If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.
Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections
2010 LibDem 52.6 Con 12.2
2015 LibDem 35.9 Con 6.2
2017 LibDem 20.9 Con 24.8
It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.
But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.
The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.
The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
(OK, figured out what was wrong and edited it! Sorry for the extra post!)
From this description (at your linked page) The UK-Elect v11.45 experimental (Beta) method was used for the forecast, using overall GB-wide percentages combined with separate Scottish percentages, with Brexit-specific tactical voting enabled. Candidate-specific settings were not utilised, but the automatic addition of Brexit Party candidates was enabled. The current recommended default settings were used, which sets Brexit electoral importance to 8/10 ("Extremely Important" to most voters). This experimental method takes account of Brexit leave and remain support levels within each constituency and each party.
Is there perhaps a danger you are double-counting any Brexit effect when you set its importance to 8/10? If it is so important, would that not already be reflected in the polling?
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
Very strange to feel affection for such a malign human being - responsible for the deaths of several babies.
If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.
Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections
2010 LibDem 52.6 Con 12.2
2015 LibDem 35.9 Con 6.2
2017 LibDem 20.9 Con 24.8
It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.
But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.
The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.
The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
Which will also be advantageous for her as it means independence will dominate the debate leading up to the Scottish Parliament elections next year (I think I’m right in saying they will be next year, not 2021). And that unquestionably is where she is strong.
It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
If Tories are going to criticise Labour people over their Russian links they had better first make sure they have clean hands.
They don’t.
I leave it to others to judge whether it it is worse to be close to the Russians and their allies because of ideological affinity or because you have been seduced by money.
In fairness, in the case of Milne at least it’s both.
Milne is not in government, for now. Thank God. Others are.
No, but the original comment was about how his links to Russia neutered Labour attacks on the issue.
So in a sense Hodges was actually agreeing with you. He was saying that because Labour do not have clean hands on this they look rather hypocritical tweeting their outrage about Cummings et al. Which they do.
To be honest, I'm not that bothered about who is being the bigger hypocrite on this. I am very bothered about the lack of integrity in people in public life and their lack of scruples about who they take money from, associate with and give cover to. At best they are giving cover to some very nasty people, at worst they are laying themselves open to blackmail.
When dirty money (and the people it comes from) enters a system the stench spreads far and wide. It may not be as interesting as some blonde being shagged by a politician but its corrosive effects are far worse. The authorities are half asleep on the job, investigative journalism is thin on the ground and the public seem not to care. But it is degrading our public life and we ought to care about it and, more importantly, do something about it.
If I vote tory, I get Singapore. If I vote Labour, I get Venezuela. If I vote SNP I get somewhere nordic, perhaps Norway. If I vote Sinn Fein, I get the ROI. If I vote DUP, I get somewhere a little backward and puritanical - perhaps 17th Century Massachusetts. If I vote BXP, I get somehwhere quite English and in splendid isolation - maybe 1950s New Zealand. If I vote Green, I get somewhere less industrialised - Papua New Guinea would be good.
I think the Liberals are missing a trick - thus far I have failed to work out what their national panacea is. Perhaps the Netherlands?
Does anyone have some better ideas?
If I vote LibDem, I get Camberwick Green.
If I vote Plaid Cymru, I get Pre-Roman Britain.
Presumably if you vote Tory you get Trumpton. I assume Boris is the alter ego of Captain Flack.
If Tories are going to criticise Labour people over their Russian links they had better first make sure they have clean hands.
They don’t.
I leave it to others to judge whether it it is worse to be close to the Russians and their allies because of ideological affinity or because you have been seduced by money.
In fairness, in the case of Milne at least it’s both.
Milne is not in government, for now. Thank God. Others are.
No, but the original comment was about how his links to Russia neutered Labour attacks on the issue.
So in a sense Hodges was actually agreeing with you. He was saying that because Labour do not have clean hands on this they look rather hypocritical tweeting their outrage about Cummings et al. Which they do.
To be honest, I'm not that bothered about who is being the bigger hypocrite on this. I am very bothered about the lack of integrity in people in public life and their lack of scruples about who they take money from, associate with and give cover to. At best they are giving cover to some very nasty people, at worst they are laying themselves open to blackmail.
When dirty money (and the people it comes from) enters a system the stench spreads far and wide. It may not be as interesting as some blonde being shagged by a politician but its corrosive effects are far worse. The authorities are half asleep on the job, investigative journalism is thin on the ground and the public seem not to care. But it is degrading our public life and we ought to care about it and, more importantly, do something about it.
Indeed yes. And it is both concerning and puzzling that both major parties have leadership groups with such close links to a distinctly malign foreign regime.
If I vote tory, I get Singapore. If I vote Labour, I get Venezuela. If I vote SNP I get somewhere nordic, perhaps Norway. If I vote Sinn Fein, I get the ROI. If I vote DUP, I get somewhere a little backward and puritanical - perhaps 17th Century Massachusetts. If I vote BXP, I get somehwhere quite English and in splendid isolation - maybe 1950s New Zealand. If I vote Green, I get somewhere less industrialised - Papua New Guinea would be good.
I think the Liberals are missing a trick - thus far I have failed to work out what their national panacea is. Perhaps the Netherlands?
Does anyone have some better ideas?
If I vote LibDem, I get Camberwick Green.
If I vote Plaid Cymru, I get Pre-Roman Britain.
Presumably if you vote Tory you get Trumpton. I assume Boris is the alter ego of Captain Flack.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
If Tories are going to criticise Labour people over their Russian links they had better first make sure they have clean hands.
They don’t.
I leave it to others to judge whether it it is worse to be close to the Russians and their allies because of ideological affinity or because you have been seduced by money.
In fairness, in the case of Milne at least it’s both.
Milne is not in government, for now. Thank God. Others are.
No, but the original comment was about how his links to Russia neutered Labour attacks on the issue.
So in a sense Hodges was actually agreeing with you. He was saying that because Labour do not have clean hands on this they look rather hypocritical tweeting their outrage about Cummings et al. Which they do.
To be honest, I'm not that bothered about who is being the bigger hypocrite on this. I am very bothered about the lack of integrity in people in public life and their lack of scruples about who they take money from, associate with and give cover to. At best they are giving cover to some very nasty people, at worst they are laying themselves open to blackmail.
When dirty money (and the people it comes from) enters a system the stench spreads far and wide. It may not be as interesting as some blonde being shagged by a politician but its corrosive effects are far worse. The authorities are half asleep on the job, investigative journalism is thin on the ground and the public seem not to care. But it is degrading our public life and we ought to care about it and, more importantly, do something about it.
Indeed yes. And it is both concerning and puzzling that both major parties have leadership groups with such close links to a distinctly malign foreign regime.
There is a lot of evidence out there. It just needs the dots joining.
I said some time ago on this forum that the next scandal in the finance sector would likely relate to private banking, the inflow of dirty money and the influence it was seeking to buy. I remain of that view. There is the usual turning of blind eyes going on.
If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.
Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections
2010 LibDem 52.6 Con 12.2
2015 LibDem 35.9 Con 6.2
2017 LibDem 20.9 Con 24.8
It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.
But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.
The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.
The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
Which will also be advantageous for her as it means independence will dominate the debate leading up to the Scottish Parliament elections next year (I think I’m right in saying they will be next year, not 2021). And that unquestionably is where she is strong.
It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
I am not aware that they can be moved from 2021. I am not sure on any weakness on policing , still have more police than ever before. Education is always a weakness for incumbents , it will never be solved to satisfy everyone, bit like NHS.
Whats wrong with that? He comes over well and humorous
It begs everyone else to answer the question for him.
Was it the first woman he sent to the abortion clinic, or the second one? Or was it the child he had with another woman when he was married?
I think everyone knows Boris is a serial philanderer already
I wonder how disruptive to his campaign it would be if opponents began pursuing him with placards saying 'How many abortions have you been responsible for, Boris?'' and 'How many babies have had to die because of you'?
The more interesting angle would be to ask how Jacob squares his religious beliefs with supporting such a man.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
Very strange to feel affection for such a malign human being - responsible for the deaths of several babies.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
We need a leader, not a showman. If Boris wants to bluster and charm, he should start a chat show.
Good spot, but it is easier to hold the seat in a by-election.
I want Defectors who Held on in the subsequent GE.
(The record is better for by-elections, which is why the TIGgers should have called by-elections, for tactical reasons).
Whilst the defector (Emma Nicholson) stood down in 1997, her successor (John Burnett) held her seat at the 97 GE after she defected in 1995.
A lot of seats changed hands in 1997.
There's a reason why on election night a party regaining a seat they held at the last election but the MP subsequently defected is reported as a HOLD. The Tories could regain every defecting seat and every independent seat they'd won last time and that would be zero gains as far as the reporting is concerned - and rightly so!
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
We need a leader, not a showman. If Boris wants to bluster and charm, he should start a chat show.
Good leaders generally have charm and it is a useful skill for a Prime Minister in their job and not just at elections.
(OK, figured out what was wrong and edited it! Sorry for the extra post!)
From this description (at your linked page) The UK-Elect v11.45 experimental (Beta) method was used for the forecast, using overall GB-wide percentages combined with separate Scottish percentages, with Brexit-specific tactical voting enabled. Candidate-specific settings were not utilised, but the automatic addition of Brexit Party candidates was enabled. The current recommended default settings were used, which sets Brexit electoral importance to 8/10 ("Extremely Important" to most voters). This experimental method takes account of Brexit leave and remain support levels within each constituency and each party.
Is there perhaps a danger you are double-counting any Brexit effect when you set its importance to 8/10? If it is so important, would that not already be reflected in the polling?
Yes, there is a danger that it over-counts the Brexit effect. But the forecast will always try and achieve the national and regional target poll percentages, so basically using a strong Brexit effect typically increases the leading remain parties vote in remain-leaning seats, and the leading leave parties vote in the leave-leaning seats.
Very strange to feel affection for such a malign human being - responsible for the deaths of several babies.
One of the positive things about GB politics is that reproductive rights and religion are not political issues, but rightly considered matters of personal conscience. This is a long held, well observed and sensible consensus. We only need to look at the conflict it creates In US and NI politics to see why this is the consensus here.
Please stop trying to make it a political issue. Other than being deeply distasteful and personal, I think you’ll find it is probably more counter-productive to your viewpoint than you realise.
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
Good spot, but it is easier to hold the seat in a by-election.
I want Defectors who Held on in the subsequent GE.
(The record is better for by-elections, which is why the TIGgers should have called by-elections, for tactical reasons).
Whilst the defector (Emma Nicholson) stood down in 1997, her successor (John Burnett) held her seat at the 97 GE after she defected in 1995.
A lot of seats changed hands in 1997.
There's a reason why on election night a party regaining a seat they held at the last election but the MP subsequently defected is reported as a HOLD. The Tories could regain every defecting seat and every independent seat they'd won last time and that would be zero gains as far as the reporting is concerned - and rightly so!
But my point was in response to the question about holding a seat at the subsequent GE after an election. It is surely more difficult for a new candidate to do so than for the (popular in this case) incumbent. Yet Burnett did so, and in being able to do so achived something much more impressive than those seats where the defector remained as the MP.
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
Good stuff - I was worried you might have collided with the world's angriest lady (with whom you used to tussle) again somewhere in the political middle ground.
I think the public in general are pro sustainable, cruelty free farming, without going all vegan, and I notice that the tories wish to end live animal exports. I'd be surprised if foxhunting has met the focus group test this time either.
I'm very anti brexit but one silver lining I can see might be the ability to control the trade in low welfare pork, intensive poultry farming, and that the rural/farm voting tories would probably be up for that as much as the urbanites. I think there are votes all round for this.
Wouldn't have an opinion on badgers. From my own observations, they appear to cull themselves on roads perfectly well without intervention from firearms. I have never seen a live one.
Yes, I agree on the farming issue (of course) - we are in tactical alliance with the NFU, who are also alarmed by the prospect of lots of cheap and nasty imports destroying their position. Gove was first rate on this, as is the Labour shadow Sue Hayman (the MP for that threatened Workington seat). His successor seems promising too.
I did once go with the Badgers' Trust to watch badgers using night binoculars - a very magical experience. I was one of the 3 MPs who persuaded Hilary Benn to stop the cull in 2014 - he was sympathetic but needed evidence to persuade civil servants. There is no doubt that badgers can carry TB and infect cows (through urine traces), but if you kill a bunch of badgers in area X, the effect is that badgers from the next area observe the absence of competition and surge in - so what you're actually doing is speeding up the movement of badgers and therefore the spread of the disease. Farmer mostly like the cull because it's apparently Doing Something, but the Welsh policy of vaccination seems clearly superior.
Thinking about the downsides of the main (only?) LibDem policy of Revoke discussed upthread, it seems to me if they were to hold the balance of power on Dec 13th they would have to trade this with either of the main two parties - as neither would countenance straight-to-Revoke.
This would simply underline again to voters, as with tuition fees, how willing the LibDems are to sacrifice their manifesto commitments and key principles.
If this is highlighted before Dec 12th it cripples their key platform.
I have no idea why Swinson went so hard for Revoke. It’s likely to put off soft Tory Remainers without gaining much. A clear straight-to-Ref2 platform would have differentiated enough from Lab on Brexit.
Good spot, but it is easier to hold the seat in a by-election.
I want Defectors who Held on in the subsequent GE.
(The record is better for by-elections, which is why the TIGgers should have called by-elections, for tactical reasons).
Whilst the defector (Emma Nicholson) stood down in 1997, her successor (John Burnett) held her seat at the 97 GE after she defected in 1995.
A lot of seats changed hands in 1997.
There's a reason why on election night a party regaining a seat they held at the last election but the MP subsequently defected is reported as a HOLD. The Tories could regain every defecting seat and every independent seat they'd won last time and that would be zero gains as far as the reporting is concerned - and rightly so!
But my point was in response to the question about holding a seat at the subsequent GE after an election. It is surely more difficult for a new candidate to do so than for the (popular in this case) incumbent. Yet Burnett did so, and in being able to do so achived something much more impressive than those seats where the defector remained as the MP.
But the swing in that seat was no different than the swing in the rest of the country at the General Election!
Rather proves the point that defections make little difference to swing.
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
You come across as bitter saying that.
No. One Nation Conservatives are those like my local MP, Anne Milton. And they have been either expelled or driven out of the Conservative Party. I do not say Boris is an extremist, but he is quite happy to get into bed with the most extreme elements of his party and that has nothing to do with One Nation conservative thinking.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
I too saw nothing wrong with his answer. It wasn’t the best answer in the world, but neither did he put foot or any part of his body in it.
The interview overall though was his usual mix of atonal waffle when delivering set lines, and car crash bluff and bluster when asked to think.
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
You come across as bitter saying that.
No. One Nation Conservatives are those like my local MP, Anne Milton. And they have been either expelled or driven out of the Conservative Party. I do not say Boris is an extremist, but he is quite happy to get into bed with the most extreme elements of his party and that has nothing to do with One Nation conservative thinking.
Europhiles got expelled for refusing to follow the Tory whip. Europhilia has nothing to do with One Nation Conservativism which long predates the EU.
The comment that constituency effects even out may be true in the larger picture. It is patently not the case when considering Con/LD fights. There are hardly any LD seats where any local variation will let in the Conservatives (North Norfolk possibly). The London (and Surrey) local effect is a factor in 10 Conservative seats (and some Labour), with similar issues in other isolated Conservative seats such as Winchester. The constituency effects of Conservative defectors is also a one sided effect. In aggregate probably in excess of 25 Conservative held seats are vulnerable to potential (I do not say definite) local effects, whilst hardly any LD seats are similarly impacted.
Given the nature of this election such a lack of balance in such effects is material.
There was hat eating when Tory’s took all those seats in 2015. But Libdems ain’t getting them back with a revoke policy.
I never said they would. I simply pointed out the flaw in the original comments. However, there are a number of the 25 or so seats so affected that are very likely to go LD (with none likely to go the other way, from LD to Con, unless North Norfolk does so). I am happy to predict the following LD wins based on the local and constituency effects which
Totnes (Wollaston is the Conservative defector certain to win)
If you do not think this is a material deviation from UNS then I wish you well in your donations to the bookies.
"Totnes (Wollaston is the Conservative defector certain to win)"
Been on the ground in Totnes constituency like me, have you? Because if you had, you wouldn't paint it at 100%.
Sure, Wollaston will do well in Totnes town itself. But it used to be proudly twinned with Narnia.
Bear in mind though that Brixham is a town only slightly smaller than Totnes. It is also the largest port for landing fish in England and Wales. Wollaston's only hope is that they are voting Brexit.
But as with the smaller towns/big villages that litter the Totnes constituency, the Tory vote in Brixham is holding up really, really well.
Narnia?
It’s one to watch as the HY 20+ majority model has Tories taking on Labour from a base of seeing off every defector and whipless wonder.
Narnia town-twinning. The sign lasted years before the council restored the original twinning. It was then replaced with "twinned with Area 51"....
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
You come across as bitter saying that.
He comes across to me as someone who consorts with and takes advice from ethno nationalists like Steve Bannon. Take your pick.
The comment that constituency effects even out may be true in the larger picture. It is patently not the case when considering Con/LD fights. There are hardly any LD seats where any local variation will let in the Conservatives (North Norfolk possibly). The London (and Surrey) local effect is a factor in 10 Conservative seats (and some Labour), with similar issues in other isolated Conservative seats such as Winchester. The constituency effects of Conservative defectors is also a one sided effect. In aggregate probably in excess of 25 Conservative held seats are vulnerable to potential (I do not say definite) local effects, whilst hardly any LD seats are similarly impacted.
Given the nature of this election such a lack of balance in such effects is material.
There was hat eating when Tory’s took all those seats in 2015. But Libdems ain’t getting them back with a revoke policy.
Totnes (Wollaston is the Conservative defector certain to win)
If you do not think this is a material deviation from UNS then I wish you well in your donations to the bookies.
"Totnes (Wollaston is the Conservative defector certain to win)"
Been on the ground in Totnes constituency like me, have you? Because if you had, you wouldn't paint it at 100%.
Sure, Wollaston will do well in Totnes town itself. But it used to be proudly twinned with Narnia.
Bear in mind though that Brixham is a town only slightly smaller than Totnes. It is also the largest port for landing fish in England and Wales. Wollaston's only hope is that they are voting Brexit.
But as with the smaller towns/big villages that litter the Totnes constituency, the Tory vote in Brixham is holding up really, really well.
Narnia?
It’s one to watch as the HY 20+ majority model has Tories taking on Labour from a base of seeing off every defector and whipless wonder.
Narnia town-twinning. The sign lasted years before the council restored the original twinning. It was then replaced with "twinned with Area 51"....
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
We need a leader, not a showman. If Boris wants to bluster and charm, he should start a chat show.
Of course we need a showman - a showman would have wrecked Corbyn at GE2017, and thus led to infinitely better Government all round rather than an unstable, vacillating minority administration.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
We need a leader, not a showman. If Boris wants to bluster and charm, he should start a chat show.
You have got to want to see Johnson’s charm and charisma to think it’s there, if you don’t you see a posh buffoon, mumbling away and saying anything that he thinks his audience wants to hear.
If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.
Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections
2010 LibDem 52.6 Con 12.2
2015 LibDem 35.9 Con 6.2
2017 LibDem 20.9 Con 24.8
It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.
But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers. For the SNP, an established party with a domestic record and a reputation for putting Scottish interests first within the union, it is probably much higher.
The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.
The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
The media made 2017 a single issue election in Scotland, including going to the extent of misquoting Sturgeon to make it seem like she had said it was a single issue election about Independence.
The weakness of the Farage position is that the only things he can object to is the transition. Boris can point out that the long term position does every Farage has ever wanted from Brexit.
If you think Farage became a national figure thanks to having a strong position, you may not have been paying attention.
When he started in politics over 20 years ago leaving the EU seemed an incredibly extreme and dangerously strong view to hold.
Thanks mainly to Farage’s force of personality back when it wasn’t deemed credible - it’s now mainstream and backed by around half the country.
Of course the transition may not end for years - the cliff edge may yet prove too challenging.
Good spot, but it is easier to hold the seat in a by-election.
I want Defectors who Held on in the subsequent GE.
(The record is better for by-elections, which is why the TIGgers should have called by-elections, for tactical reasons).
Whilst the defector (Emma Nicholson) stood down in 1997, her successor (John Burnett) held her seat at the 97 GE after she defected in 1995.
A lot of seats changed hands in 1997.
There's a reason why on election night a party regaining a seat they held at the last election but the MP subsequently defected is reported as a HOLD. The Tories could regain every defecting seat and every independent seat they'd won last time and that would be zero gains as far as the reporting is concerned - and rightly so!
But my point was in response to the question about holding a seat at the subsequent GE after an election. It is surely more difficult for a new candidate to do so than for the (popular in this case) incumbent. Yet Burnett did so, and in being able to do so achived something much more impressive than those seats where the defector remained as the MP.
But the swing in that seat was no different than the swing in the rest of the country at the General Election!
Rather proves the point that defections make little difference to swing.
The original point was that defectors tend to be punished by their constituents at the next GE. The Burnett case refutes that (in his seat and in 1997) despite his lack of incumbency. The Burnett % actually rose slightly in an election where the LD vote fell by 1%. I am not sure what you are getting at, but undoubtedly Burnett winning the seat in 97 was against the past pattern where defections were a factor.
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
I don't know how any human being can be labelled "a fraud" in this way.
The SNP might be winners in terms of few more seats, But even if they take all 59 Scottish constituencies, they ain’t getting another ref, they still have to sit there like 59 lame ducks in HoC helpless
You are not right in the head but correct that Tories will win. However your piffle on Scottish government being imprisoned is just the ravings of a lunatic. Even if the Tories managed to corrupt UK law to such an unbelievable level, International law would trump it. I wonder why I am even responding to the rantings of a lunatic.
But it happened in Spain, when the exasperated leaders took decision to take it a step further than SNP have yet chosen and what international law are you pointing to riding to their rescue.
My head can intellectually debate you on this, starting with this thoughtful question, how do you see Scotland And Catalan winning independence from the nation state determined to thwart them? How do you see it happening?
The UK and Spain are two very different countries. Scottish secession is still a very real possibility and, moreover, there's little prospect of Scotland attempting a UDI which would fail to get past its own courts, and even less of a future UK Government attempting to hold Scotland by force.
*IF* there happens to be a Conservative victory next month then pleas from Bute House for a second independence referendum will fall on deaf ears: the Tories are, after all, a Unionist party, and Johnson may well be reliant on his surviving Scottish MPs for his majority. However, an outright victory for the pro-independence camp at Holyrood in 2021 (whether by the SNP alone, or if there's a combined SNP-Green majority) would probably reverse that position.
The flame of Unionism is guttering in England, and the SNP are Labour's main potential coalition partner at Westminster. One should not, therefore, be surprised if a great many English Tories view the dissolution of the Union with far greater equanimity than their predecessors would've done.
I like the way you wrote the answer, and I thank you for it.
You didn’t answer the question though, no one, not malky or anyone, how do you see Scotland winning independence from the nation state determined to thwart them? How do you see it happening?
If you are struggling to answer perhaps I can help you.
Would the SNP compromise on a royal commission? They would after all still sit under the monarchy after separation?
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
That he can come across like this to you and simultaneously convince the ERG reactionaries and Hard Leavers generally that he is their man ought to tell you something about him. And indeed about you.
The original point was that defectors tend to be punished by their constituents at the next GE. The Burnett case refutes that (in his seat and in 1997) despite his lack of incumbency. The Burnett % actually rose slightly in an election where the LD vote fell by 1%. I am not sure what you are getting at, but undoubtedly Burnett winning the seat in 97 was against the past pattern where defections were a factor.
No the original point was that most defectors lose unless they chicken run. Which is true. An MP defecting doesn't change materially how their constituency votes.
In your example you chose the seat swung entirely in line with the country. I see no evidence the defection made any difference whatsoever. Burnett winning the seat goes entirely with the evidence since it was an LD gain that should have been expected given national swing with or without the definition.
If you want to be pedantic the swing was marginally below national average swing.
This is disgraceful. I can't stand it when people just put an apostrophe after a name ending in S instead of 'S. How typical of Brexiteers to do something so vile. It's like they just can't help themselves being wrong about absolutely fucking everything.
As or former PM used to say:
‘Brexit mean’s Brexit and Nigel is going to take the S’ out of it!’
Malcolmg says there are no weakness on policing in Scotland??!!
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
"Jeremy Corbyn’s elite‑bashing is naked populism Matthew Goodwin
Labour’s demonising of the rich is divisive, but it resonates with voters
Today,” boomed the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, “we are launching the most ambitious and radical campaign our country has ever seen!” What followed was a textbook example of the angry, divisive populism that is eroding everything once considered essential to our culture of consensus.
Britain used to be known as the classic “civic culture”. The reason Britons managed to build a durable democracy and avoid the extremism that flourished on the Continent was not because of their institutions but their political culture."
Thinking about the downsides of the main (only?) LibDem policy of Revoke discussed upthread, it seems to me if they were to hold the balance of power on Dec 13th they would have to trade this with either of the main two parties - as neither would countenance straight-to-Revoke.
This would simply underline again to voters, as with tuition fees, how willing the LibDems are to sacrifice their manifesto commitments and key principles.
If this is highlighted before Dec 12th it cripples their key platform.
I have no idea why Swinson went so hard for Revoke. It’s likely to put off soft Tory Remainers without gaining much. A clear straight-to-Ref2 platform would have differentiated enough from Lab on Brexit.
The policy is Revoke if an LD majority, referendum if hung parliament. It was not imposed by Swinson, it was agreed at conference. There are plenty of other LD policies.
I am surprised that there are so many of the "hard of understanding" on a nerdy political website.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
You do
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
We need a leader, not a showman. If Boris wants to bluster and charm, he should start a chat show.
Showmen is what a lot of people want, rather than proper leaders. Unfortunate, but there it is. What we need is not what people want - the public would not reward such behaciour if it was not what they wanted.
The weakness of the Farage position is that the only things he can object to is the transition. Boris can point out that the long term position does every Farage has ever wanted from Brexit.
If you think Farage became a national figure thanks to having a strong position, you may not have been paying attention.
When he started in politics over 20 years ago leaving the EU seemed an incredibly extreme and dangerously strong view to hold.
Thanks mainly to Farage’s force of personality back when it wasn’t deemed credible - it’s now mainstream and backed by around half the country.
Of course the transition may not end for years - the cliff edge may yet prove too challenging.
It might not end for years, but actually getting to the cliff edge would be a start, and Farage has been a major voice attempting to avoid approaching the edge because others won't committ to just taking a flying leap.
Which might have had some more resonance if everyone was seeking to prevent leavingt, but now he's criticising Boris and the ERG, people who fought for leave and those who actually believe in it respectively, for avoiding a flying leap because they have another option. It's quite obvious from hsi actions in recent years that nothing would satisfy him and he doesn't actually want to leave.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
That he can come across like this to you and simultaneously convince the ERG reactionaries and Hard Leavers generally that he is their man ought to tell you something about him. And indeed about you.
"Jeremy Corbyn’s elite‑bashing is naked populism Matthew Goodwin
Labour’s demonising of the rich is divisive, but it resonates with voters
Today,” boomed the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, “we are launching the most ambitious and radical campaign our country has ever seen!” What followed was a textbook example of the angry, divisive populism that is eroding everything once considered essential to our culture of consensus.
Britain used to be known as the classic “civic culture”. The reason Britons managed to build a durable democracy and avoid the extremism that flourished on the Continent was not because of their institutions but their political culture."
You don't need to love Boris to recognise he has charm and charisma and he came across and both authentic and disarmingly charming in that video - which May's "field of wheat" did not, it seemed out of character and a little bit strange - similar vibe that Ed Miliband gave off.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I really liked May's "fields of wheat" comment. I found it endearing. Re Boris, yes he has charm and charisma. That is undeniable. Authentic though? No. Quite the opposite. He's a fraud. Values nothing. Believes in nothing. He's all persona and no person. If you managed to strip away all the layers of artifice do you know what you would see? Nothing. You would see absolutely nothing. It's a void in there.
He comes across to me as a "one nation Conservative". Someone who has campaigned for immigration while most politicians do the opposite, someone who campaigned and marched for equal marriage before it was popular.
You come across as bitter saying that.
No. One Nation Conservatives are those like my local MP, Anne Milton. And they have been either expelled or driven out of the Conservative Party. I do not say Boris is an extremist, but he is quite happy to get into bed with the most extreme elements of his party and that has nothing to do with One Nation conservative thinking.
Europhiles got expelled for refusing to follow the Tory whip. Europhilia has nothing to do with One Nation Conservativism which long predates the EU.
None of the Maastricht rebels in the 90s were deselected or prevented from standing in the 1997 election, despite their opposition being far more organised and 'party within a party' than anything from the likes of Milton (who has been careful to keep her distance from the likes of Grieve). Boris has, quite simply, used this as an excuse to cleanse the party of anyone prepared to speak against the given word - it is a Conservative version of Stalinism, pure and simple. Even those who have held their nose and complied to regain the whip (such as Margot James) are now so disillusioned with his behaviour they see no point in continuing as MPs. I recall Andrew Tyrie (possibly the most impressive Conservative MP in recent years - his speech in the Syria debate was light years ahead of Benn) decrying the views and lack of talent in his party.
Defend Conservatism by all means, but do not pretend that Boris is a One Nation Conservative. Put simply, he is a Boris Conservative - which involves saying anything which will advance his personal interests and getting into bed with anyone who can help with that objective.
The original point was that defectors tend to be punished by their constituents at the next GE. The Burnett case refutes that (in his seat and in 1997) despite his lack of incumbency. The Burnett % actually rose slightly in an election where the LD vote fell by 1%. I am not sure what you are getting at, but undoubtedly Burnett winning the seat in 97 was against the past pattern where defections were a factor.
No the original point was that most defectors lose unless they chicken run. Which is true. An MP defecting doesn't change materially how their constituency votes.
In your example you chose the seat swung entirely in line with the country. I see no evidence the defection made any difference whatsoever. Burnett winning the seat goes entirely with the evidence since it was an LD gain that should have been expected given national swing with or without the definition.
If you want to be pedantic the swing was marginally below national average swing.
My 'pedantry' derived from yours - but I accept your apology.
Malcolmg says there are no weakness on policing in Scotland??!!
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
I agree.
I expect both the LDs and SNP (who made this election happen) to be sorely disappointed.
Because many of the core values are in conflict. However you are better placed to appear to be both if in truth you are neither. It is easier to redecorate if there is no furniture.
Malcolmg says there are no weakness on policing in Scotland??!!
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
I agree.
I expect both the LDs and SNP (who made this election happen) to be sorely disappointed.
Depends on their expectations. My feeling is that LD expectations are 20-30 seats. Some make the mistake of conflating campaign PR with expectations.
Thinking about the downsides of the main (only?) LibDem policy of Revoke discussed upthread, it seems to me if they were to hold the balance of power on Dec 13th they would have to trade this with either of the main two parties - as neither would countenance straight-to-Revoke. The policy is Revoke if an LD majority, referendum if hung parliament. It was not imposed by Swinson, it was agreed at conference. There are plenty of other LD policies.
I am surprised that there are so many of the "hard of understanding" on a nerdy political website.
Not only is the policy "Revoke if an LD majority, otherwise Referendum", but Swinson specifically repeated when supporting this proposal that it was "Revoke ONLY in the case of an ABSOLUTE majority" - which I suspect not even she believes is likely this year.
And It wasn't just "agreed" at Conference. It was agreed by a rollercoaster majority . On an afternoon chockfilled with debates on other policies - and agreements to make the proposals policies.
Pollster comes up and says “would you vote Labour to keep the baby-eating Tories out” and the answer is “that sounds like a good idea”
Very few people go on to research that, get it right and then vote like that in the ballot box
Most pollsters most of the time don't frame the question like that. I also don't understand what "right" is in your example.
OTOH I would have thought tactical *lying to opinion pollsters* was the default option for anyone politically engaged who gets polled. If you are a permanent A voter do you say "B" to stop your fellow As getting complacent? Do you say "A, but I always voted B in the past" to demoralise B, or do you take the really, really boring 3rd option of being truthful?
If we are sophisticated enough that tactical voting websites ate two a penny we are sophisticated enough to tactically lie to pollsters. Especially as a tactical lie is worth about 2 oom more than a vote because N = in the 100s not the 10,000s.
“Right” just means vote tactically in a way that achieves what you want
(eg vote LD when effective and Lab when effective)
Why? Seems a decent, funny answer to that question to me.
It illustrates both his strengths and his weaknesses. He's engaging and personal, and the interviewer responds - a little unprofessionally, she makes it clear that she likes him. On the other hand, it's not remotely Prime Ministerial and you don't come away thinking "This is the man I feel the country will be safe with."
But of course many people don't want someone Prime Ministerial to be Prime Minister. You cannot get more unpresidential than Trump, but he won and still retains a lot of support no matter how unpresidential he acts.
And while Corbyn has more personal dignity and gravitas than Boris, given part of his appeal is how he will be unlike our other PMs, I'm not sure he will get the 'appears Prime Ministerial' cred that he might otherwise get contrasted with Boris.
Boris did seem to amuse her with that answer though.
“Boris did seem to amuse her with that answer though.‘
You sure? When she does that I feel she is leading the politician on. She has a touch of David Frost about her.
I think she seemed genuinely amused. Doesnt mean she was not also leading the politician on while being so.
The best way for Boris to play it is a sheepish grin and say
"We all know I've done far worse than running through a field of wheat in my back catalogue.... But that was before I took on the very real duties of being Prime Minister. I wouldn't even run with you through a field of wheat now."
The idea that "the attempts to influence don't influence people" is itself quietly effective meme that has spread through the Brexitverse. As with many other Brexit narratives, it's asserted with total confidence and zero evidence by those who have skin in the game. Shameful gullibility all over the place, including a lot of the people on these boards.
It's fascinating but it bothers me intensely when I see some kind of narrative take hold and sweep across the political terrain like a wildfire. a few weeks ago there was a flurry of posts about the Speakership. Person after person asserting "it should be Hoyle", and nary the slightest reason why. It wasn't people predicting something, it was saying what ought to happen. And never a justification. It was the usual suspects, mostly right-wingers who've been whipped up into a froth about Bercow. And whatever the rights and wrongs of that, I couldn't help wondering what was driving everyone to insist that there was only righteous outcome. I mean, you can be fucking certain that whoever comes next won't really be much like Bercow. So why must it be Hoyle? A mystifying and relatively innocuous meme gripped this place. Where did it come from? Perhaps nowhere, but it's another small piece of evidence that we are social creatures and we take our cues from others. That's how you end up with groupthink and even mobs. Of course we're influenced by others. Of course people respond to perceptions of critical mass. Most people -- you lot included -- are too cowardly to stand apart from a tribe. Advertising and propaganda works because humans are fundamentally gutless wimps. I can think of two people on these boards whom I think are free-thinking and brave. One of them is someone I often agree with, the other is someone I nearly always disagree with and have crossed swords with often. The rest of you are in a fucking daydream.
Hoyle and Laing have both been effective and disinterested deputy speakers. It ought to be one of them rather than someone chosen because of their party or views on Brexit
If Tories are going to criticise Labour people over their Russian links they had better first make sure they have clean hands.
They don’t.
I leave it to others to judge whether it it is worse to be close to the Russians and their allies because of ideological affinity or because you have been seduced by money.
I was going to post a message asking what people think has gone wrong for the LibDems. I'm one myself but I've had qualms about a few things. This isn't really an invitation for an attack on Jo Swinson, partly because I don't think it can be just her and partly because there's a bit of misogyny around in my opinion.
No, something on policy or behaviour seems to have gone badly awry to take them from the 20% to 14% level.
I don't buy that the LDs have done anything peculiarly awful (though they've made a mega hash of explaining their Revoke policy), and they haven't actually launched their campaign yet: that 8-pager Jo hagiography was a test to evaluate which seats would repay extra resource, and real resource decisions have to await the more or less final list of seats they'll be standing down in to support other Remain Alliance members.
But they MIGHT have a real problem, and the current polls MIGHT reflect it.
For all the other parties, the Brexit crisis is at worst a total distraction (eg from Johnson's main priority of staying PM for 5 years) or at best an opportunity to promote their real objective. For the LDs, it's almost existential: free trade, arguably, is the glue that binds most of its members.
No-one but the voters can decide what an election's about, but it IS possible that the natural dynamic of a UK election - at least in England - gives the two major parties an ability to re-assert the two-party system. And right now, Corbyn's desire to concentrate on his variant of Americaphobic neo-Marxism and Johnson's desire to concentrate on Corbyn's awfulness share a common interest in re-asserting the two-party system.
Nothing, both think, stimulates votes for them as much as stirring up a phobia against the other. And both the public-spirited and the foreign billionaire-owned media find that a headline-generating narrative to publicise.
Can the LDs overcome this? That depends on the ground war. And on the question of whether their superior strength in electoral guerilla warfare can work in a freezing, dark and damp campaign increasingly influenced (but still not dominated) by nationally-generated electronics.
If LibDems believe in free trade why are they so keen to remain in a customs union?
There is more free trade inside the CU than outside it I guess.
There is no “free trade” in a Customs Union. There is trade diversion
If Tories in Ross, Skye & Lochaber decide to hold their nose and vote LD to get rid of the SNP, it's possible Blackford could lose his seat.
Why would the second place vote for the third place to unseat the incumbent? If it was to happen it would be the most sensational set of swings over the last 3 elections
2010 LibDem 52.6 Con 12.2
2015 LibDem 35.9 Con 6.2
2017 LibDem 20.9 Con 24.8
It would be interesting a bit closer to the election to see a constituency poll for this one. My answer would be that there are probably a number of Conservatives and SNP who are willing to vote Liberal Democrat, but very few Liberal Democrats and still fewer SNP who would be willing to vote Conservative. Therefore the Tories are at their ceiling while the Liberal Democrats - who after all held the seat just five years ago - are not.
But for that to happen it has to become clear that the LibDems are the main challengers again so they can rally a unionist vote behind them.
Hard to see SNP voting LD's given it is an election on Indyref2
That’s precisely why they might do so Malcolm. Is every supporter of the SNP also a supporter of independence? Logic would suggest yes. But it is worth remembering that 3% of Brexit Party supporters are Remainers.
The danger for Sturgeon in making this a single issue election is if there is still a majority against independence there is a risk she will get clobbered by it.
The advantage is she then doesn’t have to talk about the exhausted volcanoes aspect of the SNP’s domestic agenda.
She has to go all out for it , any more delay will be very bad for her. SNP for sure will increase seats, just a case of how many. She will then have to fight Westminster big time.
Which will also be advantageous for her as it means independence will dominate the debate leading up to the Scottish Parliament elections next year (I think I’m right in saying they will be next year, not 2021). And that unquestionably is where she is strong.
It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
The next Scottish general election is due to be held on 6 May 2021. Per Scottish Elections (Dates) Act 2016. (Supported IIRC by all parties.)
If Tories are going to criticise Labour people over their Russian links they had better first make sure they have clean hands.
They don’t.
I leave it to others to judge whether it it is worse to be close to the Russians and their allies because of ideological affinity or because you have been seduced by money.
Citation required.
Don’t citate against Mcmafia cycle free, you are too dear to us.
Malcolmg says there are no weakness on policing in Scotland??!!
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
Bollox, do you think police are infallible anywhere in the UK or world. Far from perfect but no more of an issue than they have ever been and far better a single force than the waste we had before. As to the SNP being hated , that will be why they have been voted in for 12 years and will be voted in overwhelmingly again. Seriously you must be joking.
I know I am laying myself open to accusations of being a Boris disciple (which I am not) but the piece with Sophy Ridge and Boris about the 'worst thing he has done in his life' illustrates why he gets away with it. He has charisma in spades and Sophy's reaction confirmed it. Indeed my wife was amused with the way he spoke to her and thought it was something many would see as Boris being Boris
You have a love hate relationship with Boris. You used to hate him. Now you love him!
Very strange to feel affection for such a malign human being - responsible for the deaths of several babies.
Are you trying to have a go at women's rights?
I have never believed in Abortion on Demand on the same basis that I deny the right of a mother to kill her own children. Nor do I adhere to the ultra-Catholic position of no abortion under any circumstances.It should certainly not be made available as a form of contraception.
Malcolmg says there are no weakness on policing in Scotland??!!
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
Bollox, do you think police are infallible anywhere in the UK or world. Far from perfect but no more of an issue than they have ever been and far better a single force than the waste we had before. As to the SNP being hated , that will be why they have been voted in for 12 years and will be voted in overwhelmingly again. Seriously you must be joking.
Bollox to you malcolmg. With your 25% scotch tax and your useless incompetence and sense of entitlement
You clearly have no idea how hated the SNP has become up here.
Thinking about the downsides of the main (only?) LibDem policy of Revoke discussed upthread, it seems to me if they were to hold the balance of power on Dec 13th they would have to trade this with either of the main two parties - as neither would countenance straight-to-Revoke. The policy is Revoke if an LD majority, referendum if hung parliament. It was not imposed by Swinson, it was agreed at conference. There are plenty of other LD policies.
I am surprised that there are so many of the "hard of understanding" on a nerdy political website.
Not only is the policy "Revoke if an LD majority, otherwise Referendum", but Swinson specifically repeated when supporting this proposal that it was "Revoke ONLY in the case of an ABSOLUTE majority" - which I suspect not even she believes is likely this year.
And It wasn't just "agreed" at Conference. It was agreed by a rollercoaster majority . On an afternoon chockfilled with debates on other policies - and agreements to make the proposals policies.
So like 90% of LibDem policies, it consists entirely of attention-seeking posturing :-o .
Comments
The UK-Elect v11.45 experimental (Beta) method was used for the forecast, using overall GB-wide percentages combined with separate Scottish percentages, with Brexit-specific tactical voting enabled. Candidate-specific settings were not utilised, but the automatic addition of Brexit Party candidates was enabled. The current recommended default settings were used, which sets Brexit electoral importance to 8/10 ("Extremely Important" to most voters). This experimental method takes account of Brexit leave and remain support levels within each constituency and each party.
Is there perhaps a danger you are double-counting any Brexit effect when you set its importance to 8/10? If it is so important, would that not already be reflected in the polling?
It will also remove the focus from domestic weakness on, for example, education or policing.
When dirty money (and the people it comes from) enters a system the stench spreads far and wide. It may not be as interesting as some blonde being shagged by a politician but its corrosive effects are far worse. The authorities are half asleep on the job, investigative journalism is thin on the ground and the public seem not to care. But it is degrading our public life and we ought to care about it and, more importantly, do something about it.
I've been able to recognise charm and charisma in politicians of parties I dislike. Blair and Salmond had it and so too does Sturgeon.
I said some time ago on this forum that the next scandal in the finance sector would likely relate to private banking, the inflow of dirty money and the influence it was seeking to buy. I remain of that view. There is the usual turning of blind eyes going on.
Plus ca change......
There's a reason why on election night a party regaining a seat they held at the last election but the MP subsequently defected is reported as a HOLD. The Tories could regain every defecting seat and every independent seat they'd won last time and that would be zero gains as far as the reporting is concerned - and rightly so!
Please stop trying to make it a political issue. Other than being deeply distasteful and personal, I think you’ll find it is probably more counter-productive to your viewpoint than you realise.
You come across as bitter saying that.
I did once go with the Badgers' Trust to watch badgers using night binoculars - a very magical experience. I was one of the 3 MPs who persuaded Hilary Benn to stop the cull in 2014 - he was sympathetic but needed evidence to persuade civil servants. There is no doubt that badgers can carry TB and infect cows (through urine traces), but if you kill a bunch of badgers in area X, the effect is that badgers from the next area observe the absence of competition and surge in - so what you're actually doing is speeding up the movement of badgers and therefore the spread of the disease. Farmer mostly like the cull because it's apparently Doing Something, but the Welsh policy of vaccination seems clearly superior.
I'm prepared to like camels too!
This would simply underline again to voters, as with tuition fees, how willing the LibDems are to sacrifice their manifesto commitments and key principles.
If this is highlighted before Dec 12th it cripples their key platform.
I have no idea why Swinson went so hard for Revoke. It’s likely to put off soft Tory Remainers without gaining much. A clear straight-to-Ref2 platform would have differentiated enough from Lab on Brexit.
Rather proves the point that defections make little difference to swing.
The interview overall though was his usual mix of atonal waffle when delivering set lines, and car crash bluff and bluster when asked to think.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q1NzDdro77WgglG7dhlE6c8ORK6xjWOfx0i1L5FUkPk/edit#gid=0
http://vote-2012.proboards.com
This is not a game changer in any way.
Thanks mainly to Farage’s force of personality back when it wasn’t deemed credible - it’s now mainstream and backed by around half the country.
Of course the transition may not end for years - the cliff edge may yet prove too challenging.
Would the SNP compromise on a royal commission? They would after all still sit under the monarchy after separation?
In your example you chose the seat swung entirely in line with the country. I see no evidence the defection made any difference whatsoever. Burnett winning the seat goes entirely with the evidence since it was an LD gain that should have been expected given national swing with or without the definition.
If you want to be pedantic the swing was marginally below national average swing.
‘Brexit mean’s Brexit and Nigel is going to take the S’ out of it!’
No weaknesses! Remebember the Yuill/Bell affair and a woman left pretty much to die on the side of the road for three days by police incompetence. The amalgamation of Scotland's police has been a disaster.
The SNP are hated - really properly hated - by large sections of people in the NE. Not just for policing, but for the NHS, education, you name it....
Lazy London journalists think the SNP control the debate. You people are in for a nasty surprise next month,
Somebody who masks an essential emptiness with an extreme and vivid persona.
Matthew Goodwin
Labour’s demonising of the rich is divisive, but it resonates with voters
Today,” boomed the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, “we are launching the most ambitious and radical campaign our country has ever seen!” What followed was a textbook example of the angry, divisive populism that is eroding everything once considered essential to our culture of consensus.
Britain used to be known as the classic “civic culture”. The reason Britons managed to build a durable democracy and avoid the extremism that flourished on the Continent was not because of their institutions but their political culture."
(£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/comment/general-election-2019-jeremy-corbyns-elite-bashing-is-naked-populism-xmrwnt9fz
I am surprised that there are so many of the "hard of understanding" on a nerdy political website.
Which might have had some more resonance if everyone was seeking to prevent leavingt, but now he's criticising Boris and the ERG, people who fought for leave and those who actually believe in it respectively, for avoiding a flying leap because they have another option. It's quite obvious from hsi actions in recent years that nothing would satisfy him and he doesn't actually want to leave.
Defend Conservatism by all means, but do not pretend that Boris is a One Nation Conservative. Put simply, he is a Boris Conservative - which involves saying anything which will advance his personal interests and getting into bed with anyone who can help with that objective.
https://twitter.com/RossThomson_MP/status/1191001620898816000/photo/1
NEW THREAD
I expect both the LDs and SNP (who made this election happen) to be sorely disappointed.
(eg vote LD when effective and Lab when effective)
As to the SNP being hated , that will be why they have been voted in for 12 years and will be voted in overwhelmingly again.
Seriously you must be joking.
You clearly have no idea how hated the SNP has become up here.