Haven't been able to follow closely but Johnson-Corbyn really is the Accrington Stanley vs Forest Green of our times isn't it? Even with the history of the big two parties, surely we now need to look elsewhere for leadership and inspiration when the core offer is so poor.
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
"Boris Johnson has designed this cabinet to win a snap election with the votes of economically disadvantaged white voters with xenophobic tendencies dazzled by buffoonery and audacity." — Paul Mason
"Boris Johnson has designed this cabinet to win a snap election with the votes of economically disadvantaged white voters with xenophobic tendencies dazzled by buffoonery and audacity." — Paul Mason
Just watched Swinson on BBC2 politics. Somebody in the LibDems needs to tell her to get rid of the nervous tic of constantly saying "you know". It is not the speech of somebody with Number 10 in her sight.
Plus - her teeth are too big for her face! Weirdly distracting....
Haven't been able to follow closely but Johnson-Corbyn really is the Accrington Stanley vs Forest Green of our times isn't it? Even with the history of the big two parties, surely we now need to look elsewhere for leadership and inspiration when the core offer is so poor.
So this thread topic's exactly what's needed.
Unfortunately for us have you seen what is lurking elsewhere, Dumb and Dumber will not cut it any better than existing dummies. Who would be stupid enough to want Farage or Swinson.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
As a Lib Dem, Mike ought to be able to find more flattering photos of Swinson. The one on the day of her leadership acceptance was even worse - it made her look as though she had jaundice.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
On the basis of notional calculations made at the time of the 2010 Boundary changes the seat would have been marginal in 2005.
It dawned on me that Bozo appointed Rudd and Morgan because he'd run out of swivel-eyed women but still needed a couple more female cabinet ministers to fill some perceived quota.
As a Lib Dem, Mike ought to be able to find more flattering photos of Swinson. The one on the day of her leadership acceptance was even worse - it made her look as though she had jaundice.
It's shallow, but image matters.
She looks really nice in the Labour attack ad saying you don't wanna vote for her because Tory coalition. Unintentionally I assume
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
As always, it hangs on whether you believe the polls.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
Just watched Swinson on BBC2 politics. Somebody in the LibDems needs to tell her to get rid of the nervous tic of constantly saying "you know". It is not the speech of somebody with Number 10 in her sight.
Plus - her teeth are too big for her face! Weirdly distracting....
Just watched Swinson on BBC2 politics. Somebody in the LibDems needs to tell her to get rid of the nervous tic of constantly saying "you know". It is not the speech of somebody with Number 10 in her sight.
Plus - her teeth are too big for her face! Weirdly distracting....
Yes, Chuka is the real star I feel, Jo the warm up act
Under almost any scenario most of the 12 Scottish tories are gone. Ruth Davidson has been very quiet recently. A no deal Brexit is now more unlikely than ever it will be a no deal Exit.
There has to be a good chance Ruth Davidson will leave politics. Brexit has utterly undermined her political position.
I don't see the point of setting up a Scottish Conservative Party that is somewhat associated with a Brexit Party Except In Name that is so toxic they need to get away.
Unless the point is to set up a properly Scottish Conservative Party ahead of independence that Malcolm G etc could sign up to
Either way I don't see Davidson having any reason to stay around.
Are you scots?
My guess is that the tories will now hoover up the unionist vote and increase their representation at the expense of the SNP.
Yes. There is a market for British, not Scottish, worth maybe 15% of the vote. The Conservatives wouldn't get any Westminster MPs and would be totally clobbered if they led any independence referendum from a unionist side.
That wasn't the market Ruth Davidson was playing in. Note past tense.
Missed BoJo's First Commons performance (was at a Service of Thanksgiving) but it seems to have been a showstopper anway
It's where we would have been three years ago if only Mr (Mrs?) Gove hadn't stuck their ambitious oar in.....
And by now we’d be welcoming someone like Mrs May into office as better able to bring the country back together after three years of divisive failure under Bozo.
It dawned on me that Bozo appointed Rudd and Morgan because he'd run out of swivel-eyed women but still needed a couple more female cabinet ministers to fill some perceived quota.
Even he regards Andrea Jenkyns as a loon too far.
Morgan: sacked by May (tick); worked with Bojo's buddy Malthouse and others on "getting Brexit done" (tick).
Rudd: gave Bojo valuable Remainery support in the leadership contest (tick).
Admittedly, in a reshuffle where people like Mordaunt got fired (and especially given Morgan's previous anti-Boris stance), I'm a little surprised.. but I can see how both have done their bit to be redeemed.
I see Watson has waved goodbye to Northern Ireland with his pride in "Britain", not the UK......
Northern Irish unionists would generally consider themselves British, which is the word Watson uses.
The term "British Isles" is less used these days due to Irish sensitivities, and nationalists and those in the Republic of Ireland understandably wouldn't identify themselves as British. But, as a geographical fact, Ireland is one of the British Isles and those there have every bit as much right to call themselves British as those on the Isle of Wight (or not - up to them). Great Britain is simply the largest of the British Isles.
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
As always, it hangs on whether you believe the polls.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
But Labour was the clear second there - within 5,000 votes of JRM - in 2010 despite any Libdem boost from Cleggmania etc.
Under almost any scenario most of the 12 Scottish tories are gone. Ruth Davidson has been very quiet recently. A no deal Brexit is now more unlikely than ever it will be a no deal Exit.
There has to be a good chance Ruth Davidson will leave politics. Brexit has utterly undermined her political position.
I don't see the point of setting up a Scottish Conservative Party that is somewhat associated with a Brexit Party Except In Name that is so toxic they need to get away.
Unless the point is to set up a properly Scottish Conservative Party ahead of independence that Malcolm G etc could sign up to
Either way I don't see Davidson having any reason to stay around.
Are you scots?
My guess is that the tories will now hoover up the unionist vote and increase their representation at the expense of the SNP.
Yes. There is a market for British, not Scottish, worth maybe 15% of the vote. The Conservatives wouldn't get any Westminster MPs and would be totally clobbered if they led any independence referendum from a unionist side.
That wasn't the market Ruth Davidson was playing in. Note past tense.
'My guess is that the tories will now hoover up the unionist vote and increase their representation at the expense of the SNP.'
Just watched Swinson on BBC2 politics. Somebody in the LibDems needs to tell her to get rid of the nervous tic of constantly saying "you know". It is not the speech of somebody with Number 10 in her sight.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
It isn’t a seat that Labour can win. Which isn’t to say Labour can’t come second - and they have.
But the probability of being able to win a seat and the probability of being in second place aren’t as closely correlated as you might think.
It is a seat the LibDems could win - as demonstrated by the balance of votes in both this year’s local and Euro elections. But it will depend on Labour voters seeing where the new land lies.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
On the basis of notional calculations made at the time of the 2010 Boundary changes the seat would have been marginal in 2005.
You are definitely doing an HYFD. You are ignoring the fact that I accepted originally they could win in a landslide situation (it was in my analysis) and are using really dubious data (notional calculations on such boundary changes are not that accurate) and even then it only becomes marginal (if it had existed) during a period of big wins by Labour.
I was simply arguing that LDs can get the tactical vote (particularly currently) but Labour can not (enough to unseat JRM).
The LDs probably won't and things may change to make this scenario redundant (LDs drop in the polls).
Everything has changed since the last election. Looking at results from 2017 and saying the LDs are nowhere and Lab are 2nd and assuming that is guide is nonsense. The LDs got massacred in 2017 so you have to look further back and see if it really is a straight Lab/Con seat.
There biggest problem for the LDs could be the targeting of easier pickings near by.
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
As always, it hangs on whether you believe the polls.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
But Labour was the clear second there - within 5,000 votes of JRM - in 2010 despite any Libdem boost from Cleggmania etc.
Being second doesn’t mean Labour has a chance of winning.
Under almost any scenario most of the 12 Scottish tories are gone. Ruth Davidson has been very quiet recently. A no deal Brexit is now more unlikely than ever it will be a no deal Exit.
There has to be a good chance Ruth Davidson will leave politics. Brexit has utterly undermined her political position.
I don't see the point of setting up a Scottish Conservative Party that is somewhat associated with a Brexit Party Except In Name that is so toxic they need to get away.
Unless the point is to set up a properly Scottish Conservative Party ahead of independence that Malcolm G etc could sign up to
Either way I don't see Davidson having any reason to stay around.
Are you scots?
My guess is that the tories will now hoover up the unionist vote and increase their representation at the expense of the SNP.
Yes. There is a market for British, not Scottish, worth maybe 15% of the vote. The Conservatives wouldn't get any Westminster MPs and would be totally clobbered if they led any independence referendum from a unionist side.
That wasn't the market Ruth Davidson was playing in. Note past tense.
To add to this The SCon surge was based on mass LD switching in the northeast. They are not going to stay switched at the next election.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
It isn’t a seat that Labour can win. Which isn’t to say Labour can’t come second - and they have.
But the probability of being able to win a seat and the probability of being in second place aren’t as closely correlated as you might think.
It is a seat the LibDems could win - as demonstrated by the balance of votes in both this year’s local and Euro elections. But it will depend on Labour voters seeing where the new land lies.
With respect , given that Labour was within 5,000 votes of JRM in 2010 - despite the Libdem Cleggmania boost - there is a strong likelihood that Labour would have won there in 2005.
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
As always, it hangs on whether you believe the polls.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
But Labour was the clear second there - within 5,000 votes of JRM - in 2010 despite any Libdem boost from Cleggmania etc.
Being second doesn’t mean Labour has a chance of winning.
And our politics today is nothing like 2010.
Indeed - even at present poll levels the LibDem vote is well below levels recorded in that campaign. Some polls only have them on 15%/16% with Labour on 28%/29%.
Talking up the LibDems is all well and good but there is a risk they will do a Farage and not show up at a general election. Even more of a risk with Farage's BXP.
As always, it hangs on whether you believe the polls.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
It is not just the polls, or the polls and the seat/swing modelling, but also the question of whether the election will be decided on the issue of Brexit. We have seen before, especially with Ukip, that one cannot just read across from one class of election to the next.
So the polls might have an entirely correct answer to quite the wrong question.
As a Lib Dem, Mike ought to be able to find more flattering photos of Swinson. The one on the day of her leadership acceptance was even worse - it made her look as though she had jaundice.
It's shallow, but image matters.
She looks really nice in the Labour attack ad saying you don't wanna vote for her because Tory coalition. Unintentionally I assume
Probably. That's the point, though. She looks absolutely fine, but somehow contrives regularly to be photographed or filmed by incompetent amateurs.
In contrast Boris deliberately looks like a mess, but is a well shot mess.
The leadership acceptance speech was especially egregious, as they had complete control of lighting and cameras.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
On the basis of notional calculations made at the time of the 2010 Boundary changes the seat would have been marginal in 2005.
You are definitely doing an HYFD. You are ignoring the fact that I accepted originally they could win in a landslide situation (it was in my analysis) and are using really dubious data (notional calculations on such boundary changes are not that accurate) and even then it only becomes marginal (if it had existed) during a period of big wins by Labour.
I was simply arguing that LDs can get the tactical vote (particularly currently) but Labour can not (enough to unseat JRM).
The LDs probably won't and things may change to make this scenario redundant (LDs drop in the polls).
Everything has changed since the last election. Looking at results from 2017 and saying the LDs are nowhere and Lab are 2nd and assuming that is guide is nonsense. The LDs got massacred in 2017 so you have to look further back and see if it really is a straight Lab/Con seat.
There biggest problem for the LDs could be the targeting of easier pickings near by.
Yes.
And if polls stay as they are (noting of course that there is a perfectly reasonable counter-argument that a GE might drive a return to two-party politics) the collapse in the Labour vote and the surge in LibDem support has to appear somewhere. And a seat like NE Somerset is very likely to be well above average in terms of Lab-LibD swing, based on actual votes cast there this year.
Our success as punters is going to rest heavily on our ability to read the new political landscape and not get overly distracted by looking back at past results with UNS fixed in our minds.
And if you think Boris is storming it, well I have a Garden Bridge to sell you. He has evaded almost every question in a way that would seem very familiar to any Mayite. The more I see him the more I think he wants to piss the quality of remaining 50 odd years I have left here away to fuel his ambition. Prick.
The Lib Dems need defections. Don't be fooled by Johnson's Mussolini tomfoolery. He is more unpleasantly right wing than Farage. I've no doubt that the country will quickly grow to despise him but without a credible Labour leader it's all down to the Lib Dems
I see Watson has waved goodbye to Northern Ireland with his pride in "Britain", not the UK......
Northern Irish unionists would generally consider themselves British, which is the word Watson uses.
The term "British Isles" is less used these days due to Irish sensitivities, and nationalists and those in the Republic of Ireland understandably wouldn't identify themselves as British. But, as a geographical fact, Ireland is one of the British Isles and those there have every bit as much right to call themselves British as those on the Isle of Wight (or not - up to them). Great Britain is simply the largest of the British Isles.
It’s not geographical “fact” that the archipelago is the “British Isles”, that’s just a name, a nomenclature that was, as you say, commonly used until the second half of the late C20. You can argue that it is a fact that we are all part of the same archipelago (I would agree) but so are Corsica and Sardinia and I don’t know of a collective name for them.
The name, as with all names, is up for grabs and can always be changed. I don’t like the rather worthy “These Islands”, Dairmud Maculloch’s “Atlantic Islands” doesn’t work because it could equally include the Canaries, and I can’t think of a suitable alternative. I once suggested the “Anglo-Celtic Islands” to someone but they thought I was taking the piss.
I really enjoyed Boris's performance today. It was a breath of fresh air in what has been a stolid mess. I even thought Bercow was slightly better behaved!
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
On the basis of notional calculations made at the time of the 2010 Boundary changes the seat would have been marginal in 2005.
You are definitely doing an HYFD. You are ignoring the fact that I accepted originally they could win in a landslide situation (it was in my analysis) and are using really dubious data (notional calculations on such boundary changes are not that accurate) and even then it only becomes marginal (if it had existed) during a period of big wins by Labour.
I was simply arguing that LDs can get the tactical vote (particularly currently) but Labour can not (enough to unseat JRM).
The LDs probably won't and things may change to make this scenario redundant (LDs drop in the polls).
Everything has changed since the last election. Looking at results from 2017 and saying the LDs are nowhere and Lab are 2nd and assuming that is guide is nonsense. The LDs got massacred in 2017 so you have to look further back and see if it really is a straight Lab/Con seat.
There biggest problem for the LDs could be the targeting of easier pickings near by.
Yes.
And if polls stay as they are (noting of course that there is a perfectly reasonable counter-argument that a GE might drive a return to two-party politics) the collapse in the Labour vote and the surge in LibDem support has to appear somewhere. And a seat like NE Somerset is very likely to be well above average in terms of Lab-LibD swing, based on actual votes cast there this year.
Our success as punters is going to rest heavily on our ability to read the new political landscape and not get overly distracted by looking back at past results with UNS fixed in our minds.
But in 2010 there were polls putting the LibDems clearly ahead of Labour right up to Polling Day . Despite that , Labour was within 10% of winning here - and might well have done so in 2005 - never mind 1997 and 2001.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
It isn’t a seat that Labour can win. Which isn’t to say Labour can’t come second - and they have.
But the probability of being able to win a seat and the probability of being in second place aren’t as closely correlated as you might think.
It is a seat the LibDems could win - as demonstrated by the balance of votes in both this year’s local and Euro elections. But it will depend on Labour voters seeing where the new land lies.
With respect , given that Labour was within 5,000 votes of JRM in 2010 - despite the Libdem Cleggmania boost - there is a strong likelihood that Labour would have won there in 2005.
That is a worthless statement given where we are now.
You have to make the assumption that the vote share is now split four ways - and I fully recognise that other arguments and scenarios are available, as a I said below.
But once you pass this assumption, it is a nonsense to apply the thinking and models developed in a world of small percentage swings between two large parties to the current environment where both Tory and Labour are seeing half of their vote share disappear and minor parties are surging from single digit percentages up to 20+% of the vote.
Missed BoJo's First Commons performance (was at a Service of Thanksgiving) but it seems to have been a showstopper anway
It's where we would have been three years ago if only Mr (Mrs?) Gove hadn't stuck their ambitious oar in.....
Yes, love him or loathe him Boris has brought new energy, charisma and passion to No 10
He’s been there less than 24 hours FFS. People were eulogising May in similar ways three years ago. The public, who had no say in his appointment either, see right through the charade. Gove tried to save us but he only managed to postpone the arrival of the man who dooms the U.K.
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get? b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
On the basis of notional calculations made at the time of the 2010 Boundary changes the seat would have been marginal in 2005.
You are definitely doing an HYFD. You are ignoring the fact that I accepted originally they could win in a landslide situation (it was in my analysis) and are using really dubious data (notional calculations on such boundary changes are not that accurate) and even then it only becomes marginal (if it had existed) during a period of big wins by Labour.
I was simply arguing that LDs can get the tactical vote (particularly currently) but Labour can not (enough to unseat JRM).
The LDs probably won't and things may change to make this scenario redundant (LDs drop in the polls).
Everything has changed since the last election. Looking at results from 2017 and saying the LDs are nowhere and Lab are 2nd and assuming that is guide is nonsense. The LDs got massacred in 2017 so you have to look further back and see if it really is a straight Lab/Con seat.
There biggest problem for the LDs could be the targeting of easier pickings near by.
Yes.
And if polls stay as they are (noting of course that there is a perfectly reasonable counter-argument that a GE might drive a return to two-party politics) the collapse in the Labour vote and the surge in LibDem support has to appear somewhere. And a seat like NE Somerset is very likely to be well above average in terms of Lab-LibD swing, based on actual votes cast there this year.
Our success as punters is going to rest heavily on our ability to read the new political landscape and not get overly distracted by looking back at past results with UNS fixed in our minds.
But in 2010 there were polls putting the LibDems clearly ahead of Labour right up to Polling Day . Despite that , Labour was within 10% of winning here - and might well have done so in 2005 - never mind 1997 and 2001.
Of course there is an argument that the polls might be wrong. Or that things might change as a GE approaches, or during the campaign.
However if the polls aren’t wrong, and don’t change, then NE Somerset is a clear LibDem target and a Labour vote is a Wasted Vote.
Comments
If it wasnt for Brexit and also the profligacy in spending commitments I would be optimistic- he seems really up for it
So this thread topic's exactly what's needed.
And yes, I have been very surprised by Boris today and his filleting of Corbyn and McDonnell has been long overdue by the conservative party
1. Joe
2. Jess
3.
4.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/25/boris-johnson-new-cabinet-prime-minister-ministerial-party-country
The question is what do we think the 'it' is?
What is he mainly keen to promote?
(a) The national interest.
(b) The party interest.
(c) Boris Johnson.
He should be composing an apology to Mrs Leon Brittan
Plus - her teeth are too big for her face! Weirdly distracting....
You said Lab would have won in 1997 and 2001:
a) What part of my 'can only win if on course for a landslide anyway' did you not get?
b) You are doing an HYFD here 'Would have won'? You just don't know that.
The one on the day of her leadership acceptance was even worse - it made her look as though she had jaundice.
It's shallow, but image matters.
Even he regards Andrea Jenkyns as a loon too far.
Picking up the NE Somerset discussion from the previous thread, based on the 2017 result it’s a safe Tory seat with Labour a clear second.
Yet on the national polls both Tory and Labour have lost about half of their GE vote share and the LibDem vote has doubled or trebled.
These vote shifts won’t fall evenly, and the odds are that a seat like NE Somerset - which the LibDems “won” in this year’s local elections and polled very well in the Euro elections - is likely to be one where the remainer shift to the LibDems is greater than average.
On a UNS model the Tories are still clear winner with Lib and Lab fighting for second place. On Flavible’s more sophisticated (not necessarily more accurate) model, the LibDems are running the Tories close for first place.
Aside from our political futures, the betting opportunities, and risks, are likely to focus upon calling seats such as this correctly.
That wasn't the market Ruth Davidson was playing in. Note past tense.
Rudd: gave Bojo valuable Remainery support in the leadership contest (tick).
Admittedly, in a reshuffle where people like Mordaunt got fired (and especially given Morgan's previous anti-Boris stance), I'm a little surprised.. but I can see how both have done their bit to be redeemed.
The term "British Isles" is less used these days due to Irish sensitivities, and nationalists and those in the Republic of Ireland understandably wouldn't identify themselves as British. But, as a geographical fact, Ireland is one of the British Isles and those there have every bit as much right to call themselves British as those on the Isle of Wight (or not - up to them). Great Britain is simply the largest of the British Isles.
That's a keeper.
But the probability of being able to win a seat and the probability of being in second place aren’t as closely correlated as you might think.
It is a seat the LibDems could win - as demonstrated by the balance of votes in both this year’s local and Euro elections. But it will depend on Labour voters seeing where the new land lies.
I was simply arguing that LDs can get the tactical vote (particularly currently) but Labour can not (enough to unseat JRM).
The LDs probably won't and things may change to make this scenario redundant (LDs drop in the polls).
Everything has changed since the last election. Looking at results from 2017 and saying the LDs are nowhere and Lab are 2nd and assuming that is guide is nonsense. The LDs got massacred in 2017 so you have to look further back and see if it really is a straight Lab/Con seat.
There biggest problem for the LDs could be the targeting of easier pickings near by.
And our politics today is nothing like 2010.
If the Tories did not have a leader committed to deliver Brexit though it may have been
So the polls might have an entirely correct answer to quite the wrong question.
That's the point, though. She looks absolutely fine, but somehow contrives regularly to be photographed or filmed by incompetent amateurs.
In contrast Boris deliberately looks like a mess, but is a well shot mess.
The leadership acceptance speech was especially egregious, as they had complete control of lighting and cameras.
And if polls stay as they are (noting of course that there is a perfectly reasonable counter-argument that a GE might drive a return to two-party politics) the collapse in the Labour vote and the surge in LibDem support has to appear somewhere. And a seat like NE Somerset is very likely to be well above average in terms of Lab-LibD swing, based on actual votes cast there this year.
Our success as punters is going to rest heavily on our ability to read the new political landscape and not get overly distracted by looking back at past results with UNS fixed in our minds.
https://www.netweather.tv/live-weather/radar
I don't agree with his politics and he has other faults, but lack of energy, charisma and passion are not amongst them.
The name, as with all names, is up for grabs and can always be changed. I don’t like the rather worthy “These Islands”, Dairmud Maculloch’s “Atlantic Islands” doesn’t work because it could equally include the Canaries, and I can’t think of a suitable alternative. I once suggested the “Anglo-Celtic Islands” to someone but they thought I was taking the piss.
A positive message is right wing ? That’s a new one..
You have to make the assumption that the vote share is now split four ways - and I fully recognise that other arguments and scenarios are available, as a I said below.
But once you pass this assumption, it is a nonsense to apply the thinking and models developed in a world of small percentage swings between two large parties to the current environment where both Tory and Labour are seeing half of their vote share disappear and minor parties are surging from single digit percentages up to 20+% of the vote.
However if the polls aren’t wrong, and don’t change, then NE Somerset is a clear LibDem target and a Labour vote is a Wasted Vote.
"I have as much chance of becoming Prime Minister as of being decapitated by a frisbee or of finding Elvis." - 2003.
"My chances of being PM are about as good as the chances of finding Elvis on Mars, or my being reincarnated as an olive." - 2004.