ban anyone except for the pollster who does them from writing about them.
I am not sure what to make of this anecdotal material. I still think that overall turnout will be nearer 30% than 40% but it might be a fraction higher than I expected.
> https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/1131750575807164416
> https://twitter.com/philipjcowley/status/1131762386401030144
My email from Labour is addressed:
Dear Liberal Democrat,
You deserve a huge thank you.
Thank you for getting out and voting. Thank you for your support during a really tough election. And if you've been out on the doorsteps, thank you for the time and energy you've spent bringing Britain together.
> > @kle4 said:
> > I refuse to be careful in rushing to judgement. Remain landslide!
> >
> > Anyway, I have meetings to get to tomorrow (thankfully in the afternoon), so it is time to rest. Turnout seems to be decent, but not amazing in either direction, which is a bit frustrating given it really is quite important.
>
> Agreed but I am a gambler and I like backing my judgement on my analysis of limited information. If you wait till everything becomes clear then you can't get decent odds.
This is a point that cannot be made too often.
https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424?s=21
The general conclusion is most people haven't voted as is the case for EU elections - who has voted is a bit less clear. Quite probably those in the middle between leave vs remain didn't care enough to bother but those who are more passionate did - or did as is often the case the younger voters didn't bother and the oldies turnout?
I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
> More turnout information here:
>
> https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424?s=21
What needs to be done is a graph of CHANGE in turnout against the referendum result. Because it’s a fact of life that settled middle class areas will have a higher turnout.
> I put £20 on the LDs to win most seats at 50/1 yesterday. You never know what might happen with elections. Just a week ago the Australian government was 18/1 to win re-election when the polls closed and they did.
Even the Australian polls had the governing Coalition ahead on first preferences and Morrison ahead as preferred PM so clues were there if you looked for them.
I get the impression that we are now waiting for TM's successor to gives some sort of idea of what his or her idea of a Withdrawal Deal should be. If, of course, any!
> > @AlastairMeeks said:
> > More turnout information here:
> >
> > https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424?s=21
>
> What needs to be done is a graph of CHANGE in turnout against the referendum result. Because it’s a fact of life that settled middle class areas will have a higher turnout.
> @Nigelb said:
> More turnout information here:
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424
>
>
>
> Eliminate the single datapoint at the right of the table, and the trend line would look flat.
> @Streeter said:
> More turnout information here:
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424
>
>
>
> Eliminate the single datapoint at the right of the table, and the trend line would look flat.
>
>
>
> Eliminate the single datapoint to the left of that one and the trend line would curve upwards.
Do with the information what you will. I merely pass it on.
> My suspicion is that in leave areas, TBP will do will and the rest of the vote might have completely collapsed.
>
> In remain areas the remain parties will do well, but the higher turnout also suggest that both leavers and remainers might have been motivated, so I would caution against calling too much for the remain parties just yet.
>
> Bloodbath for CON and particularly LAB (versus expectation).
>
> LDEMS will benefit most for coalescence around remain, but I suspect Green will have a good result too. Change UK should change their name to Continuity Blair/Cameron, because there is about as much appetite for that.
>
> I believe that 7/2 for LDEM to beat LAB in London will be one of the bets of the decade. OK, we seen better odds punts come in, but I reckon the result will show that this was a complete licence to print money,
I would be careful describing areas as Leave or Remain. A very large number of areas were pretty close to the national figures of 52/48, so even in Leave areas there are substantial numbers of Remainers and vice versa.
Nonetheless, a good night for LibDems and Greens, a bad one for Corbyn methinks. I hope we get a Labour leadership challenge this summer. We need an electable opposition.
Query. Let's say Boris becomes PM. He sets course for No Deal and fails a VONC. Would we end up with an election or is there anyone who could lead the Tory Party that could keep the whole thing together? Gove?
> More turnout information here:
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424
>
>
>
> Eliminate the single datapoint at the right of the table, and the trend line would look flat.
"You see, it depended on one or two points at the very edge of the range of the data, and there’s a principle that a point on the edge of the range of the data—the last point—isn’t very good, because if it was, they’d have another point further along." RPF
I highly doubt it will happen, but if it does Corbyn wins bigger than 2016.
>
> Nonetheless, a good night for LibDems and Greens, a bad one for Corbyn methinks. I hope we get a Labour leadership challenge this summer. We need an electable opposition.
Which is it? Was this an election or a re-run referendum? If the latter, then any result is not necessarily bad for Conservatives or Labour because we cannot extrapolate to a general election fought on other issues. There will be no TBP/LD coalition!
> Your welcome.
*You’re.
Idiotic Remainer/Leaver (delete as appropriate).
New compromise: we leave the EU at 0000 every Monday and rejoin every Thursday at noon.
1) The results will be slightly disappointing for BRX
2) V good for the Lib Dems
3) Utterly dire for Labour
> > @Nigelb said:
> > More turnout information here:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424
> >
> >
> >
> > Eliminate the single datapoint at the right of the table, and the trend line would look flat.
>
> "You see, it depended on one or two points at the very edge of the range of the data, and there’s a principle that a point on the edge of the range of the data—the last point—isn’t very good, because if it was, they’d have another point further along." RPF
Maybe, but it's a bit dodgy if you ignore some data to get your desired result. We'll know in a few days.
Feeling fairly confident my evens bet on the Lib Dems to top the poll in London will come off.
> Good morning. Quiet day today?
>
> Query. Let's say Boris becomes PM. He sets course for No Deal and fails a VONC. Would we end up with an election or is there anyone who could lead the Tory Party that could keep the whole thing together? Gove?
Boris is someone who will look like the best of the worst before he’s elected and then quickly make Theresa May look good, and give everyone buyer’s regret. He won’t unite the party as they will be split into warring factions again in months as he betrays one side then another. And he’s no more collegiate than May and has few people skills too.
Gove could actually be the opposite and surprise on the upside.
> I'm getting the feeling that
>
> 1) The results will be slightly disappointing for BRX
> 2) V good for the Lib Dems
> 3) Utterly dire for Labour
I sense a solidifying of the Conservative core in the last 48 hours. Nigel Farage still repels.
When I was in the polling booth I saw his name at the top of the SE region and winced.
> I put £20 on the LDs to win most seats at 50/1 yesterday. You never know what might happen with elections. Just a week ago the Australian government was 18/1 to win re-election when the polls closed and they did.
I got a £5 on at 60/1.
I expect to lose it but it feels a 10/1 or 12/1 shot to me, so a good value loser.
Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
> > @Nigelb said:
> > More turnout information here:
> >
> >
> >
> > https://twitter.com/andygmckay/status/1131721138025959424
> >
> >
> >
> > Eliminate the single datapoint at the right of the table, and the trend line would look flat.
>
> "You see, it depended on one or two points at the very edge of the range of the data, and there’s a principle that a point on the edge of the range of the data—the last point—isn’t very good, because if it was, they’d have another point further along." RPF
It does seem as if the point at the far right with 45% turnout is South Lakeland.
I think Tim Farron does ground organisation well. It does look like #BollockstoBrexit caught the zeitgeist, while everyone was mesmerised by Farage.
> Gove could actually be the opposite and surprise on the upside.
>
> He could hardly surprise on the downside. But that sentence strikes me as a triumph of optimism over reality.
You will always have a visceral hatred for him no matter what he does.
But he’s the only one in the Government who shows any creative thinking and intelligence about repositioning the party.
Durham 5.3%
Middlesbrough 1.4%
Copeland North West -2.9%
South Lakeland 0.5%
Ashfield 0.3%
Derby -2.6%
Harborough 4.1%
Lincoln 1.8%
Newark and Sherwood 0.7%
South Holland -0.8%
Wyre Forest -3.9%
East Cambridgeshire 6.1%
Harlow East -3.6%
Southend East 0.0%
Bath and North 6.0%
Gibraltar 8.0%
South Somerset 1.7%
Stroud. 4.1%
Swindon 0.5%
Merthyr Tydfil 1.9%
Neath Port Talbot 3.1
Cardiff 9.9%
Cheshire West and Chester 3.8%
Sedgemoor 1.1%
Mid Devon 3.0%
Carmarthenshire 5.7%
Wigan -0.5%
Until I saw how incompetent he was at the execution.
> I’m not so sure about that. Corbyn’s position on Brexit will have disilliousioned many of his supporters, plus (poi’s ably) the anti-semifinal issues. You would think that the proven evidence of him being an electoral liability would help sway thing too, but the Corbynistas seem immune that...
>
> With most polls showing us leading in Westminister VI and the performance in the last election the 'proven electoral liability' line will be a hard sell, important to remember that Labour members have a very different view from Daily Mail readers for example.
>
> Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
>
> I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
>
> As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
>
> Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
>
> Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
Corbyn’s USP was being honest, straightforward, principled and straight talking. But that was before Brexit, which has destroyed it utterly.
However being a party leader requires much more than that, and being PM requires a whole host of other skills. I personally believe Gove lacks some of the skills being a PM requires (then again, so does May, and most of the other Conservative contenders are lacking various of them as well).
I do think Gove would make a very interesting opposition leader. I'm far from sure he'd make a good PM: he rubs too many people up the wrong way.
https://twitter.com/MarieAnnUK/status/1131270489941454849?s=20&fbclid=IwAR0hs3V-nO8tJZOBrNAcT8-edp_-IekQjWzV7PC01vhRBb_GxEOmsJNGslg
> Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
>
> I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
"US President Donald Trump has said Huawei could be part of a trade deal between the US and China, despite branding the telecoms firm "very dangerous"."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48392021
> I’m not so sure about that. Corbyn’s position on Brexit will have disilliousioned many of his supporters, plus (poi’s ably) the anti-semifinal issues. You would think that the proven evidence of him being an electoral liability would help sway thing too, but the Corbynistas seem immune that...
>
> With most polls showing us leading in Westminister VI and the performance in the last election the 'proven electoral liability' line will be a hard sell, important to remember that Labour members have a very different view from Daily Mail readers for example.
>
> Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
>
> I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
>
> As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
>
> Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
>
> Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
When the rather lacklustre Owen Smith Challenged in 2016 he got 38.4% of the vote. It doesn't take a lot of switchers frustrated by Corbyn to have a different result. If Labour want to be in government, they need a new leader too this summer. Being left wing is not so much a problem as being pro Brexit and anti-semitic. Without that poisonous baggage being discarded along with Jezza, opposition is all that is possible.
> > @ydoethur said:
>
> > Gove could actually be the opposite and surprise on the upside.
>
> >
>
> > He could hardly surprise on the downside. But that sentence strikes me as a triumph of optimism over reality.
>
>
>
> You will always have a visceral hatred for him no matter what he does.
>
>
>
> But he’s the only one in the Government who shows any creative thinking and intelligence about repositioning the party.
>
> Creative thinking and intelligence over the positioning of a party are very useful skills for a party leader to have, especially one in opposition who is not subject to having to govern.
>
> However being a party leader requires much more than that, and being PM requires a whole host of other skills. I personally believe Gove lacks some of the skills being a PM requires (then again, so does May, and most of the other Conservative contenders are lacking various of them as well).
>
> I do think Gove would make a very interesting opposition leader. I'm far from sure he'd make a good PM: he rubs too many people up the wrong way.
Minority view: I think he’d actually be a better PM because he can put his ideas into place through policy very quickly and can implement change on a preexisting public platform.
In opposition, you have to show a lot of leg to get noticed, and are very response and reactive to what the Government does, and I don’t think that’s his forte.
From a few conversations in the area around Ashfield yesterday, the atttude I got was 'what is the point of voting if democratic decisions are not going to be implemented'. This is, I guess, WWC - kitchen fitters etc.
The consequences of undermining a referendum.
Watch turnout at the next General Election.
Given that the Lab majority over the Tories in Ashfield, with a realtively sane Labour MP, is only 400, and the Indys just swept the Council - heaven knows what the result will be.
If he is competent in the Council, could be Zadrozny. Or not.
> I’m not so sure about that. Corbyn’s position on Brexit will have disilliousioned many of his supporters, plus (poi’s ably) the anti-semifinal issues. You would think that the proven evidence of him being an electoral liability would help sway thing too, but the Corbynistas seem immune that...
>
> With most polls showing us leading in Westminister VI and the performance in the last election the 'proven electoral liability' line will be a hard sell, important to remember that Labour members have a very different view from Daily Mail readers for example.
>
> Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
>
> I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
>
> As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
>
> Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
>
> Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
but he will never get enough votes to become PM.. The nation will see to that.
> > @tlg86 said:
> > Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
> >
> > I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
>
> It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
>
> So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
>
> Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
There have always been practical limits on democracy. Harold Wilson fumed about the gnomes of Zurich. Brexit is in part a reactionary impulse rejecting engagement with the outside world and its complexities.
> Here are the turnout changes compared to the 2014 EU elections. The average change is just under +3%, suggesting a national turnout in the range 38-39% (I’d bet on London and Scotland being up by more, pointing to a result close to 40%)
>
>
> Durham 5.3%
> Middlesbrough 1.4%
> Copeland North West -2.9%
> South Lakeland 0.5%
> Ashfield 0.3%
> Derby -2.6%
> Harborough 4.1%
> Lincoln 1.8%
> Newark and Sherwood 0.7%
> South Holland -0.8%
> Wyre Forest -3.9%
> East Cambridgeshire 6.1%
> Harlow East -3.6%
> Southend East 0.0%
> Bath and North 6.0%
> Gibraltar 8.0%
> South Somerset 1.7%
> Stroud. 4.1%
> Swindon 0.5%
> Merthyr Tydfil 1.9%
> Neath Port Talbot 3.1
> Cardiff 9.9%
> Cheshire West and Chester 3.8%
> Sedgemoor 1.1%
> Mid Devon 3.0%
> Carmarthenshire 5.7%
> Wigan -0.5%
Some of the outlying datapoints - Cardiff, Durham, Bath - suggest that a lot more students may have turned out this time?
> Corbyn’s USP was being honest, straightforward, principled and straight talking. But that was before Brexit, which has destroyed it utterly.
Yup. If he won't go of his own accord they need someone to run at him from the left.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1131796866608369666
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1131797314039889920
> > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > @tlg86 said:
> > > Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
> > >
> > > I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
> >
> > It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
> >
> > So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
> >
> > Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
>
> There have always been practical limits on democracy. Harold Wilson fumed about the gnomes of Zurich. Brexit is in part a reactionary impulse rejecting engagement with the outside world and its complexities.
If we’re dealing in absolutes, of course.
But this is a question of degree and the UK is in a different place, now, to how it was even as recently as 25 years ago, when immigration was still very low and the West still very much on top post the Cold War.
I expect that to continue.
The Smith 38.4% is gone, who do you think have been the people leaving the party?
If someone else comes in from the left they will be attacked just the same, they don't like the occupation of Palestine, they are anti semitic, etc etc.
Labour members now full well why Corbyn has been attacked constantly, if they wanted a right wing leader and an easier time of it they would have gone for it back in 2016.
Quite frankly there is no point just being the Conservatives but virtue signalling about being slightly nicer, it makes a mockery of democracy. If the country wants Farage or Boris as PM so be it, I'd rather make a left wing offer to the country.
> > @TheJezziah said:
> > I’m not so sure about that. Corbyn’s position on Brexit will have disilliousioned many of his supporters, plus (poi’s ably) the anti-semifinal issues. You would think that the proven evidence of him being an electoral liability would help sway thing too, but the Corbynistas seem immune that...
> >
> > With most polls showing us leading in Westminister VI and the performance in the last election the 'proven electoral liability' line will be a hard sell, important to remember that Labour members have a very different view from Daily Mail readers for example.
> >
> > Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
> >
> > I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
> >
> > As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
> >
> > Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
> >
> > Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
>
> When the rather lacklustre Owen Smith Challenged in 2016 he got 38.4% of the vote. It doesn't take a lot of switchers frustrated by Corbyn to have a different result. If Labour want to be in government, they need a new leader too this summer. Being left wing is not so much a problem as being pro Brexit and anti-semitic. Without that poisonous baggage being discarded along with Jezza, opposition is all that is possible.
One thing that I have not seen commentary on - how long should a statutory investigation by the EHRC take?
> > @IanB2 said:
> > Here are the turnout changes compared to the 2014 EU elections. The average change is just under +3%, suggesting a national turnout in the range 38-39% (I’d bet on London and Scotland being up by more, pointing to a result close to 40%)
> >
> >
> > Durham 5.3%
> > Middlesbrough 1.4%
> > Copeland North West -2.9%
> > South Lakeland 0.5%
> > Ashfield 0.3%
> > Derby -2.6%
> > Harborough 4.1%
> > Lincoln 1.8%
> > Newark and Sherwood 0.7%
> > South Holland -0.8%
> > Wyre Forest -3.9%
> > East Cambridgeshire 6.1%
> > Harlow East -3.6%
> > Southend East 0.0%
> > Bath and North 6.0%
> > Gibraltar 8.0%
> > South Somerset 1.7%
> > Stroud. 4.1%
> > Swindon 0.5%
> > Merthyr Tydfil 1.9%
> > Neath Port Talbot 3.1
> > Cardiff 9.9%
> > Cheshire West and Chester 3.8%
> > Sedgemoor 1.1%
> > Mid Devon 3.0%
> > Carmarthenshire 5.7%
> > Wigan -0.5%
>
> Some of the outlying datapoints - Cardiff, Durham, Bath - suggest that a lot more students may have turned out this time?
Where did this these figures come from, please.
> > @AlastairMeeks said:
> > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > > @tlg86 said:
> > > > Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
> > > >
> > > > I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
> > >
> > > It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
> > >
> > > So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
> >
> > There have always been practical limits on democracy. Harold Wilson fumed about the gnomes of Zurich. Brexit is in part a reactionary impulse rejecting engagement with the outside world and its complexities.
>
> If we’re dealing in absolutes, of course.
>
> But this is a question of degree and the UK is in a different place, now, to how it was even as recently as 25 years ago, when immigration was still very low and the West still very much on top post the Cold War.
>
> I expect that to continue.
All this was obvious in 2016. It was in fact a central part of the case for Remain. Britain opted instead to go diplomatically off grid. But closing your eyes doesn’t make the world go away. It just makes you easier prey for predators.
> When the rather lacklustre Owen Smith Challenged in 2016 he got 38.4% of the vote. It doesn't take a lot of switchers frustrated by Corbyn to have a different result. If Labour want to be in government, they need a new leader too this summer. Being left wing is not so much a problem as being pro Brexit and anti-semitic. Without that poisonous baggage being discarded along with Jezza, opposition is all that is possible.
>
> You have to make the Labour membership believe the anti semitism smear to make it effective, Labour members are generally quite politically interested and active (compared to normal people anyway) they know what the media are like.
>
> The Smith 38.4% is gone, who do you think have been the people leaving the party?
>
> If someone else comes in from the left they will be attacked just the same, they don't like the occupation of Palestine, they are anti semitic, etc etc.
>
> Labour members now full well why Corbyn has been attacked constantly, if they wanted a right wing leader and an easier time of it they would have gone for it back in 2016.
>
> Quite frankly there is no point just being the Conservatives but virtue signalling about being slightly nicer, it makes a mockery of democracy. If the country wants Farage or Boris as PM so be it, I'd rather make a left wing offer to the country.
Hang on, yesterday your sole rationale for voting Labour was that it was the only party that might be able to beat the Brexit party.
> When the rather lacklustre Owen Smith Challenged in 2016 he got 38.4% of the vote. It doesn't take a lot of switchers frustrated by Corbyn to have a different result. If Labour want to be in government, they need a new leader too this summer. Being left wing is not so much a problem as being pro Brexit and anti-semitic. Without that poisonous baggage being discarded along with Jezza, opposition is all that is possible.
>
> You have to make the Labour membership believe the anti semitism smear to make it effective, Labour members are generally quite politically interested and active (compared to normal people anyway) they know what the media are like.
>
> The Smith 38.4% is gone, who do you think have been the people leaving the party?
>
> If someone else comes in from the left they will be attacked just the same, they don't like the occupation of Palestine, they are anti semitic, etc etc.
>
> Labour members now full well why Corbyn has been attacked constantly, if they wanted a right wing leader and an easier time of it they would have gone for it back in 2016.
>
> Quite frankly there is no point just being the Conservatives but virtue signalling about being slightly nicer, it makes a mockery of democracy. If the country wants Farage or Boris as PM so be it, I'd rather make a left wing offer to the country.
The problem is that when it comes to a GE it's not just Labour members who get to vote. Just for the record I've voted Labour in every GE since 1983, but I won't be doing so at the next GE unless there's a change of leadership, clear opposition to Brexit and expulsion of the anti-Semites.
> > @TheJezziah said:
>
> > I’m not so sure about that. Corbyn’s position on Brexit will have disilliousioned many of his supporters, plus (poi’s ably) the anti-semifinal issues. You would think that the proven evidence of him being an electoral liability would help sway thing too, but the Corbynistas seem immune that...
>
> >
>
> > With most polls showing us leading in Westminister VI and the performance in the last election the 'proven electoral liability' line will be a hard sell, important to remember that Labour members have a very different view from Daily Mail readers for example.
>
> >
>
> > Polls done on Labours position showed the majority (of Labour members) supporting Labours current position (this was a few months back I think) the people complaining have largely been the people complaining about Corbyn in one way or another for a long time.
>
> >
>
> > I'm sure some of Corbyn supporters are unhappy or disagree with his Brexit position but these people could still well choose Corbyn over an opponent. People who don't like Corbyn, or supported Corbyn but have changed their mind have been leaving the party. Those who like Corbyn have been staying. The ratio of Corbyn supporters to opponents is far better for Corbyn now than it was in 2016.
>
> >
>
> > As in the 2016 election the message will have to be come and pay to join this party you don't currently like (Labour) to make it one you like. This message fell flat on its face then I see no reason why it would be incredibly successful this time, that is if the party even had a sign up scheme this time. If only people who are currently members vote the anti Corbyn faction is sunk.
>
> >
>
> > Also have Corbyn's campaigning abilities to consider, May beat him in votes but every campaign he has been a major part of he has done far better than his opponents campaigning.
>
> >
>
> > Corbyn isn't popular on here but he doesn't have to get PB to vote for him.
>
>
>
> but he will never get enough votes to become PM.. The nation will see to that.
>
> The whole unelectable line has lost all credibility as a weapon against Corbyn in Labour internal elections.
Because he has such a glittering track record of electoral success?
> Hmmm. It appears the US's fears about Huawei might be based more in trade leverage than security fears:
>
> "US President Donald Trump has said Huawei could be part of a trade deal between the US and China, despite branding the telecoms firm "very dangerous"."
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48392021
I wouldn’t take too much stock by what Trump does or doesn’t say.
It’s pretty obvious to me that Huawei are an arm of the Chinese state, which has a well-deserved reputation for wide ranging corporate and political espionage, and should be treated as such. I don’t think the US Government does the same with Apple or Google even if they do go into bat for them in trade disputes.
If private consumers still want to exercise a choice to buy a Huawei handset knowing those risks, then fine I’d say. But I’d draw the line at them building national infrastructure networks and not issue a single one of their phones to anyone working in a private or reserved occupation.
It failed with the more anti Corbyn 2016 membership...
Before the GE'17 which killed the lines about electibility....
It will work this time because he is not popular on PB... unlike 2016 when they were big fans...
> > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > @AlastairMeeks said:
> > > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > > > @tlg86 said:
> > > > > Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
> > > > >
> > > > > I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
> > > >
> > > > It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
> > > >
> > > > So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
> > >
> > > There have always been practical limits on democracy. Harold Wilson fumed about the gnomes of Zurich. Brexit is in part a reactionary impulse rejecting engagement with the outside world and its complexities.
> >
> > If we’re dealing in absolutes, of course.
> >
> > But this is a question of degree and the UK is in a different place, now, to how it was even as recently as 25 years ago, when immigration was still very low and the West still very much on top post the Cold War.
> >
> > I expect that to continue.
>
> All this was obvious in 2016. It was in fact a central part of the case for Remain. Britain opted instead to go diplomatically off grid. But closing your eyes doesn’t make the world go away. It just makes you easier prey for predators.
So what choice did you have if you didn’t like the European Union and didn’t want to endorse Britain’s political destiny as part of it?
> > @AlastairMeeks said:
> > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > > @AlastairMeeks said:
> > > > > @Casino_Royale said:
> > > > > > @tlg86 said:
> > > > > > Interesting stuff. I wonder if any of the pollsters accounted for this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I suppose this is one of the problems of the referendum. If only those who voted in the 2015 GE had voted in 2016, Remain would probably have won. Unfortunately for Dave and George, a whole load of people who don't normally bother did because they thought that, for once, their vote would make a difference.
> > > > >
> > > > > It’s quite possible it doesn’t. That’s what we’re told, from school upwards, but the truth is that there are so many things determined and operated at a pan-global level, now, that we don’t really have a choice because unlike the US or China we’re not big or powerful enough for our electorate to call the shots on matters that directly affect it. We think we should be because of our history and pride, and there’s nothing wrong with that, but we’re no longer at that level. So issues that large parts of the electorate really care about, like national sovereignty, rule setting destiny, or mass immigration, can’t be changed without blowing up the macro economy.
> > > > >
> > > > > So either you vote to accept what you already actively dislike and is shit (and you tacitly endorse it by doing so), or you vote differently and are ignored, or you’re listened to and everything is made much worse as it collides with a world we can no longer control.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately the logical end state of that process is that democracy eventually peters out. And it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s where we get to by the time I’m in my old age.
> > > >
> > > > There have always been practical limits on democracy. Harold Wilson fumed about the gnomes of Zurich. Brexit is in part a reactionary impulse rejecting engagement with the outside world and its complexities.
> > >
> > > If we’re dealing in absolutes, of course.
> > >
> > > But this is a question of degree and the UK is in a different place, now, to how it was even as recently as 25 years ago, when immigration was still very low and the West still very much on top post the Cold War.
> > >
> > > I expect that to continue.
> >
> > All this was obvious in 2016. It was in fact a central part of the case for Remain. Britain opted instead to go diplomatically off grid. But closing your eyes doesn’t make the world go away. It just makes you easier prey for predators.
>
> So what choice did you have if you didn’t like the European Union and didn’t want to endorse Britain’s political destiny as part of it?
Sometimes choices are between bad and worse. Don’t self-indulgently vote for the worse one. Abstain if you really think both are awful.
I want to beat Farage (or Boris in a hypothetical) but that doesn't mean they shouldn't become PM if they win the election. If enough people vote for them they should win that is how democracy works.
Also just to note not my sole reason Just one I listed in a two sentence post as a good reason to vote Labour.
> May's replacement may be the last Conservative PM for some time.....
>
> https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1131796866608369666
>
>
> https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1131797314039889920
Isn't it likely that any swing in the Tories to the right will gift even more votes to the Lib Dems...
So we didn’t really have a choice.
That was my original point.
And mass abstaining is exactly what I expect to happen in future, which will eventually fracture our national democracy.
It doesn't matter if PB thinks Corbyn is an electoral liability, for left wing people who were battered with the unelectable line for a couple of years before the surge in GE'17 it has lost all credibility.
> > @TheJezziah said:
>
> > When the rather lacklustre Owen Smith Challenged in 2016 he got 38.4% of the vote. It doesn't take a lot of switchers frustrated by Corbyn to have a different result. If Labour want to be in government, they need a new leader too this summer. Being left wing is not so much a problem as being pro Brexit and anti-semitic. Without that poisonous baggage being discarded along with Jezza, opposition is all that is possible.
>
> >
>
> > You have to make the Labour membership believe the anti semitism smear to make it effective, Labour members are generally quite politically interested and active (compared to normal people anyway) they know what the media are like.
>
> >
>
> > The Smith 38.4% is gone, who do you think have been the people leaving the party?
>
> >
>
> > If someone else comes in from the left they will be attacked just the same, they don't like the occupation of Palestine, they are anti semitic, etc etc.
>
> >
>
> > Labour members now full well why Corbyn has been attacked constantly, if they wanted a right wing leader and an easier time of it they would have gone for it back in 2016.
>
> >
>
> > Quite frankly there is no point just being the Conservatives but virtue signalling about being slightly nicer, it makes a mockery of democracy. If the country wants Farage or Boris as PM so be it, I'd rather make a left wing offer to the country.
>
>
>
> Hang on, yesterday your sole rationale for voting Labour was that it was the only party that might be able to beat the Brexit party.
>
> Sorry, is there a contradiction there?
>
> I want to beat Farage (or Boris in a hypothetical) but that doesn't mean they shouldn't become PM if they win the election. If enough people vote for them they should win that is how democracy works.
>
> Also just to note not my sole reason Just one I listed in a two sentence post as a good reason to vote Labour.
So you want Labour to win, only on your terms, and the electorate needs to fall in behind that. I wonder why Labour are going backwards fast.
2014 Euro election results by council area
> So what choice did you have if you didn’t like the European Union and didn’t want to endorse Britain’s political destiny as part of it?
This. This is your choice. It's not easy. Whether it's better than the pre-referendum status quo depends on how much you hate EU membership - assuming that we do eventually leave.
You say that Corbyn is a great campaigner, but that is based on the 2017 GE alone. In every other election he has campaigned on it has been pisspoor for Labour, whether in the Locals each year, the Brexit referendum, in which he weakly backed Remain, or in these recent Euro elections.
2017 starts to look like the outlier, and we should consider how much of that was an anti May, anti-Brexit vote. Take those away and Jezza looks like he is swimming with no trunks on.
I agree that some of the press coverage of anti-semitism is exagerrated, but it does have basis in reality. The Corbynite anti-semitism is just one particularly nasty feature of a wider bullying tendency. Just look at the misogynistic and vicious abuse heaped on Jess Phillips from the hard left.
Maybe I am just unusual but politics for me is about more than winning.
I expect a referendum for any Brexit line will be forced in the next conference.
But yes, I can imagine that being part of a 'trade'.
You don't seem to be replying to what I wrote.
To clarify I don't want Boris or Farage to become PM but if they get enough votes to become PM they should do... this is absolutely nothing to do with the electorate falling in behind my views as I don't actually support Boris or Farage.
Is this more clear now or does this sound like me demanding the electorate do what I want?
I am saying what the electorate chooses to do is up to them, pretty much the opposite of what you accused me of.
And the terrifying thing is that Leonard is pretty much the cream of the current crop.
I’m old enough to remember when Labour in Scotland was absolutely jam-packed full of talent.
It is arguable that it was not Better Together that crippled Labour, but a dearth of bright, talented recruits. Negativity might have saved the Union for a brief swan song, but it is fatal for enthusiasm.
But it will not shift my vote at all. Indeed I believe that the least we interfere in Middle East politics the better, we have a strong track record over the last century there of repeated interventions there that make things worse and shred our international reputation. The sooner that we stop messing with the region the better.
So yes, this does sound like you demanding the electorate do what you want.
On that basis do we expect TBP to slightly underperform their best polling, the Lib Dems to do very well and possibly win London?
The suggestion on here (not a representative sample of course) is that more Tories than might have been expected reluctantly voted for the party in the end. That might also take the gloss off TBP. Labour seem to have been badly hit by their totally confused and confusing position and to have been a major source of Lib Dem votes.