How many MPs do we have stranding at this election for parties they did not stand for at the last election? Off the top of my head, we have:
Tiggers - Gapes, Wollaston, Soubry - all in same constituency Tiggers-turned-LDs - Chukka, Smith (was she a tigger?) - both in different constituencies (any others?) Lab-turned-ind: Williamson, Godsdiff - both in same constituency. Con-turned-ind: Grieve - same constutuency
Any others? Ordinarily I'd have a fairly good idea on where all the anomalies like these were, but that's because ordinarily you'd only have one or two at most. Politics is currently far too eventful to keep track of!
Bastani is obviously putting a very optimistic spin on this. But I think I can explain explain why, from my perspective at least, many people in Labour are at least cautiously optimistic about polls like this even when they show the Tories widening their lead.
For Labour to do well, probably three different things were always required:
1. The focus isn't entirely on Brexit, allowing some votes to flow back from the LDs. 2. Their policies and overall electoral sales pitch are better received than the Tories' 3. (Unless the first two go *extremely well*) They outperform the polls- either by getting a higher percentage than expected or a more efficient vote distribution than expected or both.
We'll only really know about 3. on the day (though the signs are optimistic in terms of fundraising and volunteering for Momentum, who hope to have a really impactful canvassing and GOTV operation). It's also probably somewhat too early for 2.- that's going to be driven by the manifestos, debate performance, etc. So the focus is really on 1, and that's what the polls are, at least tenatively, pointing towards.
That doesn't mean the rest of the dominos will fall- each of those three things is its own separate battle- but to be honest if we had started seeing movement in the direction some people here had predicted where more voters started switching from Lab to LD, then this would pretty much be over before it began. So: relief, cautious optimism.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Well the Tories have reached their shortest position yet on a majority...
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
What, they are seeking people to blame when really there aren't any? And an opportunistic offer of a "chance to meet to seek explanations" should have reconciled them to the killing of their son?
Patronising twit.
I agree. It is outrageous this diplomat's wife has fled justice and there must be redress.
How many MPs do we have stranding at this election for parties they did not stand for at the last election? Off the top of my head, we have:
Tiggers - Gapes, Wollaston, Soubry - all in same constituency Tiggers-turned-LDs - Chukka, Smith (was she a tigger?) - both in different constituencies (any others?) Lab-turned-ind: Williamson, Godsdiff - both in same constituency. Con-turned-ind: Grieve - same constutuency
Any others? Ordinarily I'd have a fairly good idea on where all the anomalies like these were, but that's because ordinarily you'd only have one or two at most. Politics is currently far too eventful to keep track of!
Similarly, which MPs have been pushed out by their own parties, whether by deselection or withdrawal of the whip?
This week's Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for week ending 10th November: 8 polls including BMG, Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs (fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th Nov):
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
No. Trump ambushed them and they responded with a lot more dignity than would most in that situation. If, as they say, they have legal opinion saying that the private agreements between the US and UK governments (which extend diplomatic immunity to this case) have no status in law, then it would be wholly inappropriate to seek costs as a sly attempt to warn them off. I do not know if this will affect voters, but if it encourages one voter to abandon Raab it should be used.
Trump is a shit and no friend to the UK. He deserves to die bankrupt and in prison.
With Vaz confirming he is going, the situation of retirements so far is
(sorted by party and age at the end of 2019)
Conservative
Glyn Davies 75 Nicholas Soames 71 Keith Simpson 70 David Tredinnick 69 Bill Grant 68 Michael Fallon 67 Alistair Burt 64 Henry Bellingham 64 David Lidington 63 Alan Duncan 62 Margot James 62 Patrick McLoughlin 62 Richard Harrington 62 Caroline Spelman 61 Hugo Swire 60 Jeremy Lefroy 60 Richard Benyon 59 Sarah Newton 58 Mark Prisk 57 Nick Hurd 57 George Hollingbery 56 Peter Heaton-Jones 56 Claire Perry 55 Mark Field 55 Ed Vaizey 51 Mark Lancaster 49 Jo Johnson 48 Nicky Morgan 47 Seema Kennedy 45
Labour
Ann Clwyd 82 Geoffrey Robinson 81 Jim Cunningham 78 Ronnie Campbell 76 Adrian Bailey 74 Kate Hoey 73 Kevin Barron 73 Stephen Pound 71 Jim Fitzpatrick 67 Helen Jones 65 Teresa Pearce 64 Keith Vaz 63 Roberta Blackman-Woods 62 Albert Owen 60 Stephen Twigg 60 Ian Lucas 59 John Mann 59 Paul Farrelly 57 Tom Watson 52 Owen Smith 49 Gloria De Piero 47
LD
Vince Cable 76 Norman Lamb 62 Heidi Allen 44
Ind and co ex Con
Kenneth Clarke 79 Philip Hammond 64 Oliver Letwin 63 Margot James 62 Amber Rudd 56 Nick Boles 54 Guto Bebb 51 Justine Greening 50 Charlie Elphicke 48 David Gauke 48 Rory Stewart 46
Suspended Lab
Kelvin Hopkins 78
Ind and co ex Lab
Louise Ellman 74 Ann Coffey 73 Joan Ryan 64 Ian Austin 54 John Woodcock 41
Northern Ireland
Sylvia Hermon 64 David Simpson 60
Other
John Bercow 56
@AndreaParma_82 , you are as always a grace to this site. Thank you for the rather sad list. Truly a watershed, and possibly a realigning, election
How many MPs do we have stranding at this election for parties they did not stand for at the last election? Off the top of my head, we have:
Tiggers - Gapes, Wollaston, Soubry - all in same constituency Tiggers-turned-LDs - Chukka, Smith (was she a tigger?) - both in different constituencies (any others?) Lab-turned-ind: Williamson, Godsdiff - both in same constituency. Con-turned-ind: Grieve - same constutuency
Any others? Ordinarily I'd have a fairly good idea on where all the anomalies like these were, but that's because ordinarily you'd only have one or two at most. Politics is currently far too eventful to keep track of!
I think that Shuker and Leslie may both be standing as independents, and Wollaston is definitely defending Totnes as a Lib Dem. Oh, and Antoinette Sandbach is also defending her seat as a Lib Dem, and Sam Gyimah is contesting a different constituency as a Lib Dem as well.
In an interview with Q, Skepta – real name Joseph Junior Adenuga – said acts sold “themselves for fucking bullshit” and that four months after the campaign, politicians “don’t give a fuck about us again”
What?! You mean that politicians are politicians no matter what rosette they wear, and that people who have been MPs for over 30 years are, in fact, political animals too?
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
FWIW the tables from the latest YouGov show a small net movement of 2017 LD voters to Con, but I think we'd need to collate similar data from a number of surveys before suggesting that this could be a definite trend.
With Vaz confirming he is going, the situation of retirements so far is
(sorted by party and age at the end of 2019)
Conservative
Glyn Davies 75 Nicholas Soames 71 Keith Simpson 70 David Tredinnick 69 Bill Grant 68 Michael Fallon 67 Alistair Burt 64 Henry Bellingham 64 David Lidington 63 Alan Duncan 62 Margot James 62 Patrick McLoughlin 62 Richard Harrington 62 Caroline Spelman 61 Hugo Swire 60 Jeremy Lefroy 60 Richard Benyon 59 Sarah Newton 58 Mark Prisk 57 Nick Hurd 57 George Hollingbery 56 Peter Heaton-Jones 56 Claire Perry 55 Mark Field 55 Ed Vaizey 51 Mark Lancaster 49 Jo Johnson 48 Nicky Morgan 47 Seema Kennedy 45
Labour
Ann Clwyd 82 Geoffrey Robinson 81 Jim Cunningham 78 Ronnie Campbell 76 Adrian Bailey 74 Kate Hoey 73 Kevin Barron 73 Stephen Pound 71 Jim Fitzpatrick 67 Helen Jones 65 Teresa Pearce 64 Keith Vaz 63 Roberta Blackman-Woods 62 Albert Owen 60 Stephen Twigg 60 Ian Lucas 59 John Mann 59 Paul Farrelly 57 Tom Watson 52 Owen Smith 49 Gloria De Piero 47
LD
Vince Cable 76 Norman Lamb 62 Heidi Allen 44
Ind and co ex Con
Kenneth Clarke 79 Philip Hammond 64 Oliver Letwin 63 Margot James 62 Amber Rudd 56 Nick Boles 54 Guto Bebb 51 Justine Greening 50 Charlie Elphicke 48 David Gauke 48 Rory Stewart 46
Suspended Lab
Kelvin Hopkins 78
Ind and co ex Lab
Louise Ellman 74 Ann Coffey 73 Joan Ryan 64 Ian Austin 54 John Woodcock 41
Northern Ireland
Sylvia Hermon 64 David Simpson 60
Other
John Bercow 56
@AndreaParma_82 , you are as always a grace to this site. Thank you for the rather sad list. Truly a watershed, and possibly a realigning, election
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I have discussed this previously and in the circumstances would have met her in the White House to seek explanations and answers. Whether that would have started reconcilliation it is impossible to know but we have great sympathy for the terrible position the family are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
He must really beleive what he said in his heart, since I cannot think of another reason to leap into a definitive view on the situation rather than some waffle about wanting the best for everyone, need for dialogue and calm etc.
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
No. Trump ambushed them and they responded with a lot more dignity than would most in that situation. If, as they say, they have legal opinion saying that the private agreements between the US and UK governments (which extend diplomatic immunity to this case) have no status in law, then it would be wholly inappropriate to seek costs as a sly attempt to warn them off. I do not know if this will affect voters, but if it encourages one voter to abandon Raab it should be used.
In the High Court costs generally follow the event. Not seeking costs would be more unusual
However there is precedent for High Court costs not to be awarded where the court accepts the case raises issues in the public interest. I can think of few cases more in the public interest than testing the legality of private agreements which enable someone to avoid the consequences of causing a death. In such a case it is wholly inappropriate for a government to seek costs and it should waive its right at outset rather than threaten with the obvious intention of avoiding scrutiny.
The principle of diplomatic immunity is well established and as sad as this matter is there is not a public interest issue of law here.
This week's Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for week ending 10th November: 8 polls including BMG, Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs (fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th Nov):
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
You'd think the public of spain would be, but no...
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I have discussed this previously and in the circumstances would have met her in the White House to seek explanations and answers. Whether that would have started reconcilliation it is impossible to know but we have great sympathy for the terrible position the family are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
How many MPs do we have stranding at this election for parties they did not stand for at the last election? Off the top of my head, we have:
Tiggers - Gapes, Wollaston, Soubry - all in same constituency Tiggers-turned-LDs - Chukka, Smith (was she a tigger?) - both in different constituencies (any others?) Lab-turned-ind: Williamson, Godsdiff - both in same constituency. Con-turned-ind: Grieve - same constutuency
Any others? Ordinarily I'd have a fairly good idea on where all the anomalies like these were, but that's because ordinarily you'd only have one or two at most. Politics is currently far too eventful to keep track of!
I think that Shuker and Leslie may both be standing as independents, and Wollaston is definitely defending Totnes as a Lib Dem. Oh, and Antoinette Sandbach is also defending her seat as a Lib Dem, and Sam Gyimah is contesting a different constituency as a Lib Dem as well.
Thanks Black Rook. I had forgotten about Sandbach and Gymiah already. And I had forgotten almost completely about the existence of Shuker and Leslie. Ordinarily, if we had just one or two of these anomalies their seats would be furiously interesting; but I am failing to keep track in many cases.
Are we about to see a complete u turn . Clearly looking at the polls the Tories should avoid any sort of pact with him . It would do more harm than good given they are keeping many of their Remainers on side aswell as most of their Leavers .
FWIW the tables from the latest YouGov show a small net movement of 2017 LD voters to Con, but I think we'd need to collate similar data from a number of surveys before suggesting that this could be a definite trend.
My wife will be voting blue to stop Corbyn. Although she voted leave the Lib Dem candidate here is a great public servant.
A labour govenrment as they are now would be a disaster both morally and financially.
This week's Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for week ending 10th November: 8 polls including BMG, Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs (fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th Nov):
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs flatlining, LAB and CON both up.
Keep that trend up for another 4.5 weeks and you'd get
CON 42.67 LAB 35.51 LD 15.34 BXP 1.24
Seems quite believable.
I think the absolute minimum for the Brexit Party is about 5%.
I wouldn't be surprised if Farage himself quit this week to save face. Then 1.9%, as per when Paul Nuttalls was in charge of the UKIPs, would seem about right.
Are we about to see a complete u turn . Clearly looking at the polls the Tories should avoid any sort of pact with him . It would do more harm than good given they are keeping many of their Remainers on side aswell as most of their Leavers .
Farage does seem to be in a bit of a pickle. Heart of stone and all that. I wonder though if the Conservatives would like to keep BXP in the game so it can peel off Labour leavers.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
Are we about to see a complete u turn . Clearly looking at the polls the Tories should avoid any sort of pact with him . It would do more harm than good given they are keeping many of their Remainers on side aswell as most of their Leavers .
Farage does seem to be in a bit of a pickle. Heart of stone and all that. I wonder though if the Conservatives would like to keep BXP in the game so it can peel off Labour leavers.
The Brexit Party are polling no better than UKIP 2015 at best and we know then the Tories gained a few seats from Labour like Gower and Vale of Clwyd mainly because of Labour voters going UKIP which they lost in 2017 when they went back to Labour again
This week's Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for week ending 10th November: 8 polls including BMG, Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs (fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th Nov):
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs flatlining, LAB and CON both up.
Keep that trend up for another 4.5 weeks and you'd get
CON 42.67 LAB 35.51 LD 15.34 BXP 1.24
Seems quite believable.
I think the absolute minimum for the Brexit Party is about 5%.
I wouldn't be surprised if Farage himself quit this week to save face. Then 1.9%, as per when Paul Nuttalls was in charge of the UKIPs, would seem about right.
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I have discussed this previously and in the circumstances would have met her in the White House to seek explanations and answers. Whether that would have started reconcilliation it is impossible to know but we have great sympathy for the terrible position the family are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
But... but the USA are supposed to be our closest ally!
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I have discussed this previously and in the circumstances would have met her in the White House to seek explanations and answers. Whether that would have started reconcilliation it is impossible to know but we have great sympathy for the terrible position the family are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
But... but the USA are supposed to be our closest ally!
Americans do tend to be very arrogant when they make mistakes.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
The LDs are not a single issue party. They offer competence and pragmatism as opposed to two parties led by people who are not morally fit to be prime minster.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
The LDs are not a single issue party. They offer competence and pragmatism as opposed to two parties led by people who are not morally fit to be prime minster.
Yawn.
Yes, because the LibDems are so morally superior.
Like your bar charts for starters.
And how about that paragon of virtue Lord Rennard. Is he still involved in the LibDem election campaign?
And if he is, then that makes Jo Swinson a hypocrite of the first order.
Americans do tend to be very arrogant when they make mistakes.
Cavalese was a straightforward and correct application of the NATO treaty rules.
A far more egregious case of American overreach in Italy was the Egypt Air 2843 intercept which ended with an armed standoff between the Carabinieri and SEAL Team SIX on the tarmac at NAS Sigonella.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
The LDs are not a single issue party. They offer competence and pragmatism as opposed to two parties led by people who are not morally fit to be prime minster.
Yawn.
Yes, because the LibDems are so morally superior.
Like your bar charts for starters.
And how about that paragon of virtue Lord Rennard. Is he still involved in the LibDem election campaign?
And if he is, then that makes Jo Swinson a hypocrite of the first order.
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will y are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
But... but the USA are supposed to be our closest ally!
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The “threat and intimidation” amounts to saying “we will defend ourselves if you take us to court and, if we win, we will seek costs”
It is so very sad. They are very bitter and seeking people to blame
Unfortunately Trump will not allow her back here but to be honest he did afford them a chance to meet to seek explanations and even a small path to reconcilliation but that door is closed now
I am so sorry for them, but I do not see a way forward unless they themselves can see it, maybe and hopefully in time
@Big_G_NorthWales , that reply both patronised and blamed the victims. That is out of character for you. Letting them speak to the person who killed their son without giving them the opportunity to seek redress thru the criminal justice system is not "reconciliation", it was a sop. Think how you would react in the same circumstances.
I had no intention of patronising and certainly not blaming them in any way
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
The Harry Dunn case is bad, but it is not as bad as the Cavalese cable car disaster, which happened when good ole' Bill Clinton was President.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
They faced a trial in the US but were acquitted of manslaughter though dismissed from the Marine corps
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
Well of course, the US has a bigger military and economy than we do, we need their support in terms of seeing off Putin and IS sponsored terrorism etc more than they need ours
I'm really surprise/worried at how well the Labour poll numbers are holding up....
Since the start of the campaign the Tory vote has increased by about the same amount as the Labour vote. At the start it was something like 36/25, now it's 39/28. I think when you feed those figures into the various seat calculators the Tory majority has actually increased slightly.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
The LDs are not a single issue party. They offer competence and pragmatism as opposed to two parties led by people who are not morally fit to be prime minster.
Yawn.
Yes, because the LibDems are so morally superior.
Like your bar charts for starters.
And how about that paragon of virtue Lord Rennard. Is he still involved in the LibDem election campaign?
And if he is, then that makes Jo Swinson a hypocrite of the first order.
Lord Reynard is not a candidate to be prime minister of this country. Unfortunately, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn are.
No denial that His Lordship is activelly involved.
And I have a leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be our next Prime Minister. And if His Lordship is still involved, then that makes her a fucking hypocrite.
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
Well of course, the US has a bigger military and economy than we do, we need their support in terms of seeing off Putin and IS sponsored terrorism etc more than they need ours
How about their support in repatriating Mrs Sacoolas?
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
On current polls Boris will likely win a majority around the levels Thatcher got in 1979 or Blair got in 2005
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
On current polls Boris will likely win a majority around the levels Thatcher got in 1979 or Blair got in 2005
Agree 100%. Indeed, I'm thinking they could end up with an enormous majority - perhaps 150-200.
Labour start from a position of weakness but you correctly identify the ingredients are there to save them from disaster. A very good point that they have avoided the initial danger of leaching votes to the LDs. Swinson has not had a good start to the campaign, she really needed to be racing out of the blocks but the Brexit policy looks to have been a bit of a misfire as it’s crowding out their ability to talk about other issues.
Yes, a mass flight from Lab to LD which would have produced a huge loss of seats seems have been averted - partly, I think, because people have a view on Brexit but the majority aren't all that interested in it - that's perhaps why the single-issue LDs and BXP are both struggling.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
The LDs are not a single issue party. They offer competence and pragmatism as opposed to two parties led by people who are not morally fit to be prime minster.
Yawn.
Yes, because the LibDems are so morally superior.
Like your bar charts for starters.
And how about that paragon of virtue Lord Rennard. Is he still involved in the LibDem election campaign?
And if he is, then that makes Jo Swinson a hypocrite of the first order.
Disgraceful. It is retroactively authorising law-breaking by the UK army against what is legally "its own people", even though all sides know the UK considers them a left-over minority.
This week's Sunil on Sunday ELBOW (Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week) for week ending 10th November: 8 polls including BMG, Deltapoll, Panelbase, ICM, Opinium and 3 YGs (fieldwork end-dates 4th to 10th Nov):
Take-home: BXP getting squeezed, LDs flatlining, LAB and CON both up.
Keep that trend up for another 4.5 weeks and you'd get
CON 42.67 LAB 35.51 LD 15.34 BXP 1.24
Seems quite believable.
I think the absolute minimum for the Brexit Party is about 5%.
I wouldn't be surprised if Farage himself quit this week to save face. Then 1.9%, as per when Paul Nuttalls was in charge of the UKIPs, would seem about right.
I agree that would make a difference.
The trouble is...where does be go after that....one of the reasons he started BXP was that he is addicted to the attention and "power" it gives him,
Disgraceful. It is retroactively authorising law-breaking by the UK army against what is legally "its own people", even though all sides know the UK considers them a left-over minority.
It is a sound decision given the release of IRA terrorists from prison under the GFA too
Disgraceful. It is retroactively authorising law-breaking by the UK army against what is legally "its own people", even though all sides know the UK considers them a left-over minority.
It is a sound decision given the release of IRA terrorists from prison under the GFA too
Well, exactly. You are saying the UK army is on the same moral footing as some terrorists. That is like telling the minority, sorry it was a war against you and your army all along.
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
On current polls Boris will likely win a majority around the levels Thatcher got in 1979 or Blair got in 2005
Agree 100%. Indeed, I'm thinking they could end up with an enormous majority - perhaps 150-200.
I see three trends;
Essentially, I could see
I think the Tories could get a lead of 150 over Labour but not an overall majority that high given likely losses to the LDs and SNP
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
It's more to do with the vagaries of the electoral system and the way in which the opposition is divided.
In 2017 the Tories got almost exactly the same share of the vote as Mrs Thatcher did in 1983 and Blair did in 1997, but the latter two won huge majorities whereas Mrs May was 8 seats short.
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
The American is a 4 star general. The Royal navy guys appear to be a commodore and a captain - that's three and four ranks junior respectively.
Dead right the General is the boss.
Woah there, it doesn't work like that. The only people that gives orders to the Royal Navy is the Royal Navy (and the Queen and Defence Minister). Not the Army, not the RAF, and not the USMC. That's why there has to be a Minister of Defence and Chief of the Defence Staff, so orders can be passed from service to service. It's also why joint operations are so difficult, and why the Army and Navy have their own little air forces (Army Air Corps and Fleet Air Arm) instead of relying on the RAF. It doesn't matter what his rank is, if he's not in the same service he can't issue orders. Boss my arse.
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
On current polls Boris will likely win a majority around the levels Thatcher got in 1979 or Blair got in 2005
...and it's beginning to feel like 2001. A lot of people are still convinced that the Opposition have a chance, despite all the evidence saying "Um, no"
To think a majority of 66 is enormous and barely credible for most of the past 9 years, and it was a huge reduction in 2005.
After Blair it seemed like the public had it large majority government... But after this Parliament I wonder whether the public have it with hung parliaments.
I reckon the days of big majorities are gone forever in this country. I don't think the public will ever again put so much faith into one individual like they did with Thatcher and Blair.
On current polls Boris will likely win a majority around the levels Thatcher got in 1979 or Blair got in 2005
Agree 100%. Indeed, I'm thinking they could end up with an enormous majority - perhaps 150-200.
I see three trends;
Essentially, I could see
This post seems garbled, Robert. I'd be very interested in what the three trends are you see and what essentially you could see ...
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
The American is a 4 star general. The Royal navy guys appear to be a commodore and a captain - that's three and four ranks junior respectively.
Dead right the General is the boss.
Two things: (1) junior people trying to impress a way more senior guest is what it looks like; (2) it is possible in joint NATO operations for UK military to be under the command of an officer from another NATO nation. Not sure that that is relevant in this context, but equally it is not true to say that in no circumstance would a US Marine general not be able to give orders to British military personnel.
Corbyn is at last playing to his strength. 2017 Labour supporters showed that they wanted to end austerity and by a distance Corbyn's mob are seen as the party to do it. They've promised to spend beyond anyone's wildest dreams.
For reasons of wanting to appear prudent the Tories not only advertised this spending but exaggerated it and their friends in the media gave it front page treatment. It might have sounded pie in the sky but the Tories managed to ground it by saying they've costed it and even put a figure on it. No one looks a gift horse in the mouth.
Despite a long running attempt to paint Corbyn as a second Oswald Mosely I don't see many people buying it. He's been around too long. They see him as more likely to be ladling soup at Greenham Common than leading an army of Blackshirts up Cable Street.
His downside is that he looks like Michael Foot and his values are not those of a person who loves Queen and country.This is partially alleviated by facing Johnson who is the ugly side of a person who was born into those values.
My guess is the polls will narrow and the have-nots will see him as being on their side and his traditional support will largely return.
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
The American is a 4 star general. The Royal navy guys appear to be a commodore and a captain - that's three and four ranks junior respectively.
Dead right the General is the boss.
Two things: (1) junior people trying to impress a way more senior guest is what it looks like; (2) it is possible in joint NATO operations for UK military to be under the command of an officer from another NATO nation. Not sure that that is relevant in this context, but equally it is not true to say that in no circumstance would a US Marine general not be able to give orders to British military personnel.
Possible yes, but he would have to be appointed as some kind of force commander. It's not assumed by virtue of his rank.
Plus I think there would have to be a RN officer on his staff as liaison thru which the order would be passed.
Not sure that will save Capt Mercer in his seat if BXP stand against him......
BXP will likely take Labour votes in Plymouth too
Plymouth Sutton and Devonport will be a very interesting seat to watch on election night.
Jonny M faces an uphill climb to keep this seat, its only a few months ago he got embroiled in a money scandal, his seat has always been marginal, Plymouth is quite a Brexity place and JM is a reluctant convert to LEAVE, the military vote is somewhat overstated in my opinion. I'd agree its definitely one to watch and a scalp I suspect :Labour would be very happy to take (with a bit of help from BXP).
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
The American is a 4 star general. The Royal navy guys appear to be a commodore and a captain - that's three and four ranks junior respectively.
Dead right the General is the boss.
Two things: (1) junior people trying to impress a way more senior guest is what it looks like; (2) it is possible in joint NATO operations for UK military to be under the command of an officer from another NATO nation. Not sure that that is relevant in this context, but equally it is not true to say that in no circumstance would a US Marine general not be able to give orders to British military personnel.
it was only a few months ago that the previous Commander of Queen Elizaberth had to resign his command over, ahem, misuse of a military vehicie (shopping trips to Waitrose IIRC).
New Zealand and Australia and Canada are closer allies for the UK than the USA, the US is our most powerful ally but not our closest
The word "ally" doesn't really the capture the essence of the UK-USA defence relationship. Look at this picture of the CMC, Gen. Berger, inspecting HMS QE. You can tell who the boss really is from the body language...
The American is a 4 star general. The Royal navy guys appear to be a commodore and a captain - that's three and four ranks junior respectively.
Dead right the General is the boss.
Two things: (1) junior people trying to impress a way more senior guest is what it looks like; (2) it is possible in joint NATO operations for UK military to be under the command of an officer from another NATO nation. Not sure that that is relevant in this context, but equally it is not true to say that in no circumstance would a US Marine general not be able to give orders to British military personnel.
it was only a few months ago that the previous Commander of Queen Elizaberth had to resign his command over, ahem, misuse of a military vehicie (shopping trips to Waitrose IIRC).
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myntJD4EXaQ
Which one is PBs favourite BONG!!!!!
Here's a thought... Could the Brexit Party win Chorley?
No Conservatives or Lib Dems as Hoyle is standing as speaker, so it'll be a Hoyle Vs BXP Vs Green fight - in a 58% leave seat... 🤷♂️
I was in the supermarket in Ruthin today, David Jones'seat.
Overhead three separate conversations about Brexit, the betrayal of the 17.4m and how BXP are the only way to stand up for Brexit.
Small numbers but I was surprised by the strength of feeling. This is usually good rural Tory area.
If this happens across the N Wales target seats, the Con could find it harder than the polls suggest.
What?! You mean that politicians are politicians no matter what rosette they wear, and that people who have been MPs for over 30 years are, in fact, political animals too?
Scrap that, Brexit Party have confirmed they will NOT be standing in Chorley. https://t.co/5MskMzAzTk
I suspect it is the same for the Brexit party.
It is a dreadful fact that diplomatic immunity was used and Trump will not release her. That is not the FCO fault and it is a terrible impass. My wife and I have discussed this previously and in the circumstances would have met her in the White House to seek explanations and answers. Whether that would have started reconcilliation it is impossible to know but we have great sympathy for the terrible position the family are in
If I have given the wrong impression or expressed my thoughts insensitively I apologise
Corbyn rushing to comment on Bolivia once again.
This is when two US Marine Corps "while flying too low, against regulations, in order for the pilots to have fun and take videos of the scenery, cut a cable supporting a gondola of an aerial tramway" and caused the deaths of 20 civilians in Italy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalese_cable_car_disaster_(1998)
The US Marine Corps never faced a proper trial.
The US looks after its own. Trump is bad, but no US President (judging by previous behaviour of either Republican or Democratic Presidents) would have acted any different. They would not have returned Anne Sacoolas.
Not sure Raab (though highly dislikable) could ever have done much to change that.
Not sure how that helps as they seem to be stalling and of course many are refusing yo stand for Farage
Maybe Bastani will see his converts heading back to Farage
Are we about to see a complete u turn . Clearly looking at the polls the Tories should avoid any sort of pact with him . It would do more harm than good given they are keeping many of their Remainers on side aswell as most of their Leavers .
And Boris is correct to keep away from him
Boris has to win this on his Brexit deal and only Boris can stop Corbyn
A labour govenrment as they are now would be a disaster both morally and financially.
I dont need prompting.
Labour still needs LibDems to be doing well in their Tory target seats, and for the Con-Lab gap to narrow to no more than 7. I doubt if the manifestos will change much, but the leader debates are more unpredictable.
Been putting garden stakes up all weekend well at least driving the van.
So far 60 up based on 2017 list.
3 rejections 1 Brexit 2 Corbyn haters
So on my massive sample of 60 LAB 5% down on 2017 even amongst normally committed voters.
250 more to go.
Peep Show star is ‘depressed’ by Brexit but tries to focus on the ‘greatest aim’ of being funny"
https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/david-mitchell-the-internet-and-the-smartphone-have-been-a-disaster-for-civilisation-1.4065803
Yes, because the LibDems are so morally superior.
Like your bar charts for starters.
And how about that paragon of virtue Lord Rennard. Is he still involved in the LibDem election campaign?
And if he is, then that makes Jo Swinson a hypocrite of the first order.
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/liberal-democrats/news/90736/lib-dem-deputy-jo-swinson-savages-party-over
A far more egregious case of American overreach in Italy was the Egypt Air 2843 intercept which ended with an armed standoff between the Carabinieri and SEAL Team SIX on the tarmac at NAS Sigonella.
https://twitter.com/HMSQNLZ/status/1192437880280539136
And I have a leaflet from Jo Swinson saying she is going to be our next Prime Minister. And if His Lordship is still involved, then that makes her a fucking hypocrite.
Dead right the General is the boss.
I see three trends;
Essentially, I could see
I mean they gave that money back from the convicted fraudster right?
Oh
says
The next State Opening [of parliament] is expected to be in 2020.
Is that reliable (not clear when last updated maybe 14th Oct?) ?
Elsewhere we have
https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/elections-and-voting/general/general-election-2019-timetable/
Tuesday 17 December - Parliament is expected to return for the election of the Speaker
In 2017 the Tories got almost exactly the same share of the vote as Mrs Thatcher did in 1983 and Blair did in 1997, but the latter two won huge majorities whereas Mrs May was 8 seats short.
For reasons of wanting to appear prudent the Tories not only advertised this spending but exaggerated it and their friends in the media gave it front page treatment. It might have sounded pie in the sky but the Tories managed to ground it by saying they've costed it and even put a figure on it. No one looks a gift horse in the mouth.
Despite a long running attempt to paint Corbyn as a second Oswald Mosely I don't see many people buying it. He's been around too long. They see him as more likely to be ladling soup at Greenham Common than leading an army of Blackshirts up Cable Street.
His downside is that he looks like Michael Foot and his values are not those of a person who loves Queen and country.This is partially alleviated by facing Johnson who is the ugly side of a person who was born into those values.
My guess is the polls will narrow and the have-nots will see him as being on their side and his traditional support will largely return.
https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1193700741451517952?s=20
Plus I think there would have to be a RN officer on his staff as liaison thru which the order would be passed.