The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
Wil a few, but very few exceptions Tory Remain voters will vote Tory because they are err Tories. Around here they have hated Farron much longer than they have hated Brexit.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
And that AV referendum helps nicely too. The people voted overwhelmingly to keep FPTP.
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Mr. Above, must admit, I'm not persuaded we'll see low turnout.
It could be interesting to see, though, as it might act as a useful guideline for whether people are likelier to vote in opposition to something rather than for something.
I think the expected closeness of the result and yes strong feelings against both main parties are more important than the weather and daylight issues.
If there is a low turnout it will mean a disproportionate number of tactical Remainers participating, as they are the most motivated to vote according to all the polling. Given the seats they have to win the Tories need a high turnout.
Why is everyone making national generalities when the key thing is going to be local differential?
Far more important to overall turnout could be this postal strike... It will hit some regions far more than others with postal votes..are there any contingency plans?
I think this is true.
The other matter which could really affect turnout would be a MAJOR snowstorm with substantial drifting - we had one on 9 Dec 2009 as I remember.
The very snowy December was 2010. I think a strong gale is more likely, but neither that likely.
Far more important to overall turnout could be this postal strike... It will hit some regions far more than others with postal votes..are there any contingency plans?
I think this is true.
The other matter which could really affect turnout would be a MAJOR snowstorm with substantial drifting - we had one on 9 Dec 2009 as I remember.
The very snowy December was 2010. I think a strong gale is more likely, but neither that likely.
There’s certainly a lot of wind about at the moment.
Far more important to overall turnout could be this postal strike... It will hit some regions far more than others with postal votes..are there any contingency plans?
I think this is true.
The other matter which could really affect turnout would be a MAJOR snowstorm with substantial drifting - we had one on 9 Dec 2009 as I remember.
Do local officials have any discretion to extend polling into a subsequent day, for example if the Sheffield weather had been on polling day presumably some kind of extension could be applied?
Thought experiment: impact of another "Great Storm" in the South? The North?
The move from income tax to NIC cuts looks quite clever and designed to attract voters who'd not normally vote Conservative. A lot of Labour's recent announcements (although they might not be included in the manifesto) look as if they will appeal only to people who vote Labour anyway.
The move from income tax to NIC cuts looks quite clever and designed to attract voters who'd not normally vote Conservative. A lot of Labour's recent announcements (although they might not be included in the manifesto) look as if they will appeal only to people who vote Labour anyway.
That will also of course be popular with businesses, especially small businesses on tight margins.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
No, but it plagued him throughout his third term. And he wasn't trying to push through anything as radical and divisive as Brexit whatever you think of it.
I think Boris should be going for maximum mandate and not just a win on points.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
No, but it plagued him throughout his third term. And he wasn't trying to push through anything as radical and divisive as Brexit whatever you think of it.
I think Boris should be going for maximum mandate and not just a win on points.
Gordon Brown signed the Lisbon Treaty after the 2005 GE - that's just as controversial as Brexit, in my opinion.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
No, but it plagued him throughout his third term. And he wasn't trying to push through anything as radical and divisive as Brexit whatever you think of it.
I think Boris should be going for maximum mandate and not just a win on points.
Of course he will be but probably not for the reasons you state. His removal of the whip means some of his less reliable members will not be in the next Parliament but he wants a majority sufficient to overcome any awkward squad resistance on either side of the argument. Whether he will achieve that remains to be seen but the regional polling for Labour yesterday was an eye opener.
The leadership debates should be fun. We have all seen Corbyn turn into Magic Grandpa ranting away about stuff that the majority of voters rightly think doesn't affect then. We've all watched agog as a seemingly drunk and incoherent Johnson rambles away not knowing his own Brexit deal.
I honestly think the broadcasters are doing Swinson a favour. Two horrific excuses for leaders tearing chunks off each other in a rant about who is the most evil and whose leave deal will be best, and how many gazillion pounds they would spend but the gazillion pounds promised by the other lectern is reckless. "Do you really want to vote for that?" captioning a still image of them at their worst should do it.
The leadership debates should be fun. We have all seen Corbyn turn into Magic Grandpa ranting away about stuff that the majority of voters rightly think doesn't affect then. We've all watched agog as a seemingly drunk and incoherent Johnson rambles away not knowing his own Brexit deal.
I honestly think the broadcasters are doing Swinson a favour. Two horrific excuses for leaders tearing chunks off each other in a rant about who is the most evil and whose leave deal will be best, and how many gazillion pounds they would spend but the gazillion pounds promised by the other lectern is reckless. "Do you really want to vote for that?" captioning a still image of them at their worst should do it.
Swinson still needs to find the reason why someone should vote for her.
'Far left scum' is not only offensive it's also an ugly use of language. I think you should apologise. I blame Boris Johnson. 'Get Brexit Done' was a bad example to set and though similar it has nothing of the dynamism and fluidity of 'Just Do It'
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
No, but it plagued him throughout his third term. And he wasn't trying to push through anything as radical and divisive as Brexit whatever you think of it.
I think Boris should be going for maximum mandate and not just a win on points.
Boris getting 52% of the electorate would have a lovely symmetry to it..... In reality, 40% would be more than enough
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
He would think about that exactly as much as Tony Blair thought about the nature of his 2005 mandate. ie not at all.
Maybe it'll stop Tories boring on about the injustice of Tony's 2005 mandate.
I note with amusement that Jezziah is predictably saying literally anything to defend his Master's anti-semitism problem. Even quoting YouGov in his defence. Shall we look at what YouGov says abour Labour's vote share vs 2017?
Say what you like mate, it really doesn't matter. Keep on selecting anti-semite after anti-semite as candidates whilst insisting its all a smear, it really doesn't matter.
I can't call this election's result. But it seems clear that Labour are going to get an absolute beating from the electorate. I despise so much of what the uncaring Tory party have done. But that is nothing compared to the actual considered rational racism exhibited by Corbyn's Labour Party. That it's coming from a Labour Party, a Labour Party which supposedly is a bastion against racism is even more tragic.
So, please, Jezziah. Keep digging. The deeper you dig, the deeper the Labour Party gets buried.
The worst thing is that Labour won't get buried. They're almost certainly going to lose seats, but not that many. Labour will still poll comfortably in excess of 30%, and if the Tories fail to win outright Corbyn will be PM by Christmas.
There simply aren't that many voters who genuinely give a toss about the rights of minorities. They either don't care full stop, or will convince themselves that Labour isn't guilty because that's what they want to believe. Regardless, we're going to be stuck with a large cohort of Far Left MPs for a long, long time.
The leadership debates should be fun. We have all seen Corbyn turn into Magic Grandpa ranting away about stuff that the majority of voters rightly think doesn't affect then. We've all watched agog as a seemingly drunk and incoherent Johnson rambles away not knowing his own Brexit deal.
I honestly think the broadcasters are doing Swinson a favour. Two horrific excuses for leaders tearing chunks off each other in a rant about who is the most evil and whose leave deal will be best, and how many gazillion pounds they would spend but the gazillion pounds promised by the other lectern is reckless. "Do you really want to vote for that?" captioning a still image of them at their worst should do it.
Swinson still needs to find the reason why someone should vote for her.
Yes, that is right. Why vote LibDem if their only message is that Jo Swinson should be included in the leaders' debate?
A good piece from David as usual, although personally I can see a high turnout. People in general want to send a message to the politicians, even if the politicians and their activists don’t like having to ‘work’ when it’s cold and wet outside.
Less good to see the thinly veiled racism of one poster on this thread. But it’s definitely not an institutional problem.
I think the contrary. My biggest bets are on low turnout, which is good value on less than 60% at 9.5. Not so much the weather as Bored of Brexit. Combine this with unpopular leaders, lacklustre candidates and crap campaigns.
There's a pretty formidable PB consensus forming around low turnout.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
He would think about that exactly as much as Tony Blair thought about the nature of his 2005 mandate. ie not at all.
Maybe it'll stop Tories boring on about the injustice of Tony's 2005 mandate.
Signed: a naive fucking idiot.
Do Tories go on about it? The smart ones put it in the bank for the day when the boot is on the other foot.
A good piece from David as usual, although personally I can see a high turnout. People in general want to send a message to the politicians, even if the politicians and their activists don’t like having to ‘work’ when it’s cold and wet outside.
Less good to see the thinly veiled racism of one poster on this thread. But it’s definitely not an institutional problem.
I think the contrary. My biggest bets are on low turnout, which is good value on less than 60% at 9.5. Not so much the weather as Bored of Brexit. Combine this with unpopular leaders, lacklustre candidates and crap campaigns.
There's a pretty formidable PB consensus forming around low turnout.
Dangerous!
I think that the majority are favouring higher turnout on this thread from my quick skim. I certainly don't think that there is a consensus.
I must say I'm starting to come round to @AlastairMeeks view of Fraser Nelson.
He's written what must be the mostly deeply cynical leader for The Spectator this week that I've ever seen. It argues for an amnesty for all illegal immigrants here (over 1.2 million it estimates via the Home Office) and a ten-year qualification period for future amnesties going forwards.
Now, regardless of what you think of this (disclosure: I think it's simplistic and naive, will encourage further illegal migration and will be totally at odds with his readership) he openly admits that Boris needs to sound tough on migration right now and 'quietly bury his support for an amnesty'. But he then argues Boris thinks that anyway and he should slip it in the manifesto and implement the policy regardless. It mentions his personal brand of liberal Conservatism, the time he first made the case for an amnesty as editor of the Spectator in 2001 and then refers to the version of Brexit he argued for in the Leave campaign.
This is completely disingenuous. Fraser knows full well that Leave won the campaign because people expected Leaving the EU would allow the UK to implement further migration controls and end free movement, thus reducing immigration and addressing their concerns. Something Theresa May understood.
However, there seem to be a remarkable number of Tory Leavers, or Leave advocates now (Fraser claims to have voted Remain) who all move in the same circles who feel totally unconstrained by this. They are totally dismissive of the concerns of the pawns who gave them the result they wanted on the basis of the campaign they ran, and perfectly comfortable with interpreting the mandate for whatever policy they want (usually based on wholesale deregulation, liberal immigration, and a single-minded obsession with pursuing a US trade deal - any trade deal).
It's boiled my piss. And I hate being made to look foolish by those I've previously defended.
Why the campaigns are quite so bad? Good question. 1) Because both leave and remain factions split the major parties, leading to a lack of conviction 2) Because this is an election about the fundamental future of the UK in two different but linked respects: relation with EU, relation within the union. 3) Because the campaigns have to over simplify a very complex reality 4) Because despite promises the major parties are all promising to increase the debt our children and grandchildren will bear to levels which are unsustainable if interest rates rise 5) Because no-one believes that remaining or leaving will solve the splits 6) Because they are trying to be upbeat about the future when the public is not 7) Because for complex reasons both major parties have caused their brightest talents either to leave or to languish. 8) Because social media has diminished the capacity of people to think or hear in more than single slogans. 9) Because neither leave nor remain are good options.
Predict low turnout for similar reasons: if you don't vote when there are no good options you can blame others.
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
In order to make Tory voters feel safe that a vote for anyone other than the Tories is *NOT* a vote for Corbyn, the Lib Dems have to provide convincing reassurance that they won't put Corbyn into Downing Street - which, of course, is impossible. The only way they avoid Brexit is by propping up a Labour Government for long enough to get a revocation or a second referendum. All of their attempts at feigning equidistance are, therefore, useless.
The Lib Dems best chances of advancement are as a Remainian alternative to Labour in London, and a Unionist alternative to the SNP in Scotland. Their direct gains from the Tories will be counted on the fingers of one hand.
'Far left scum' is not only offensive it's also an ugly use of language. I think you should apologise. I blame Boris Johnson. 'Get Brexit Done' was a bad example to set and though similar it has nothing of the dynamism and fluidity of 'Just Do It'
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
We're in 2nd place in the SW, SE and the East of England. I had EEng down as Brexit heartlands - the good people of Boston who don't want to work in the local food industry wanting rid of the migrants who came to take the jobs they won't do, that sort of thing. Yet the LibDems are in 2nd ahead of Labour https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1192803313462448128
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
Spoiler: Jo Swinson will not be PM. The LibDems are a self-important and frankly ridiculous sideshow regarding who will be the occupant of Number 10 on December 13th.
Judging from the truly awful campaigns full of hopeless false promises which hardly anyone believes, there is a reasonably clear case for banning all campaigning, opinion polling and press/media coverage once an election has been called, the only action being to just let people vote. They all get poilling cards, they all know where to vote and and how etc. The media can then concentrate on things that really matter, if they are capable.
"Once the ethnic minority population of a constituency reaches 30%... it becomes almost impossible for [the Conservatives] to win it," says Lord Cooper.
"In 1987 there were no constituencies in the UK with 30% or more ethnic minority populations, but it has been estimated that by 2022, the next election… there could be as many as 120."
In my experience, Gujerati Hindus are quite willing to vote Tory, but even so most vote Labour.
One issue that is under explored is how minorities feel about each other. Are Hindus less likely to vote for a Muslim than an ethnic Brit, and vice versa? If you want to see how fervent these issues can be, ask either about Kashmir.
In my experience, ethnic minorities usually react mildly positively to a candidate from another minority because of an assumption of shared experience. There is less mutual aggro than some think - e.g. during the last Indo-Pakistani war, the big Indian and Pakistani ethnic communities in Nottingham agreed to just sit it out - "In the end we're British, it's not going to achieve anything to have a punch-up in Nottingham", as one said. But second+ generation immigrants are pretty immune to the "vote for him because he's one of us" stuff. I used to think that an ethnic voter was very promising, but for the younger ones it's as uncertain as everyone else - which is a good thing, really.
That said, voters can be keen to ask candidates what they think about their countries of origin. My very first experience of canvassing in 1966 was in Hornsey, where a routine question was "What does the candidate think about Cyprus?", and the temptation to spin the reply according to whether the voter's name looked Greek or Turkish was strong. Even then, though, I don't think it was changing many votes - people were just anxious about the problems that were happening there and wanted an MP who would take an interest.
I am not convinced the campaigns are historically bad.
It is just that social media has made it much more difficult to control the narrative this issue down over a very long period of times & that is major incompetence.
The overwhelming majority of Jews disagree. I think the 'is Corbyn antisemitic' question comes down to where you set the bar - and understandably victims set it lower than political allies or others who don't want to make the accusation. Does he believe he has any animus towards Jews? Of course not. But he does hold attitudes that are often adjacent to antisemitism (despite not necessarily being antisemitic themselves) on Palestine/Israel, 'anti-imperialism', and anti-capitalism, and has often slipped into supporting those who are blatantly antisemitic by being either to dim to see the difference or too defensive of his political side and therefore often displaying what looks and smells like anti-Jewish prejudice.
Does that make him an antisemite? Once upon a time we'd have said no. But it's 2019 not 1979 and we're much more aware that functionally the result is often the same in terms of its effect on the victims of racism and so such behaviour is usually held up as an example of prejudice - particularly on the left. The culture he has helped create in Labour - one where antisemites feel welcome but Jews do not - is in itself damning because he has treated Jewish complaints in a way he would never do with any other minority group that made serious representations about his and his allies' conduct - something that itself could be described as anti-Jewish prejudice.
As for the dismal first week of the campaign, my hunch is that it harms Labour more than the Tories for two reasons. Firstly Labour are behind so both being crap means little changes. If you're 2-0 down and both teams score own goals then you're still 3-1 down. Labour need something to change in Corbyn and now the party's ratings, otherwise they won't get those 2017 remainers back, and persuade leavers a 2nd ref is worth their spending plans. Secondly, Labour's self-inflicted wounds on anti-semitism and general party culture probably play worse with their target voters than the Tories' screw-ups on Grenfell, Russia etc. do. Labour's hopes rest on centre-left and even centre-right remainers holding their nose and voting for the party to stop Brexit - and the back end of the week's headlines is a reminder to many why they just aren't prepared to do so again. I'm not sure hardened leavers care quite as much about the Tory disgraces as those who are already noisily either in the Labour camp or the anti-Tory remain, even if it means Corbyn one.
Yes, that is right. Why vote LibDem if their only message is that Jo Swinson should be included in the leaders' debate?
We have a lot of very good policies - announcement today about free childcare for kids older than 9 months old as an example. But I take your point - its an election at the moment about Brexit and the personality deficits of Johnson and Corbyn. I can see how this plays for Swinson (already playing "The Past" (those two) vs "The future" (her) on graphics) if Johnson and Corbyn as as awful head to head as I am hoping.
But it could also get drowned. I think her strategy is right though. There is clear ground level swing on a massive scale in target seats. So make a huge noise about how we're doing just that and being ignored - which tunes into an electorate who thinks The Man is out to do them over.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
He would think about that exactly as much as Tony Blair thought about the nature of his 2005 mandate. ie not at all.
Maybe it'll stop Tories boring on about the injustice of Tony's 2005 mandate.
Signed: a naive fucking idiot.
Do Tories go on about it? The smart ones put it in the bank for the day when the boot is on the other foot.
I guess the key word there is smart...
I'm sure it was mentioned at least once in the last week.
However, there seem to be a remarkable number of Tory Leavers, or Leave advocates now (Fraser claims to have voted Remain) who all move in the same circles who feel totally unconstrained by this. They are totally dismissive of the concerns of the pawns who gave them the result they wanted on the basis of the campaign they ran, and perfectly comfortable with interpreting the mandate for whatever policy they want (usually based on wholesale deregulation, liberal immigration, and a single-minded obsession with pursuing a US trade deal - any trade deal).
The US trade deal... the one that will worsen UK trade with the US by rebalancing in favour of US companies and (if it is like other US trade deals) handing ajudication of disputes to an American "court"?
You have to wonder why people on the UK side are so keen to pursue such a deal. Do they, personally, stand to financially benefit? That at least would make sense.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
He would think about that exactly as much as Tony Blair thought about the nature of his 2005 mandate. ie not at all.
Maybe it'll stop Tories boring on about the injustice of Tony's 2005 mandate.
Signed: a naive fucking idiot.
Do Tories go on about it? The smart ones put it in the bank for the day when the boot is on the other foot.
I guess the key word there is smart...
I'm sure it was mentioned at least once in the last week.
But in what context was it mentioned? It's hardly surprising that it's coming up given the current polls.
I must say I'm starting to come round to @AlastairMeeks view of Fraser Nelson.
He's written what must be the mostly deeply cynical leader for The Spectator this week that I've ever seen. It argues for an amnesty for all illegal immigrants here (over 1.2 million it estimates via the Home Office) and a ten-year qualification period for future amnesties going forwards.
Now, regardless of what you think of this (disclosure: I think it's simplistic and naive, will encourage further illegal migration and will be totally at odds with his readership) he openly admits that Boris needs to sound tough on migration right now and 'quietly bury his support for an amnesty'. But he then argues Boris thinks that anyway and he should slip it in the manifesto and implement the policy regardless. It mentions his personal brand of liberal Conservatism, the time he first made the case for an amnesty as editor of the Spectator in 2001 and then refers to the version of Brexit he argued for in the Leave campaign.
This is completely disingenuous. Fraser knows full well that Leave won the campaign because people expected Leaving the EU would allow the UK to implement further migration controls and end free movement, thus reducing immigration and addressing their concerns. Something Theresa May understood.
However, there seem to be a remarkable number of Tory Leavers, or Leave advocates now (Fraser claims to have voted Remain) who all move in the same circles who feel totally unconstrained by this. They are totally dismissive of the concerns of the pawns who gave them the result they wanted on the basis of the campaign they ran, and perfectly comfortable with interpreting the mandate for whatever policy they want (usually based on wholesale deregulation, liberal immigration, and a single-minded obsession with pursuing a US trade deal - any trade deal).
It's boiled my piss. And I hate being made to look foolish by those I've previously defended.
If they put that in the manifesto it would be a "dementia tax" moment and Jeremy would start measuring up for net curtains in no.10. It's a remoaner plot to lose the election.
"Once the ethnic minority population of a constituency reaches 30%... it becomes almost impossible for [the Conservatives] to win it," says Lord Cooper.
"In 1987 there were no constituencies in the UK with 30% or more ethnic minority populations, but it has been estimated that by 2022, the next election… there could be as many as 120."
In my experience, Gujerati Hindus are quite willing to vote Tory, but even so most vote Labour.
One issue that is under explored is how minorities feel about each other. Are Hindus less likely to vote for a Muslim than an ethnic Brit, and vice versa? If you want to see how fervent these issues can be, ask either about Kashmir.
In my experience, ethnic minorities usually react mildly positively to a candidate from another minority because of an assumption of shared experience. There is less mutual aggro than some think - e.g. during the last Indo-Pakistani war, the big Indian and Pakistani ethnic communities in Nottingham agreed to just sit it out - "In the end we're British, it's not going to achieve anything to have a punch-up in Nottingham", as one said. But second+ generation immigrants are pretty immune to the "vote for him because he's one of us" stuff. I used to think that an ethnic voter was very promising, but for the younger ones it's as uncertain as everyone else - which is a good thing, really.
That said, voters can be keen to ask candidates what they think about their countries of origin. My very first experience of canvassing in 1966 was in Hornsey, where a routine question was "What does the candidate think about Cyprus?", and the temptation to spin the reply according to whether the voter's name looked Greek or Turkish was strong. Even then, though, I don't think it was changing many votes - people were just anxious about the problems that were happening there and wanted an MP who would take an interest.
There must be a message in there telling us why we should vote Labour.
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
We're in 2nd place in the SW, SE and the East of England. I had EEng down as Brexit heartlands - the good people of Boston who don't want to work in the local food industry wanting rid of the migrants who came to take the jobs they won't do, that sort of thing. Yet the LibDems are in 2nd ahead of Labour https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1192803313462448128
Boston is part of thd East Midlands area for the purposes of these polls not East of England.
I am not convinced the campaigns are historically bad.
It is just that social media has made it much more difficult to control the narrative this issue down over a very long period of times & that is major incompetence.
The overwhelming majority of Jews disagree. I think the 'is Corbyn antisemitic' question comes down to where you set the bar - and understandably victims set it lower than political allies or others who don't want to make the accusation. Does he believe he has any animus towards Jews? Of course not. But he does hold attitudes that are often adjacent to antisemitism (despite not necessarily being antisemitic themselves) on Palestine/Israel, 'anti-imperialism', and anti-capitalism, and has often slipped into supporting those who are blatantly antisemitic by being either to dim to see the difference or too defensive of his political side and therefore often displaying what looks and smells like anti-Jewish prejudice.
Does that make him an antisemite? Once upon a time we'd have said no. But it's 2019 not 1979 and we're much more aware that functionally the result is often the same in terms of its effect on the victims of racism and so such behaviour is usually held up as an example of prejudice - particularly on the left. The culture he has helped create in Labour - one where antisemites feel welcome but Jews do not - is in itself damning because he has treated Jewish complaints in a way he would never do with any other minority group that made serious representations about his and his allies' conduct - something that itself could be described as anti-Jewish prejudice.
As for the dismal first week of the campaign, my hunch is that it harms Labour more than the Tories for two reasons. Firstly Labour are behind so both being crap means little changes. If you're 2-0 down and both teams score own goals then you're still the back end of the week's headlines is a reminder to many why they just aren't prepared to do so again. I'm not sure hardened leavers care quite as much about the Tory disgraces as those who are already noisily either in the Labour camp or the anti-Tory remain, even if it means Corbyn one.
A good post with much that can be easily agreed.
I'd be careful about overdoing it though. AS is one of those issues that is desperately important to a small number of people. Most of us rarely encounter it in everyday life for the good reason that it isn't widely prevalent, and whilst in the body politic it is cetainly an issue, it is not a widespread cancer.
Football tiny stakes bets (disclaimer: I know nothing about football): Chelsea beat Crystal Palace, 1.33 Burnley and West Ham draw, 3.5 Everton beat Southampton, 2.4 Spurs and Sheffield draw, 4 Leicester beat Arsenal, evens Newcastle and Bournemouth draw, 3.2
Plus an accumulator of 5 of those (not Chelsea) at 244. So even if it came off it wouldn't beat the Verstappen bet, but it'd still be nice.
It's snowing in Alyn & Deeside constituency this morning.
Not much, but it doesnt look nice out there.
I think I'll apply for a postal vote this time just incase.
I mean I live only 5 mins walk from the polling station, but will be working from 1.30pm till 9.30pm so cant vote then. And I do like my sleep. So....... Better not to risk it.
Yes, that is right. Why vote LibDem if their only message is that Jo Swinson should be included in the leaders' debate?
We have a lot of very good policies - announcement today about free childcare for kids older than 9 months old as an example. But I take your point - its an election at the moment about Brexit and the personality deficits of Johnson and Corbyn. I can see how this plays for Swinson (already playing "The Past" (those two) vs "The future" (her) on graphics) if Johnson and Corbyn as as awful head to head as I am hoping.
But it could also get drowned. I think her strategy is right though. There is clear ground level swing on a massive scale in target seats. So make a huge noise about how we're doing just that and being ignored - which tunes into an electorate who thinks The Man is out to do them over.
As suggested earlier, the LibDems should try to arrange a head-to-head against Farage. First, Swinson would win (except with diehard Leavers who are lost anyway). Secondly, she'd get half the airtime as opposed to a third in a 3-way debate and an eighth in an "every party the producers can think of" debate.
So moaning about Boris/Corbyn being unfair is counter-productive for those reasons and because it drowns out any positive or policy reasons for voting LibDem.
Actions not words, the Israeli government is a far bigger Muslim killer than vice versa.
Tens of thousands of Israelis have died fighting for their survival against Arab regimes who united to crush Israel from the first day of its existence. Had they succeeded, there would haveeen a second mass genocide of the Jewish people, less than a decade after the first one wiped out six million of us.
"Push them into the sea" was a rallying call from Arab autocracies who knew they had us surrounded and is still dreamt of among the more vicious anti-Semites today. I have heard it brought up on multiple occasions in arguments about Israel online. I have also heard how the cesspool of far left online activism has argued how the "Blairites" are just the "Zionist lobby" out to get Corbyn, echoing long held narratives about sinister Jewish conspiracies. So don't pretend how "push the Blairites into sea" is so fucking innocent.
I have not yet decided who I will vote for. Most likely I will go Lib Dem or abstain. Though I become seriously tempted to vote Conservative every time the ugliness of far left scum like you comes pouring out. Corbynism is the ugly underbelly of the left, which has infiltrated and rotted from within the Labour movement with a sick nastiness that will destroy the party. I look forward to the day the Liberal Democrats overtake you and banish your types to the fringes where you belong.
Sorry to spoil your fun mate but far right pieces of crap like yourself are the ones being pushed to the fringes, young people aren't up for old bigoted views any more.
I shared the YouGov polling earlier with Labour vote among 18-24. The 'but the Muslims' from you scummy far right pieces of crap doesn't wash with the younger generation. The young will see you off you bigoted gammon types.
I realise the Muslim woman is annoying and think she can complain about the racism but you know better right, she just shut up and be grateful we let her type live in this country, how dare she criticise the almighty Blair and world hero Netanyahu, now your lane BAME girl.
You are scum mate, absolute scum I'm glad my generations and the ones below are rejecting the hatred and racism you support.
I have been centre-left my whole life. I have actively campaigned against Netanyahu. But because I am Jewish and protest anti-Semitism, I am far right.
You are clearly as anti-Semitic as the rest of your far left ilk. The absolute dregs of our political system.
Who is the “white supremacy fangirl” she says is a #10 advisor?
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
We're in 2nd place in the SW, SE and the East of England. I had EEng down as Brexit heartlands - the good people of Boston who don't want to work in the local food industry wanting rid of the migrants who came to take the jobs they won't do, that sort of thing. Yet the LibDems are in 2nd ahead of Labour https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1192803313462448128
Boston is part of thd East Midlands area for the purposes of these polls not East of England.
Normally I don't bother to read the comments to the tweet but they were instructive and heartwarming in this case. There was nothing but support for her.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
I'm sure Tony Blair never lost sleep over his 66 majority on 35% of the vote on 61% turnout..
No, but it plagued him throughout his third term. And he wasn't trying to push through anything as radical and divisive as Brexit whatever you think of it.
Are you having a giraffe? Only the continued occupation and submission of a sovereign nation that he had “preemptively” invaded two years previously.
Normally I don't bother to read the comments to the tweet but they were instructive and heartwarming in this case. There was nothing but support for her.
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
We're in 2nd place in the SW, SE and the East of England. I had EEng down as Brexit heartlands - the good people of Boston who don't want to work in the local food industry wanting rid of the migrants who came to take the jobs they won't do, that sort of thing. Yet the LibDems are in 2nd ahead of Labour https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1192803313462448128
There's a definite pattern emerging. Tories down Labour tanking and Lib Dems doing very well. I wonder whether this is going to be the big breakthrough. At the moment all they've got going for them is not being a Johnson led Tory Party or a Corbyn led Labour one but with six weeks to go and time to get their policies and PR in order they could shock us all.
On topic, I disagree with the whole premise of the article.
My impression so far knocking on doors is we are heading for a very HIGH turnout election. The "don't know" level is far below what it normally is this early in a campaign - people have a firm view (for you or against you), and I fully expect them to vote in numbers. Activism, while constrained by weather and dark evenings, is fairly widespread and enthusiastic (again, not limited to one side).
Admittedly, that's my area and may not be true across the country. I am in a very Remain area, and it may be specific to those areas - but I suspect from other reports it is more general.
Hmm, I dunno, I mean people should stay away from anything that looks like a threat of violence especially in the current climate, but that's not really what that meme is about... OTOH the crying face makes it slightly more disturbing than it should be...
Two words that show the hypocrisy of Labour:
Jo Cox.
I don't know who you think is speaking for Labour?
It's a rubbish ad because they're giving their opponent's position free advertising. Lots of people will look at that and actually believe Boris can deliver Brexit by the new year (if he wins the majority he seeks and "drains the swamp" at Westminster). Even more will look at that and think well, at least he's trying, in the face of the hated EU.
The much talked of ‘Labour Leavers’ appears already to be with the BXP. Plenty of Tory remainers there, still.
The Lib Dems need to squeeze the Tory Remain vote, but they probably need Labour to be doing a bit worse before people feel free to risk it.
But they never will risk it, not while Corbyn is Labour leader. The shock of that 2017 exit poll is a huge asset for the Tories. The idea that "well, he can't get in" so it is safe to vote LibDem for Remainers/Brexit for Leavers has been knocked out of play in 2019.
Nonsense. YouGov had Lib Dems in second place in SE and SW England. Corbyn is not the alternative to BoZo, the yellow peril are.
We're in 2nd place in the SW, SE and the East of England. I had EEng down as Brexit heartlands - the good people of Boston who don't want to work in the local food industry wanting rid of the migrants who came to take the jobs they won't do, that sort of thing. Yet the LibDems are in 2nd ahead of Labour https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1192803313462448128
Boston is part of thd East Midlands area for the purposes of these polls not East of England.
Thanks for the clarification. Explains that then
FWIW, I reckon out of all the seats in the Eastern region, Labour will hold Norwich South and both the Lutons, Cambridge will switch from Lab to LD, and the LDs will take St Albans (and, if they're having a very good night, South Cambs,) from Con. Everywhere else will go Tory. I make that a net gain of 2 or 3 for Johnson (by picking up North Norfolk, Peterborough, Bedford and Ipswich.) But we shall see.
Who is the “white supremacy fangirl” she says is a #10 advisor?
Elsewhere.in the rant she mentions Chloe Westley as the person. Never heard her so no idea if this is a fair description. Based on the rest of the ravings I would suspect not.
The campaigns really will matter – which does beg the question why they’re quite so bad.
I think one possibility to which we should give serious consideration is that both campaigns are being run by incompetent imbeciles.
To be fair to the incompetent imbeciles, with a gotcha culture among the media, social media witch-hunts and an electronic record of candidates previous utterances it’s harder to keep on track today vs previous elections
The whole "what about Tory Islamophobia" narrative only emerged to avoid answering questions on the institutional anti-Semitism in Labour.
This is a deeply troubling thing to read from someone who clearly understands the danger of racism directed against a religious group. Minimising the efforts of people from all across the political spectrum to combat islamophobia to an obfuscation of antisemitism does a deep disservice our friends in the Muslim communities. Indeed, it goes beyond that, since Islamophobic attacks are sometimes targeted at people of other faiths: the ignorant street thugs who target "Muslims" sometimes attack Sikhs, Hindus, and even people of colour who have no religious affiliation.
Your comment minimises their experience, diminishes the fight against racism, and politicises the cross-party fight against islamophobia. Islamophobia is real, and even though the Conservative party has seen an overly high share of the problem, it extends far beyond the Conservatives. Just as antisemitism is not confined to Labour.
I'm aghast that you appear to be cheapening the fight against this widespread and murderous form of bigotry, to the point that I can't quite believe you meant it in the way you said it. I look forward to a clarification from you, and I sincerely hope you were just being clumsy in the way you were trying to say something quite different.
It's a rubbish ad because they're giving their opponent's position free advertising. Lots of people will look at that and actually believe Boris can deliver Brexit by the new year (if he wins the majority he seeks and "drains the swamp" at Westminster). Even more will look at that and think well, at least he's trying, in the face of the hated EU.
Yes, first look at that advert I would have guessed it was pro-Boris, fighting for Brexiters against the intransigent Barnier.
I think the eye is naturally drawn to the centre of the page where the pictures and the Boris-friendly words are.
Who is the “white supremacy fangirl” she says is a #10 advisor?
Elsewhere.in the rant she mentions Chloe Westley as the person. Never heard her so no idea if this is a fair description. Based on the rest of the ravings I would suspect not.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
He would think about that exactly as much as Tony Blair thought about the nature of his 2005 mandate. ie not at all.
Maybe it'll stop Tories boring on about the injustice of Tony's 2005 mandate.
Signed: a naive fucking idiot.
Do Tories go on about it? The smart ones put it in the bank for the day when the boot is on the other foot.
I guess the key word there is smart...
I'm sure it was mentioned at least once in the last week.
But in what context was it mentioned? It's hardly surprising that it's coming up given the current polls.
If I recall correctly it was connected to a discussion on how often does Scotland affect UK GE results, a context in which it regularly gets trotted out. I haven't been keeping a score, but I'm pretty sure it's a recurring PB meme in several contexts, if not the most repetitively egregious one.
On topic, I disagree with the whole premise of the article.
My impression so far knocking on doors is we are heading for a very HIGH turnout election. The "don't know" level is far below what it normally is this early in a campaign - people have a firm view (for you or against you), and I fully expect them to vote in numbers. Activism, while constrained by weather and dark evenings, is fairly widespread and enthusiastic (again, not limited to one side).
Admittedly, that's my area and may not be true across the country. I am in a very Remain area, and it may be specific to those areas - but I suspect from other reports it is more general.
It's a rubbish ad because they're giving their opponent's position free advertising. Lots of people will look at that and actually believe Boris can deliver Brexit by the new year (if he wins the majority he seeks and "drains the swamp" at Westminster). Even more will look at that and think well, at least he's trying, in the face of the hated EU.
Yes, first look at that advert I would have guessed it was pro-Boris, fighting for Brexiters against the intransigent Barnier.
I think the eye is naturally drawn to the centre of the page where the pictures and the Boris-friendly words are.
Who is the “white supremacy fangirl” she says is a #10 advisor?
Elsewhere.in the rant she mentions Chloe Westley as the person. Never heard her so no idea if this is a fair description. Based on the rest of the ravings I would suspect not.
She thinks Anne-Marie Waters is a hero.
Waters is a fascist. Anyone who supports her needs their head examined.
Who is the “white supremacy fangirl” she says is a #10 advisor?
Elsewhere.in the rant she mentions Chloe Westley as the person. Never heard her so no idea if this is a fair description. Based on the rest of the ravings I would suspect not.
On topic, I disagree with the whole premise of the article.
My impression so far knocking on doors is we are heading for a very HIGH turnout election. The "don't know" level is far below what it normally is this early in a campaign - people have a firm view (for you or against you), and I fully expect them to vote in numbers. Activism, while constrained by weather and dark evenings, is fairly widespread and enthusiastic (again, not limited to one side).
Admittedly, that's my area and may not be true across the country. I am in a very Remain area, and it may be specific to those areas - but I suspect from other reports it is more general.
And the winner's going to be????
My personal view is relative stalemate with Lib Dems and SNP up (but probably not as much as the LDs hope), Tories steady, Labour down (but less than some of them fear as they will do enough in the Northern towns). But that's VERY speculative - in truth, I don't have a good handle on the Rugby League Towns at all, it's all hunch.
I don't think differential turnout will drive it particularly. I'd like to believe my experience is indicative of Remain areas being much more likely to turn out. In truth, though, I suspect it's general and both sides will be motivated (based on the fact the small number of Leavers locally are also going to vote). Those grasping at differential turnout are often grasping at straws.
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
It will be valid under our system of electing local representatives
On topic, excellent article. The other factor to consider is potential Conservative and Labour moderate voters just staying at home (being unable to abide the choices and in an election that looks a foregone conclusion). Possibly the impact of the postal strike on postal votes as well.
I hope Boris has considered how valid his mandate will be if he wins a majority of 50 on a voteshare of 35% on a turnout of 59%.
Especially as many of the 20% of the electorate that would have voted for Bozo in your scenario were only blackmailed into doing so by our electoral system. Many would have preferred to have voted for someone else but daren't risk it because in reality we are only allowed to choose between Bozo and Corbyn.
So the majority we are heading for would be based on the positive votes of about 15% of the electorate. Still no doubt HYUFD will be alongg to tell us that this much better then the 8% the Tories got in May when people could actually vote for what they wanted!
Comments
What the weather will be like is an imponderable.
I think Boris should be going for maximum mandate and not just a win on points.
They aren't. We aren't representative.
I honestly think the broadcasters are doing Swinson a favour. Two horrific excuses for leaders tearing chunks off each other in a rant about who is the most evil and whose leave deal will be best, and how many gazillion pounds they would spend but the gazillion pounds promised by the other lectern is reckless. "Do you really want to vote for that?" captioning a still image of them at their worst should do it.
Signed: a naive fucking idiot.
There simply aren't that many voters who genuinely give a toss about the rights of minorities. They either don't care full stop, or will convince themselves that Labour isn't guilty because that's what they want to believe. Regardless, we're going to be stuck with a large cohort of Far Left MPs for a long, long time.
Dangerous!
He's written what must be the mostly deeply cynical leader for The Spectator this week that I've ever seen. It argues for an amnesty for all illegal immigrants here (over 1.2 million it estimates via the Home Office) and a ten-year qualification period for future amnesties going forwards.
Now, regardless of what you think of this (disclosure: I think it's simplistic and naive, will encourage further illegal migration and will be totally at odds with his readership) he openly admits that Boris needs to sound tough on migration right now and 'quietly bury his support for an amnesty'. But he then argues Boris thinks that anyway and he should slip it in the manifesto and implement the policy regardless. It mentions his personal brand of liberal Conservatism, the time he first made the case for an amnesty as editor of the Spectator in 2001 and then refers to the version of Brexit he argued for in the Leave campaign.
This is completely disingenuous. Fraser knows full well that Leave won the campaign because people expected Leaving the EU would allow the UK to implement further migration controls and end free movement, thus reducing immigration and addressing their concerns. Something Theresa May understood.
However, there seem to be a remarkable number of Tory Leavers, or Leave advocates now (Fraser claims to have voted Remain) who all move in the same circles who feel totally unconstrained by this. They are totally dismissive of the concerns of the pawns who gave them the result they wanted on the basis of the campaign they ran, and perfectly comfortable with interpreting the mandate for whatever policy they want (usually based on wholesale deregulation, liberal immigration, and a single-minded obsession with pursuing a US trade deal - any trade deal).
It's boiled my piss. And I hate being made to look foolish by those I've previously defended.
1) Because both leave and remain factions split the major parties, leading to a lack of conviction
2) Because this is an election about the fundamental future of the UK in two different but linked respects: relation with EU, relation within the union.
3) Because the campaigns have to over simplify a very complex reality
4) Because despite promises the major parties are all promising to increase the debt our children and grandchildren will bear to levels which are unsustainable if interest rates rise
5) Because no-one believes that remaining or leaving will solve the splits
6) Because they are trying to be upbeat about the future when the public is not
7) Because for complex reasons both major parties have caused their brightest talents either to leave or to languish.
8) Because social media has diminished the capacity of people to think or hear in more than single slogans.
9) Because neither leave nor remain are good options.
Predict low turnout for similar reasons: if you don't vote when there are no good options you can blame others.
https://twitter.com/sonnexpeter/status/1193086887378014208?s=21
The Lib Dems best chances of advancement are as a Remainian alternative to Labour in London, and a Unionist alternative to the SNP in Scotland. Their direct gains from the Tories will be counted on the fingers of one hand.
For reference, he's 2.75 to win in Brazil.
Also, it's Grands Prix not Grand Prixs. Honestly.
The media can then concentrate on things that really matter, if they are capable.
That said, voters can be keen to ask candidates what they think about their countries of origin. My very first experience of canvassing in 1966 was in Hornsey, where a routine question was "What does the candidate think about Cyprus?", and the temptation to spin the reply according to whether the voter's name looked Greek or Turkish was strong. Even then, though, I don't think it was changing many votes - people were just anxious about the problems that were happening there and wanted an MP who would take an interest.
Does that make him an antisemite? Once upon a time we'd have said no. But it's 2019 not 1979 and we're much more aware that functionally the result is often the same in terms of its effect on the victims of racism and so such behaviour is usually held up as an example of prejudice - particularly on the left. The culture he has helped create in Labour - one where antisemites feel welcome but Jews do not - is in itself damning because he has treated Jewish complaints in a way he would never do with any other minority group that made serious representations about his and his allies' conduct - something that itself could be described as anti-Jewish prejudice.
As for the dismal first week of the campaign, my hunch is that it harms Labour more than the Tories for two reasons. Firstly Labour are behind so both being crap means little changes. If you're 2-0 down and both teams score own goals then you're still 3-1 down. Labour need something to change in Corbyn and now the party's ratings, otherwise they won't get those 2017 remainers back, and persuade leavers a 2nd ref is worth their spending plans. Secondly, Labour's self-inflicted wounds on anti-semitism and general party culture probably play worse with their target voters than the Tories' screw-ups on Grenfell, Russia etc. do. Labour's hopes rest on centre-left and even centre-right remainers holding their nose and voting for the party to stop Brexit - and the back end of the week's headlines is a reminder to many why they just aren't prepared to do so again. I'm not sure hardened leavers care quite as much about the Tory disgraces as those who are already noisily either in the Labour camp or the anti-Tory remain, even if it means Corbyn one.
Not much, but it doesnt look nice out there.
He's got bigger pockets and he'll never be undersold.
But it could also get drowned. I think her strategy is right though. There is clear ground level swing on a massive scale in target seats. So make a huge noise about how we're doing just that and being ignored - which tunes into an electorate who thinks The Man is out to do them over.
I'm sure it was mentioned at least once in the last week.
You have to wonder why people on the UK side are so keen to pursue such a deal. Do they, personally, stand to financially benefit? That at least would make sense.
Oh dear! That must smell unpleasant
That's what it would have been if it had been up-rated with wages as it was when it was originally introduced by Lawson in 1988.
It's only fiscal drag that has seen it progressively creep down to£50k.
It's a remoaner plot to lose the election.
Which for a campaign is quite a good idea.
She would have been a good MP I suspect
I'd be careful about overdoing it though. AS is one of those issues that is desperately important to a small number of people. Most of us rarely encounter it in everyday life for the good reason that it isn't widely prevalent, and whilst in the body politic it is cetainly an issue, it is not a widespread cancer.
Brexit on the other hand......
Chelsea beat Crystal Palace, 1.33
Burnley and West Ham draw, 3.5
Everton beat Southampton, 2.4
Spurs and Sheffield draw, 4
Leicester beat Arsenal, evens
Newcastle and Bournemouth draw, 3.2
Plus an accumulator of 5 of those (not Chelsea) at 244. So even if it came off it wouldn't beat the Verstappen bet, but it'd still be nice.
I mean I live only 5 mins walk from the polling station, but will be working from 1.30pm till 9.30pm so cant vote then.
And I do like my sleep. So.......
Better not to risk it.
So moaning about Boris/Corbyn being unfair is counter-productive for those reasons and because it drowns out any positive or policy reasons for voting LibDem.
My impression so far knocking on doors is we are heading for a very HIGH turnout election. The "don't know" level is far below what it normally is this early in a campaign - people have a firm view (for you or against you), and I fully expect them to vote in numbers. Activism, while constrained by weather and dark evenings, is fairly widespread and enthusiastic (again, not limited to one side).
Admittedly, that's my area and may not be true across the country. I am in a very Remain area, and it may be specific to those areas - but I suspect from other reports it is more general.
The Cyprus issue? No problem in Hornsey, I'm sure. On the other hand had you asked whether they supported Tottenham or Arsenal......!
Your comment minimises their experience, diminishes the fight against racism, and politicises the cross-party fight against islamophobia. Islamophobia is real, and even though the Conservative party has seen an overly high share of the problem, it extends far beyond the Conservatives. Just as antisemitism is not confined to Labour.
I'm aghast that you appear to be cheapening the fight against this widespread and murderous form of bigotry, to the point that I can't quite believe you meant it in the way you said it. I look forward to a clarification from you, and I sincerely hope you were just being clumsy in the way you were trying to say something quite different.
I think the eye is naturally drawn to the centre of the page where the pictures and the Boris-friendly words are.
Atleast that's what I think this tweet means.
🤷♂️🤷♂️
https://mobile.twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1192895991961268225
https://labour.org.uk/people/shadow-cabinet/
The portly bloke front and centre? I assume he's the new shadow chancellor.
https://twitter.com/otto_english/status/1154438815395864578?lang=en
So I can understand why someone who backed Tommy Robinson and Ann Marie Waters gets tarred as a white supremacist.
I mean if she was proud of what she did she would not have deleted the tweet like a Labour candidate with a history of antisemitism.
I don't think differential turnout will drive it particularly. I'd like to believe my experience is indicative of Remain areas being much more likely to turn out. In truth, though, I suspect it's general and both sides will be motivated (based on the fact the small number of Leavers locally are also going to vote). Those grasping at differential turnout are often grasping at straws.
Whatabout! Whatabout!
So the majority we are heading for would be based on the positive votes of about 15% of the electorate. Still no doubt HYUFD will be alongg to tell us that this much better then the 8% the Tories got in May when people could actually vote for what they wanted!