Despite the rave reviews under this twitter thread I think it may be flawed.
We aren’t looking at Tory and Labour “supporters “defecting” to the BXP.
We are looking at BXP Euro-election voters and weighing up how many of them might switch (“return”, if you insist) to Tory or Labour.
Looked at this way, Tory leavers - except the diehard ultras who won’t shift anyway - clearly have every reason to return, whereas Labour leavers don’t (excepting to those few Lab MPs with leaver appeal like Flint).
Therefore it remains possible that at its current single figure ratings the BXP has very few potential switchers to Tory amongst its support.
This hypothesis has added credibility when you consider that the Tory vote share has already recovered considerably as BXP deflated, whereas Labour’s has not (only just picking up more recently as the LDs start to drift)
Good points. But Labour leaning Brexit Party supporters are still quite likely to switch to Labour at the last minute. The Brexit Party has artfully kept its Brexit offering vanilla flavoured. The Tory Party's Brexit is very much a deregulator's Singapore on Thames global Britain Brexit. That is the polar opposite of the Lexiters who want more protectionism and state intervention.
Based on this thread then the 4/6 available with Ladbrokes on Plaid to get 4 seats or less is excellent value. It loses only if PC hang on in Ceredigion (=30% chance if Robert's 70% is correct) AND their other 3 seats AND they also pick up another seat, with Ynys Mon being the only realistic possibility of a gain in a seat where the Conservatives are also in contention to take the seat off Labour.
If Plaid Cymru get out of this election with 4 seats, they will have dodged a bullet.
Their voters are about 1/3 Leave, and many are highly pissed off that they have joined the Remain Alliance. There have been rumblings of discontent that have even reached the BBC.
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
I’m not a big fan of Swinson but to be honest with you she does have an undeniable point: how can the two men be there slagging off her revoke policy and she’s not there to defend it?
And the Tories are the Conservative and Unionist Party and some Labour MPs are Labour and Co-Operative Party MPs and we don't both to be precise every single time with them, there's no confusion referring to the Lib Dems as the Liberals as a shorthand. The actual Liberal Party are so tiny there's no reasonable way for people to get confused by who is meant.
Since the Tories are increasingly not unionist and Labour certainly aren’t very co-operative the Liberals have every excuse.
The Lib Dems were hyping their chances in Aberdeen South last week, saying the Unionist vote was coming to them. But with the idiot Ross Thomson suddenly standing down, looks like the Tories are back in the game: the Lib Dem’s have drifted to 40/1.
Best prices - Aberdeen South SNP 1/2 Con (incumbent) 15/8 LD 40/1
Er, could the Tories maybe think about perhaps, er, starting to campaign? Not that the other parties have made much of an impact, but if it were me, I'd want to at least have one big event setting out the major themes of the campaign so as to try to frame the next 6 weeks from my perspective as much as possible...
It is weird that we have a system that places so much emphasis on the link between MP and constituency and the MPs role in engaging in the political process on behalf of their constituents, yet then tolerates four such constituencies whose MPs are unable to engage in politics and one where every elector is effectively excluded from the election.
It would be more sensible for the Speaker and deputies to be excluded from the 650 MP total, and for a vacancy to be created upon their ascent to said position, to be filled by by-election. Thereby ensuring all constituencies are represented by an active political (except Hallam, obvs )
To be fair the Speaker by tradition gets privileged access for constituency problems (typically a direct meeting with the Minister) to compensate for their inability to raise the issue in the normal way. I assume the same applies to deputies. So it's only on the more political issues that their constituents can't raise controversial points, and to be fair there are 640 other people only too keen to fill in for them.
It's nice to see the genuine all-party enthusiasm for Lindsay. He's unpompous and working-class and Northern without making a big thing of any of it - he just is what he is, and neither boasts nor apologises for it. He was never wildly partisan - a union man, but not associated as far as I know with any of the party factions. He's also quite jolly, which doesn't do any harm in these fraught times.
That's all fine, but where does he stand on grabbing more powers for himself and taking it away from precedent?
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
That's a near 20% of voters who should already be natural feeding ground for LDs, and higher in any even vaguely Lib Demmy seat. (actually that petition was broken down by seat, could be good source material).
There are many factors in this (e.g. signatories in safe Labour seats), but LDs s should have the aim of pushing that 20% mark nationally, equally gaining many who didn't sign but are sympathetic.
While any opinions will obviously coloured by his own position, I must say I think Guido's campaign roundups via bullet points of the main parties is a useful approach more should adopt.
Guido also has a list of MPs standing down. I’d missed this one:
Bill Grant, Con, Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
He is nearly 70, and has had a quiet two years.
Looking at the massive shifts in votes in that seat, like many others in Scotland, I don't think becoming a Scottish MP is a path for those seeking a quiet life generally though.
After SNP up 30, then Con up 20, might as well now see LDs up 35 so we can See Lab/SNP/Con/LD follow each other in successive elections.
Best prices - Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock (Bill Grant, Con, standing down)
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
If you invite Swansong then surely you'd have to invite the SNP too, as a larger party? And who would turn up? Be a hell of a show though.
It is weird that we have a system that places so much emphasis on the link between MP and constituency and the MPs role in engaging in the political process on behalf of their constituents, yet then tolerates four such constituencies whose MPs are unable to engage in politics and one where every elector is effectively excluded from the election.
It would be more sensible for the Speaker and deputies to be excluded from the 650 MP total, and for a vacancy to be created upon their ascent to said position, to be filled by by-election. Thereby ensuring all constituencies are represented by an active political (except Hallam, obvs )
To be fair the Speaker by tradition gets privileged access for constituency problems (typically a direct meeting with the Minister) to compensate for their inability to raise the issue in the normal way. I assume the same applies to deputies. So it's only on the more political issues that their constituents can't raise controversial points, and to be fair there are 640 other people only too keen to fill in for them.
It's nice to see the genuine all-party enthusiasm for Lindsay. He's unpompous and working-class and Northern without making a big thing of any of it - he just is what he is, and neither boasts nor apologises for it. He was never wildly partisan - a union man, but not associated as far as I know with any of the party factions. He's also quite jolly, which doesn't do any harm in these fraught times.
That's all fine, but where does he stand on grabbing more powers for himself and taking it away from precedent?
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
I’m not a big fan of Swinson but to be honest with you she does have an undeniable point: how can the two men be there slagging off her revoke policy and she’s not there to defend it?
I’m fairly sure they’ll be able to square it with their consciences.
I think the Tories will..... gain Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne from the LDs ......
They are certainly in contention and the LDs won't hang on if they rely only on Remain supporters in those Leave seats. Yet nationally only 3% of Remain supporters currently plan to vote LD according to YouGov. Norman Lamb is also standing down so I expect the Conservatives to pick up his seat, Eastbourne is harder to call and the Brexit waters there are a bit muddier given the MP's stance.
"nationally only 3% of Remain supporters currently plan to vote LD according to YouGov"
Really? How does that work?
Fair cop. Now edited to Leave.
In that case it must be in the region of 33% of Remain voters, though when we discount Scotland it must be higher still. Given some variance over that average, there may well be some surprises.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
On the Plaid seats betting, are the Assembly results helpful or do they just add confusion. For example, was looking at Aberconwy with Guto Bebb standing down, and the Assembly seat on the same boundaries is a tight Con-Plaid marginal. Whereas in Westminster elections Plaid are nowhere, and it is Con-Lab. Any of our Welsh visitors have any thoughts on this ?
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
If you invite Swansong then surely you'd have to invite the SNP too, as a larger party? And who would turn up? Be a hell of a show though.
Surely “a show” is exactly what broadcasters want?
When is UKIP launching its campaign? The nation awaits.
Their website seems pretty out of date (with a prominent button for information on Wills and legacies to help UKIP), but there is this interesting piece from a couple of weeks ago.
Is it worth backing the PM?
I don’t speak officially for UKIP, and this is purely a personal view, but I’m guessing millions of Brexiteers across the Country now support Boris Johnson’s “EU Deal”. I know I do.
Nigel Farage (The Brexit Party) is currently sounding the claxons, firing off flare-pistols, declaiming: “Is this the Brexit you voted for?” To which the answer is: No, Nigel. Of course not. But it’s better than seeing Corbyn, Sturgeon, and Swinson cancelling the Referendum.”...
You have to know when to be satisfied with what you’ve got. The Boris Deal isn’t perfect. Life never is. My preferred option would be No Deal and a Clean-Break Brexit. ..
If there’s a general election, UKIP and The Brexit Party should field no more than a handful of candidates, or we risk destroying Brexit. We’ll be to blame. We must back the Boris Deal.
The EU is clearly desperate for Westminster to ratify Boris’s ‘Brexit-In-Name-Only’ treaty which will keep us in an extendable transition period for three more years and subject us to all of the directives and regulations of the EU Commission, and all the rulings of the European Court of Justice, both past and future...
No-one who respects democracy should accept this brazen Brexit betrayal nor be exasperated into fatigue. ..
The only way to leave the EU is for a Clean-Break Brexit where we take back full control of our money, borders, laws, trade, fishing waters, and keep control of our armed forces which are to be subjugated into the EU military control and command architecture.
Regardless of this new, abominable delay to leaving the EU, UKIP will fight on to achieve the Clean-Break Brexit that the people voted for, and the liberty that is our birth-right as a nation.
Despite the rave reviews under this twitter thread I think it may be flawed.
We aren’t looking at Tory and Labour “supporters “defecting” to the BXP.
We are looking at BXP Euro-election voters and weighing up how many of them might switch (“return”, if you insist) to Tory or Labour.
Looked at this way, Tory leavers - except the diehard ultras who won’t shift anyway - clearly have every reason to return, whereas Labour leavers don’t (excepting to those few Lab MPs with leaver appeal like Flint).
Therefore it remains possible that at its current single figure ratings the BXP has very few potential switchers to Tory amongst its support.
This hypothesis has added credibility when you consider that the Tory vote share has already recovered considerably as BXP deflated, whereas Labour’s has not (only just picking up more recently as the LDs start to drift)
Good points. But Labour leaning Brexit Party supporters are still quite likely to switch to Labour at the last minute. The Brexit Party has artfully kept its Brexit offering vanilla flavoured. The Tory Party's Brexit is very much a deregulator's Singapore on Thames global Britain Brexit. That is the polar opposite of the Lexiters who want more protectionism and state intervention.
Yes, very notably not "Singapore on Trent" or Singapore on Tees"
This looks like a classic case where not publishing is going to create worse publicity than publishing. I suspect the actual report is pretty anodyne.
I suspect not. There will be no smoking gun but there will likely be enough of interest there for those who know where to look and/or know how to join up the dots to other information which is already in the public domain.
Also interesting that it is the security chiefs who are pushing for publication and not just the MPs.
I agree with Robert. I doubt the Liberals [...] I would like to see the Liberals
Their name is Liberal Democrats
Sometimes I will use Tory in place of Conservative [& Unionist]. I don't think it should be that confusing or insulting to use Liberal in place of Liberal Democrat.
On the Plaid seats betting, are the Assembly results helpful or do they just add confusion. For example, was looking at Aberconwy with Guto Bebb standing down, and the Assembly seat on the same boundaries is a tight Con-Plaid marginal. Whereas in Westminster elections Plaid are nowhere, and it is Con-Lab. Any of our Welsh visitors have any thoughts on this ?
It is BigG's seat, as I recall.
The WA elections are not a particularly good guide, as turnout is low, and those of a Nationalist persuasion are more likely to vote.
The former Tory candidate was ex-Plaid Cymru (actually a grandson of the founder of Plaid Cymru).
I imagine if the Tories have chosen someone half-way sensible (i.e., reasonably local, a Welsh speaker), then they will hold the seat rather easily.
Sir Lynsley Hoyle seems a dull choice after Bercow.
Hardly a knight to remember
I think dull is probably a desirable trait in a speaker.
He is exactly the right choice, compared to somebody like Captain Underpants who would have made Bercow look like a shy and retiring scared of the limelight kind of speaker.
Huzzah for Sir Lindsay Hoyle.. Thrilled that he got the job and not Harriet harman. A good day for democracy.
Surely it would have been a good day for democracy whoeve won, given it was a secret democratic vote of the relevant constituency?
Or is it only a good day for democracy if your preferred candidate wins ?
Touche, though I think similar things when people talk about the government losing votes in the Commons in terms of parliament's will or of accusations the government is treating parliament with contempt, trying to stop it having power...when if the government wins those votes parliament is saying it is fine to be treated that way.
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
If you invite Swansong then surely you'd have to invite the SNP too, as a larger party? And who would turn up? Be a hell of a show though.
Surely “a show” is exactly what broadcasters want?
Dutch Olympic athlete Madiea Ghafoor has been jailed for eight and a half years after being found guilty of drug smuggling and trafficking.
The 27-year-old, who competed in the 4x400m relay at Rio 2016, had £2m worth of drugs in the boot of her car when she was stopped at a routine border check near Elten in Germany in June.
The court heard that she thought she was carrying doping materials and did not know she was transporting ecstasy and crystal meth.
This looks like a classic case where not publishing is going to create worse publicity than publishing. I suspect the actual report is pretty anodyne.
I suspect not. There will be no smoking gun but there will likely be enough of interest there for those who know where to look and/or know how to join up the dots to other information which is already in the public domain.
Also interesting that it is the security chiefs who are pushing for publication and not just the MPs.
Separately wasn't there a report yesterday where Departments were refusing to give Cummings information even though he is supposedly Deep Vetted.
When is UKIP launching its campaign? The nation awaits.
Their website seems pretty out of date (with a prominent button for information on Wills and legacies to help UKIP), but there is this interesting piece from a couple of weeks ago.
Is it worth backing the PM?
I don’t speak officially for UKIP, and this is purely a personal view, but I’m guessing millions of Brexiteers across the Country now support Boris Johnson’s “EU Deal”. I know I do.
Nigel Farage (The Brexit Party) is currently sounding the claxons, firing off flare-pistols, declaiming: “Is this the Brexit you voted for?” To which the answer is: No, Nigel. Of course not. But it’s better than seeing Corbyn, Sturgeon, and Swinson cancelling the Referendum.”...
You have to know when to be satisfied with what you’ve got. The Boris Deal isn’t perfect. Life never is. My preferred option would be No Deal and a Clean-Break Brexit. ..
If there’s a general election, UKIP and The Brexit Party should field no more than a handful of candidates, or we risk destroying Brexit. We’ll be to blame. We must back the Boris Deal.
The EU is clearly desperate for Westminster to ratify Boris’s ‘Brexit-In-Name-Only’ treaty which will keep us in an extendable transition period for three more years and subject us to all of the directives and regulations of the EU Commission, and all the rulings of the European Court of Justice, both past and future...
No-one who respects democracy should accept this brazen Brexit betrayal nor be exasperated into fatigue. ..
The only way to leave the EU is for a Clean-Break Brexit where we take back full control of our money, borders, laws, trade, fishing waters, and keep control of our armed forces which are to be subjugated into the EU military control and command architecture.
Regardless of this new, abominable delay to leaving the EU, UKIP will fight on to achieve the Clean-Break Brexit that the people voted for, and the liberty that is our birth-right as a nation.
Sir Lynsley Hoyle seems a particularly dull choice after Bercow.
Hardly a knight to remember
You won't like it Roger but unless I have misread the man, he will be fair and impartial, unlike Bercow.
To be fair to Bercow extraordinary times put him on the spot so often unlike other speakers who had it easier and everyone recalls fondly. The nations divided, the government not in position to command parliament and quite rightly tried it on as much as they could themselves.
To be fair to his detractors, there’s other aspects of the role, like looking after bullied workers he doesn’t appear to have excelled in.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
IIRC Leavers were making the claim of Russian bots, because, well, it had to be. It didn't make much sense, but it did get enough currency to be Fact Checked.
A large majority of sampled signatures appeared genuine. I wouldn't rule out that there were a few 100000 EU citizens amongst that lot, who were genuinely allowed to petition, but I'd certainly think we were a lot closer.to 16% of the actual GE electorate having signed it than we were to 10%.
Pretty much daily Lib Dem leaflets here in Hampstead - for weeks now - long before the election was called.
Nothing from anyone else.
Election very boring so far. No-one has offered me a free owl, or any other interesting wildlife.
Best quality Quilted toilet tissue for every household. Poorer households will get it free, wealthy households have to take a low interest loan to pay for theirs.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
One pointer is that its distribution by constituency follows the Remain vote in the referendum fairly well. This is a strong indicator that it's real voters who participated in both - but also means that it doesn't add much extra information over the referendum vote numbers.
The main problem is that a large number of the signatories will be very committed Labour voters (and members) with no intention of voting Liberal Democrat except in very rare circumstances.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
IIRC Leavers were making the claim of Russian bots, because, well, it had to be. It didn't make much sense, but it did get enough currency to be Fact Checked.
A large majority of sampled signatures appeared genuine. I wouldn't rule out that there were a few 100000 EU citizens amongst that lot, who were genuinely allowed to petition, but I'd certainly think we were a lot closer.to 16% of the actual GE electorate having signed it than we were to 10%.
And how many of them were old enough to vote. All you have to do to sign a Government petition is have a UK postcode and have a valid email address. So you have 3.1 million EU citizens who would be eligible to sign the petition but not vote and then how many million 14-17 year olds?
One very good example of why petitions are a really stupid way to try and gauge electoral support.
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
If you invite Swansong then surely you'd have to invite the SNP too, as a larger party? And who would turn up? Be a hell of a show though.
Surely “a show” is exactly what broadcasters want?
Who called it a joke to have Jo in the debate? If Swinson debates anything like some of her interviews, if you were Boris and Jez wouldn’t you want to debate her and put her and her revoke policy under pressure and win votes from her shrill and aggressive performance? This isn’t a joke this is serious, One of the pressing political concerns right now is to reconcile a deeply divided and bitter country, and Lib Dem’s have come out with a purely opportunistic policy not remotely attempting to address the 17.4 million leave votes and how bitter and divided the nation is. If Labour and Tory’s at all levels can’t take Lib Dem’s apart on that, are running away from debating her, they shouldn’t even be in politics.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
One pointer is that its distribution by constituency follows the Remain vote in the referendum fairly well. This is a strong indicator that it's real voters who participated in both - but also means that it doesn't add much extra information over the referendum vote numbers.
The main problem is that a large number of the signatories will be very committed Labour voters (and members) with no intention of voting Liberal Democrat except in very rare circumstances.
Yeah, it’d take a Brexit election where Labour wasn’t campaigning against Brexit. That might do it.
Two interesting NEW polls from a quick flick through the last thread. ICM (the gold standard ) has Labour within 7 points of the Tories and another poll showing Labour overtaking the Tories in Wales. Clearly the fat lady hasn't even cleared her throat yet.
The Wales poll shows
Labour 18 (-10) Conservatives 17 (+9) Plaid 4 Lib dem 1 (+1)
This would see labour in a minority of seats for the first time in decades
Also the tory share has risen faster than Labour with icm
The poll I was referring to tells a different story re the Welsh poll.
Labour: 29 (+4) Conservatives: 28 (-1) Brexit Party: 15 (+1) Liberal Democrats: 12 (-4) Plaid Cymru: 12 (no change) Greens: 3 (-1) Others: 1 (no change)
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
IIRC Leavers were making the claim of Russian bots, because, well, it had to be. It didn't make much sense, but it did get enough currency to be Fact Checked.
A large majority of sampled signatures appeared genuine. I wouldn't rule out that there were a few 100000 EU citizens amongst that lot, who were genuinely allowed to petition, but I'd certainly think we were a lot closer.to 16% of the actual GE electorate having signed it than we were to 10%.
Is there a link to the fact-checking ?
As the webpage fell over as soon as there was a large volume of signatories, and as 'good enough for Government use' is famously shorthand for a bodged job in any IT project, I'd guess the verification process is pretty poor.
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
It’s about time you changed your user name to something more accurate, unless it’s a lavatorial reference?
Despite the rave reviews under this twitter thread I think it may be flawed.
We aren’t looking at Tory and Labour “supporters “defecting” to the BXP.
We are looking at BXP Euro-election voters and weighing up how many of them might switch (“return”, if you insist) to Tory or Labour.
Looked at this way, Tory leavers - except the diehard ultras who won’t shift anyway - clearly have every reason to return, whereas Labour leavers don’t (excepting to those few Lab MPs with leaver appeal like Flint).
Therefore it remains possible that at its current single figure ratings the BXP has very few potential switchers to Tory amongst its support.
This hypothesis has added credibility when you consider that the Tory vote share has already recovered considerably as BXP deflated, whereas Labour’s has not (only just picking up more recently as the LDs start to drift)
Good points. But Labour leaning Brexit Party supporters are still quite likely to switch to Labour at the last minute. The Brexit Party has artfully kept its Brexit offering vanilla flavoured. The Tory Party's Brexit is very much a deregulator's Singapore on Thames global Britain Brexit. That is the polar opposite of the Lexiters who want more protectionism and state intervention.
Except the points based immigration system and more money for the NHS and police and a higher minimum wage Boris is offering is exactly what most Lexiters want
This looks like a classic case where not publishing is going to create worse publicity than publishing. I suspect the actual report is pretty anodyne.
I suspect not. There will be no smoking gun but there will likely be enough of interest there for those who know where to look and/or know how to join up the dots to other information which is already in the public domain.
Also interesting that it is the security chiefs who are pushing for publication and not just the MPs.
Separately wasn't there a report yesterday where Departments were refusing to give Cummings information even though he is supposedly Deep Vetted.
Yes.
The links between Cummings and corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs with links to Russian mobsters would give me sleepless nights, were I in intelligence. Even banks won’t deal with these people. Quite why parts of the British Establishment are so willing to embrace them is another matter. Well, we know why - money.
The question that is never asked is why such people take so much care to get to know movers and shakers and those close to them in the political, charity and commercial worlds. It’s not just money which is laundered. Reputations are as well. We’ve known this - or ought to have known this, if the people in charge did not have the attention span of a goldfish - since the days of Robert Maxwell. The level of naivety and the lack of curiosity are astounding.
Here's the thing. That Revoke petition. 6.1m signatures. 16% of the total electorate, and a 16% one would think is politicised enough to turn out. Perhaps minus a few Mickey Mouses and EU citizens, but only a few mind.
Our of interest, how do you know that?
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
One pointer is that its distribution by constituency follows the Remain vote in the referendum fairly well. This is a strong indicator that it's real voters who participated in both - but also means that it doesn't add much extra information over the referendum vote numbers.
The main problem is that a large number of the signatories will be very committed Labour voters (and members) with no intention of voting Liberal Democrat except in very rare circumstances.
Yeah, it’d take a Brexit election where Labour wasn’t campaigning against Brexit. That might do it.
I know, anecdote, but if my Facebook feed is anything to go by that doesn't have any effect at all. The rare circumstances I was thinking of would be living in a Liberal Democrat/Tory marginal.
I think the Tories will hold South Cambridgeshire and gain Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne from the LDs but Chuka will win Cities of London and Westminster and Luciana will win Finchley and Golders Green from the Tories, Labour falling to 3rd in both heavily Remain seats through tactical voting for the LDs
Eastbourne is a special case. The MP there basically spends all his time working the constituency.
BTW from that r/neoliberal thread someone posted a nice spreadsheet of parties standing down for each other. (Sorry if this has already been posted, or somebody here made it):
Two interesting NEW polls from a quick flick through the last thread. ICM (the gold standard ) has Labour within 7 points of the Tories and another poll showing Labour overtaking the Tories in Wales. Clearly the fat lady hasn't even cleared her throat yet.
The Wales poll shows
Labour 18 (-10) Conservatives 17 (+9) Plaid 4 Lib dem 1 (+1)
This would see labour in a minority of seats for the first time in decades
Also the tory share has risen faster than Labour with icm
The poll I was referring to tells a different story re the Welsh poll.
Labour: 29 (+4) Conservatives: 28 (-1) Brexit Party: 15 (+1) Liberal Democrats: 12 (-4) Plaid Cymru: 12 (no change) Greens: 3 (-1) Others: 1 (no change)
Wut? The Lib Dem vote is going to be up in Scotland. There's 10,000 Con tactical Unionist votes to squeeze (with a much smaller pro-Indy Labout vote for the SNP to tap)
Sure the LDs should be odds on favourite here not the SNP?
And the Tories are the Conservative and Unionist Party and some Labour MPs are Labour and Co-Operative Party MPs and we don't both to be precise every single time with them, there's no confusion referring to the Lib Dems as the Liberals as a shorthand. The actual Liberal Party are so tiny there's no reasonable way for people to get confused by who is meant.
First. Like the Lib Dem candidates in many places. Robert told us the other day that his forecasts were based entirely on gut feeling. Far more important, I think, is that the Lib Dems are focusing their efforts on a relatively reduced number of seats. We have seen several reports in recent weeks of constituencies which have received several centrally-produced and delivered publications. This concentration will not be reflected in the overall polling figures.
The lib dems have always been a 50/50 party at elections, fifty targets and fifty development seats. Thirty is looking on the difference this time is that we have the cash fo r an air war as well as a ground war. Many on here think we shouldn’t exist and should leave it to the real politicians, well they can fuck off.
You are admitting that with such a limited number of target seats, the leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be Prime Minister is, to coin a phrase, bollocks?
So why should she be in the potential PMs debate? Or maybe, I dunno, she should fuck off?
Yes - her inclusion would be a joke.
If you invite Swansong then surely you'd have to invite the SNP too, as a larger party? And who would turn up? Be a hell of a show though.
Violet Elizabeth will whine and whine that her minority 4th party should be represented. Be a real laugh to see her being torn to shreds.
Wut? The Lib Dem vote is going to be up in Scotland. There's 10,000 Con tactical Unionist votes to squeeze (with a much smaller pro-Indy Labout vote for the SNP to tap)
Sure the LDs should be odds on favourite here not the SNP?
Fife NE is also stuffed full of English students at St Andrews. They'll probably be a bit "rah", but they'll still be pro-Union, pro-EU.
Pretty much daily Lib Dem leaflets here in Hampstead - for weeks now - long before the election was called.
Nothing from anyone else.
Election very boring so far. No-one has offered me a free owl, or any other interesting wildlife.
Hampstead could be a surprise LD gain from Labour, they also won it in the European elections
It’s Hampstead and Kilburn which may make it tougher for the Lib Dems than a place like Richmond. And Tulip Siddiq has an 11,000 majority. It could change but not a certainty by any means.
Not least because I think Labour will do better than people are expecting, the Tories not as well as they would like to and the Lib Dems will slightly underperform.
Wreck it for Labour. How are the dead expected to vote if they cannot do so postally?
Sent my postal application in this morning.
Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered.
You should get the postal vote in time, and you can always take it to the polling station (indeed any polling station in the constituency) yourself, to save risking the return post.
Seats lost to the Lib Dems are also in the anti Corbyn column
Labour at least can offer the LDs something they want if they are largest party, or if all non-Tories together have a majority at least.
If the Tories are largest party and the LDs hold the balance of power and refuse to make Corbyn PM, Boris stays PM
There’s a clear drift to Labour in the polls this week. If this continues for a few weeks last weeks comments about Labour finishing behind Libdems and Boris getting 20+ majority can be cut out made to resemble a unicorn.
The history books will say gamble that went wrong under picture of Boris, but that would be bad history. This decision to press for 2019 election was taken before Boris was even elected Tory leader. Boris has said to a few interviews now there was no choice and he sounds genuine on this. What’s the point being in offices and chauffeur driven cars without power in Parliament?
I think even if he went into opposition Boris will say on as leader, and become prime minister after the next election. In fact the Tory’s best hope for a long spell of majority government may be if they go into opposition on December 14th.
Comments
Their voters are about 1/3 Leave, and many are highly pissed off that they have joined the Remain Alliance. There have been rumblings of discontent that have even reached the BBC.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-50283189
On a bad day, I think PC could lose Arfon, as their vote may fall more than Labour's, giving a rare Labour gain. Ynys Mon is very unpredictable.
So, I think your bet is a good spot.
Best prices - Aberdeen South
SNP 1/2
Con (incumbent) 15/8
LD 40/1
The Tories are doing well with their 2017 Remain voters . Johnson getting a deal has certainly helped there .
This is an issue for the Lib Dems in those marginals , it’s not enough to just hoover up Labour Remainers .
That's a near 20% of voters who should already be natural feeding ground for LDs, and higher in any even vaguely Lib Demmy seat. (actually that petition was broken down by seat, could be good source material).
There are many factors in this (e.g. signatories in safe Labour seats), but LDs s should have the aim of pushing that 20% mark nationally, equally gaining many who didn't sign but are sympathetic.
SNP 2/7
Con 11/4
Lab 20/1
LD 50/1
One for Casino to chuck his cash on.
Not sure about the humps but I am an even-toed ungulate, so yes, I think so,
This looks like a classic case where not publishing is going to create worse publicity than publishing. I suspect the actual report is pretty anodyne.
I am on 20-29 at 18/1 with Shadsy.
I have no idea how many of the 6.1 million signatures are on the electoral roll, but I would have guessed it may be in error by a significant amount.
Happy to be corrected, though.
SNP 1/5
Lab 5/1
Con 25/1
LD 66/1
Nothing from anyone else.
Election very boring so far. No-one has offered me a free owl, or any other interesting wildlife.
Sir Lynsley Hoyle seems a dull choice after Bercow.
Hardly a knight to remember
Or is it only a good day for democracy if your preferred candidate wins ?
Is it worth backing the PM?
I don’t speak officially for UKIP, and this is purely a personal view, but I’m guessing millions of Brexiteers across the Country now support Boris Johnson’s “EU Deal”. I know I do.
Nigel Farage (The Brexit Party) is currently sounding the claxons, firing off flare-pistols, declaiming: “Is this the Brexit you voted for?” To which the answer is: No, Nigel. Of course not. But it’s better than seeing Corbyn, Sturgeon, and Swinson cancelling the Referendum.”...
You have to know when to be satisfied with what you’ve got. The Boris Deal isn’t perfect. Life never is. My preferred option would be No Deal and a Clean-Break Brexit. ..
If there’s a general election, UKIP and The Brexit Party should field no more than a handful of candidates, or we risk destroying Brexit. We’ll be to blame. We must back the Boris Deal.
https://www.ukip.org/national-ukip-news-item.php?id=244
------------------------------
Though the very next piece from another person strikes a very different tone
The EU is clearly desperate for Westminster to ratify Boris’s ‘Brexit-In-Name-Only’ treaty which will keep us in an extendable transition period for three more years and subject us to all of the directives and regulations of the EU Commission, and all the rulings of the European Court of Justice, both past and future...
No-one who respects democracy should accept this brazen Brexit betrayal nor be exasperated into fatigue. ..
The only way to leave the EU is for a Clean-Break Brexit where we take back full control of our money, borders, laws, trade, fishing waters, and keep control of our armed forces which are to be subjugated into the EU military control and command architecture.
Regardless of this new, abominable delay to leaving the EU, UKIP will fight on to achieve the Clean-Break Brexit that the people voted for, and the liberty that is our birth-right as a nation.
https://www.ukip.org/national-ukip-news-item.php?id=245
Labour Leavers are Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Also interesting that it is the security chiefs who are pushing for publication and not just the MPs.
The WA elections are not a particularly good guide, as turnout is low, and those of a Nationalist persuasion are more likely to vote.
The former Tory candidate was ex-Plaid Cymru (actually a grandson of the founder of Plaid Cymru).
I imagine if the Tories have chosen someone half-way sensible (i.e., reasonably local, a Welsh speaker), then they will hold the seat rather easily.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-50292235
Its ok, cos she was a student when she was bashing this stuff out.
The 27-year-old, who competed in the 4x400m relay at Rio 2016, had £2m worth of drugs in the boot of her car when she was stopped at a routine border check near Elten in Germany in June.
The court heard that she thought she was carrying doping materials and did not know she was transporting ecstasy and crystal meth.
https://www.bbc.com/sport/athletics/50294553
Who did she think she was a Tour de France cyclist?
To be fair to his detractors, there’s other aspects of the role, like looking after bullied workers he doesn’t appear to have excelled in.
A large majority of sampled signatures appeared genuine. I wouldn't rule out that there were a few 100000 EU citizens amongst that lot, who were genuinely allowed to petition, but I'd certainly think we were a lot closer.to 16% of the actual GE electorate having signed it than we were to 10%.
One feels though that the Scottish BXP supporter is on the harder core edge of things.
PS. And a free owl.
The main problem is that a large number of the signatories will be very committed Labour voters (and members) with no intention of voting Liberal Democrat except in very rare circumstances.
One very good example of why petitions are a really stupid way to try and gauge electoral support.
Conservatives in Dumfriesshire Clydesdale and Tweeddale @1.44 seems awfully generous of Ladbrokes
No, not those polls!
As the webpage fell over as soon as there was a large volume of signatories, and as 'good enough for Government use' is famously shorthand for a bodged job in any IT project, I'd guess the verification process is pretty poor.
The links between Cummings and corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs with links to Russian mobsters would give me sleepless nights, were I in intelligence. Even banks won’t deal with these people. Quite why parts of the British Establishment are so willing to embrace them is another matter. Well, we know why - money.
The question that is never asked is why such people take so much care to get to know movers and shakers and those close to them in the political, charity and commercial worlds. It’s not just money which is laundered. Reputations are as well. We’ve known this - or ought to have known this, if the people in charge did not have the attention span of a goldfish - since the days of Robert Maxwell. The level of naivety and the lack of curiosity are astounding.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/106pw1Q5I0xmUmilb-M3IKe9SUfRD6QDQQUWSa_RYz8E/edit#gid=0
I do not understand Roger's point
Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered.
Surely the Fife North East Price on Ladbrokes is wrong
LD @Evens
Wut? The Lib Dem vote is going to be up in Scotland. There's 10,000 Con tactical Unionist votes to squeeze (with a much smaller pro-Indy Labout vote for the SNP to tap)
Sure the LDs should be odds on favourite here not the SNP?
But the criticisms of him on here are completely OTT in my view.
I would vote Green if I lived there just for the hell of it. And that's despite the rogue apostrophe in "it's".
I think they'll fall into line and vote LD.
It’s Hampstead and Kilburn which may make it tougher for the Lib Dems than a place like Richmond. And Tulip Siddiq has an 11,000 majority. It could change but not a certainty by any means.
Not least because I think Labour will do better than people are expecting, the Tories not as well as they would like to and the Lib Dems will slightly underperform.
The history books will say gamble that went wrong under picture of Boris, but that would be bad history. This decision to press for 2019 election was taken before Boris was even elected Tory leader. Boris has said to a few interviews now there was no choice and he sounds genuine on this. What’s the point being in offices and chauffeur driven cars without power in Parliament?
I think even if he went into opposition Boris will say on as leader, and become prime minister after the next election. In fact the Tory’s best hope for a long spell of majority government may be if they go into opposition on December 14th.
I am surprised so many try to excuse his arrogance and bullying
That should send Steve Baker into orbit.