Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Conservatives’ election chances. Ten Seats To Watch

24567

Comments

  • Nigelb said:

    Swinson: "Luciana didn't want to leave Labour she was driven"

    I see what she wants to say here, but is it wise to say some of your candidates are only here for negative reasons.

    Or you might be saying that you are offering a broad church party of the centre, which can accommodate both Conservative and Labour members who have been driven out by the lurch of their own parties away from the centre ground.
    Indeed. So say that. Keep saying it. There are millions of voters without a home now the two main parties have gone totally nuts.
    Indeed. Lib Dems are the only lot left that I can vote for even though it will be a pointless vote as they have no chance where I live. I am wondering whether to bother voting at all.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513

    Cyclefree said:

    At least Boris doesn’t have one of these.

    https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1191495086581792768?s=21

    Trump has faith?!

    Is this some new religion he’s just invented?
    Mammon.
    Is she insane? God is wherever she walks? She's downloading Heaven???

    In an earlier age she would be burnt for heresy.
    The laying on of hands... though curiously omitting the casting out of demons:
    https://twitter.com/Paula_White/status/1190005496159383552
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,349
    edited November 2019
    GIN1138 said:
    That 7% for BXP looked a bit of an outlier. This is now probably a reasonable base number for the start of the campaign.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,873
    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815

    I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    I thought the article was excellent and the choice of constituencies thought provoking.

    I suspect (I have no way of knowing, but I think I 'get' pit country) that the constituency is more brexity than the borough as a whole -probably 70%+) and that there aren't that many labour remainers who would put their remaininess above their labourness.

    Also the UKIP surge of 2015 unwound mainly to the tories in 2017. I think these same people will love a BXP candidate, and this will affect the conservative vote more.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    edited November 2019
    Despite what the pundits say about the Tories having had a bad week there has been a swing to them from Labour in the polls

    https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1191675269070950400

  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
  • I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    eek said:

    I think Stockton South could be interesting. Tories are 888 behind, and have their usual oodles of cash. Which combined with Labour's collapse on Teesside in May could make things right.

    Stockton South should be an easy Tory gain.
    Agree with you (for once).
    Should be. It's a race to the bottom for both Labour and Tory vote tallies - the party who loses the fewest votes wins the seat. Brexit Party will take thousands of votes from both. Although I'm a LibDem now I'm not predicting big things here (not a target seat) but I anticipate thousands of "can't vote for Corbyn" voters up for grabs who aren't Brexit chanters either.
    Logically (and emotionally) a voter should vote for the least worst party able to win the seat - it's why I will hold my nose of vote Labour as it's a 2 horse race in our seat and the Tory candidate is awful in a lot of ways.

    It will be interesting to see where Corbyn campaigns as I suspect a lot of candidates will not want him anywhere near their seat as they campaign on a yes I'm the Labour candidate but I'm not a Corbynite platform.
    Hugo Rifkind had an amusing line about all the Labour voters last time around assuring him that theirs was a vote for the party, and absolutely not for Corbyn. Many of them in Corbyn's constituency...
  • Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    At least Boris doesn’t have one of these.

    https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1191495086581792768?s=21

    Trump has faith?!

    Is this some new religion he’s just invented?
    Mammon.
    Is she insane? God is wherever she walks? She's downloading Heaven???

    In an earlier age she would be burnt for heresy.
    The laying on of hands... though curiously omitting the casting out of demons:
    https://twitter.com/Paula_White/status/1190005496159383552
    I find that so pathetic. That these people have turned off their brains and put all their hopes in a narcissistic, vain, self-obsessed, prideful man.

    I thought that Trump's "qualities" were exactly the sort of things that the Bible railed against?
  • Nigelb said:

    philiph said:

    As the report is critical of the advice that was given, instructing residents to stay, it seems like a logical extension of that fact that survival numbers would have increased if people had left the building.
    "What I woulda done' is different from 'What shoulda happened' (and pretty prickish in the context).
    The pricks are those trying to make political capital out of perfectly sensible comments.
    Imagine you had a relative who had died in the fire, and listening to Rees Mogg saying they'd have survived if they'd been a bit smarter.

    The comments might have an arguable logic about them, but to call them sensible (in both senses of the word) is a stretch.
    The logical conclusion of that being we should not learn from mistakes. We seem these days to be far too concerned about protecting people from hurt feelings even at the cost of allowing the same mistakes to be made again and again.
    It was the LFB wot told them to stay put.
    And on Piper Alpha it was the safety rules, in place for years and drummed into everyone through drills and exercises, that told over 100 men to go and die in the accommodation block. In both cases the official instructions were ill considered and caused many more deaths than was necessary.

    People who broke the rules in both cases survived.
    And who gave the official instructions at Grenfell?
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    I just saw Ming Campbell at the LibDem launch - haven't seen him for ages.
    Talking of blasts from the past, I noticed Geoffrey Robinson on the green benches yesterday. I read a book about BL, and he was a senior executive there 50 years ago. Extraordinary that he is still in public life, and looking well too. What a career!
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,060

    Nigelb said:

    Swinson: "Luciana didn't want to leave Labour she was driven"

    I see what she wants to say here, but is it wise to say some of your candidates are only here for negative reasons.

    Or you might be saying that you are offering a broad church party of the centre, which can accommodate both Conservative and Labour members who have been driven out by the lurch of their own parties away from the centre ground.
    Indeed. So say that. Keep saying it. There are millions of voters without a home now the two main parties have gone totally nuts.
    But unfortunately millions of voters have no sensible alternative but to put a cross next to one of those parties, who have "gone totally nuts".
  • Excellent article by Alastair. I suspect Caroline Flint will hold and I am sure there are many Tories like me who would love to see her cross the floor of the house. I also think Paul should hold East Renfrewshire because he has worked it hard and it is home to the overwhelming majority of Scotland's Jewish community. I had tipped Hamilton East and Lanark in 2017 to be a surprise Tory gain but this time I am undecided. Alex Chalk is always good on SKY etc so I am quietly confident for him and I think Chuka's love for himself will put many voters off. The other seats I will watch with interest.

    In Scotland, a fascinating battle will be Stirling. Stephen has worked it hard for years and was rewarded in 2017 with a slim majority over the SNP. Remember it had been Michael Forsyth's seat until 1997 and Labour held it until 2015. The SNP has now parachuted in Alyn Smith their top MEP and I dont think that will necessarily go down well with the locals in a seat which if in England would have a 10,000+ Tory majority. How much the Liberals take back from the SNP could determine the outcome this time.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    GIN1138 said:
    That 7% for BXP looked a bit of an outlier. This is now probably a reasonable base number for the start of the campaign.
    I'd rather be the Tories than Labour on those figures - but there is more squeezable voting matter available for Labour, so they shouldn't be giving up just yet.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,873
    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @Cyclefree FPT

    I’ve not seen the report, but one outcome could be - for example - evidence of a criminal offence by someone

    If so, then to publish that before the election would likely jeopardise the outcome of a prosecution

    the 10 day period is in the minimum review time, not the maximum. The government has been quite busy over the last few days so may not have completed its review.

    I’m sure that it’s politically convenient to sit on the report for a few days but are you really surprised about a politician doing something politically convenient? Likewise it’s entirely standard practice for the opposition to attack the “cover up”.

    Rest assured if it really is as damming as you think it would be leaked. That is the way things work.

  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,060

    Excellent article by Alastair. I suspect Caroline Flint will hold and I am sure there are many Tories like me who would love to see her cross the floor of the house.

    Is there a "Meaning of Liff" entry for the number of months after a GE that an MP has to wait before crossing the floor, without them appearing a total *$&("/?

    Perhaps a "Don Valley" would be an appropriate moniker.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Streeter said:

    FPT

    Streeter said:

    Charles said:

    Streeter said:

    Charles said:

    The old “guilty until proven innocent” line i see
    What has he got to hide?
    Moving on to smears.

    So uplifting
    I didn’t smear him. I simply asked what he has to hide. If the answer is ‘nothing’ he has the power to release the report.

    If he chooses not to it doesn’t take Coleen Rooney’s powers to deduce his motive.
    Nor yours.
    Nor, indeed, yours or more to the point, Johnson’s.
    Not publishing now doesn’t mean he has something to hide. You are assuming that.
  • I would add Devon North to the list.

    Traditionally a very strong seat for the LDs and should fall to them under UNS but estimated to have voted 57% Brexit
  • Nigelb said:

    philiph said:

    As the report is critical of the advice that was given, instructing residents to stay, it seems like a logical extension of that fact that survival numbers would have increased if people had left the building.
    "What I woulda done' is different from 'What shoulda happened' (and pretty prickish in the context).
    The pricks are those trying to make political capital out of perfectly sensible comments.
    Imagine you had a relative who had died in the fire, and listening to Rees Mogg saying they'd have survived if they'd been a bit smarter.

    The comments might have an arguable logic about them, but to call them sensible (in both senses of the word) is a stretch.
    The logical conclusion of that being we should not learn from mistakes. We seem these days to be far too concerned about protecting people from hurt feelings even at the cost of allowing the same mistakes to be made again and again.
    It was the LFB wot told them to stay put.
    And on Piper Alpha it was the safety rules, in place for years and drummed into everyone through drills and exercises, that told over 100 men to go and die in the accommodation block. In both cases the official instructions were ill considered and caused many more deaths than was necessary.

    People who broke the rules in both cases survived.
    And who gave the official instructions at Grenfell?
    It was (and still is in most tower blocks) the official policy given to residents by the housing associations and landlords through their fire safety instructions. It is repeated by fire services in their literature. Last week friends of mine in a tower block in Birmingham were told it remained the official instruction to all residents.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,749
    edited November 2019
    Corbyn thinks his mantra about Boris selling out the NHS to the US is a winner.

    After all he says nothing else in every speech

    Maybe somone should tell him Boris is more trusted than he is on the NHS

    Anecdote:

    I was in a local opticians this morning and just chatting to the staff when one of them said, out of the blue, her Mother absolutely hates Corbyn, and everyone there concurred he is unfit for office

    It did take me by surprise but I suspect that is a widely held view
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Anyone who is astonished that you get maggots in oranges and rat hair in paprika has a) never worked for an organic food distributor; b) never worked in the food industry at all; c) possibly never had a 'proper' job.

    Millions of northern monkeys googling "what is paprika?"
  • ParistondaParistonda Posts: 1,843
    Swinson kind of needs a result where Labour and SNP is enough to form a government without her. She's beginning to box herself into a corner with her anti Corbyn comments, simply because if the result is a NOM needing LD votes she will have to pick a side, and it's the Labour side that is currently closest to the LD position regardless of Corbyn. Clear that she's currently choosing her words carefully but she may get pressed harder on this soon enough. She needs to make immediate PR a precondition of any pact, which would put the ball back in Labour's court.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited November 2019

    I would add Devon North to the list.

    Traditionally a very strong seat for the LDs and should fall to them under UNS but estimated to have voted 57% Brexit

    I still think the LDs can win seats like Devon North and Cornwall North but the swing in their favour will probably be modest compared to places like SW London and the Remainy areas of the Home Counties.
  • I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
    Only to the picky, pendantic types. You will be insisting on, correct, punctation and; full stops at the. end of sentences next
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    nunu2 said:
    I agree. Don't think they will put up a candidate in Portsmouth South though.
  • Nigelb said:

    philiph said:

    As the report is critical of the advice that was given, instructing residents to stay, it seems like a logical extension of that fact that survival numbers would have increased if people had left the building.
    "What I woulda done' is different from 'What shoulda happened' (and pretty prickish in the context).
    The pricks are those trying to make political capital out of perfectly sensible comments.
    Imagine you had a relative who had died in the fire, and listening to Rees Mogg saying they'd have survived if they'd been a bit smarter.

    The comments might have an arguable logic about them, but to call them sensible (in both senses of the word) is a stretch.
    The logical conclusion of that being we should not learn from mistakes. We seem these days to be far too concerned about protecting people from hurt feelings even at the cost of allowing the same mistakes to be made again and again.
    It was the LFB wot told them to stay put.
    And on Piper Alpha it was the safety rules, in place for years and drummed into everyone through drills and exercises, that told over 100 men to go and die in the accommodation block. In both cases the official instructions were ill considered and caused many more deaths than was necessary.

    People who broke the rules in both cases survived.
    And who gave the official instructions at Grenfell?
    It was (and still is in most tower blocks) the official policy given to residents by the housing associations and landlords through their fire safety instructions. It is repeated by fire services in their literature. Last week friends of mine in a tower block in Birmingham were told it remained the official instruction to all residents.
    The usual position is for a stay in place (or stay put) policy to be maintained until the Fire Service provide further direction. This is to ensure, so far as possible, that proper fire compartmentalization is maintained (generally a flat by flat or zone by zone basis) which greatly assists in putting out the fire.

  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541

    nichomar said:

    I can’t imagine he has ever been in a council run tower block in his life.
    Not without his nanny accompanying him certainly.
    Wasn’t he the candidate for a very working class part of Glasgow in 1997 when he famously campaigned with his nanny? That would have sent him into some blocks of council flats I’m sure.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
  • marke09marke09 Posts: 926
    Welsh independence voting intention:

    "Should Wales be an independent country?"

    Yes: 22%
    No: 57%

    via @YouGov
    , 31 Oct - 04 Nov
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kinabalu said:

    Cheltenham LD gain; Cities of L&W Lab gain; Southport LD gain; E Renfrew SNP gain; Norwich N Con hold; Kensington Lab hold; Ipswich Con gain; Lanark & HE SNP hold; Wrexham Con gain; Don Valley (& Bolsover, Workington, Newcastle UL) Con gain.

    Don Valley goes blue ?? !!
    Must be the candidate that makes the difference @Tissue_Price

    😝
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,060
    Dura_Ace said:

    nichomar said:

    I can’t imagine he has ever been in a council run tower block in his life.
    He might take that weird kid of his that he enjoys exposing to the lower orders.
    By "lower oders" do you mean to Chequers for lunch with the Prime Minister?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,349
    AndyJS said:

    I would add Devon North to the list.

    Traditionally a very strong seat for the LDs and should fall to them under UNS but estimated to have voted 57% Brexit

    I still think the LDs can win seats like Devon North and Cornwall North but the swing in their favour will probably be modest compared to places like SW London and the Remainy areas of the Home Counties.
    The voters of North Devon (and elsewhere in the South West) know what the LibDems really think of them.

    https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2019-09-19/north-devon-lib-dem-parliamentary-candidate-kirsten-johnson-resigns-after-offensive-radio-interview/
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    This is what an epic fail looks like:

    "A government plan to create 200,000 new homes in England for first-time buyers has resulted in no homes being built, the National Audit Office has found.
    Announced in 2014, "starter homes" were meant to be aimed at those under the age of 40 and sold at a 20% discount.
    But legislation to take the project forward was never passed.
    Labour called the policy a total failure, but the government said it had a "great track record" for house building.
    Former prime minister David Cameron committed to the scheme in the 2015 Conservative Party manifesto as a way of tackling the affordable housing crisis."

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50296672
  • I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
    Only to the picky, pendantic types. You will be insisting on, correct, punctation and; full stops at the. end of sentences next
    10 pedants or fewer :smile:
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Your average Labour voting or Corbyncurious scrote doesn't analyse it on that level. All they hear is something they like (the NHS) in combination with something they despise (USA Boris). That juxtaposition causes flickers of primal fear in their basal ganglia which is all Corbyn needs.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    I'm not so sure, as voters really don't pay for drugs directly.
    They pay for prescriptions.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,060
    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Who pays the NHS?

    If the Pharma companies charge more for their products then either there is less money for doctors, nurses, operations, replacement hips, MRI scanners, dialysis machines, modernising hospitals..... or British tax payers end up footing the bill
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,729
    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    He really does need to be kept in a locked box somewhere. Much like Labour hid Gerald Kaufman back in 92.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    This polling average site is currently forecasting a Tory majority of 40 seats, which seems reasonable.

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/polls/general-election
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    He really does need to be kept in a locked box somewhere. Much like Labour hid Gerald Kaufman back in 92.
    Agreed, the only time he should be used in this campaign is to be dismissive of the Brexit Party (if that is required).
  • DougSeal said:

    nichomar said:

    I can’t imagine he has ever been in a council run tower block in his life.
    Not without his nanny accompanying him certainly.
    Wasn’t he the candidate for a very working class part of Glasgow in 1997 when he famously campaigned with his nanny? That would have sent him into some blocks of council flats I’m sure.
    It was Central Fife. There must have been a lot of low rise social housing but I am not sure there are any tower blocks in Methil, Leven, Glenwood etc. I am certain that mutual incomprehension abounded.
  • Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does.
    There is no such thing as NHS money. There is only taxpayers' money.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Cyclefree said:

    At least Boris doesn’t have one of these.

    https://twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1191495086581792768?s=21

    Trump has faith?!

    Is this some new religion he’s just invented?
    Mammon.
    Is she insane? God is wherever she walks? She's downloading Heaven???

    In an earlier age she would be burnt for heresy.
    There's a reason why the Puritans fled to the Massachusetts Bay colony.
  • Brom said:

    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.

    This is rubbish. The last time that polls were tested ,EP2019, the Tories were overstated by some margin by all the firms bar Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
  • I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
    Only to the picky, pendantic types. You will be insisting on, correct, punctation and; full stops at the. end of sentences next
    10 pedants or fewer :smile:
    What is the collective noun for pedants - a pontification?
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    Dura_Ace said:

    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Your average Labour voting or Corbyncurious scrote doesn't analyse it on that level. All they hear is something they like (the NHS) in combination with something they despise (USA Boris). That juxtaposition causes flickers of primal fear in their basal ganglia which is all Corbyn needs.
    Is USA something they despise?

    Trump, maybe, but USA holds allure of Hollywood, many TV series, New York and much more.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,141

    Nigelb said:

    philiph said:

    As the report is critical of the advice that was given, instructing residents to stay, it seems like a logical extension of that fact that survival numbers would have increased if people had left the building.
    "What I woulda done' is different from 'What shoulda happened' (and pretty prickish in the context).
    The pricks are those trying to make political capital out of perfectly sensible comments.
    Imagine you had a relative who had died in the fire, and listening to Rees Mogg saying they'd have survived if they'd been a bit smarter.

    The comments might have an arguable logic about them, but to call them sensible (in both senses of the word) is a stretch.
    The logical conclusion of that being we should not learn from mistakes. We seem these days to be far too concerned about protecting people from hurt feelings even at the cost of allowing the same mistakes to be made again and again.
    It was the LFB wot told them to stay put.
    And on Piper Alpha it was the safety rules, in place for years and drummed into everyone through drills and exercises, that told over 100 men to go and die in the accommodation block. In both cases the official instructions were ill considered and caused many more deaths than was necessary.

    People who broke the rules in both cases survived.
    I know someone who is extremely cut up about the fact she was on the phone to one of the victims advising her to stay put, because that was the LFB's advice.

    I don't know at what point my survival instinct would have kicked in, and whether it would have kicked in too late, in that situation.
  • Brom said:

    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.

    This is rubbish. The last time that polls were tested ,EP2019, the Tories were overstated by some margin by all the firms bar Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
    EP elections have nothing to do with General Elections as you yourself have wisely pointed out time and time again before now.

    Or did UKIP win in 2015? Did Michael Howard and William Hague win in 2005 and 2001 following their victories in the EP elections?
  • The contours of Labour's campaign form themselves:

    https://twitter.com/CasparSalmon/status/1191680946795401216
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    eristdoof said:

    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Who pays the NHS?

    If the Pharma companies charge more for their products then either there is less money for doctors, nurses, operations, replacement hips, MRI scanners, dialysis machines, modernising hospitals..... or British tax payers end up footing the bill
    Yeah. See point b), above.

    Oh, the irony of Labour accusing the Tories of planning to spend tens of billions more each year on healthcare...
  • marke09marke09 Posts: 926
    From the Evening Standard

    Labour is currently on 39 per cent, which is up four points from the last Mile End Institute poll in May but marks a tumble from 2017 when the party took a huge 54.5 per cent share of votes actually cast. It has a lead of 10 points today, compared with 22 points in the 2017 election.
    Conservatives are on 29 per cent, up six from May but down from a 33 per cent share in the 2017 contest.
    Liberal Democrats are at 19, down two from May but almost twice as high as the 8.8 per cent they scored in 2017.
    Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party is at six per cent (+4 since May) in the Remain-dominated London electorate, while Sian Berry’s Green Party is almost level at five (-2).
  • camel said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Anyone who is astonished that you get maggots in oranges and rat hair in paprika has a) never worked for an organic food distributor; b) never worked in the food industry at all; c) possibly never had a 'proper' job.

    Millions of northern monkeys googling "what is paprika?"
    Hey, no need for that!

    *Googles 'what is paprika?'*
  • I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
    Only to the picky, pendantic types. You will be insisting on, correct, punctation and; full stops at the. end of sentences next
    10 pedants or fewer :smile:
    What is the collective noun for pedants - a pontification?
    A lesser of pedants :D
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Labour's candidate in Harlow looks like a sixth-former. (She's probably 10 years older).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 70,513
    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
    'Most read' on BBC news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50302573
  • philiph said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Your average Labour voting or Corbyncurious scrote doesn't analyse it on that level. All they hear is something they like (the NHS) in combination with something they despise (USA Boris). That juxtaposition causes flickers of primal fear in their basal ganglia which is all Corbyn needs.
    Is USA something they despise?

    Trump, maybe, but USA holds allure of Hollywood, many TV series, New York and much more.
    California and New York always seem to vote Democrat :)
  • Endillion said:

    eristdoof said:

    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Who pays the NHS?

    If the Pharma companies charge more for their products then either there is less money for doctors, nurses, operations, replacement hips, MRI scanners, dialysis machines, modernising hospitals..... or British tax payers end up footing the bill
    Yeah. See point b), above.

    Oh, the irony of Labour accusing the Tories of planning to spend tens of billions more each year on healthcare...
    There is no such thing as NHS money. There is only taxpayers' money.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815

    The contours of Labour's campaign form themselves:

    https://twitter.com/CasparSalmon/status/1191680946795401216

    Do people buy this rubbish?

    Anything that is grown has insects fragments, rat shit and lots of slug slime. Washing helps. Cooking helps more. 3mg/454g seems pretty clean to me.

    Please do not wonder how much cow piss there is in milk.
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,453
    edited November 2019
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,706
    Perth and North Perthshire has surely got to be the biggest target for the Tories in Scotland. In 2017 they came within 21 votes of taking it.

    Of course that may well prove to be a Ruth led peak and the Tories are not polling in Scotland what they were then but the SNP probably aren't either. With 5k Labour votes still to squeeze (by both parties in fairness) it may well be determined by whose vote drops the least.

    Later this month the indictment will be served on Alex Salmond. There will of course be reporting restrictions pending the trial but it is difficult not to see the SNP taking a modest hit from this and that is all that is required.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,871
    camel said:

    Do people buy this rubbish?

    Yes.
  • Brom said:

    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.

    This is rubbish. The last time that polls were tested ,EP2019, the Tories were overstated by some margin by all the firms bar Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
    EP elections have nothing to do with General Elections as you yourself have wisely pointed out time and time again before now.

    Or did UKIP win in 2015? Did Michael Howard and William Hague win in 2005 and 2001 following their victories in the EP elections?
    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/05/20/putting-thursday-into-context-a-look-back-at-previous-uk-euro-elections/


    Recent EU elections have actually been a poor guide to the winning party’s fortunes at the subsequent general election. In their regally purple heyday, UKIP under their ex-leader Nigel Farage won the largest share of the vote and the most seats at the most recent EU election in 2014, but their vote halved at the GE the following year, winning only one MP. By contrast, the Tories under David Cameron won the previous 2009 EU election, whilst they were in opposition, and then went on to become largest party at the 2010 GE, and the larger party in the ensuing Con-LibDem coalition. And in 2014, the Tories came a poor third, behind UKIP and Labour, but then went on to win an outright majority at GE 2015. However, Labour were the first governing party to come third in a EU election, in 2009, trailing the Tories and UKIP on vote-share, but equalling UKIP on seats.
  • camelcamel Posts: 815
    Anorak said:
    I loved this picture, especially the cruelty of the person who made him a cuppa, then placed it out of arms reach.
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    A picture seems to be emerging that the two mains parties are taking shares from the minor parties and the lib dem 'revoke' policy could be their 'poll tax'

    A completely unnecessary own goal. They should have campaigned for a second refererendum
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    Surely con and labour the wrong way round, here ?
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited November 2019

    I included Don Valley for a specific reason (and it is a counterpart to Cheltenham). In both seats, the MP finds their party's views going against the grain of the local electorate as a whole. In both cases, the MP has sought to appease the local electorate. But in both cases, they may be falling victim to the ecological fallacy: the majority of their own voters almost certainly in both cases align with their party line. It is as likely that Caroline Flint finds herself punished by angry Labour Remainers voting Lib Dem, Green or abstaining as rewarded by floating Leavers.

    @AlastairMeeks - Have you allowed for the fact that the percentages from 2016 are now regarded as unreliable due to shifts in the demographics of the country? Less Leavers and more Remainers on the electoral rolls?
    FEWER Leavers?
    Only to the picky, pendantic types. You will be insisting on, correct, punctation and; full stops at the. end of sentences next
    10 pedants or fewer :smile:
    What is the collective noun for pedants - a pontification?
    A zealotry of pedants.

    "A small zealotry of pedants was in the corner, by the fireplace, discussing the misuse of apostrophes by greengrocers."
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    Surely con and labour the wrong way round, here ?
    Fascinating jump for Labour and dip for the Brexit party.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    Changes since GE2017:

    Lab -16%
    Con -4%
    LD +10%
    BRX +6%
    Grn +2%

    Swing 6% from Lab to Con
  • % of Britons who think the following parties Brexit policies are clear/not clear

    Brexit Party - 68% clear / 15% not clear
    Conservatives - 57% / 29%
    Lib Dems - 56% / 27%
    Green - 30% / 35%
    Labour - 21% / 65%

    https://t.co/GSd7M2bFYm https://t.co/cuNDk6AdCM
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    Surely con and labour the wrong way round, here ?
    It is a London poll
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,050
    edited November 2019
    Is that the westminster constituency or for the westminster parliament ?

    Edit - ah my mistake.

    London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    Surely con and labour the wrong way round, here ?
    It is a London poll
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
    'Most read' on BBC news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50302573
    LMAO. I'd been waiting for that. Brom's original quote pretty much meant that was fated to happen.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760

    Brom said:

    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.

    This is rubbish. The last time that polls were tested ,EP2019, the Tories were overstated by some margin by all the firms bar Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
    I disagree, these were different circumstances as The Brexit Party launched and we directly saw the Tory vote shift to BXP (and the Lib Dems) as the campaign went on. The BXP/Tory relationship is now understood better in the polling. Yes the Tories were possibly overstated by a few points but nothing like the 10+ points they were overstated in 2017. But either way there is only so much you can infer from a low turnout European election with protest votes a plenty, certainly there was zero risk of a Corbyn government if you didnt vote Tory back then.
  • Is that the westminster constituency or for the westminster parliament ?

    It is for London
  • alb1onalb1on Posts: 698
    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Probably not nationally, but it could be significant in London seats.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,060

    Brom said:

    There are so many ways to look at polls but effectively every poll we have seen so far will lead to a Tory majority. Yet odds on a Tory majority are greater than evens. So the betting has already built in the concept that Labour will campaign well and will close the gap on the Conservatives.

    But does the betting take into account that the polling methods have changed since 2017 and that the polling is potentially more accurate now than it was 5 weeks prior to the 2017 election? If the 2017 Corbyn surge was as much down to bad polling samples/models than it was a great Labour campaign then surely the Tories are in a very, very good place right now for a majority with a 'believable' double figure lead.

    This is rubbish. The last time that polls were tested ,EP2019, the Tories were overstated by some margin by all the firms bar Ipsos MORI and YouGov.
    EP elections have nothing to do with General Elections as you yourself have wisely pointed out time and time again before now.

    Or did UKIP win in 2015? Did Michael Howard and William Hague win in 2005 and 2001 following their victories in the EP elections?
    You have either misunderstood Mike's comment or are deliberately misrepresenting it.

    He was not claiming that the result of the EPE2019 is a prediction for GE2019. He was pointing out that the last time opinion polls were tested on a national level was in EPE2019 not in GE2017. The opinion poll house adjustments different for the two types of election of course, but the assesment after the EPE at the very least is a good measure of how variable and biassed* the opinion polls are.

    (I'm using the word "biassed" in the statistical sense and not a political sense here)
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Anorak said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
    'Most read' on BBC news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50302573
    LMAO. I'd been waiting for that. Brom's original quote pretty much meant that was fated to happen.
    Sure but it's still a minority, where will it be on the TV news and won't a lot of folk nod along in agreement?
  • How clear do the public think the parties are on their policies in key areas as we head into the general election? Just 21% of Britons think the Labour policy on Brexit is clear, compared to 56-68% for the Lib Dems, Tories and Brexit Party
    https://t.co/GSd7M2bFYm https://t.co/OjlexiWvX3
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    alb1on said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Probably not nationally, but it could be significant in London seats.
    only Kensington, and the main danger to a Lab loss there is Sam Gyimah splitting the vote.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,947
    Sean_F said:

    I know someone who is extremely cut up about the fact she was on the phone to one of the victims advising her to stay put, because that was the LFB's advice.

    I don't know at what point my survival instinct would have kicked in, and whether it would have kicked in too late, in that situation.

    This is the only humane and honest thing to say on the matter. One simply cannot know what one would have done in the appalling circumstances which those residents found themselves in. I have listened to the Rees Mogg clip and he does not restrict himself in this way. He opines that to leave (against instructions) was "common sense" and he would have done so. That is crass and arrogant. The swift apology was well merited.
  • London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    A picture seems to be emerging that the two mains parties are taking shares from the minor parties and the lib dem 'revoke' policy could be their 'poll tax'

    A completely unnecessary own goal. They should have campaigned for a second refererendum

    I doubt the LD Revoke policy is having any affect at all. My guess is that the fact there is a real election in the offing has concentrated quite a few anti-Tory minds and that a lot of anti-Tory voters are now beginning to look at who has the best chance of defeating the Tory in their constituency.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 77,873

    London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    2017 result:

    % vote
    54.5% LAB
    33.1% CON
    8.8% LD
    1.8% GRN
    1.3% UKIP
    0.5% OTH

    Changes

    Lab (-15.5)
    Con (-4.1)
    LD (+10.2)
    BXP (+4.7) (From UKIP I suppose)
    GRN (+3.2)
    OTH (+1.5) (Implied)

    Lab -> Con swing 5.7%
    Con -> LD swing 7.15%
    Lab -> LD Swing 12.85%

    Implied on Uniform (London) Swing (ULS)

    Con Gain: Kensington, Battersea, Enfield Southgate, Croydon Central, Dagenham

    LD Gain: Richmond Park, Bermondsey & Old Southwark

    Con +4, Lab -5, LD +1
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092
    Awfully charitable of the Telegraph to advertise one of Labour's flagship policies on their front page today.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited November 2019
    Brom said:

    Anorak said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
    'Most read' on BBC news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50302573
    LMAO. I'd been waiting for that. Brom's original quote pretty much meant that was fated to happen.
    Sure but it's still a minority, where will it be on the TV news and won't a lot of folk nod along in agreement?
    You'll drop all those straws, if you're not careful.

    It was one of the 3 or 4 stories rolling around the BBC News Channel ticker.
  • Nigelb said:
    Politicians need to learn to give straight answers. Shilly-shallying is not good.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    Endillion said:

    eristdoof said:

    Endillion said:

    AndyJS said:

    Corbyn is being very clever by talking about NHS drug prices potentially rising due to deals with Trump's USA. Whether or not it's true, it's the sort of thing that will resonate with voters.

    Why? We don't pay for those, the NHS does. It's only an effective line if either:

    a) it's accompanied by a second attack line about Tories privatising the NHS and forcing patients to pay for those drugs; or
    b) Corbyn somehow thinks t's a good idea to get the public thinking about how party's spending commitments might affect them in future, via increased taxation or limits on spending.
    Who pays the NHS?

    If the Pharma companies charge more for their products then either there is less money for doctors, nurses, operations, replacement hips, MRI scanners, dialysis machines, modernising hospitals..... or British tax payers end up footing the bill
    Yeah. See point b), above.

    Oh, the irony of Labour accusing the Tories of planning to spend tens of billions more each year on healthcare...
    There is no such thing as NHS money. There is only taxpayers' money.
    We know.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    On universal swing the Tories would gain the following seats from Labour in London based on the new YouGov poll:

    Kensington
    Battersea
    Enfield Southgate
    Croydon Central
    Dagenham & Rainham
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    Anorak said:

    Brom said:

    Anorak said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Brom said:

    Sensible for Mogg to apologise. Even if he thinks that and he is indeed correct in this case it is not wise contradict emergency service advise.

    He is lucky this story has little exposure and will probably only be seen by a small minority of the public thanks to his swift apology.

    Doubtless it'll be banged round Another Angry Voice et al facebook and twitter for a week or so though.
    Yeah, it'll rally the far left hatred of Tories. Hard to say if it'll translate into any extra votes though.
    Could cost Kensington
    'Most read' on BBC news:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-50302573
    LMAO. I'd been waiting for that. Brom's original quote pretty much meant that was fated to happen.
    Sure but it's still a minority, where will it be on the TV news and won't a lot of folk nod along in agreement?
    You'll drop all those straws, if you're not careful.

    It was one of the 3 or 4 stories rolling around the BBC News Channel ticker.
    My office is full of TVs, havent seen it once. Not to say it won't but it's not as harmful as Jezza's Brexit gaffes IMO.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    AndyJS said:

    On universal swing the Tories would gain the following seats from Labour in London based on the new YouGov poll:

    Kensington
    Battersea
    Enfield Southgate
    Croydon Central
    Dagenham & Rainham

    I think the Tories will take Kensington. Gyimah has little chance of winning but he appears to be harming Dent Coad significantly.
  • camel said:

    The contours of Labour's campaign form themselves:

    https://twitter.com/CasparSalmon/status/1191680946795401216

    Do people buy this rubbish?

    Anything that is grown has insects fragments, rat shit and lots of slug slime. Washing helps. Cooking helps more. 3mg/454g seems pretty clean to me.

    Please do not wonder how much cow piss there is in milk.
    None. A cow's urethra is on the back of the cow. The udder is underneath. The urine lands a metre or two behind the cow.

    Besides, udders get cleaned before milking. As someone who has cleaned hundreds, if not thousands of udders, I speak from experience.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 4,092

    London Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 39% (+4)
    CON: 29% (+6)
    LDM: 19% (-2)
    BXP: 6% (-4)
    GRN: 5% (-2)

    Via @YouGov, 30 Oct-4 Nov.
    Changes w/ 7-10 May.

    A picture seems to be emerging that the two mains parties are taking shares from the minor parties and the lib dem 'revoke' policy could be their 'poll tax'

    A completely unnecessary own goal. They should have campaigned for a second refererendum
    I agree with the picture, though the idea that the revoke policy is to blame is purely speculation.

    At the Euros, we saw that voter intentions tend to be quite sticky until a campaign, at which point they can rapidly shift to match the issues which are in the limelight. It's quite possible that the shift we're seeing now is just a movement away from the "stuck" VIs from the Euro elections, where LDs and TBP benefited from having the clearest visions to sell.
This discussion has been closed.