DIg into the piece and there are some nuggets for them
Interesting. I actually think Labour's campaign has been quite good: it gives the impression of a party fizzing with ideas and not afraid to be adventurous. My guess is that will be enough to retain traditional Labour voters who might otherwise have flirted with Boris: a kind of 'A for effort' endorsement if you will.
Several of the lifelong Labour voters I've spoken to will not vote for Labour again until Corbyn and McDonnell have long gone.
Undoubtedly true but I know a lot of Labour supporters who said the same thing about Tony Blair ...
End of the day, Labour supporters are much more ready to hold their noses.
Yes, I agree. Labour leavers will hold their nose and vote for Boris.
UPDATE: A source close to @ChukaUmunna emphatically denies any plans to replace Swinson before the election.
Says ‘the campaign has been disappointing but it’s too late to do anything about it now’
I'm not a Lib Dem and don't know how the party works
But I would imagine that kind of stuff will really piss a lot of people off
Not if he wins Cities of London and Westminster, likely one of the few realistic LD gains of the night, in which case he will have been proved right
I can't understand why you think it's at all likely that Umunna will be elected.
Yougov MRP has Umunna closer to the Tories in Cities of London and Westminster than they are in almost any of their traditional seats in the SW bar Cheltenham for instance. Remember Westminster was almost 70% Remain.
Umunna winning Cities of London and Westminster but Skinner losing 70% Leave Bolsover to the Tories is a strong possibility in this Brexit election.
This poll had him just 6% behind with a big Labour vote to squeeze
And 'not as bad as Zimbabwe', which had interest rates of 65,000% and life expectancies worse than 14th century England (both within living memory) is damning with faint praise.
Mr. Alistair, easily done.
But you were replying to a comment which was related to someone mentioning Zimbabwe and Venezuela. I don't believe I made any comments where I threw out an economic opinion on it's own - just ones related to the hyperbole and insults that were flying around
DIg into the piece and there are some nuggets for them
Interesting. I actually think Labour's campaign has been quite good: it gives the impression of a party fizzing with ideas and not afraid to be adventurous. My guess is that will be enough to retain traditional Labour voters who might otherwise have flirted with Boris: a kind of 'A for effort' endorsement if you will.
Several of the lifelong Labour voters I've spoken to will not vote for Labour again until Corbyn and McDonnell have long gone.
Undoubtedly true but I know a lot of Labour supporters who said the same thing about Tony Blair ...
End of the day, Labour supporters are much more ready to hold their noses.
Yes, I agree. Labour leavers will hold their nose and vote for Boris.
They won't. That Sky polling data showed a shift from 57% to 71% of 2017 Labour Leavers coming back to Labour.
In all the kerfuffle, one thing has gone overlooked
Boris has successfully dodged an interview with Andrew Neil
True but it doesn't't alter the fact that the man who is going to be our PM for the next 5 years is too frightened to do an interview with Andrew Neill.
I don't think Boris is personally scared to do an interview, but he's certainly politically concerned about the fallout if it was anything like Corbyn's evisceration. He won't do it now, there's far too much to lose this close to an election. In fact, he'd be utterly stupid to agree to it now.
He is debating Corbyn in a head to head on BBC on friday at 8.30pm
I expect that will be the last debate Boris will take part in
I have a hunch Corbyn might just throw one more mad roll of the dice, and that is to announce the cancelling of all student debt live on air. It would certainly make the headlines and maybe run right into the following week.
Of course, we all know that the sums of money involved would never materialise, just like all the other pledges they've made. But still. I reckon Corbyn is just about desperate enough to say anything now, no matter how far fetched.
And what new voters to Labour will that attract? Arent the students already a slam dunk for them?
DIg into the piece and there are some nuggets for them
Interesting. I actually think Labour's campaign has been quite good: it gives the impression of a party fizzing with ideas and not afraid to be adventurous. My guess is that will be enough to retain traditional Labour voters who might otherwise have flirted with Boris: a kind of 'A for effort' endorsement if you will.
Several of the lifelong Labour voters I've spoken to will not vote for Labour again until Corbyn and McDonnell have long gone.
Undoubtedly true but I know a lot of Labour supporters who said the same thing about Tony Blair ...
End of the day, Labour supporters are much more ready to hold their noses.
Yes, I agree. Labour leavers will hold their nose and vote for Boris.
They won't. That Sky polling data showed a shift from 57% to 71% of 2017 Labour Leavers coming back to Labour.
Lab's NHS line is a slow burn. It will pick up supporters all the way to polling day. I'm not sure they've stalled.
No they certainly haven't. Sniffles are spreading, NHS creaking and then you have Donald Trump in town and a bit of a smoking gun with Dominic Raab today.
It will burn and burn and burn all the way to Dec 12th. And as I've mentioned many times, it's FAR more important to Labour Leavers than Brexit.
Bet accordingly ...
Actually, no: don’t bet accordingly.
Bets should be based on objective analysis of the best factual (citeable) information available versus the value in the market, coupled with an assessment of the risk.
They shouldn’t be appended to party political wishful thinking. Particularly not on this site.
Summing up my current view of the pluses and minuses (mainly minuses) of various outcomes:
1. Large Tory majority reduces risk of no-deal because ERG would be small minority and EU would see stable negotiating partner. Corbyn/momentum might be defeated within LP or there might be split and creation of new centre left opposition party with LDs.
2. Small Tory majority reduces chance of Corbynista grip being loosened and increases risk of no-deal.
3. Tories + DUP majority as per 2 but more likely to no-deal.
4. Tories largest party forming minority government. Chance of no-deal, rapid new election (unknown outcome) or possible deal versus revoke referendum. Latter could be good if public mood is to accept the result as definitive. Would they though?
5. Labour minority government would result in immediate negative economic impact. Great political instability beckons, would they be in power long enough to re-negotiate exit agreement? If they try BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically.
6. Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term. Could still result in LP split so might be short-lived.
Although an anti-Tory centrist and remainer who would welcome a democratic revoke (maybe an impossibility) my head is leading me to 1 or 4 as the best outcomes. Stopping Corbynism is #1 priority. I'll vote LD I think as a marker for the future because I think it is safe to do so. In other circumstances I would vote to defeat Corbyn as the constituency situation demanded.
DIg into the piece and there are some nuggets for them
Interesting. I actually think Labour's campaign has been quite good: it gives the impression of a party fizzing with ideas and not afraid to be adventurous. My guess is that will be enough to retain traditional Labour voters who might otherwise have flirted with Boris: a kind of 'A for effort' endorsement if you will.
Several of the lifelong Labour voters I've spoken to will not vote for Labour again until Corbyn and McDonnell have long gone.
Undoubtedly true but I know a lot of Labour supporters who said the same thing about Tony Blair ...
End of the day, Labour supporters are much more ready to hold their noses.
Yes, I agree. Labour leavers will hold their nose and vote for Boris.
They won't. That Sky polling data showed a shift from 57% to 71% of 2017 Labour Leavers coming back to Labour.
That's momentum. It's with Labour at the moment.
No, the shift was amongst all Labour voters ie mainly Remainers from the LDs, not Labour Leavers
Interesting, we have had 2 decent polls for the Tories today and the betting line hasn't shifted.
I, for one, have been looking at RobD's graph every update hoping to see the gap stabilize. It finally happened yesterday/today ... every additional day the gap fails to close any further from now until GE day will make me breath slightly easier but I guess after 2017 nobody wants to conclude that Labour can't rise further.
I am still extremely concerned that Labour can squeeze Lib Dems some more, where as the Tories are relying on flat cap Fred and friends to change the habit of a lifetime and vote Tory.
I have said I think the Tories need to be showing 10+ leads right up to polling day to be on the safe side.
Absolutely ... when the dust settles on this GE and the analysis is done the most fascinating thing will be to what extent traditional loyalites / habits remained intact. I share your nervousness. Lib Dems/Remainers will vote Labour in a heartbeat despite Corbyn but visceral hatred of the Tories will make it tough for dyed-in-the-wool Labour voters to put their cross in that box. Do they despise all that Corbyn stands for enough to vote for "Boris" to deliver Brexit - that is the question on which the GE rests.
Indeed. I am still expecting a lot of Lab-Tory switchers to not materialise and spoil Johnson's fanbois best fantasies. Every outcome of this election is potentially a loss for the UK. Corbyn=big economic disaster. Johnson + Brexit= economic disaster. Hung parliament = political disaster.
You know the chap currently visiting London became the President of the United States because rust-belt Democrats overcame the habit of a lifetime to vote for him, right?
Yes, and that iar" influencing factors, the UK is not the USA - tribal voting is more entrenched here.
In 2017 Corbyn was still pretending to be in favour of leaving the EU, while Remainers projected their own fantasies onto him as the only opposition to May who definitely wanted to Leave. This time around Corbyn actually merits a decent chunk of the Remain vote (insofar as he merits anything), but Leavers rightly feel betrayed.
The result is a big net negative for Labour...
So what about Tory Remainers who supported Johnson when he was pro-EU? Presumably they just shrug and say 'That's Boris'?
Yvette Cooper is the only one of these candidates I find likeable.
If you like her, that probably rules her out with most Labour members
Why would it when I've always voted Labour when they've won general elections recently? (2001 and 2005). I'm precisely the sort of voter Labour needs to get into power.
Summing up my current view of the pluses and minuses (mainly minuses) of various outcomes:
1. Large Tory majority reduces risk of no-deal because ERG would be small minority and EU would see stable negotiating partner. Corbyn/momentum might be defeated within LP or there might be split and creation of new centre left opposition party with LDs.
2. Small Tory majority reduces chance of Corbynista grip being loosened and increases risk of no-deal.
3. Tories + DUP majority as per 2 but more likely to no-deal.
4. Tories largest party forming minority government. Chance of no-deal, rapid new election (unknown outcome) or possible deal versus revoke referendum. Latter could be good if public mood is to accept the result as definitive. Would they though?
5. Labour minority government would result in immediate negative economic impact. Great political instability beckons, would they be in power long enough to re-negotiate exit agreement? If they try BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically.
6. Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term. Could still result in LP split so might be short-lived.
Although an anti-Tory centrist and remainer who would welcome a democratic revoke (maybe an impossibility) my head is leading me to 1 or 4 as the best outcomes. Stopping Corbynism is #1 priority. I'll vote LD I think as a marker for the future because I think it is safe to do so. In other circumstances I would vote to defeat Corbyn as the constituency situation demanded.
You would hope that 2-4 offered enough time for Labour to find a decent leader...
Even though the lead is unchanged at 9%, the doubling in the BXP vote share back to 4% in that YouGov poll in itself reduces the Tory majority by 20 on my model.
My model on the YouGov 42/33/12/4/4 split gives the Tories 336 ENGLAND seats compared to 189 Lab and 7 LD. [Note: The model is about 12 seats more favourable to the Tories than the MRP model on the same national polling figures, but that is besides the point.]
Yet keep a 9% Tory lead with Con/Lab/LD unchanged and BXP down to only 2 (as previously with YouGov) and the Tories 346 seats, with 180 Lab and 6 LD. So 10 more Tory seats, 9 fewer Lab and 1 fewer LD. 20 more to the Con majority.
Why such a result? Well the BXP vote share may seem innocuous when they stand to win zero seats in every scenario, but it is concentrated in only a minority of seats including all the critical seats the Tories need to pick up to get a majority. Even on 4.0% nationally it represents quite a significant vote share averaging 9.3%+ in those seats, the majority of which would otherwise break to the Tories. So the larger the BXP share, the less efficient the distribution of the Tory vote - they get significantly fewer votes where they need them most.
The silver lining for the Tories is that with the BXP vote share back up, you would expect the national Tory lead to have fallen, and yet it hasn't, so there has been other churn in the Tories favour. A Tory optimist might take a glass half full view that they could extend the Tory vote lead over Labour if they squeezed the BXP vote down to 2% again.
Why would it when I've always voted Labour when they've won general elections recently? (2001 and 2005). I'm precisely the sort of voter Labour needs to get into power.
Yvette Cooper is the only one of these candidates I find likeable.
If you like her, that probably rules her out with most Labour members
Why would it when I've always voted Labour when they've won general elections recently? (2001 and 2005). I'm precisely the sort of voter Labour needs to get into power.
I think the party line is: if you don’t like Labour as it is now then you’re a fucking Tory.
The timing of this election should also be helpful to Labour: a man with a white beard and a penchant for red bringing gifts of mysterious origin. Jezza is the very personification of seasonal cheer!
Even though the lead is unchanged at 9%, the doubling in the BXP vote share back to 4% in that YouGov poll in itself reduces the Tory majority by 20 on my model.
My model on the YouGov 42/33/12/4/4 split gives the Tories 336 ENGLAND seats compared to 189 Lab and 7 LD. [Note: The model is about 12 seats more favourable to the Tories than the MRP model on the same national polling figures, but that is besides the point.]
Yet keep a 9% Tory lead with Con/Lab/LD unchanged and BXP down to only 2 (as previously with YouGov) and the Tories 346 seats, with 180 Lab and 6 LD. So 10 more Tory seats, 9 fewer Lab and 1 fewer LD. 20 more to the Con majority.
Why such a result? Well the BXP vote share may seem innocuous when they stand to win zero seats in every scenario, but it is concentrated in only a minority of seats. Even on 4.0% nationally it represents quite a significant vote share averaging 9.3%+ in those seats, the majority of which would otherwise break to the Tories. So the larger the BXP share, the less efficient the distribution of the Tory vote - they get significantly fewer votes where they need them most.
The silver lining for the Tories is that with the BXP vote share back up, you would expect the national Tory lead to have fallen, and yet it hasn't, so there has been other churn in the Tories favour. A Tory optimist might take a glass half full view that they could extend the Tory vote lead over Labour if they squeezed the BXP vote down to 2% again.
What does your model say with the current polling average of 43/32/14?
Not doing so well in Scotland, needless to say. Falling behind mitteleuropa in maths and science. Be interesting to see how much coverage the stats get in the Scottish press given Nicola's pledge that it is her number one priority and the pride Scots take in education.
Don't think Southron posters appreciate how vulnerable SNP will be over 'elf and edukayshon in the run up to the 2021 SP elections.
Shame it doesn't count for a hill of turnips against the call for Yet Another Bloody Referendum in 2019 though....
Tory frothers getting agitated that SNP are ever more popular , who would have thought it. What a pair of sour pusses. Have a look at your lying cheating party, UK in the toilet , English NHS crap, tuition fees, food banks , homeless , I could go on for hours yet you idiots whine about a miniscule of a % drop in an average.
Yvette Cooper is the only one of these candidates I find likeable.
If you like her, that probably rules her out with most Labour members
Why would it when I've always voted Labour when they've won general elections recently? (2001 and 2005). I'm precisely the sort of voter Labour needs to get into power.
I think the party line is: if you don’t like Labour as it is now then you’re a fucking Tory.
Err... yeah.
The problem with Labour now is its members would rather be in opposition and ideologically pure than in Government with former Tory voters.
Unless that changes hard to see it getting back to power
Not doing so well in Scotland, needless to say. Falling behind mitteleuropa in maths and science. Be interesting to see how much coverage the stats get in the Scottish press given Nicola's pledge that it is her number one priority and the pride Scots take in education.
Don't think Southron posters appreciate how vulnerable SNP will be over 'elf and edukayshon in the run up to the 2021 SP elections.
Shame it doesn't count for a hill of turnips against the call for Yet Another Bloody Referendum in 2019 though....
Tory frothers getting agitated that SNP are ever more popular , who would have thought it. What a pair of sour pusses. Have a look at your lying cheating party, UK in the toilet , English NHS crap, tuition fees, food banks , homeless , I could go on for hours yet you idiots whine about a miniscule of a % drop in an average.
Afternoon, Malc. Scotland now behind Latvia and Slovenia in maths and drifting further behind England generally. Don't think Miss Jean Brodie would be impressed.
Summing up my current view of the pluses and minuses (mainly minuses) of various outcomes:
1. Large Tory majority reduces risk of no-deal because ERG would be small minority and EU would see stable negotiating partner. Corbyn/momentum might be defeated within LP or there might be split and creation of new centre left opposition party with LDs.
2. Small Tory majority reduces chance of Corbynista grip being loosened and increases risk of no-deal.
3. Tories + DUP majority as per 2 but more likely to no-deal.
4. Tories largest party forming minority government. Chance of no-deal, rapid new election (unknown outcome) or possible deal versus revoke referendum. Latter could be good if public mood is to accept the result as definitive. Would they though?
5. Labour minority government would result in immediate negative economic impact. Great political instability beckons, would they be in power long enough to re-negotiate exit agreement? If they try BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically.
6. Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term. Could still result in LP split so might be short-lived.
Although an anti-Tory centrist and remainer who would welcome a democratic revoke (maybe an impossibility) my head is leading me to 1 or 4 as the best outcomes. Stopping Corbynism is #1 priority. I'll vote LD I think as a marker for the future because I think it is safe to do so. In other circumstances I would vote to defeat Corbyn as the constituency situation demanded.
Interesting and generally plausible views, thanks.
I take issue with two points:
"BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically". Disagree. Farage and co would bleat for sure but if it's done as a binding referendum whichever won would settle the issue.
"Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term." Aside from the fact that this outcome is never going to happen at this election, I think you have fallen for the right-wing press propagada here. The levels of spending proposed by Labour are no higher than in many other European countries. The country desparately needs investment in public services.
Just had by 9-13th latest LD leaflets (including the regulation joke one from OGH).
It's utterly insane - there is zero chance they are sticking to spending limits - They must have spent £3 on me alone by this point, in a constituency they have no chance in.
If delivered by hand by volunteers they're not expensive.
As discussed before, the form of the imprint on the Mike Smithson letters implies they're claimed not to be promoting a candidate,
I had another A3 leaflet from the Lib Dems today. I suspect it was delivered by Royal Mail "door to door" (aka Royal Junk Mail). Again the message was "Vote Lib Dem" but the imprint mentioned only the party, not the candidate.
The Lib Dems seem to be operating on the principle that they can bypass constituency spending limits by claiming leaflets are part of the national campaign, even when (as with Smithson's letters) they specifically mention the constituency.
How parties respond to defeat is, if anything, more important than how they respond to victory.
It doesn't really matter very much who leads Labour - the question within the Party (as it will be for the LDs as well I suspect) is whether the failure was that of the leader or of the policy programme or both.
Time makes fools of us all and by 2024 no one (apart from the hostile) will remember or care what was in either the Labour or LD manifesto in 2019.
It may be Labour will think the problem was Corbyn and they can run the 2019 manifesto in 2024 against a tired Conservative Government with a record (and some spending pledges) to defend.
The LDs may feel the Brexit policy (and perhaps Swinson) were the problems but the bulk of the 2019 programme (perhaps with a new USP) wasn't a bad offering.
A more interesting prospect would be if Labour decided BOTH the programme and the leader were problems and a new leader took the Party to a more centrist offering - as we've seen in the past, a tired old Tory Government can be eaten alive by a non-socialist opposition party of the centre or centre-left.
Even though the lead is unchanged at 9%, the doubling in the BXP vote share back to 4% in that YouGov poll in itself reduces the Tory majority by 20 on my model.
My model on the YouGov 42/33/12/4/4 split gives the Tories 336 ENGLAND seats compared to 189 Lab and 7 LD. [Note: The model is about 12 seats more favourable to the Tories than the MRP model on the same national polling figures, but that is besides the point.]
Yet keep a 9% Tory lead with Con/Lab/LD unchanged and BXP down to only 2 (as previously with YouGov) and the Tories 346 seats, with 180 Lab and 6 LD. So 10 more Tory seats, 9 fewer Lab and 1 fewer LD. 20 more to the Con majority.
Why such a result? Well the BXP vote share may seem innocuous when they stand to win zero seats in every scenario, but it is concentrated in only a minority of seats. Even on 4.0% nationally it represents quite a significant vote share averaging 9.3%+ in those seats, the majority of which would otherwise break to the Tories. So the larger the BXP share, the less efficient the distribution of the Tory vote - they get significantly fewer votes where they need them most.
The silver lining for the Tories is that with the BXP vote share back up, you would expect the national Tory lead to have fallen, and yet it hasn't, so there has been other churn in the Tories favour. A Tory optimist might take a glass half full view that they could extend the Tory vote lead over Labour if they squeezed the BXP vote down to 2% again.
What does your model say with the current polling average of 43/32/14?
Yvette Cooper is the only one of these candidates I find likeable.
If you like her, that probably rules her out with most Labour members
Why would it when I've always voted Labour when they've won general elections recently? (2001 and 2005). I'm precisely the sort of voter Labour needs to get into power.
I think the party line is: if you don’t like Labour as it is now then you’re a fucking Tory.
Err... yeah.
The problem with Labour now is its members would rather be in opposition and ideologically pure than in Government with former Tory voters.
Unless that changes hard to see it getting back to power
I think that’s true have been told by family members that losing with corbyn is better than winning with a blairite. I can only think they reckon they only have to win once so will stick with the project.
In all the kerfuffle, one thing has gone overlooked
Boris has successfully dodged an interview with Andrew Neil
True but it doesn't't alter the fact that the man who is going to be our PM for the next 5 years is too frightened to do an interview with Andrew Neill.
I don't think Boris is personally scared to do an interview, but he's certainly politically concerned about the fallout if it was anything like Corbyn's evisceration. He won't do it now, there's far too much to lose this close to an election. In fact, he'd be utterly stupid to agree to it now.
He is debating Corbyn in a head to head on BBC on friday at 8.30pm
I expect that will be the last debate Boris will take part in
I have a hunch Corbyn might just throw one more mad roll of the dice, and that is to announce the cancelling of all student debt live on air. It would certainly make the headlines and maybe run right into the following week.
Of course, we all know that the sums of money involved would never materialise, just like all the other pledges they've made. But still. I reckon Corbyn is just about desperate enough to say anything now, no matter how far fetched.
Making the student loans interest free might be a better policy, doesnt actually cost that much as most of the interest is not expected to be repaid anyway.
Even though the lead is unchanged at 9%, the doubling in the BXP vote share back to 4% in that YouGov poll in itself reduces the Tory majority by 20 on my model.
My model on the YouGov 42/33/12/4/4 split gives the Tories 336 ENGLAND seats compared to 189 Lab and 7 LD. [Note: The model is about 12 seats more favourable to the Tories than the MRP model on the same national polling figures, but that is besides the point.]
Yet keep a 9% Tory lead with Con/Lab/LD unchanged and BXP down to only 2 (as previously with YouGov) and the Tories 346 seats, with 180 Lab and 6 LD. So 10 more Tory seats, 9 fewer Lab and 1 fewer LD. 20 more to the Con majority.
Why such a result? Well the BXP vote share may seem innocuous when they stand to win zero seats in every scenario, but it is concentrated in only a minority of seats including all the critical seats the Tories need to pick up to get a majority. Even on 4.0% nationally it represents quite a significant vote share averaging 9.3%+ in those seats, the majority of which would otherwise break to the Tories. So the larger the BXP share, the less efficient the distribution of the Tory vote - they get significantly fewer votes where they need them most.
The silver lining for the Tories is that with the BXP vote share back up, you would expect the national Tory lead to have fallen, and yet it hasn't, so there has been other churn in the Tories favour. A Tory optimist might take a glass half full view that they could extend the Tory vote lead over Labour if they squeezed the BXP vote down to 2% again.
I have a strong feeling that the BXP +2 is essentially a visceral reaction to the London attack, which should dissipate by polling day.
UPDATE: A source close to @ChukaUmunna emphatically denies any plans to replace Swinson before the election.
Says ‘the campaign has been disappointing but it’s too late to do anything about it now’
I'm not a Lib Dem and don't know how the party works
But I would imagine that kind of stuff will really piss a lot of people off
Not if he wins Cities of London and Westminster, likely one of the few realistic LD gains of the night, in which case he will have been proved right
I can't understand why you think it's at all likely that Umunna will be elected.
Yougov MRP has Umunna closer to the Tories in Cities of London and Westminster than they are in almost any of their traditional seats in the SW bar Cheltenham for instance. Remember Westminster was almost 70% Remain.
Umunna winning Cities of London and Westminster but Skinner losing 70% Leave Bolsover to the Tories is a strong possibility in this Brexit election.
Interesting, we have had 2 decent polls for the Tories today and the betting line hasn't shifted.
I,r.
I am still extremely concerned that Labour can squeeze Lib Dems some more, where as the Tories are relying on flat cap Fred and friends to change the habit of a lifetime and vote Tory.
I have said I think the Tories need to be showing 10+ leads right up to polling day to be on the safe side.
Absolutely ... when the dust settles on this GE and the analysis is done the most fascinating thing will be to what extent traditional loyalites / habits remained intact. I share your nervousness. Lib Dems/Remainers will vote Labour in a heartbeat despite Corbyn but visceral hatred of the Tories will make it tough for dyed-in-the-wool Labour voters to put their cross in that box. Do they despise all that Corbyn stands for enough to vote for "Boris" to deliver Brexit - that is the question on which the GE rests.
Indeed. I am still expecting a lot of Lab-Tory switchers to not materialise and spoil Johnson's fanbois best fantasies. Every outcome of this election is potentially a loss for the UK. Corbyn=big economic disaster. Johnson + Brexit= economic disaster. Hung parliament = political disaster.
You know the chap currently visiting London became the President of the United States because rust-belt Democrats overcame the habit of a lifetime to vote for him, right?
Yes, and that iar" influencing factors, the UK is not the USA - tribal voting is more entrenched here.
In 2017 Corbyn was still pretending to be in favour of leaving the EU, while Remainers projected their own fantasies onto him as the only opposition to May who definitely wanted to Leave. This time around Corbyn actually merits a decent chunk of the Remain vote (insofar as he merits anything), but Leavers rightly feel betrayed.
The result is a big net negative for Labour...
So what about Tory Remainers who supported Johnson when he was pro-EU? Presumably they just shrug and say 'That's Boris'?
True, but 2012 was a long time ago. Many Leavers now weren’t then.
And I think Boris will go for a close relationship with the EU. My preference now is for a big majority so has political room to do it.
Further update on tactical voting (from the Guardian blog):
Clearly not actually a teacher then. Teacher's at local comprehensives buy their own pens, pencils and ink just to keep lessons running. The truest sign ever we are at the absolute arse end of a Tory Administration. Plus your'e happy withdrawing from the EU science funding euratom etc etc?
Just imagine if Corbyn gets in and gives the schools the money and respect they deserve. Whatever would you do. Being a fyzicyst you clearly cannot be taken in buy the populist right wing. ' oh yeah mate Corbyn he's a terrorist its well known mate' (sharp exhalation of breath through teeth).
Why you so frightened:(???
Who said I teach at a comprehensive?
I voted remain and would have been much happier if we were staying in. An Ed Miliband type leader of Labour would probably have me voting Lib Dem without too many qualms. Jeremy Corbyn is altogether different. I am old enough to remember the end of the Seventies and the chaos of Labour relations at that time: I don’t want a government that thinks it was a golden age. I remember the IRA’s bombing campaign: I don’t want a Prime Minister whose response to the Brighton Bombing was to invite IRA leaders to Parliament. I don’t want a Prime Minister who instinctively sides with Britain’s enemies. I don’t want a Prime Minister who can’t see the antisemitism around him. Do I want Boris to be Prime Minister? No, I think he will probably end up beIng a disaster. But better him than Corbyn.
Surely inviting terrorists to Parliament to discuss their issues is the only true way to sort out such a mess. This is how the peace process began. The current crop of radicals dont want to know which has made them far more difficult to deal with.
Also I never said you taught at a comprehensive. Clearly you have just read off 5 of the biggest 'Corbyn mate' sound bites and have no political ideology at all. Do you drive to your Ivory School in a Mercedes Sprinter eating a londis pasty reading the Mail. I think you probably do.
... "Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term." Aside from the fact that this outcome is never going to happen at this election, I think you have fallen for the right-wing press propagada here. The levels of spending proposed by Labour are no higher than in many other European countries. The country desparately needs investment in public services.
This new line that Labour's spending 'plans' (if that's not too kind a word) would take us to a point no higher than that of other European countries is utterly divorced from reality. It seems to have been generated by Labour apologists selectively misquoting the IFS, and missing out the bits in the IFS report about the Labour plans not being 'remotely credible'.
And if you want more 'investment' (by which you mean current-account spending) on in public services, then fine - but why in the name of heaven would anyone even remotely sane blow that extra spending on things like £58bn for WASPIs, £300bn or so on ideological nationalisations, or further billions on appropriating OpenReach?
Summing up my current view of the pluses and minuses (mainly minuses) of various outcomes:
.... edited for brevity
Although an anti-Tory centrist and remainer who would welcome a democratic revoke (maybe an impossibility) my head is leading me to 1 or 4 as the best outcomes. Stopping Corbynism is #1 priority. I'll vote LD I think as a marker for the future because I think it is safe to do so. In other circumstances I would vote to defeat Corbyn as the constituency situation demanded.
Interesting and generally plausible views, thanks.
I take issue with two points:
"BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically". Disagree. Farage and co would bleat for sure but if it's done as a binding referendum whichever won would settle the issue.
"Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term." Aside from the fact that this outcome is never going to happen at this election, I think you have fallen for the right-wing press propagada here. The levels of spending proposed by Labour are no higher than in many other European countries. The country desparately needs investment in public services.
I think that a BINO + Revoke referendum would give a powerful right wing betrayal myth and we know here they can end... I would hope to be wrong on that but better to have the Tory deal versus revoke if there is going to be another referendum.
I think you are too sanguine about the LP manifesto taken as a whole. The expenditure increases are rapid and they have ruled out more taxes for middle-income tax payers. They have added more enormous commitments like Waspi. The investment stuff is ludicrously overblown The killer is the other numerous anti business steps: effective confiscation of 10% of large companies, immediate and big increases in minimum wage, governance changes - I could go on. Throw in unrealistic de-carbonisation and I think that a very vicious circle of reduced tax take, reduced investment, higher interest rates and increasing unemployment would soon spiral out of control.
I agree about public services which is why I'm bitterly angry at the Corbyn clique.
Apparently Hugh Grant is canvassing in London,going door to door to warn against the terrifying prospect of a Boris Johnson government,not sure it will change anything.
I see Labour are shortening in Putney: virtually now Evens.
Incredible to think that at the 2015 GE the Tories had a 10,000+majority in Putney, which fell to 1,500 in 2017. The influx of thousands of students at Roehampton Uni can't have helped, neither more recently can the indefinite closure, for the umpteenth time, of Putney Bridge which is murder for many commuters. On the other side of the coin, Tory-controlled Wandsworth of which Putney is part continues to charge the lowest rate of poll tax in the land.
Lab's NHS line is a slow burn. It will pick up supporters all the way to polling day. I'm not sure they've stalled.
No they certainly haven't. Sniffles are spreading, NHS creaking and then you have Donald Trump in town and a bit of a smoking gun with Dominic Raab today.
It will burn and burn and burn all the way to Dec 12th. And as I've mentioned many times, it's FAR more important to Labour Leavers than Brexit.
Bet accordingly ...
Actually, no: don’t bet accordingly.
Bets should be based on objective analysis of the best factual (citeable) information available versus the value in the market, coupled with an assessment of the risk.
They shouldn’t be appended to party political wishful thinking. Particularly not on this site.
I'm sorry Casino I respectfully disagree. It takes a mug to be on the other end of successful bets and if @Mysticrose wants to bet on a Labour victory based on wishful thinking let him lay the bets the rest of you take.
At least when Leicester fans bet on wishful thinking they got 5000/1.
Comments
Umunna winning Cities of London and Westminster but Skinner losing 70% Leave Bolsover to the Tories is a strong possibility in this Brexit election.
This poll had him just 6% behind with a big Labour vote to squeeze
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1198316331948486656?s=20
That's momentum. It's with Labour at the moment.
Bets should be based on objective analysis of the best factual (citeable) information available versus the value in the market, coupled with an assessment of the risk.
They shouldn’t be appended to party political wishful thinking. Particularly not on this site.
1. Large Tory majority reduces risk of no-deal because ERG would be small minority and EU would see stable negotiating partner. Corbyn/momentum might be defeated within LP or there might be split and creation of new centre left opposition party with LDs.
2. Small Tory majority reduces chance of Corbynista grip being loosened and increases risk of no-deal.
3. Tories + DUP majority as per 2 but more likely to no-deal.
4. Tories largest party forming minority government. Chance of no-deal, rapid new election (unknown outcome) or possible deal versus revoke referendum. Latter could be good if public mood is to accept the result as definitive. Would they though?
5. Labour minority government would result in immediate negative economic impact. Great political instability beckons, would they be in power long enough to re-negotiate exit agreement? If they try BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically.
6. Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term. Could still result in LP split so might be short-lived.
Although an anti-Tory centrist and remainer who would welcome a democratic revoke (maybe an impossibility) my head is leading me to 1 or 4 as the best outcomes. Stopping Corbynism is #1 priority. I'll vote LD I think as a marker for the future because I think it is safe to do so. In other circumstances I would vote to defeat Corbyn as the constituency situation demanded.
Ah...
...and it's stopped!
Damn!
I don't hold out much hope
It's the last throw of the dice and it is hardly going to make their spending plans any more ludicrous.
My model on the YouGov 42/33/12/4/4 split gives the Tories 336 ENGLAND seats compared to 189 Lab and 7 LD. [Note: The model is about 12 seats more favourable to the Tories than the MRP model on the same national polling figures, but that is besides the point.]
Yet keep a 9% Tory lead with Con/Lab/LD unchanged and BXP down to only 2 (as previously with YouGov) and the Tories 346 seats, with 180 Lab and 6 LD. So 10 more Tory seats, 9 fewer Lab and 1 fewer LD. 20 more to the Con majority.
Why such a result? Well the BXP vote share may seem innocuous when they stand to win zero seats in every scenario, but it is concentrated in only a minority of seats including all the critical seats the Tories need to pick up to get a majority. Even on 4.0% nationally it represents quite a significant vote share averaging 9.3%+ in those seats, the majority of which would otherwise break to the Tories. So the larger the BXP share, the less efficient the distribution of the Tory vote - they get significantly fewer votes where they need them most.
The silver lining for the Tories is that with the BXP vote share back up, you would expect the national Tory lead to have fallen, and yet it hasn't, so there has been other churn in the Tories favour. A Tory optimist might take a glass half full view that they could extend the Tory vote lead over Labour if they squeezed the BXP vote down to 2% again.
https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1201916257827741701?s=20
Look forward to the Maaj convincing all his new right wing pals that Hizb ut-Tahrir are a lovely bunch of lads.
That'll be another couple of commuter marginals lost to the Tories, to go along with the flooded bits....
Anyway, I'm off.
Err... yeah.
Cracking opening for Hillary..
Unless that changes hard to see it getting back to power
This makes me very sad.
I take issue with two points:
"BINO + Revoke referendum that could unleash mayhem politically". Disagree. Farage and co would bleat for sure but if it's done as a binding referendum whichever won would settle the issue.
"Labour majority government would mean truly dreadful economic and political impact even in short term." Aside from the fact that this outcome is never going to happen at this election, I think you have fallen for the right-wing press propagada here. The levels of spending proposed by Labour are no higher than in many other European countries. The country desparately needs investment in public services.
I had another A3 leaflet from the Lib Dems today. I suspect it was delivered by Royal Mail "door to door" (aka Royal Junk Mail). Again the message was "Vote Lib Dem" but the imprint mentioned only the party, not the candidate.
The Lib Dems seem to be operating on the principle that they can bypass constituency spending limits by claiming leaflets are part of the national campaign, even when (as with Smithson's letters) they specifically mention the constituency.
How parties respond to defeat is, if anything, more important than how they respond to victory.
It doesn't really matter very much who leads Labour - the question within the Party (as it will be for the LDs as well I suspect) is whether the failure was that of the leader or of the policy programme or both.
Time makes fools of us all and by 2024 no one (apart from the hostile) will remember or care what was in either the Labour or LD manifesto in 2019.
It may be Labour will think the problem was Corbyn and they can run the 2019 manifesto in 2024 against a tired Conservative Government with a record (and some spending pledges) to defend.
The LDs may feel the Brexit policy (and perhaps Swinson) were the problems but the bulk of the 2019 programme (perhaps with a new USP) wasn't a bad offering.
A more interesting prospect would be if Labour decided BOTH the programme and the leader were problems and a new leader took the Party to a more centrist offering - as we've seen in the past, a tired old Tory Government can be eaten alive by a non-socialist opposition party of the centre or centre-left.
Oh...
You meant the other sort of Virgin?
Another crap decision by Failing Grayling.
And I think Boris will go for a close relationship with the EU. My preference now is for a big majority so has political room to do it.
NEW THREAD
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2019/dec/03/uk-six-richest-people-control-as-much-wealth-as-poorest-13m-study
They would say wouldn't they. Never trust a nationalist. Nationalism is a liars creed.
Judging by the bar chart on the leaflet I had on Monday, so is Liberal Democacy.
And if you want more 'investment' (by which you mean current-account spending) on in public services, then fine - but why in the name of heaven would anyone even remotely sane blow that extra spending on things like £58bn for WASPIs, £300bn or so on ideological nationalisations, or further billions on appropriating OpenReach?
I think you are too sanguine about the LP manifesto taken as a whole. The expenditure increases are rapid and they have ruled out more taxes for middle-income tax payers. They have added more enormous commitments like Waspi. The investment stuff is ludicrously overblown The killer is the other numerous anti business steps: effective confiscation of 10% of large companies, immediate and big increases in minimum wage, governance changes - I could go on. Throw in unrealistic de-carbonisation and I think that a very vicious circle of reduced tax take, reduced investment, higher interest rates and increasing unemployment would soon spiral out of control.
I agree about public services which is why I'm bitterly angry at the Corbyn clique.
At least when Leicester fans bet on wishful thinking they got 5000/1.