Cheating is probably the wrong word given that there is nothing in electoral law that states "thou shalt be interviewed by Andrew Neil," but I get the sentiment. Of course, there is nothing to say that Johnson wouldn't have been interviewed by Neil by now, and Corbyn wouldn't have kept well away, if Labour were doing really well with older voters and Johnson were desperate to win them back. Politicians will be politicians.
I'm not sure what the BBC is supposed to do about this. They've no power to make the Prime Minister turn up, and there's very little they can do to try to embarass him that wouldn't fall foul of Ofcom - even assuming that any such action would have the effect that you would like. It could just as easily confirm voters who are already inclined to back the Prime Minister in their views of bias at the broadcaster, and thus firm up his support.
The amazing thing is that Labour, LD, SNP and whoever else, isn’t running their social media 24/7 on Boris being a chicken, don’t have people following him everywhere he goes wearing chicken suits making utter arses of themselves in front of cameras etc etc.
The typical sort of (younger) voter who gets all their news online isn't going to care that Johnson didn't turn up for a TV interview because they don't watch network TV; consequently, they didn't know that the interview was supposedly meant to be a thing, let alone feel dismayed that they didn't get to see it; and the vast majority of them probably haven't heard of Andrew Neil either.
Agreed.
Corbyn and Sturgeon were daft to do the Neil interviews. Johnson played them, and the BBC, beautifully. End of chapter. And another nail in the coffin of state broadcasting.
The world has moved on. Politicians will wake up eventually.
Not sure about that. None of this is game-changing stuff. Neil interviews have some impact but aren't massive, water-cooler events.
Corbyn took a nasty but non-fatal hit by not apologising on antisemitism, and generally being at his stubborn and tetchy worst - a grumpy old man up past his bedtime. Sturgeon had tough questions but is a capable enough politician to deal well enough with it. Swinson probably did herself some favours, answering some doubters who feel she's not up to it. Johnson has had a bit of damage from chickening out, but he's frontrunner and probably correct that it's better to keep quiet and have a few people think you're a dullard than speak and remove all doubt.
Lib Dems good politics/cheating in the Esher ground game Tories good politics/cheating in the Neill interview Labour good politics/cheating leaking out sensitive/secret documents on the NHS
The Neil thing stands out. It relates to the fairness of election coverage by our national broadcaster. They've allowed one party leader to avoid the engagement which carries the most risk.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
You know Johnson would be left a shivering jelly if he did the interview so you hide behind ‘he doesn’t he has to do it’ it’s pathetic but the great British public will not notice and all you are interested in is a Tory majority regardless how and on what basis it is gained. The new definition of one nation Tory makes me laugh as apparently a one nation Tory is reflective of the membership who think they occupy the center ground, well it’s a view.
There's nothing new. Cameron didn't do it either and I respected him.
Not a single leader I respect has ever agreed to be interviewed by Neil during an election campaign.
Andrew Neil is good, but he is not God.
What is the impact of Johnson's standing in the event of say a small win (majority of less than 10)...his conduct of the campaign is hardly likely to endear him to his backbenchers in the event of anything less than a clear win. Avoiding Andrew Neil indicates a lack of backbone and in a party where the MPs are not exactly fulsome in support of BJ a coup may be on the cards
I think Boris, will be average at best. But what I like about him, is his ability to drive his opponents to foot stamping , teary eyed, frothing at the mouth impotent rage. It's not fair, it's not fair. He has to do AN, he just HAS to! Delicious.
You are rather petty in other words?
Easily amused. But, there's a lot to be amused about. The screaming and screaming until they're sick, about not appearing on AN is hilarious.
Lib Dems good politics/cheating in the Esher ground game Tories good politics/cheating in the Neill interview Labour good politics/cheating leaking out sensitive/secret documents on the NHS
The Neil thing stands out. It relates to the fairness of election coverage by our national broadcaster. They've allowed one party leader to avoid the engagement which carries the most risk.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
You know Johnson would be left a shivering jelly if he did the interview so you hide behind ‘he doesn’t he has to do it’ it’s pathetic but the great British public will not notice and all you are interested in is a Tory majority regardless how and on what basis it is gained. The new definition of one nation Tory makes me laugh as apparently a one nation Tory is reflective of the membership who think they occupy the center ground, well it’s a view.
Corbyn & certainly Swinson have got nothing to lose. Anyway from the polling nobody gives a cluck.
Lib Dems good politics/cheating in the Esher ground game Tories good politics/cheating in the Neill interview Labour good politics/cheating leaking out sensitive/secret documents on the NHS
The Neil thing stands out. It relates to the fairness of election coverage by our national broadcaster. They've allowed one party leader to avoid the engagement which carries the most risk.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
You know Johnson would be left a shivering jelly if he did the interview so you hide behind ‘he doesn’t he has to do it’ it’s pathetic but the great British public will not notice and all you are interested in is a Tory majority regardless how and on what basis it is gained. The new definition of one nation Tory makes me laugh as apparently a one nation Tory is reflective of the membership who think they occupy the center ground, well it’s a view.
There's nothing new. Cameron didn't do it either and I respected him.
Not a single leader I respect has ever agreed to be interviewed by Neil during an election campaign.
Andrew Neil is good, but he is not God.
What is the impact of Johnson's standing in the event of say a small win (majority of less than 10)...his conduct of the campaign is hardly likely to endear him to his backbenchers in the event of anything less than a clear win. Avoiding Andrew Neil indicates a lack of backbone and in a party where the MPs are not exactly fulsome in support of BJ a coup may be on the cards
I think Johnson now owns the Tory Party. This time last year I thought he had missed the the boat but he is in for the long haul I fear.
SLab drifting in Midlothian, now 7/2 (SLab Maj = 885).
This can hardly be a surprise, they are very weak. I had a quick look at the tables from the latest YouGov and (with the usual health warnings about small sub-samples) the Rule of Halves obeyed by their Scotland-only poll in October appears to hold: SNP/2 = Con; Con/2 = Lab.
Being outgunned 2:1 in vote share by the SCons is not, dare one say, a recipe for electoral success.
This has been an awful GE campaign, Johnson has no ideology and Corbyn has a surfeit. Neither side has any really practical people left in senior positions, the only reason the Tories are ahead because their plans are more like a slow puncture rather than Labours smashing everything up and starting again.
What is the impact of Johnson's standing in the event of say a small win (majority of less than 10)...his conduct of the campaign is hardly likely to endear him to his backbenchers in the event of anything less than a clear win. Avoiding Andrew Neil indicates a lack of backbone and in a party where the MPs are not exactly fulsome in support of BJ a coup may be on the cards
It's all an expectations game.
In 2017, at the start of the campaign, if you'd offered a Tory MP a 50 seat majority they would NOT have taken it. They wanted 100+, and polls and local election performance fully justified that. So to go backwards was a disaster and poisoned May's relationship with the party even though she struggled on.
In 2019, partly due to volatile polls, partly the performance in 2017, partly due to failing to leave the EU as promised. a sensible Tory would have bitten your hand off for say a 30 seat majority. If it turns out to be 10, that's pretty disappointing for them from where the polls are now, but would probably not be seen as spectacularly awful. It's just about adequate to get Johnson's Brexit deal through given the Clarke wing has been killed off and all candidates required to drink the Kool Aid, and to get other legislation through too.
Guido doubling down, it turns out that “advance together” are standing five candidates, all in LD/Con contests, and are doing no campaigning except for high-quality anti-Tory leaflets that don’t mention their candidate, and all run by people who were active LDs two years ago. Their ‘party leader’ ran a website suggesting that she was trying to attract Tory to LD switchers. https://order-order.com/2019/12/04/advance-together-party-leader-objective-syphon-tory-votes-lib-dems/ I imagine someone is going to report this to the police and Electoral Commission, hope there’s no emails anywhere, or maybe they were all with the press officer they suspended this week?
A description of the ex-UKIP “liberals” across the South West...
Sajid Javid in North Devon today (BoZo visited last week). It does look as if the Tories are getting rather twitchy about this seat - I await the latest iteration of You Gov MRP with interest.
Lib Dems good politics/cheating in the Esher ground game Tories good politics/cheating in the Neill interview Labour good politics/cheating leaking out sensitive/secret documents on the NHS
The Neil thing stands out. It relates to the fairness of election coverage by our national broadcaster. They've allowed one party leader to avoid the engagement which carries the most risk.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
You know Johnson would be left a shivering jelly if he did the interview so you hide behind ‘he doesn’t he has to do it’ it’s pathetic but the great British public will not notice and all you are interested in is a Tory majority regardless how and on what basis it is gained. The new definition of one nation Tory makes me laugh as apparently a one nation Tory is reflective of the membership who think they occupy the center ground, well it’s a view.
There's nothing new. Cameron didn't do it either and I respected him.
Not a single leader I respect has ever agreed to be interviewed by Neil during an election campaign.
Andrew Neil is good, but he is not God.
What is the impact of Johnson's standing in the event of say a small win (majority of less than 10)...his conduct of the campaign is hardly likely to endear him to his backbenchers in the event of anything less than a clear win. Avoiding Andrew Neil indicates a lack of backbone and in a party where the MPs are not exactly fulsome in support of BJ a coup may be on the cards
Cheating is probably the wrong word given that there is nothing in electoral law that states "thou shalt be interviewed by Andrew Neil," but I get the sentiment. Of course, there is nothing to say that Johnson wouldn't have been interviewed by Neil by now, and Corbyn wouldn't have kept well away, if Labour were doing really well with older voters and Johnson were desperate to win them back. Politicians will be politicians.
I'm not sure what the BBC is supposed to do about this. They've no power to make the ister in their views of bias at the broadcaster, and thus firm up his support.
The amazing thing is that Labour, LD, SNP and whoever else, isn’t running their social media 24/7 on Boris being a chicken, don’t have people following him everywhere he goes wearing chicken suits making utter arses of themselves in front of cameras etc etc.
The typical sort of (younger) voter who gets all their news online isn't going to care that Johnson didn't turn up for a TV interview because they don't watch network TV; consequently, they didn't know that the interview was supposedly meant to be a thing, let alone feel dismayed that they didn't get to see it; and the vast majority of them probably haven't heard of Andrew Neil either.
Agreed.
Corbyn and Sturgeon were daft to do the Neil interviews. Johnson played them, and the BBC, beautifully. End of chapter. And another nail in the coffin of state broadcasting.
The world has moved on. Politicians will wake up eventually.
Not sure about that. None of this is game-changing stuff. Neil interviews have some impact but aren't massive, water-cooler events.
Corbyn took a nasty but non-fatal hit by not apologising on antisemitism, and generally being at his stubborn and tetchy worst - a grumpy old man up past his bedtime. Sturgeon had tough questions but is a capable enough politician to deal well enough with it. Swinson probably did herself some favours, answering some doubters who feel she's not up to it. Johnson has had a bit of damage from chickening out, but he's frontrunner and probably correct that it's better to keep quiet and have a few people think you're a dullard than speak and remove all doubt.
Johnson is not a dullard, but he is unquestionably a liar and Neil would have hammered that home relentlessly. Nevertheless a non-appearance is weak and will cost - not hugely, but something. Had he appeared, that would have cost too, but again not hugely. Most people already know he's a liar and have factored that in.
On the whole, six of one and half a dozen of the other.
I think Boris, will be average at best. But what I like about him, is his ability to drive his opponents to foot stamping , teary eyed, frothing at the mouth impotent rage. It's not fair, it's not fair. He has to do AN, he just HAS to! Delicious.
You are rather petty in other words?
Easily amused. But, there's a lot to be amused about. The screaming and screaming until they're sick, about not appearing on AN is hilarious.
Oddly enough this is neither a reality TV show, comedy (well at times it is) or a football match it’s supposedly about who is the most competent potential PM with the best policies. Corbyn fails on both criteria Johnson fails on the first and nobody knows what his five year plan is on the second. Our voting system makes others views irrelevant so whilst you find humor in the situation many find it rather sad. Johnson will, undeservedly win by 60-80 corbyn will lead labour to a worse result than Foot but apart from the lie of getting brexit done nobody really knows what the duplicitous self promoting idiot will do. Funny though it is not.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
No need for anal and deflecting linguistic contortions. The point is that just the one leader has managed to avoid the toughest BBC interview. This is not a good thing. It's a bad thing. Doesn't invalidate the election or anything - perspective - but it is a poor show. You need to accept the obvious truth of this conclusion.
Serious question. Discussions about Bolsover in previous threads. Do people think this is a seat a Labour would hold with a younger and more energetic candidate, or is it only Skinner’s personal popularity that has kept it red for so long?
I think we can all agree Skinner is past it. His legendary level of attendance was well down last time I checked and he’s not been up to the usual standard of invective recently. But I was wondering what impact that was having.
Andrew Neil trying to get Swinson to admit voters don't like her. I reckon she's holding her own at the minute.
I am coming to the conclusion that in the event of a hung parliament Jo cannot support a minority Corbyn Government or a minority Corbyn/SNP government under any circumstances. I think she could support a Conservative minority government so long as Boris allows a second referendum. Is that likely?
No.
Anyway, if the Liberal Democrats outnumber the Euroscpetic Tories there seems a very real chance Swinson will be Prime Minister.
This typo thing seems to be catching on. Are you a Lib Dme ?
Cheating is probably the wrong word given that there is nothing in electoral law that states "thou shalt be interviewed by Andrew Neil," but I get the sentiment. Of course, there is nothing to say that Johnson wouldn't have been interviewed by Neil by now, and Corbyn wouldn't have kept well away, if Labour were doing really well with older voters and Johnson were desperate to win them back. Politicians will be politicians.
I'm not sure what the BBC is supposed to do about this. They've no power to make the ister in their views of bias at the broadcaster, and thus firm up his support.
The amazing thing is that Labour, LD, SNP and whoever else, isn’t running their social media 24/7 on Boris being a chicken, don’t have people following him everywhere he goes wearing chicken suits making utter arses of themselves in front of cameras etc etc.
The typical sort of (younger) voter who gets all their news online isn't going to care that Johnson didn't turn up for a TV interview because they don't watch network TV; consequently, they didn't know that the interview was supposedly meant to be a thing, let alone feel dismayed that they didn't get to see it; and the vast majority of them probably haven't heard of Andrew Neil either.
Agreed.
Corbyn and Sturgeon were daft to do the Neil interviews. Johnson played them, and the BBC, beautifully. End of chapter. And another nail in the coffin of state broadcasting.
The world has moved on. Politicians will wake up eventually.
Not sure about that. None of this is game-changing stuff. Neil interviews have some impact but aren't massive, water-cooler events.
Corbyn took a nasty but non-fatal hit by not apologising on antisemitism, and generally being at his stubborn and tetchy worst - a grumpy old man up past his bedtime. Sturgeon had tough questions but is a capable enough politician to deal well enough with it. Swinson probably did herself some favours, answering some doubters who feel she's not up to it. Johnson has had a bit of damage from chickening out, but he's frontrunner and probably correct that it's better to keep quiet and have a few people think you're a dullard than speak and remove all doubt.
Johnson is not a dullard, but he is unquestionably a liar and Neil would have hammered that home relentlessly. Nevertheless a non-appearance is weak and will cost - not hugely, but something. Had he appeared, that would have cost too, but again not hugely. Most people already know he's a liar and have factored that in.
On the whole, six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Serious question. Discussions about Bolsover in previous threads. Do people think this is a seat a Labour would hold with a younger and more energetic candidate, or is it only Skinner’s personal popularity that has kept it red for so long?
I think we can all agree Skinner is past it. His legendary level of attendance was well down last time I checked and he’s not been up to the usual standard of invective recently. But I was wondering what impact that was having.
Wiki reckons he was born in 1932, which makes him 87. That’s an astonishing career, he’s been an MP since 1970.
The question is, is his personal vote positive or negative?
Andrew Neil trying to get Swinson to admit voters don't like her. I reckon she's holding her own at the minute.
I am coming to the conclusion that in the event of a hung parliament Jo cannot support a minority Corbyn Government or a minority Corbyn/SNP government under any circumstances. I think she could support a Conservative minority government so long as Boris allows a second referendum. Is that likely?
No.
Anyway, if the Liberal Democrats outnumber the Euroscpetic Tories there seems a very real chance Swinson will be Prime Minister.
This typo thing seems to be catching on. Are you a Lib Dme ?
Johnson is not a dullard, but he is unquestionably a liar and Neil would have hammered that home relentlessly. Nevertheless a non-appearance is weak and will cost - not hugely, but something. Had he appeared, that would have cost too, but again not hugely. Most people already know he's a liar and have factored that in.
On the whole, six of one and half a dozen of the other.
The downside risk is still there however so best to take the known hit and pray his lack of appearance doesn't make the news again.
Sajid Javid in North Devon today (BoZo visited last week). It does look as if the Tories are getting rather twitchy about this seat - I await the latest iteration of You Gov MRP with interest.
I don't know. Sajid Javid visiting isn't going to shift a lot of votes, to be honest.
In terms of political visits by these second rank figures, I don't think parties plan them around where they feel there are big threats. It's probably more that they want Javid to talk about rural policing or something in an authentically rural place where he isn't massively likely to be lynched by angry natives.
I know at least some organisers who basically tell the national party to sod off if the situation is really tight. These things are something of a faff to organise, distracting from other things, and the rewards are limited to the constituency campaign.
This has been an awful GE campaign, Johnson has no ideology and Corbyn has a surfeit. Neither side has any really practical people left in senior positions, the only reason the Tories are ahead because their plans are more like a slow puncture rather than Labours smashing everything up and starting again.
Good summary.
Imagine however if Labour also had to deliver Brexit.
Andrew Neil trying to get Swinson to admit voters don't like her. I reckon she's holding her own at the minute.
I am coming to the conclusion that in the event of a hung parliament Jo cannot support a minority Corbyn Government or a minority Corbyn/SNP government under any circumstances. I think she could support a Conservative minority government so long as Boris allows a second referendum. Is that likely?
No.
Anyway, if the Liberal Democrats outnumber the Euroscpetic Tories there seems a very real chance Swinson will be Prime Minister.
This typo thing seems to be catching on. Are you a Lib Dme ?
I think Boris, will be average at best. But what I like about him, is his ability to drive his opponents to foot stamping , teary eyed, frothing at the mouth impotent rage. It's not fair, it's not fair. He has to do AN, he just HAS to! Delicious.
You are rather petty in other words?
Easily amused. But, there's a lot to be amused about. The screaming and screaming until they're sick, about not appearing on AN is hilarious.
The desire to "own the libs" (i.e. to make self-righteous lefty outriders choke on their political impotence) is not a small part of the populist right's electoral appeal.
It's precisely because they send our despised opponents into a childish frenzy that we put up with a lot of stuff that would be less palatable if they were boring, straight bats.
How exactly does "gender neutrality" work in practice? Does it mean no-one is allowed to identify their gender except in the privacy of their own underwear? It would make the concept of female emancipation historically redundant. Who was the first female MP? Wash your mouth out with soap! On the upside, ladies' football could become yet another oppressed rural pursuit, with gender neutral saboteurs storming the field, puncturing the ball with their hatpins.
Guido doubling down, it turns out that “advance together” are standing five candidates, all in LD/Con contests, and are doing no campaigning except for high-quality anti-Tory leaflets that don’t mention their candidate, and all run by people who were active LDs two years ago. Their ‘party leader’ ran a website suggesting that she was trying to attract Tory to LD switchers. https://order-order.com/2019/12/04/advance-together-party-leader-objective-syphon-tory-votes-lib-dems/ I imagine someone is going to report this to the police and Electoral Commission, hope there’s no emails anywhere, or maybe they were all with the press officer they suspended this week?
There's a fine line here.
If I stand in Jo Swinson's seat, and put out anti-Jo Swinson literature, that doesn't mention my name. Well, that's my business. I'm not associated with any political party so if I want to spend my money in that way, then that's fine.
But if I was being bankrolled by the SNP, or what I was doing was at the behest of the SNP, then I would have crossed a line.
My guess is that there will not be sufficient evidence that it was the latter.
Cheating is probably the wrong word given that there is nothing in electoral law that states "thou shalt be interviewed by Andrew Neil," but I get the sentiment. Of course, there is nothing to say that Johnson wouldn't have been interviewed by Neil by now, and Corbyn wouldn't have kept well away, if Labour were doing really well with older voters and Johnson were desperate to win them back. Politicians will be politicians.
I'm not sure what the BBC is supposed to do about this. They've no power to make the ister in their views of bias at the broadcaster, and thus firm up his support.
The amazing thing is that Labour, LD, SNP and whoever else, isn’t running their social media 24/7 on Boris being a chicken, don’t have people following him everywhere he goes wearing chicken suits making utter arses of themselves in front of cameras etc etc.
The typical sort of (younger) voter who gets all their news online isn't going to care that Johnson didn't turn up for a TV interview because they don't watch network TV; consequently, they didn't know that the interview was supposedly meant to be a thing, let alone feel dismayed that they didn't get to see it; and the vast majority of them probably haven't heard of Andrew Neil either.
Agreed.
Corbyn and Sturgeon were daft to do the Neil interviews. Johnson played them, and the BBC, beautifully. End of chapter. And another nail in the coffin of state broadcasting.
The world has moved on. Politicians will wake up eventually.
Not sure about that. None of this is game-changing stuff. Neil interviews have some impact but aren't massive, water-cooler events.
Corbyn took a nasty but remove all doubt.
Johnson is not a dullard, but he is unquestionably a liar and Neil would have hammered that home relentlessly. Nevertheless a non-appearance is weak and will cost - not hugely, but something. Had he appeared, that would have cost too, but again not hugely. Most people already know he's a liar and have factored that in.
On the whole, six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Show me a politician that's not a liar.
It's facile and lazy to tar them all with the same brush. It also excuses the electorate's reluctance to punish the more blatantly and cynically dishonest amongst them.
I did a YouGov with named constituency candidates on 25/11, MRP was 27/11. I did another YouGov with named candidates yesterday, so I'd guess tomorrow.
It also had very specific questions about Corbyn, with an open ended question to offer your detailed opinion on his performance.
They don't "allow" anything, party leaders choose which engagements they wish to partake in. Just because Corbyn and May agreed to Neil doesn't mean anyone else has to do so.
Did they "allow" Cameron and Brown to avoid Neil in 2010? Did they "allow" Cameron and Miliband to avoid Neil in 2015? Did they "allow" Blair and Howard to avoid Neil in 2005?
No need for anal and deflecting linguistic contortions. The point is that just the one leader has managed to avoid the toughest BBC interview. This is not a good thing. It's a bad thing. Doesn't invalidate the election or anything - perspective - but it is a poor show. You need to accept the obvious truth of this conclusion.
No. I don't.
One politician outsmarted the idiots opposing him. Well I don't want an idiot for PM so that's fine by me.
Go cry to mummy. I'm sure whinging "it's so unfair" like some overentitled teenager will really impress Putin.
I did a YouGov with named constituency candidates on 25/11, MRP was 27/11. I did another YouGov with named candidates yesterday, so I'd guess tomorrow.
It also had very specific questions about Corbyn, with an open ended question to offer your detailed opinion on his performance.
I hope you said he's wonderful because he is delivering a Con majority!
I did a YouGov with named constituency candidates on 25/11, MRP was 27/11. I did another YouGov with named candidates yesterday, so I'd guess tomorrow.
It also had very specific questions about Corbyn, with an open ended question to offer your detailed opinion on his performance.
Good job I didn't do that one....not sure they would have enough space provided....
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
LD vote continues to drop, Remainers need to get serious and come back to Labour. We can still get a HP.
Labour voters need to get behind the lib dems across the south of England and elsewhere and desert the nationalizing union promoting idiot so that maybe the Labour Party May one day be a relevant party seeking to do good for working people.
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
I doubt if that margin would stop Johnson. More likely a majority of 30.
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
Lol - there's no Labour surge in the polls, so you decided to create your own. Why not just pretend that Labour gets a landslide next Thursday and spend the next five years in blissful fantasy?
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
Not if it means corbyn, sorry. Vote lib dem to show both of them they are useless. But it’s stupid because con 60+ majority so let’s stop playing games and start to realize that corbyn is the tories massive helper.
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
Lol - there's no Labour surge in the polls, so you decided to create your own. Why not just pretend that Labour gets a landslide next Thursday and spend the next five years in blissful fantasy?
I only looked at what the data tables say. If people actually bother to vote, the gap reduces, which is as I would expect. I continue to hope for a Hung Parliament.
So ComRes with all likely to vote + weighted is 30/38. If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
I doubt if that margin would stop Johnson. More likely a majority of 30.
That's at the moment. A bit of tactical voting, a few more people come over to the Labour side, off we go. I live in hope
Comments
Corbyn took a nasty but non-fatal hit by not apologising on antisemitism, and generally being at his stubborn and tetchy worst - a grumpy old man up past his bedtime. Sturgeon had tough questions but is a capable enough politician to deal well enough with it. Swinson probably did herself some favours, answering some doubters who feel she's not up to it. Johnson has had a bit of damage from chickening out, but he's frontrunner and probably correct that it's better to keep quiet and have a few people think you're a dullard than speak and remove all doubt.
Corbyn & certainly Swinson have got nothing to lose.
Anyway from the polling nobody gives a cluck.
Being outgunned 2:1 in vote share by the SCons is not, dare one say, a recipe for electoral success.
Neither side has any really practical people left in senior positions, the only reason the Tories are ahead because their plans are more like a slow puncture rather than Labours smashing everything up and starting again.
In 2017, at the start of the campaign, if you'd offered a Tory MP a 50 seat majority they would NOT have taken it. They wanted 100+, and polls and local election performance fully justified that. So to go backwards was a disaster and poisoned May's relationship with the party even though she struggled on.
In 2019, partly due to volatile polls, partly the performance in 2017, partly due to failing to leave the EU as promised. a sensible Tory would have bitten your hand off for say a 30 seat majority. If it turns out to be 10, that's pretty disappointing for them from where the polls are now, but would probably not be seen as spectacularly awful. It's just about adequate to get Johnson's Brexit deal through given the Clarke wing has been killed off and all candidates required to drink the Kool Aid, and to get other legislation through too.
https://devonlive.com/news/devon-news/chancellor-sajid-javid-devon-morning-3607596
Some people are just never satisfied.
As indicated in the recent leadership election?
On the whole, six of one and half a dozen of the other.
Corbyn fails on both criteria
Johnson fails on the first and nobody knows what his five year plan is on the second.
Our voting system makes others views irrelevant so whilst you find humor in the situation many find it rather sad. Johnson will, undeservedly win by 60-80 corbyn will lead labour to a worse result than Foot but apart from the lie of getting brexit done nobody really knows what the duplicitous self promoting idiot will do. Funny though it is not.
I think we can all agree Skinner is past it. His legendary level of attendance was well down last time I checked and he’s not been up to the usual standard of invective recently. But I was wondering what impact that was having.
Why do you read Guido? He got the Bum's Rush from here many years ago, and with good reason.
Are you a Lib Dme ?
PC 6/4
Con 2/1
Lab 9/4
The question is, is his personal vote positive or negative?
In terms of political visits by these second rank figures, I don't think parties plan them around where they feel there are big threats. It's probably more that they want Javid to talk about rural policing or something in an authentically rural place where he isn't massively likely to be lynched by angry natives.
I know at least some organisers who basically tell the national party to sod off if the situation is really tight. These things are something of a faff to organise, distracting from other things, and the rewards are limited to the constituency campaign.
Imagine however if Labour also had to deliver Brexit.
CON 42% (-1)
LAB 32% (-1)
LD 12% (-1)
Other 15% (+4)
It's precisely because they send our despised opponents into a childish frenzy that we put up with a lot of stuff that would be less palatable if they were boring, straight bats.
Boris vs. May in a nutshell.
If I stand in Jo Swinson's seat, and put out anti-Jo Swinson literature, that doesn't mention my name. Well, that's my business. I'm not associated with any political party so if I want to spend my money in that way, then that's fine.
But if I was being bankrolled by the SNP, or what I was doing was at the behest of the SNP, then I would have crossed a line.
My guess is that there will not be sufficient evidence that it was the latter.
Corbyn had better hurry up with that red wave. Is there anything left to nationalise? McDonald's, maybe?
8 point lead with all respondents likely to vote.
I think also 18-24 intention is up again.
I still live in hope.
It also had very specific questions about Corbyn, with an open ended question to offer your detailed opinion on his performance.
One politician outsmarted the idiots opposing him. Well I don't want an idiot for PM so that's fine by me.
Go cry to mummy. I'm sure whinging "it's so unfair" like some overentitled teenager will really impress Putin.
You sure as hell don't want them doing that in Raab's constituency.
If people actually bother to come out to vote, we can definitely stop Boris Johnson. Let's do it!
Labour voters need to get behind the lib dems across the south of England and elsewhere and desert the nationalizing union promoting idiot so that maybe the Labour Party May one day be a relevant party seeking to do good for working people.
So either China takes over the world economy ... or disappears up its own @rse.
All the main parties down 1 .
I continue to hope for a Hung Parliament.