politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New PB / Polling Matters podcast. And they’re off! General Ele

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New PB / Polling Matters podcast. And they’re off! General Election 2019 kicks off.

Keiran Pedley and Leo Barasi look at the numbers as a December 12th election is announced. Who is best placed? What is the path to victory for each party and what should we look out for in the coming weeks?

Read the full story here

DavidL

Oh first?

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

TheScreamingEagles

67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

kle4

New podcast? Splendid

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Watch that LD number plummet!

(Actually I do think they'll double their vote from last time - they did surprisingly poorly - but they'll do what they need to do stop the Tories. Because stopping Brexit requires it).

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712

MarqueeMark

kle4 said:

New podcast? Splendid

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Watch that LD number plummet!

(Actually I do think they'll double their vote from last time - they did surprisingly poorly).

But the squeeze is on.....

TheScreamingEagles

Oh phew, I've not violated an embargo.

Byronic

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Is this the first national VI poll since it became obvious we weren't Brexiting on Halloween?

If so, I think the Tories will be mildly encouraged. No damage incurred.

FrancisUrquhart

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

FrancisUrquhart

Byronic said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Is this the first national VI poll since it became obvious we weren't Brexiting on Halloween?

If so, I think the Tories will be mildly encouraged. No damage incurred.

Boris getting a deal that had better PR than Mays has certainly helped. If he had not got a deal, i think he would be in a lot more trouble.

TheScreamingEagles

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

Byronic

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

kle4

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Eh, it was one where they only had an 8% lead before. While I'm sure they'd like all the polls to match the ones with larger leads, if 8% is on the lower end of their leads I'm sure they'll be happy. So long as it actually manifests of course.

But that BXP and LD share is pretty high for both Lab and Con to be very happy.

Gabs2

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712

That 80% tactical voting is shockingly good for the Tories.

Big_G_NorthWales

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh phew, I've not violated an embargo.

I read it in my online copy hence why I posted the numbers earlier

But there is a lot in the individual questions that should worry labour

TheScreamingEagles

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

nico67

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

Big_G_NorthWales

TheScreamingEagles said:

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris

RH1992

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

I would be too. Labour are starting from roughly the same position as 2017 at around 25%, but the Tories in 2017 were averaging 40-42%. Granted, the Tories are dampened by the Brexit Party to a degree so we'll see if a squeeze happens on that side too.

FrancisUrquhart

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

HYUFD

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

kle4

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

1923 was the last time my area elected a non Tory. Purely for variety it might be nice for the next December election to see things change, but I doubt it.

Foxy

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

Looking around my local seats BXP candidates seem to be selected for most. 14 days though to see if they all get nomination forms signed.

FrancisUrquhart

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris

The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.

FrancisUrquhart

Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

kle4

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris

The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.

It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.

FrancisUrquhart

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris

The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.

It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.

And for leave voters?

glw

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

That's my view too. God alone knows how a more divided House of Commons is meant to help getting Brexit done. Not that Brexit will be done anytime soon anyway.

moonshine

When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

FrancisUrquhart

glw said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

That's my view too. God alone knows how a more divided House of Commons is meant to help getting Brexit done. Not that Brexit will be done anytime soon anyway.

Another GE in 2020....

MaxPB

The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.

BigRich

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712

Im not shore how legit these tactical question are. 68% of Lib Dem would vote tactically to stop Con and 39% would vote tactical to stop Lab so that 107% who are the 7 % who would vote tactically to stop both Con and Lab, planing on voting for THE BREXIT PARTY???

Gabs2

68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?

NickPalmer

TheScreamingEagles said:

67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.

glw

FrancisUrquhart said:

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.

kle4

FrancisUrquhart said:

kle4 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Byronic said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.

Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.

The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris

The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.

It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.

And for leave voters?

They'll cling to the official policy as reason they can stick with their traditional labour vote and not throw in with Boris

Foxy

Gabs2 said:

68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?

Surely it just depends on what constituency they are in. SNP, PC are also options.

TheScreamingEagles

moonshine said:

When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

June 2017.

YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.

kle4

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.

I think someone's trying to bounce BXP into a small scale strategy. But even if Farage were not so ego driven, it's a lot of candidates who would need to stand down, he might not be able to persuade the party. He might stick to his guns rather than see candidates say they'll stand as indys or something.

isam

Election fever hitting my Facebook feed

Gabs2

Foxy said:

Gabs2 said:

68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?

Surely it just depends on what constituency they are in. SNP, PC are also options.

Ah the nationalists make more sense. Still, it is hard to imagine a Lib Dem that despises Labour and the Tories but is fine with the SNP or Plaid.

Sunil_Prasannan

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.

Nige has had seven failed shots at gaining a Westminster seat and counting...

SunnyJim

If 80% of TBP voters would vote tactically to stop Labour then there is clearly a sizeable portion of their 12% up for grabs if they only field candidates in a limited number of seats.

Foxy

NickPalmer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.

That as many Lab voters are willing to vote tactically as LD is a hopeful sign. That should bring a lot more LD target seats into prospects across Shire England.

HYUFD

https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1189683301549826048?s=20

moonshine

TheScreamingEagles said:

moonshine said:

When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

June 2017.

YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.

MRP = FMUMSP ?

GIN1138

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

If that was Opinium or YouGov it would be somewhat concerning but for Survation it's not bad for Con.

Though it goes without saying its very, very early days with this general election.

kle4

Foxy said:

NickPalmer said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.

That as many Lab voters are willing to vote tactically as LD is a hopeful sign. That should bring a lot more LD target seats into prospects across Shire England.

Requires labour voters to accept they are not the best placed despite being second in many of them though. It makes sense, but is a harder sell.

TheScreamingEagles

moonshine said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

moonshine said:

When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

June 2017.

YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.

MRP = FMUMSP ?

Oui.

Foxy

isam said:

Election fever hitting my Facebook feed

If I were you, I would get some new friends...

glw

Sunil_Prasannan said:

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.

Nige has had seven failed shots at gaining a Westminster seat and counting...

Still a way to go before the takes the record from Lord Sutch then.

BigRich

If we do end up with a Lib dem and Labour coalition will there be another referendum?

moonshine

TheScreamingEagles said:

moonshine said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

moonshine said:

When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

June 2017.

YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.

MRP = FMUMSP ?

Oui.

Polling people in December should be a good laugh for the pollsters.

HYUFD

42% of voters would have been more likely to vote Labour without Corbyn as leader, only 18% less likely.

51% would fear a Corbyn premiership, only 23% feel joy.

44% blame Parliament for us still being in the EU, 32% blame Boris, 11% blame the EU.

52% oppose a 2nd indyref in Scotland, only 27% for.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

kyf_100

FrancisUrquhart said:

Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

The entire third reich was knocking back Pervitin (more or less the same thing) throughout most of WWII. Plenty of people use speed as a productivity aid, as it makes mind numbingly repetitive tasks enjoyable. I've known brickies, shelf stackers and van drivers who've used it on the job... Not condoning it, just saying it's rife, particularly with a lot of blue collar / manual work.

AndyJS

Survation with Flavible:

Con 338
Lab 188
LD 53
SNP 48
PC 4
Grn 1

https://flavible.co.uk/userprediction/gb/34/26/19/12/1/3.1/0.5/0.7

Foxy

BigRich said:

If we do end up with a Lib dem and Labour coalition will there be another referendum?

Yes, that is both parties policy.

I wouldn't expect coalition though, just a minority government, with cross party support on some issues, at least while Jezza is leader.

HYUFD

Preferred PM

Boris 42%
Corbyn 19%
Swinson 15%

Tories lead Labour on the economy, defence, jobs, foreign relations, trade and even the NHS. Labour just lead on welfare

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

isam

Foxy said:

isam said:

Election fever hitting my Facebook feed

If I were you, I would get some new friends...

Most of my friends aren’t on it!

nunu2

FrancisUrquhart said:

Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

Look at the number of homeless on CA and you'll see where that number comes from.

AndyJS

FrancisUrquhart said:

Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

Seems to be a case of meth addicts on the west coast and opioid addicts elsewhere in the US.

Foxy

In the latest bit of weirdness from across the pond, Donald has tweeted a fake picture of himself giving a medal to a dog...

https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1189630141401571328?s=19

Charles

kle4 said:

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

nico67 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.

That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.

I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.

I think someone's trying to bounce BXP into a small scale strategy. But even if Farage were not so ego driven, it's a lot of candidates who would need to stand down, he might not be able to persuade the party. He might stick to his guns rather than see candidates say they'll stand as indys or something.

But if he says “you’re not a BXP candidate” presumably they can’t claim to be? At that point they are just another independent without a personal vote

Foxy

nunu2 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

Look at the number of homeless on CA and you'll see where that number comes from.

The third episode of Simon Reeve in the Americas is worth seeing, and has quite a big section on homelessness in LA. It's on Sunday nights and iplayer.

Barnesian

FrancisUrquhart said:

Link to mail polling

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

Headline figures are 34/26/19

In the data:

Trustworthy

Johnson -30
Corbyn -37
Swinson +20

Now that's interesting

The_Taxman

That picture of Rees-mogg is terrible. Born to rule pose!

Wulfrun_Phil

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.

The_Taxman

Barnesian said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Link to mail polling

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

Headline figures are 34/26/19

In the data:

Trustworthy

Johnson -30
Corbyn -37
Swinson +20

Now that's interesting

That is dreadful for Johnson given he is peak honeymoon. LD upto 2010 were usually seen as trustworthy, so that is interesting that Swinson has a positive score as up to a few months ago they were tainted by post 2010. I am surprised that JC has not got worse figures compared to BJ given the Tory/Brexit supporting media output. If I were still a Tory -30 would worry me...

GIN1138

Wulfrun_Phil said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.

Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris...

The_Taxman

GIN1138 said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.

Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris...

Not surprising given the Brexit supporting media. I would caution your glee. When Black Wednesday occured i seem to remember the Tories had a poll lead. It was only later things deteriorated and then when Blair became leader a couple of years later the Tories plumbed depths that were catastrophic for the Tories...

AramintaMoonbeamQC

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1189698619844288512

The_Taxman

AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1189698619844288512

Swing to the LD!

Interesting that I was just thinking you don't hear much about the Windsor MP. Wonder if he will stand again? I think TM is standing again in neighbouring Maidenhead.

RobD

MaxPB said:

The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.

This might help: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/30/brexit-party-could-help-tories-general-election-not-fighting/

HYUFD

The_Taxman said:

GIN1138 said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.

I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.

Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris...

Not surprising given the Brexit supporting media. I would caution your glee. When Black Wednesday occured i seem to remember the Tories had a poll lead. It was only later things deteriorated and then when Blair became leader a couple of years later the Tories plumbed depths that were catastrophic for the Tories...

After 14 years in power, the Tories have only been in 9 years

HYUFD

The_Taxman said:

Barnesian said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Link to mail polling

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

Headline figures are 34/26/19

In the data:

Trustworthy

Johnson -30
Corbyn -37
Swinson +20

Now that's interesting

That is dreadful for Johnson given he is peak honeymoon. LD upto 2010 were usually seen as trustworthy, so that is interesting that Swinson has a positive score as up to a few months ago they were tainted by post 2010. I am surprised that JC has not got worse figures compared to BJ given the Tory/Brexit supporting media output. If I were still a Tory -30 would worry me...

Corbyn has a 7% worse rating than Boris on trustworthy, trails Boris by 23% as best PM and 51% fear a Corbyn Premiership.

That is great for Boris and abysmal for Corbyn on any measure

Yellow_Submarine

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

justin124

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.

The_Taxman

RobD said:

MaxPB said:

The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.

This might help: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/30/brexit-party-could-help-tories-general-election-not-fighting/

I suspect it is just postering by TBP. Due to them being a new party with no GE track record, they have to be creative in how they get media attention. Another way to look at TBP is they are saying they are similar to the Tories, so it is safe to vote TBP instead of Tory. In the EU elections TBP engaged in this strategy and the Brexit supporting media assisted in presenting this view. The Tories could be screwed as they are going after Leave Labour voters...

HYUFD

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.

Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency

Chris

I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.

justin124

HYUFD said:

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.

Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency

I don't disagree with much of that.

Charles

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

justin124

It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.

The_Taxman

HYUFD said:

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.

Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency

The current sea change in scottish politics could wipe out the advantage of incumbency. Given Scotland voted 62% remain. That is a big pool of anti-tory tactical voting! The Tories could be gubbed!

Drutt

Chris said:

I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.

Surely there's no MV and the way it gets through is the WAB?

Chris

Drutt said:

Chris said:

I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.

Surely there's no MV and the way it gets through is the WAB?

By law there has to be a MV in the prescribed form, as well as the WAB.

My thought is that if he can by any means start the new session before 1 January, a MV will take only a few hours and will be of huge symbolic significance (especially as the Letwin amendment must still rankle).

Chris

Talking of betting, I wonder why Betfair still haven't settled the Brexit by 31/10/2019 and No Deal in 2019 markets, despite their own rules saying they would be settled when a extension was agreed, which it was (formally) yesterday.

HYUFD

The_Taxman said:

HYUFD said:

justin124 said:

HYUFD said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

Tories 350
Labour 208
LDs 33
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base

On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.

Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency

The current sea change in scottish politics could wipe out the advantage of incumbency. Given Scotland voted 62% remain. That is a big pool of anti-tory tactical voting! The Tories could be gubbed!

The latest Scotland only poll had the Tories losing 8 seats and holding 5 which was already factored in the 324 Tory total

HYUFD

justin124 said:

It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.

The Brexit Party were not around in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze either.

That 8% Tory lead is with the Brexit Party still on 12%

williamglenn

Does anyone know what Baker is referring to?

https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1189603578584977409?s=21

Chris

HYUFD said:

justin124 said:

It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.

The Brexit Party were not around in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze either.

That 8% Tory lead is with the Brexit Party still on 12%

Surely you've done enough now to become Lord Hyufd of Hyufd in the Principality of Wales and can stop trying now.

Yellow_Submarine

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

Chris

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

And if I remember the rules correctly, they'll need to keep standing all the way to closing time.

Charles

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play

The_Taxman

williamglenn said:

Does anyone know what Baker is referring to?

https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1189603578584977409?s=21

From looking at the comments Baker seems to be upset the LD have said BJ broke his promise to leave EU on the 31st oct 2019. Also some references to the LD being a local candidate. To be honest unless mainstream media pick it up i dont know why he is bothering as his twitter feed will change no votes in wycombe. Not unless he gets shit faced and starts saying things in intemperate language, which i doubt he will do! Seems a bit of a dull MP!

Endillion

Barnesian said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Link to mail polling

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

Headline figures are 34/26/19

In the data:

Trustworthy

Johnson -30
Corbyn -37
Swinson +20

Now that's interesting

Not really. No one knows much about Swinson yet.

One thing I'm quite confident about this campaign, is the longer it goes on, the weaker the LD position will look, and it will be largely because of negative reactions to Swinson. The LDs have been suckered into thinking she's a vote winner because of positive reaction to the cancel Brexit policy and how all over the place Labour are on the issue. It won't last.

Yellow_Submarine

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play

The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .

Charles

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play

The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .

I’m drawing a distinction between media coverage and the official OFCOM status

Yellow_Submarine

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Charles said:

Yellow_Submarine said:

Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP

The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.

I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play

The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .

I’m drawing a distinction between media coverage and the official OFCOM status

Yes, which is why I disagree with you. OFCOM regulated broadcasters use tge OFCOM party statuses to meet their statutory duty to provide ' balanced ' coverage during campaign periods. If the Brexit Party isn't designated a major party broadcasters won't be able to give them the same volume of coverage as those that are designated.

Yellow_Submarine

Labour Party affliate won't campaign for the Labour Party. The times we live in.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/31/jewish-group-removes-campaigning-support-for-labour-in-election