Mishcon's must be happy to be doing such brisk trade in Labour party fallings out
I must I find the idea of a would-be candidate taking legal action against a party to force it to adopt her is pretty hilarious. Sometimes MPs end up falling out with their party towards the ends of their parliamentary careers, but it's quite an innovation falling out in a legal dispute before you've even reached parliament.
The thing that interests there is that the majority of the seats changing hands appear to be into the Liberal Democrats. I counted 15 of 120 seats turning Lib Dem, compared to just 12 gains for the Tories.
Could it be that we are underestimating the lib dems?
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
Also, George bloody Osborne is saying the Tory spending will equal higher taxes down the line. So is the magical thinking that Tory spending = always good, Labour spending = always bad. Considering a lot of the Tory spending plans looked nicked from Ed Miliband, should we call Johnson a secret socialist?
Every Labour leader not named Blair gets called a goddamn commie, and people just seem to eat it up. I don't understand.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
I don't - she attacked a gay woman, who has already received many death threats. Bad enough if she is an activist, but she is the candidate.
Even when she was told to apologise, she victim blamed, and then got huffy because people were criticising her.
If this is the quality of the candidates coming through, I despair for the next generation. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that in the grown up world, potential employers Google your name, and check social media. I employ graduates every year, this is absolutely basic stuff.
Do I sound like an old fogey? I'm only in my early 40s.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Why only the LDs? No overall majority is pretty likely. Either all parties should be expected to declare their hands in advance without knowing the parliamentary arithmetic or none.
It is fine for them to say they want to form the government and if other parties want to offer the new LD govt supply and confidence that would be welcomed.
The prosaic reality is that it is far easier to negotiate these things once the exact permutations are known.
Mishcon's must be happy to be doing such brisk trade in Labour party fallings out
I must I find the idea of a would-be candidate taking legal action against a party to force it to adopt her is pretty hilarious. Sometimes MPs end up falling out with their party towards the ends of their parliamentary careers, but it's quite an innovation falling out in a legal dispute before you've even reached parliament.
It is sometimes said that the law can't force two people to live peaceably under one roof - can it force them to share a party?
I can't remember an election where we've had almost as many constituency polls as national polls.
It's true that we had a lot of constituency polls in 2015 from Lord Ashcroft, but we also had a lot more national polls then as well. YouGov had their famous daily poll which appeared every day of the week apart from Saturday IIRC.
Mishcon's must be happy to be doing such brisk trade in Labour party fallings out
I must I find the idea of a would-be candidate taking legal action against a party to force it to adopt her is pretty hilarious. Sometimes MPs end up falling out with their party towards the ends of their parliamentary careers, but it's quite an innovation falling out in a legal dispute before you've even reached parliament.
It is sometimes said that the law can't force two people to live peaceably under one roof - can it force them to share a party?
Mishcon's must be happy to be doing such brisk trade in Labour party fallings out
I must I find the idea of a would-be candidate taking legal action against a party to force it to adopt her is pretty hilarious. Sometimes MPs end up falling out with their party towards the ends of their parliamentary careers, but it's quite an innovation falling out in a legal dispute before you've even reached parliament.
Labour can't be trusted to follow their own rules. What chance the law if they become the government?
We'd be hoping for even more judicial interference than we've seen recently.
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
Farage has declared open warfare on labour and as HYUFD points out where UKIP stood against labour in 2015 they took votes from labour, but it did not happen in 2017 when they did not stand
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
You believed Farage word for word by the sound of it.I didn’t, he knows which party he is going into battle with for those voters. What HY didn’t tell you yougov cross-breaks show BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
I have two thoughts, most BP voters from back in summer are going to Boris because they like him and fear for brexit if he doesn’t get majority. Some still imming amming Tories will squeeze these BP even further where it matters on Election Day.
However we can’t know this for certain till Election Day because as Meeks has said, 2016 result is not our point of reference because it’s baked into 2017. What that really means is if true that is, there’s not that many votes in play from lab leave to Tory, especially if as yougov say BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
In this febrile bubble can I debate more respectfully or thoughtfully than this?
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Nevertheless, his economic programme is not "A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian one". (sic)
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Nevertheless, his economic programme is not "A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian one". (sic)
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
Project Fear. (I understand why you guys like slogans and ignoring people you disagree with, it is rather cathartic)
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Nevertheless, his economic programme is not "A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian one". (sic)
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
Project Fear. (I understand why you guys like slogans and ignoring people you disagree with, it is rather cathartic)
Touched a nerve? Don't like your Messiah being disparaged do you? Bless.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
I was, I believe, one of only three LD candidates in 2010 to refuse to sign the Student Fees pledge.
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
Farage has declared open warfare on labour and as HYUFD points out where UKIP stood against labour in 2015 they took votes from labour, but it did not happen in 2017 when they did not stand
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
You believed Farage word for word by the sound of it.I didn’t, he knows which party he is going into battle with for those voters. What HY didn’t tell you yougov cross-breaks show BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
I have two thoughts, most BP voters from back in summer are going to Boris because they like him and fear for brexit if he doesn’t get majority. Some still imming amming Tories will squeeze these BP even further where it matters on Election Day.
However we can’t know this for certain till Election Day because as Meeks has said, 2016 result is not our point of reference because it’s baked into 2017. What that really means is if true that is, there’s not that many votes in play from lab leave to Tory, especially if as yougov say BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
In this febrile bubble can I debate more respectfully or thoughtfully than this?
You'd think if one was going to concoct a load of spurious bollocks for a defence it might have a teeny connection to reality, but though I've heard of 'getting the bullet' in reference to sacking, never 'taking a bullet'.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Nevertheless, his economic programme is not "A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian one". (sic)
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
Project Fear. (I understand why you guys like slogans and ignoring people you disagree with, it is rather cathartic)
Touched a nerve? Don't like your Messiah being disparaged do you? Bless.
Ok boomer.
He isn't my Messiah, either, I am a Green Party member, and will probably vote tactically for the LDs in my seat. I am just a lefty who does not understand the awfulisation of the left from the right who are equally willing to dismiss all evidence of the negatives of their chosen policy positions. Like, worst case realistic scenario for Brexit probably doesn't include the IMF selling off our assets, but you think that is a realistic future under Corbyn as PM of a minority government.
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
Farage has declared open warfare on labour and as HYUFD points out where UKIP stood against labour in 2015 they took votes from labour, but it did not happen in 2017 when they did not stand
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
You believed Farage word for word by the sound of it.I didn’t, he knows which party he is going into battle with for those voters. What HY didn’t tell you yougov cross-breaks show BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
I have two thoughts, most BP voters from back in summer are going to Boris because they like him and fear for brexit if he doesn’t get majority. Some still imming amming Tories will squeeze these BP even further where it matters on Election Day.
However we can’t know this for certain till Election Day because as Meeks has said, 2016 result is not our point of reference because it’s baked into 2017. What that really means is if true that is, there’s not that many votes in play from lab leave to Tory, especially if as yougov say BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
In this febrile bubble can I debate more respectfully or thoughtfully than this?
Yes and I am sorry it you thought otherwise
No not at all. We’re good. 😍
Let me run this passed you, In Labour seats Tories are targeting we need break out of mindset that it’s brexit, how it voted leave, what will BP do result if run aggressive campaign there (only bad for Tory imo) but think instead of lab to tory switchers because they like Boris, in their mind he’s got the required charisma and oomph compared to someone with the oomph of sodden broccoli off an allotment. Call it Egg Theory, If there’s healthy majority for Johnson it’s down to this theory at least as much as brexit.
Survation must be praying that all these constituency polls they have been conducting on behalf of the Liberals will be close to the end result. If not they should be finished as a serious polling company. I presume after the failure of the Noble Lord's expensive constituency polling in 2017 that he isn't going to waste his money this time.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
The current Lib Dems are (mercifully) a different beast to the Clegg-era party. The idea of Clegg and the loathsome Danny Alexander entering an electoral pact with the "watermelon" Greens is implausible.
Labour in particular needs to be careful about constantly revisiting the sins of others' forefathers, given their in-recent-memory enthusiasm for illegal wars.
He came within 2,800 votes of winning Pontypridd in 2010.
2010 is a long time ago. Of course the LDs are trying to build up again a lot of the seats where they were strong during the Noughties, but any serious pact requires them to give up a few of them, eg. also the Isle of WIght.
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
You believed Farage word for word by the sound of it.I didn’t, he knows which party he is going into battle with for those voters. What HY didn’t tell you yougov cross-breaks show BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
I have two thoughts, most BP voters from back in summer are going to Boris because they like him and fear for brexit if he doesn’t get majority. Some still imming amming Tories will squeeze these BP even further where it matters on Election Day.
However we can’t know this for certain till Election Day because as Meeks has said, 2016 result is not our point of reference because it’s baked into 2017. What that really means is if true that is, there’s not that many votes in play from lab leave to Tory, especially if as yougov say BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
In this febrile bubble can I debate more respectfully or thoughtfully than this?
Yes and I am sorry it you thought otherwise
No not at all. We’re good. 😍
Let me run this passed you, In Labour seats Tories are targeting we need break out of mindset that it’s brexit, how it voted leave, what will BP do result if run aggressive campaign there (only bad for Tory imo) but think instead of lab to tory switchers because they like Boris, in their mind he’s got the required charisma and oomph compared to someone with the oomph of sodden broccoli off an allotment. Call it Egg Theory, If there’s healthy majority for Johnson it’s down to this theory at least as much as brexit.
I am with you 100% on this
I earlier said that this election is all to do with Boris and whether he can produce a Macron style popularity.
Indeed, the whole of Brexit stands or falls on this. Farage, lib dem pacts etc, would all be swept away if Boris can rides the crest of popular support
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/06/are-bill-taylors-notebooks-trumps-nixon-tapes/ On Wednesday, House Democrats announced that their leadoff witness at the start of public impeachment hearings next week will be one William Brockenbrough Taylor Jr., the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine. At the same time, the House Intelligence Committee revealed why Democrats believe Taylor will be a formidable witness: He has a nearly hour-by-hour account of developments in the Ukraine scandal.
In the transcript, released Wednesday, of his 10-hour, closed-door deposition, Taylor explained how he kept meticulous notes of his every interaction since the Trump administration brought him back from retirement earlier this year to serve in Ukraine...
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
I didn't say he was a social democrat, I said he is a democratic socialist; they are different things.
Nevertheless, his economic programme is not "A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian one". (sic)
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
Project Fear. (I understand why you guys like slogans and ignoring people you disagree with, it is rather cathartic)
Touched a nerve? Don't like your Messiah being disparaged do you? Bless.
Ok boomer.
He isn't my Messiah, either, I am a Green Party member, and will probably vote tactically for the LDs in my seat. I am just a lefty who does not understand the awfulisation of the left from the right who are equally willing to dismiss all evidence of the negatives of their chosen policy positions. Like, worst case realistic scenario for Brexit probably doesn't include the IMF selling off our assets, but you think that is a realistic future under Corbyn as PM of a minority government.
That is why I don't take you seriously.
And neither I you. That you cannot understand the very serious implications of undermining the right to private property and capital by way of governmental confiscation shows you don't really understand what you're saying.
Survation must be praying that all these constituency polls they have been conducting on behalf of the Liberals will be close to the end result. If not they should be finished as a serious polling company. I presume after the failure of the Noble Lord's expensive constituency polling in 2017 that he isn't going to waste his money this time.
What we really need is regional polls. I think that geographic unit is about right in identifying how the votes might translate into seats. The problem is we only see a quarter to a third of the picture, and when swings in London or Wales don’t match the National picture we’re left to guess as to whether that’s because the national figures are iffy or if it means another party is doing especially well elsewhere.
He isn't my Messiah, either, I am a Green Party member, and will probably vote tactically for the LDs in my seat. I am just a lefty who does not understand the awfulisation of the left from the right who are equally willing to dismiss all evidence of the negatives of their chosen policy positions. Like, worst case realistic scenario for Brexit probably doesn't include the IMF selling off our assets, but you think that is a realistic future under Corbyn as PM of a minority government.
That is why I don't take you seriously.
If the IMF selling off our assets is the worst effect of a Corbyn government then I will happily concede it has surpassed my expectations.
If the LDs stand down in too many seats it'll start to affect their national vote share.
It is a dumb stupid idiotic policy for a party that wishes to be considered a Major Party, It is very simple, Major Parties don't stand aside for other parties. Every vote counts, as you point out, to National Vote Share. That is important.
What I can't understand is people saying that Corbyn is very principled but not taking the time to look at the evidence over decades of what those principles are and then trying to tell us that he is not a threat to the economy and ultimately democracy.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
I was, I believe, one of only three LD candidates in 2010 to refuse to sign the Student Fees pledge.
Perhaps I should have said all their successful candidates? I believe all those elected had signed it.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
Which bit of being the junior member of a coalition is tricky to understand? Would you have preferred them to resign from the government and put themselves out of the position they exist solely to occupy, largest party aside.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Swinson has promised not to put in the Tories, or Labour as they currently stand. This means there is a wide range of results in which so far as you can see, no government is possible. That is, any result in which isn't one of these: Tory outright win, Labour ditto, Labour + SNP win. The chances of such a result must be in the region of 30+%. I think the LDs owe its voters a line on what outcomes it actually envisages, and what is actually possible (as opposed to what isn't) because the remain voters - half the nation or so - need to know.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
The current Lib Dems are (mercifully) a different beast to the Clegg-era party. The idea of Clegg and the loathsome Danny Alexander entering an electoral pact with the "watermelon" Greens is implausible.
Labour in particular needs to be careful about constantly revisiting the sins of others' forefathers, given their in-recent-memory enthusiasm for illegal wars.
I don't believe any promise made by a politician. But as an elector, and former Lib Dem member and worker, I think that particular broken promise is the worst in recent British political history.
The Lib Dems are not standing in very few seats , and they could see a big increase in the others as Labour Remainers move towards them.
In the seats in England where the Greens stand down there’s likely to be more publicity around Unite to Remain . UTR needs to go full on with campaign literature aimed at explaining what’s happening .
We're talking about the replacement (or not) to John Mann, right?
Apologies, we are talking at cross purposes. I was referring to the deselection of the Labour candidate in Edinburgh South West threatening Joanna Cherry.
Sally Gimson in Bassetlaw has been stitched up by the NEC, and I have every sympathy for her.
Survation must be praying that all these constituency polls they have been conducting on behalf of the Liberals will be close to the end result. If not they should be finished as a serious polling company. I presume after the failure of the Noble Lord's expensive constituency polling in 2017 that he isn't going to waste his money this time.
What we really need is regional polls. I think that geographic unit is about right in identifying how the votes might translate into seats. The problem is we only see a quarter to a third of the picture, and when swings in London or Wales don’t match the National picture we’re left to guess as to whether that’s because the national figures are iffy or if it means another party is doing especially well elsewhere.
The late and much missed Paul Lloyd, once of this parish, used to undertake a South West political opinion poll via his market research company.
Survation must be praying that all these constituency polls they have been conducting on behalf of the Liberals will be close to the end result. If not they should be finished as a serious polling company. I presume after the failure of the Noble Lord's expensive constituency polling in 2017 that he isn't going to waste his money this time.
At least Ashcroft's polling was transparent, in that polling was undertaken systematically across a whole series of key seats rather that coming out in dribs and drabs at a time of the client's choosing. Yet this Survation polling is clearly being coordinated by the Lib Dems across the country, using the same company with identical (very small) sample sizes and format.
Given their history of brazen manipulation of survey results, I have no doubt that the Lib Dems haven't suddenly turned over a new leaf. They will publish polls which help them, and keep ones which don't under lock and key. So look out for the dog that doesn't bark in other constituencies. They may also conduct multiple polls in the same constituency over different dates, and publish only the one which most favour them. Finally, they use the "named candidate" format, which compared to the traditional format undoubtably flatter the LDs, regardless of the fact that that format was a disaster when used by Ashcroft in 2015 and led to dashed expectations that the LDs would retain the bulk of their seats.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
Which bit of being the junior member of a coalition is tricky to understand?
Are you too stupid to understand the meaning of "signed promise"?
If the LDs stand down in too many seats it'll start to affect their national vote share.
It is a dumb stupid idiotic policy for a party that wishes to be considered a Major Party, It is very simple, Major Parties don't stand aside for other parties. Every vote counts, as you point out, to National Vote Share. That is important.
I'm going to attempt to work out how much their 2017 share would have been affected had they not stood in the seats they've decided not to stand in this time.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Has she actually said she will always VONC Corbyn?
My interpretation is she wont give any supply and confidence and of course wont join a coalition with him, but that is different to stopping him being PM.
Either way its easy to promise beforehand,but if faced with one way to stop Brexit she'll do what she must, even at the cost of the party later - unless Brexit is not the big deal she thinks.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
Which bit of being the junior member of a coalition is tricky to understand?
Are you too stupid to understand the meaning of "signed promise"?
Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?
If the LDs stand down in too many seats it'll start to affect their national vote share.
It is a dumb stupid idiotic policy for a party that wishes to be considered a Major Party, It is very simple, Major Parties don't stand aside for other parties. Every vote counts, as you point out, to National Vote Share. That is important.
I'm going to attempt to work out how much their 2017 share would have been affected had they not stood in the seats they've decided not to stand in this time.
And then there are the votes that they donate to other parties by advocating tactically voting Labour.
Very hard to quantify, but if they are significant they are dooming themselves to a minor influence in the future unless they are very lucky. Tactically voting Labour potentially adds Labour MPs and lessens LibDem vote share. That to me looks like the opposite of win/win for the LibDems.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
Which bit of being the junior member of a coalition is tricky to understand?
Are you too stupid to understand the meaning of "signed promise"?
Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?
Events didn't change though. Lib Dems were never going to form a majority and they knew that.
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
Yes, this GE Corbyn may finally get the sub Foot 1983 trouncing he should have got in 2017 if it was not for May's dementia tax gaffe and Remainers tactically voting Labour. Labour will be down to its socialist core
If all Tory strategists agree with that analysis it will be the Tory party that gets booted to kingdom come in this election, and once the manifestos are out and the TV debates start happening the move to Labour in the polls will be as sharp and sustained as it was last time. Labour didn't win a seat such as Canterbury because of dementia tax and tactically donated "Remainer" votes.
No. It won Canterbury because it could simltaneously convince Labour Leave voters that it was for Leave, and LD and Tory Remainers that it was for Remain. That might not happen again.
The Greens should be ideally placed to surge in this campaign. Politics has changed remarkably in their favour since 2017, and they should be able to clean up disaffected soft-Left/socialist votes. Particularly with younger voters.
However, due to their idiotically dogmatic beliefs against leadership they are very likely to miss the open goal.
Can you translate that for those of us who do not bet - thank you
The markets believe Johnson has approximately a 43% chance of winning a majority.
Strange given his current average polling lead is about 13%, the same as Blair achieved in 1997 when he won a 179 seat majority.
That's my feeling too, Andy. Punters appear to be factoring in imponderables such as tactical voting, campaign 'events', regional variations and the like. You can see where they're coming from, but they're overegging it imo, and I would have ConMaj at 50% myself.
But it's a wildly unpredictable election and this Punter's pennies are remaining in the pocket.
Seriously - in 2010 the Lib Dems not only gave their voters a line, but every candidate personally signed a written promise about how they would vote on a particular issue. Within days of the election nearly all the Lib Dem MPs had decided to ignore it.
Which bit of being the junior member of a coalition is tricky to understand?
Are you too stupid to understand the meaning of "signed promise"?
Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?
Comments
Could it be that we are underestimating the lib dems?
Every Labour leader not named Blair gets called a goddamn commie, and people just seem to eat it up. I don't understand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism#:~:targetText=The difference between the two,economy from capitalism to socialism.
4 more years after that
https://twitter.com/worgztheowl/status/1192466592594104320
Well, if that is the Tories having a shit opening to their campaign.....
Even when she was told to apologise, she victim blamed, and then got huffy because people were criticising her.
If this is the quality of the candidates coming through, I despair for the next generation. They need to be told in no uncertain terms that in the grown up world, potential employers Google your name, and check social media. I employ graduates every year, this is absolutely basic stuff.
Do I sound like an old fogey? I'm only in my early 40s.
It is fine for them to say they want to form the government and if other parties want to offer the new LD govt supply and confidence that would be welcomed.
The prosaic reality is that it is far easier to negotiate these things once the exact permutations are known.
It's true that we had a lot of constituency polls in 2015 from Lord Ashcroft, but we also had a lot more national polls then as well. YouGov had their famous daily poll which appeared every day of the week apart from Saturday IIRC.
"To remind themselves" is pretty clear, is it not ?
Welsh Lib Dem Votes to Leave Remain Alliance https://t.co/CcFSltV8VM https://t.co/FXGxnno2t9
We'd be hoping for even more judicial interference than we've seen recently.
What HY didn’t tell you yougov cross-breaks show BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
I have two thoughts, most BP voters from back in summer are going to Boris because they like him and fear for brexit if he doesn’t get majority. Some still imming amming Tories will squeeze these BP even further where it matters on Election Day.
However we can’t know this for certain till Election Day because as Meeks has said, 2016 result is not our point of reference because it’s baked into 2017. What that really means is if true that is, there’s not that many votes in play from lab leave to Tory, especially if as yougov say BXP taking 6% of 2017 Lab voters and 14% of 2017 Tory voters.
In this febrile bubble can I debate more respectfully or thoughtfully than this?
Corbyn has a long-held and deeply rooted hatred of capital and private ownership. In any form. He is more akin ideologically to Castro and Chavez than any Scandinavian socialist.
That you cannot see this, and support it, is to be quite honest quite frightening.
But it will be fun seeing the IMF carving up the NHS and flogging parts to the highest bidders. More out of irony than anything else. But you go ahead. Support your little Communist. Don't say you weren't warned.
Meanwhile, @nigelmp calls on Brexit Party candidates in the 60 Remain Alliance constituencies to stand down to counter the Remainer's attempts... https://t.co/CcFSlucKkm https://t.co/TDaQ9zFru8
And, yes, I guess Huhne may well be thinking "I'm sorry".
I'm sorry I got caught. Vicky too.
Census data for English and Welsh constituencies.
http://www.research-lincs.org.uk/UI/Documents/Census 2011 Constituency results Appendix RP13-20.pdf
"Mechanical engineer appears in court after threatening Nicola Sturgeon with ‘bullet’ over independence stance"
https://tinyurl.com/y2zd2o3n
You'd think if one was going to concoct a load of spurious bollocks for a defence it might have a teeny connection to reality, but though I've heard of 'getting the bullet' in reference to sacking, never 'taking a bullet'.
You have a rather impressive, but strange imagination.
He isn't my Messiah, either, I am a Green Party member, and will probably vote tactically for the LDs in my seat. I am just a lefty who does not understand the awfulisation of the left from the right who are equally willing to dismiss all evidence of the negatives of their chosen policy positions. Like, worst case realistic scenario for Brexit probably doesn't include the IMF selling off our assets, but you think that is a realistic future under Corbyn as PM of a minority government.
That is why I don't take you seriously.
I actually googled Dodds and she is obviously super-bright. I wonder what, in the quiet moments at home after a day like that, she really thinks.
Let me run this passed you, In Labour seats Tories are targeting we need break out of mindset that it’s brexit, how it voted leave, what will BP do result if run aggressive campaign there (only bad for Tory imo) but think instead of lab to tory switchers because they like Boris, in their mind he’s got the required charisma and oomph compared to someone with the oomph of sodden broccoli off an allotment. Call it Egg Theory, If there’s healthy majority for Johnson it’s down to this theory at least as much as brexit.
..... Miss Jo is Miss Julie, with Adam Price playing the role of Jean.
Labour in particular needs to be careful about constantly revisiting the sins of others' forefathers, given their in-recent-memory enthusiasm for illegal wars.
I earlier said that this election is all to do with Boris and whether he can produce a Macron style popularity.
Indeed, the whole of Brexit stands or falls on this. Farage, lib dem pacts etc, would all be swept away if Boris can rides the crest of popular support
And at this moment in time I am 50/50
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/11/06/are-bill-taylors-notebooks-trumps-nixon-tapes/
On Wednesday, House Democrats announced that their leadoff witness at the start of public impeachment hearings next week will be one William Brockenbrough Taylor Jr., the top U.S. diplomat in Ukraine. At the same time, the House Intelligence Committee revealed why Democrats believe Taylor will be a formidable witness: He has a nearly hour-by-hour account of developments in the Ukraine scandal.
In the transcript, released Wednesday, of his 10-hour, closed-door deposition, Taylor explained how he kept meticulous notes of his every interaction since the Trump administration brought him back from retirement earlier this year to serve in Ukraine...
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-11-04/johnson-v-corbyn-the-itv-debate-ask-your-question-in-the-first-election-head-to-head-between-the-two-leaders/
*sighs*
We're talking about the replacement (or not) to John Mann, right?
2.3 / 2.32
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.136297311
Godwin.
And yes this is a Labour PPC in a winnable seat.
Possibly members of the Cabinet in 5 weeks time.
If you are going to buy a money tree, why not buy a big one?
In the seats in England where the Greens stand down there’s likely to be more publicity around Unite to Remain . UTR needs to go full on with campaign literature aimed at explaining what’s happening .
Unite to Remain is IMO a brilliant handle .
Sally Gimson in Bassetlaw has been stitched up by the NEC, and I have every sympathy for her.
Given their history of brazen manipulation of survey results, I have no doubt that the Lib Dems haven't suddenly turned over a new leaf. They will publish polls which help them, and keep ones which don't under lock and key. So look out for the dog that doesn't bark in other constituencies. They may also conduct multiple polls in the same constituency over different dates, and publish only the one which most favour them. Finally, they use the "named candidate" format, which compared to the traditional format undoubtably flatter the LDs, regardless of the fact that that format was a disaster when used by Ashcroft in 2015 and led to dashed expectations that the LDs would retain the bulk of their seats.
*innocent face*
Very hard to quantify, but if they are significant they are dooming themselves to a minor influence in the future unless they are very lucky. Tactically voting Labour potentially adds Labour MPs and lessens LibDem vote share. That to me looks like the opposite of win/win for the LibDems.
However, due to their idiotically dogmatic beliefs against leadership they are very likely to miss the open goal.
But it's a wildly unpredictable election and this Punter's pennies are remaining in the pocket.
Got a little more hedge set up, and thinking of trying to lay Chelsea at evens.