I see the hard Leaver Tories are today setting impossible conditions for a deal. Nothing will satisfy them. It makes compromise impossible.
This is why I favour revoke now.
You should have backed the Withdrawal Agreement in the first place then rather then set up a No Deal v Revoke showdown.
On today's Yougov poll figures Boris gets a Tory majority of 76 on a 4% swing from Labour to the Tories with 363 Tories, 182 Labour and 48 LD MPs based on electoral calculus
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
Yeah, I've seen a few maps on these weird numbers that produce outcomes in seats I just can't believe. F'rinstance I know the Stoke area is more Brexity and going in the Tory direction a bit, but I can't imagine all the seats going Tory. Also, St Albans is deffo looking like a LD target from Tories, but even on some of these strong Tory / weak LD numbers they are still predicted to flip it, and I find that less certain. I dunno how different models work, but I wonder if they're accounting Leave / Remain and EU results a bit favourably....
But Yougov is showing strong LD vote share and the Tory vote is much weaker than 2017. The problem the LDs face in St Albans is that Labour is also a significant force - having held the seat 1997 - 2005 . Their vote is not that likely to crumble tactically in favour of the Tory Little Helpers.
I mean, in recent local elections LDs have eaten up here; I think they got 55% of the overall vote last time. But at GE more Tories vote / more people are willing to vote Tory. I just don't think that flip is inevitable if numbers keep going the way they are.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
Option 3. It is immoral to lie but you don't have a contract yet so still have further time to negotiate.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
2 or 3 acceptable since both are honest. 1 and 4 dishonest.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
I would probably say option 1! I can understand why you might choose other options for ethical reasons but personally speaking as I don't have a high income or large amounts of savings I would be cut throat!
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
Option 3. It is immoral to lie but you don't have a contract yet so still have further time to negotiate.
Judging from a quick look at eBay, being offered £30 for a used iPhone 5 is a great deal. Hard to see how the shop would make any money on that.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
Option 3. It is immoral to lie but you don't have a contract yet so still have further time to negotiate.
Likely it was worth at least £30 and they will sell it above that anyway. Though if it will bug you it is not worth it for a tenner.
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
Yeah, I've seen a few maps on these weird numbers that produce outcomes in seats I just can't believe. F'rinstance I know the Stoke area is more Brexity and going in the Tory direction a bit, but I can't imagine all the seats going Tory. Also, St Albans is deffo looking like a LD target from Tories, but even on some of these strong Tory / weak LD numbers they are still predicted to flip it, and I find that less certain. I dunno how different models work, but I wonder if they're accounting Leave / Remain and EU results a bit favourably....
But Yougov is showing strong LD vote share and the Tory vote is much weaker than 2017. The problem the LDs face in St Albans is that Labour is also a significant force - having held the seat 1997 - 2005 . Their vote is not that likely to crumble tactically in favour of the Tory Little Helpers.
I disagree. Labour won St Albans with Tony Blair as leader, who was not worried by people getting rich.
Labour under Corbyn is very different. St Albans has lots of middle class professionals commuting into London and house prices are impacted as a result. There is also a reasonable Jewish population who are unlikely to view Corbyn favourably.
A radical Labour government is not going to entice your typical St Albans vote, let alone the personal characteristics of Corbyn.
There are one or two wards which do not have these attributes and may favour Labour, but I would predict that the Labour vote will crumble further in St Albans as a whole under a Corbyn leadership.
People misunderstand the 30 days. They are not to create alternative arrangements - these have already been created. And they have been created to work alongside the existing WDA. They are to repackage them, and make commitments alongside them, in a way that makes everyone look like they have won a small victory.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
2, same as you Nick. Its the same when I get a bill that has omitted items from it in a restaurant or a cafe or get too much change in a shop. Its just dishonest to do anything else and that is more important to me than the money.
Forriners who insist on having difficult to pronounce names? Better off rid of 'em! Bad eggs! Not sound chaps! Probably never went to Eton either.....
What on earth are you ranting on about? Until we hear some detail about this case it's best not to rush to judgement. Unless you have an agenda of course.
I am ranting on about the scandalous treatment of people who are British in all but legality. People who have contributed over the years in both tax and cultural terms to the well being of the country.
As for an agenda, I have several which you well know
Agenda 1) Brexit is a huge mistake. Stop it now while we can
Agenda 2) The Tory party has become UKIP and is no longer fit for govt
You become British by taking up citizenship - exactly the same as would apply to me In Spain. Every country has rules and procedures to be followed with regard to Citizenship and residency. They have to be followed. You are taking the whole thing at face value without a clue as to the real facts. Your agenda 1. shows shows no respect for democracy and as for 2. that also is up to all the voters not just you.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
2, same as you Nick. Its the same when I get a bill that has omitted items from it in a restaurant or a cafe or get too much change in a shop. Its just dishonest to do anything else and that is more important to me than the money.
Same. Not worth bothering about. If there was an extra zero, I might choose option 5. "You said £200, but as you've now offered £300 let's split the difference, £250." And be prepared to walk away if they were too surly to take it.
"I would predict that the Labour vote will crumble further in St Albans as a whole under a Corbyn leadership">
It's not just St Albans. In my far-edge-of-London-commuting constituency, not only Labour Remainers, but Labour Johnson haters (ie practically all of them), say they'll vote LibDem next time: their dislike of the Coalition is far outweighed by their dislike of Corbyn. They argue that life's too short to worry about what should have happened in 2010, that No Deal is unthinkable - and that the shock of a Labour crumble will force Labour into selecting a proper Social Democrat.
They're clear they're just lending the LibDems their vote for the country's sake and to get the real Labour Party back.
Which, mutatis mutandis, is what the Johnson-hating wing of our Tories (here: also over 50% of Tories) is saying as well. The overall YouGov numbers might be correct - but their effect will vary hugely by constituency. In times like these, Electoral Calculus is likely to be far less reliable than voting intention polls,
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
Yeah, I've seen a few maps on these weird numbers that produce outcomes in seats I just can't believe. F'rinstance I know the Stoke area is more Brexity and going in the Tory direction a bit, but I can't imagine all the seats going Tory. Also, St Albans is deffo looking like a LD target from Tories, but even on some of these strong Tory / weak LD numbers they are still predicted to flip it, and I find that less certain. I dunno how different models work, but I wonder if they're accounting Leave / Remain and EU results a bit favourably....
But Yougov is showing strong LD vote share and the Tory vote is much weaker than 2017. The problem the LDs face in St Albans is that Labour is also a significant force - having held the seat 1997 - 2005 . Their vote is not that likely to crumble tactically in favour of the Tory Little Helpers.
I disagree. Labour won St Albans with Tony Blair as leader, who was not worried by people getting rich.
Labour under Corbyn is very different. St Albans has lots of middle class professionals commuting into London and house prices are impacted as a result. There is also a reasonable Jewish population who are unlikely to view Corbyn favourably.
A radical Labour government is not going to entice your typical St Albans vote, let alone the personal characteristics of Corbyn.
There are one or two wards which do not have these attributes and may favour Labour, but I would predict that the Labour vote will crumble further in St Albans as a whole under a Corbyn leadership.
I cannot speak for St.Albans. But do not expect just because there are middle class professionals, they would not vote Labour. In fact, many middle class professionals vote Labour. They are also astute enough to work out who to vote for in the Remain/Brexit conundrum.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
Take the £30, give the extra tenner to the homeless.
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
UNS is far from perfect - but probably the best guide particularly as the 'swing' of 3.75% is not massive. Admittedly the Con to LD swing and Lab to LD swing is much bigger - but ,at the moment is largely a YouGov phenomenon. Most of the Labour seats at risk to the LDs are likely to be safe - with established candidates such as Simon Hughes and Greg Mulholland not standing again.
No it's not the best guide. With extreme changes in vote share, a better model is one based on proportionate swing moderated by incumbancy effects. Across all pollsters, the Labour vote share is down around 2/5ths from 40% to an average of around 24% and that is extreme as it stands. The definitive study comparing UNS to proportional swing is that on UKPR in May 2011 following the Lib Dems' meltdown in the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. In seats the Lib Dems held, the fall in their vote share was in all but one of 13 seats considerably more than implied by UNS. Effectively the larger the vote share they started with, the larger the fall in the LD vote, a pattern moderated slightly by incumbancy effects but by not enough to make a difference between winning and losing the seat.
I don't share your eternal optimism that the Labour vote will defy the polls, nor do others from Norwich from the look of it:
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
2, same as you Nick. Its the same when I get a bill that has omitted items from it in a restaurant or a cafe or get too much change in a shop. Its just dishonest to do anything else and that is more important to me than the money.
I tell people if they give me too much change, I once got an employee in Burger King into trouble as I gave them £10 and they gave me £20 in change. The manager went ballistic when I gave them the money back! But it is different if you are selling something IMO. I give money to street beggars but many on here would not, would the same people who say it is immoral to take the higher figure from a shop who want to buy something and make money out of you, give money to beggars?
One Aussie wicket down. Warner for 0. BBC grabbing at a straw by saying there was only one duck in Englands innings. Sadly, of course, it was the captain!
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
Yeah, I've seen a few maps on these weird numbers that produce outcomes in seats I just can't believe. F'rinstance I know the Stoke area is more Brexity and going in the Tory direction a bit, but I can't imagine all the seats going Tory. Also, St Albans is deffo looking like a LD target from Tories, but even on some of these strong Tory / weak LD numbers they are still predicted to flip it, and I find that less certain. I dunno how different models work, but I wonder if they're accounting Leave / Remain and EU results a bit favourably....
But Yougov is showing strong LD vote share and the Tory vote is much weaker than 2017. The problem the LDs face in St Albans is that Labour is also a significant force - having held the seat 1997 - 2005 . Their vote is not that likely to crumble tactically in favour of the Tory Little Helpers.
I disagree. Labour won St Albans with Tony Blair as leader, who was not worried by people getting rich.
Labour under Corbyn is very different. St Albans has lots of middle class professionals commuting into London and house prices are impacted as a result. There is also a reasonable Jewish population who are unlikely to view Corbyn favourably.
A radical Labour government is not going to entice your typical St Albans vote, let alone the personal characteristics of Corbyn.
There are one or two wards which do not have these attributes and may favour Labour, but I would predict that the Labour vote will crumble further in St Albans as a whole under a Corbyn leadership.
In 2017 it was white working class voters who had a problem with Corbyn and many switched to the Tories. Labour middle class support increased sharply.
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
UNS is far from perfect - but probably the best guide particularly as the 'swing' of 3.75% is not massive. Admittedly the Con to LD swing and Lab to LD swing is much bigger - but ,at the moment is largely a YouGov phenomenon. Most of the Labour seats at risk to the LDs are likely to be safe - with established candidates such as Simon Hughes and Greg Mulholland not standing again.
No it's not the best guide. With extreme changes in vote share, a better model is one based on proportionate swing moderated by incumbancy effects. Across all pollsters, the Labour vote share is down around 2/5ths from 40% to an average of around 24% and that is extreme as it stands. The definitive study comparing UNS to proportional swing is that on UKPR in May 2011 following the Lib Dems' meltdown in the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. In seats the Lib Dems held, the fall in their vote share was in all but one of 13 seats considerably more than implied by UNS. Effectively the larger the vote share they started with, the larger the fall in the LD vote, a pattern moderated slightly by incumbancy effects but by not enough to make a difference between winning and losing the seat.
I don't share your eternal optimism that the Labour vote will defy the polls, nor do others from Norwich from the look of it:
Interesting. The Twitter post from a Labour canvasser bemoaning the comments she was getting on Corbyn and Brexit in "remain-y Norwich" has been deleted.
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30! Option 2: £20! Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile) Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
Take the £30, give the extra tenner to the homeless.
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
UNS is far from perfect - but probably the best guide particularly as the 'swing' of 3.75% is not massive. Admittedly the Con to LD swing and Lab to LD swing is much bigger - but ,at the moment is largely a YouGov phenomenon. Most of the Labour seats at risk to the LDs are likely to be safe - with established candidates such as Simon Hughes and Greg Mulholland not standing again.
No it's not the best guide. With extreme changes in vote share, a better model is one based on proportionate swing moderated by incumbancy effects. Across all pollsters, the Labour vote share is down around 2/5ths from 40% to an average of around 24% and that is extreme as it stands. The definitive study comparing UNS to proportional swing is that on UKPR in May 2011 following the Lib Dems' meltdown in the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. In seats the Lib Dems held, the fall in their vote share was in all but one of 13 seats considerably more than implied by UNS. Effectively the larger the vote share they started with, the larger the fall in the LD vote, a pattern moderated slightly by incumbancy effects but by not enough to make a difference between winning and losing the seat.
I don't share your eternal optimism that the Labour vote will defy the polls, nor do others from Norwich from the look of it:
Interesting. The Twitter post from a Labour canvasser bemoaning the comments she was getting on Corbyn and Brexit in "remain-y Norwich" has been deleted.
On the basis of the Yougov poll - assuming UNS - Labour loses 34 seats to the Tories , 5 to the LDs and 6 to SNP. That would bring Labour down to 217 seats. The Tory gains are apartly offset by 14 losses to the LDs and circa 8 to the SNP. That generates a net gain of 12 seats bringing them to 329 - slightly below Cameron's 2015 total. In reality, I suspect that Labour would hang on in 4 of the 5 seats at risk to the LDs - only Sheffield Hallam would be likely to fall.
UNS cannot be applied in circumstances of extreme changes in the popular vote. In that poll the Labour vote is 18% down on average on its 2017 vote of 40%. There were plenty of seats across the UK where Labour secured well under 18% in 2017, and in those the fall in its vote must mathematically be less than 18%.
UNS is far from perfect - but probably the best guide particularly as the 'swing' of 3.75% is not massive. Admittedly the Con to LD swing and Lab to LD swing is much bigger - but ,at the moment is largely a YouGov phenomenon. Most of the Labour seats at risk to the LDs are likely to be safe - with established candidates such as Simon Hughes and Greg Mulholland not standing again.
No it's not the best guide. With extreme changes in vote share, a better model is one based on proportionate swing moderated by incumbancy effects. Across all pollsters, the Labour vote share is down around 2/5ths from 40% to an average of around 24% and that is extreme as it stands. The definitive study comparing UNS to proportional swing is that on UKPR in May 2011 following the Lib Dems' meltdown in the 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. In seats the Lib Dems held, the fall in their vote share was in all but one of 13 seats considerably more than implied by UNS. Effectively the larger the vote share they started with, the larger the fall in the LD vote, a pattern moderated slightly by incumbancy effects but by not enough to make a difference between winning and losing the seat.
I don't share your eternal optimism that the Labour vote will defy the polls, nor do others from Norwich from the look of it:
Interesting. The Twitter post from a Labour canvasser bemoaning the comments she was getting on Corbyn and Brexit in "remain-y Norwich" has been deleted.
I am not persuaded. Most polls have Labour now in the 25% - 30% range. Survation had them on 24% - but that was a UK figure with the GB vote share likely to be 25%. Even as things stand, Labour's vote share is where it was in late April 2017 with the Tory vote share being much lower.
Comments
Islington South and Finsbury Islington LIB gain from LAB : Emily Thornberry
Last week, I noticed that a small high street shop (not sure if part of a chain) was offering to buy phones. I looked in with my old iPhone5, which has been lying in a drawer since I upgraded, and the young assistant offered me £20, but said I needed to charge it up first so he could delete the data on it (I didn't even know that SIMless phones have data). So I did (maybe I could have got more somewhere, but £20 beats nowt, and it's local so very easy), and went back today.
"Fine," he said, and scratched his head - "Errr...did I say £20 or £30?"
Option 1: £30!
Option 2: £20!
Option 3: You said £20, but I'll take £30 (winning smile)
Option 4: I can't remember, shall we say £25?
Relevant fact: he was clearly a wage slave, not the owner, so had no reason to care. I suspect his bargaining range is £20-30 and he couldn't remember if I'd haggled.
I just automatically took option 2, but later thought I might have taken option 3 (indeed maybe he was even inviting it). A Greek colleague at work says, "If it was a chain, option 1, if a small shop option 2 - but hey, I am Greek, we haggle!".
What would pb'ers do?
It might well rain at Old Trafford and you'll be able to get a refund.
One fast bowler does not an Ashes winning summer make.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/david-koch-billionaire-conservative-activist-philanthropist-dies-79-n1045696
Labour under Corbyn is very different. St Albans has lots of middle class professionals commuting into London and house prices are impacted as a result. There is also a reasonable Jewish population who are unlikely to view Corbyn favourably.
A radical Labour government is not going to entice your typical St Albans vote, let alone the personal characteristics of Corbyn.
There are one or two wards which do not have these attributes and may favour Labour, but I would predict that the Labour vote will crumble further in St Albans as a whole under a Corbyn leadership.
Extremely (!) perceptive and prescient.
Missing only the lottery numbers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FqAaD_lsRw&t=17s
It's not just St Albans. In my far-edge-of-London-commuting constituency, not only Labour Remainers, but Labour Johnson haters (ie practically all of them), say they'll vote LibDem next time: their dislike of the Coalition is far outweighed by their dislike of Corbyn. They argue that life's too short to worry about what should have happened in 2010, that No Deal is unthinkable - and that the shock of a Labour crumble will force Labour into selecting a proper Social Democrat.
They're clear they're just lending the LibDems their vote for the country's sake and to get the real Labour Party back.
Which, mutatis mutandis, is what the Johnson-hating wing of our Tories (here: also over 50% of Tories) is saying as well. The overall YouGov numbers might be correct - but their effect will vary hugely by constituency. In times like these, Electoral Calculus is likely to be far less reliable than voting intention polls,
I don't share your eternal optimism that the Labour vote will defy the polls, nor do others from Norwich from the look of it:
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1164812742953324544