These "opinion polls" and "MRPs" and "experts" are all very well, but I have three reasons for believing there will be a Labour landslide next Thursday:
a) A Very British Coup forecasts that the Communist Labour leader will win a surprise victory against the Tory. JC=Harry Perkins, surely? b) failing to deliver Brexit in March and again in October, was meant to be an "extinction level event" for the Conservatives c) Putin seems to be backing Corbyn, and he really controls what happens in UK elections.
Hampshire North West a nailed on Lab gain, surely?
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory. Am I the David Herdson of 2019?
Tories are 7 points ahead. Mori leader favorability doesn't lie.
When the average polls show that I will believe you
Because the polls are never wrong... The reality is none of us knows what will happen. What I do know is that historically the Mori leader positive favorability differential does a better job of predicting the final result than the polls do. Out of sample it predicted the vote share margin to within 1pp in both 2015 and 2017, when the polls were completely wrong. So, why do you think that this time it is the polls that will be right? I mean, you could be right, but what has changed?
The anecdotal evidence from canvassers and constituency polls together with reports from Lord Ashcroft and others on the ground in the north does give credence to a majority win. I would say I am not calling it and await the exit poll on thursday
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory.
I always have problems with these majority figures
With the speakers and sinn fein deducted the actual majority
650 - 10 = 640
640 -335
= 305 so majority is 30
You can't deduct the speakers because they need to be elected, 1 from labour, Hoyle and two theories
Also, I read that 3 Sinn Fein candidates have stood aside, so as I understand it, they are only likely to have 4 candidates elected.
I doubt they've stood down in seats they presently hold, but in seats the SDLP might win from unionists? Though they could lost to the SDLP in 1 or 2 as well.
On a bad night they could lose to the UUP in Fermanagh too
Foyle is also close, SF majority of 169 over the SDLP.
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory. Am I the David Herdson of 2019?
Tories are 7 points ahead. Mori leader favorability doesn't lie.
When the average polls show that I will believe you
Because the polls are never wrong... The reality is none of us knows what will happen. What I do know is that historically the Mori leader positive favorability differential does a better job of predicting the final result than the polls do. Out of sample it predicted the vote share margin to within 1pp in both 2015 and 2017, when the polls were completely wrong. So, why do you think that this time it is the polls that will be right? I mean, you could be right, but what has changed?
FWIW, at this stage in 2017 the gap in net favourability between Corbyn and May was only four points. Utilising the proposed law of thirds, that equates to a Tory lead of 1.3% - the result on polling day was about one point higher, at a 2.4% Tory lead.
The current net favourability gap between Corbyn and Johnson is 24 points, which by the same method of reckoning would indicate a Tory lead of 8%. Again, if this is adrift by the same amount as last time then we might expect a final Conservative lead in terms of vote share of about 9%.
The current average of all nationwide polls with fieldwork completed on or after November 25th (which would appear to be around the point at which the final significant movement, the Labour squeeze of the Lib Dem vote, ended) gives a Conservative lead of 9.75%.
Consequently, the national VI numbers appear broadly to stack up with the Tory lead that might be implied from the favourability ratings.
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory. Am I the David Herdson of 2019?
Tories are 7 points ahead. Mori leader favorability doesn't lie.
When the average polls show that I will believe you
Because the polls are never wrong... The reality is none of us knows what will happen. What I do know is that historically the Mori leader positive favorability differential does a better job of predicting the final result than the polls do. Out of sample it predicted the vote share margin to within 1pp in both 2015 and 2017, when the polls were completely wrong. So, why do you think that this time it is the polls that will be right? I mean, you could be right, but what has changed?
The anecdotal evidence from canvassers and constituency polls together with reports from Lord Ashcroft and others on the ground in the north does give credence to a majority win. I would say I am not calling it and await the exit poll on thursday
Yes the mood music is certainly pointing in the other direction. Roll on St John of Curtice.
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory. Am I the David Herdson of 2019?
Tories are 7 points ahead. Mori leader favorability doesn't lie.
When the average polls show that I will believe you
Because the polls are never wrong... The reality is none of us knows what will happen. What I do know is that historically the Mori leader positive favorability differential does a better job of predicting the final result than the polls do. Out of sample it predicted the vote share margin to within 1pp in both 2015 and 2017, when the polls were completely wrong. So, why do you think that this time it is the polls that will be right? I mean, you could be right, but what has changed?
FWIW, at this stage in 2017 the gap in net favourability between Corbyn and May was only four points. Utilising the proposed law of thirds, that equates to a Tory lead of 1.3% - the result on polling day was about one point higher, at a 2.4% Tory lead.
The current net favourability gap between Corbyn and Johnson is 24 points, which by the same method of reckoning would indicate a Tory lead of 8%. Again, if this is adrift by the same amount as last time then we might expect a final Conservative lead in terms of vote share of about 9%.
The current average of all nationwide polls with fieldwork completed on or after November 25th (which would appear to be around the point at which the final significant movement, the Labour squeeze of the Lib Dem vote, ended) gives a Conservative lead of 9.75%.
Consequently, the national VI numbers appear broadly to stack up with the Tory lead that might be implied from the favourability ratings.
Positive favorability is a better predictor than net favorability. The latter suggests a 9 point lead, the former 7 points. I don't know about you law of thirds, I used a linear regression model.
It's squeaky bum time folks ... with just five days to go, Electoral Calculus has the Tories winning 335 seats, i.e achieving a 20 seat majority. Almost MOE territory. Am I the David Herdson of 2019?
I said Tory majority of 10 when RCS predicted 110. Does that make me Cassandra?
This election could end up a 46:29 blowout for Boris.
I don't think so. The combined CON+BRX vote has been around 46-48%. The combined LAB+LD+GRN share of the vote is around 48-51%.
For the result to end 46:29, the Brexit party would have needed to have standed down in all seats, and the LD to score around 17-18%.
Alternatively, a large bunch of Labour voters get to Thursday and think "can't be arsed, mate...."
If turnout is lower, much lower than expected then it could be, just like 2001. That is something that can be seen during election day.
A day of really shit weather, the polls show Boris is going to win, so Brexit is going to happen. A massive cloud of "what is the bloody point?" hangs over the nation. Fuck it, let's just stay in and watch the telly....
A week is a long time in politics. What about 5 days?
5 days before the 1992 election the polls were showing Neil Kinnock 7% ahead and heading for a majority.
A thought has passed my mind, if the pollsters where 10% off in 1992, then Thatcher was still beating Kinnock when she was forced to resign in 1990.
If the pollsters had provided accurate figures Thatcher might have stayed on as Conservative leader, how different would things have been.
Blair would still have become PM but at the 2000 general election.
Well Thatcher would have gotten a boost from the Gulf War, but ERM would still have strangled the economy, the end of the USSR could have offered her a boost or simply make her redundant like George Bush.
There is a chance that she could have won the 1992 election like Major did, since the polls where wrong by that much.
She would have vetoed Maastricht and be vindicated over the ERM fiasco, the EU would have never existed it would still be the EEC, and Yugoslavia could still have been intact as she would have gone hard on the Germans.
Indeed she could have lasted as long as Kohl in Germany.
That was pretty funny. The Labour position is not actually that bad, but the relative lack of senior people within the party who will fight for the deal they plan to negotiate really undercuts the message a bit.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
But as the pollsters have said themselves, the MRP does not deal with local factors. And this GE has more local factors than I have ever seen (from independent Conservatives to vastly different regional factors). I will be surprised if the LDs end up with less than 20, but will that make a difference? No.
That was pretty funny. The Labour position is not actually that bad, but the relative lack of senior people within the party who will fight for the deal they plan to negotiate really undercuts the message a bit.
Quite. It’s bollocks. You know it, I know it, they know it, so does everyone else. It’s death by triangulation.
Sadly too many people will be taken in by the bollocks and the lying buffoon gets to stay in Number 10.
357.
Night all.
There is a simple explanation. Socialism is bollocks in the sense that it has never worked anywhere, so articulating why you support it does not inspire confidence. Capitalism works and people are prepared to look beyond the personal qualities (or lack of them) of Porky Blunders because of this. I regret all of this, but better to recognise facts than bury heads in the sand.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
Plus add heavily Remain Wimbledon, where the LDs trail the Tories 36% to 38% with Deltapoll, Kensington where they trail 33% to 36%, Esher and Walton where they trail 46% to 41% and Cities of London and Westminster where they trail 33% to 39%. In the London seats there is a Labour vote over 20% for them to squeeze.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
Ahh, the old Art racket. It's not pretty but is it art? Yes if it's value is 120k.
(If the banana rotts, will that reduce it's value to zero?)
No, it will enhance the value as it will be 'living art' (Well, to be precise 'dying art') and the transformation of the banana will be given some meta-philosophical back story and used as an indictment of modern humanity's descent into the spiritual wilderness. Other BS is available.
For what it's worth, if we do end up leaving with Johnson I have no interest in a rejoin campaign. Labour should campaign for a softer relationship and move onto the issues that actually matter, with a new leader, still with radical policies but with fresh leadership.
I think the $190m damages being sought were the killer. If they'd asked for the legal fees to be paid plus nominal damages to go to a cave rescue organisation not linked to them then the jury might have gone differently.
For what it's worth, if we do end up leaving with Johnson I have no interest in a rejoin campaign. Labour should campaign for a softer relationship and move onto the issues that actually matter, with a new leader, still with radical policies but with fresh leadership.
Labour need a more centrist leader and policies to be able to win in the future.
A week is a long time in politics. What about 5 days?
5 days before the 1992 election the polls were showing Neil Kinnock 7% ahead and heading for a majority.
We're allll rrriiihhhgt!!!!!
That was when politics was fun.
I went to the University Young Labour do on election night, and one of my mate's brothers lost the seat he had recently gained in a by-election from the Tories, straight back to the Tories.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
Plus add heavily Remain Wimbledon, where the LDs trail the Tories 36% to 38% with Deltapoll, Kensington where they trail 33% to 36%, Esher and Walton where they trail 46% to 41% and Cities of London and Westminster where they trail 33% to 39%. In the London seats there is a Labour vote over 20% for them to squeeze.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
I agree and YouGov MRP agrees Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne will go Tory, maybe Carshalton and Wallington too.
My gut is that there'll be less turnover in those seats than you might expect. I'd expect the LDs to fall 5-10 points short in all their London targets bar Richmond Park (which I expect them to take by a healthy margin).
Carshalton, by contrast, will I think be a Tom Brake hold. (A Tom Brake hold is not the same as a LibDem hold...) Although it's far from inconceivable that it could fall.
I can't help think that the LDs might hold North Norfolk and Eastbourne, but lose Westmoreland & Lonsdale.
Could there be shy Labour voters out there, embarrassed to admit they're voting for Magic Grandpa even in online surveys?
More like shy labour voters too embarrassed to publicly admit they are voting for Boris 😂
Or Labour voters simply staying at home? Hence the projections of only a modest Tory majority. Obviously 2017 Labour voters sitting on their hands (or voting BXP) is only half as much use in turning over Labour majorities than would be 2017 Labour voters going out to vote Conservative.
Could there be shy Labour voters out there, embarrassed to admit they're voting for Magic Grandpa even in online surveys?
More like shy labour voters too embarrassed to publicly admit they are voting for Boris 😂
Or Labour voters simply staying at home? Hence the projections of only a modest Tory majority. Obviously 2017 Labour voters sitting on their hands (or voting BXP) is only half as much use in turning over Labour majorities than would be 2017 Labour voters going out to vote Conservative.
Goodall reckoned there's a good chance - like you say - Labour voters just don't bother to vote rather than vote Tory.
For what it's worth, if we do end up leaving with Johnson I have no interest in a rejoin campaign. Labour should campaign for a softer relationship and move onto the issues that actually matter, with a new leader, still with radical policies but with fresh leadership.
Labour need a more centrist leader and policies to be able to win in the future.
Are we expecting a post-election Ed Miliband to pose in front of it?
David Miliband!
He is in the US, or so I thought. I was referring to the possibility the remaining Miliband is reported to be trailing electorally and may need a new outlet for his abilities after next week.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
Plus add heavily Remain Wimbledon, where the LDs trail the Tories 36% to 38% with Deltapoll, Kensington where they trail 33% to 36%, Esher and Walton where they trail 46% to 41% and Cities of London and Westminster where they trail 33% to 39%. In the London seats there is a Labour vote over 20% for them to squeeze.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
I agree and YouGov MRP agrees Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne will go Tory, maybe Carshalton and Wallington too.
My gut is that there'll be less turnover in those seats than you might expect. I'd expect the LDs to fall 5-10 points short in all their London targets bar Richmond Park (which I expect them to take by a healthy margin).
Carshalton, by contrast, will I think be a Tom Brake hold. (A Tom Brake hold is not the same as a LibDem hold...) Although it's far from inconceivable that it could fall.
I can't help think that the LDs might hold North Norfolk and Eastbourne, but lose Westmoreland & Lonsdale.
I'm still convinced that North Norfolk is going to go Tory, but then again it is one of my hobby horses.
Having it and Eastbourne staying LD but Westmorland going Con would also be a somewhat peculiar outcome in the context of an election where Brexit has, of course, received so much attention.
For what it's worth, if we do end up leaving with Johnson I have no interest in a rejoin campaign. Labour should campaign for a softer relationship and move onto the issues that actually matter, with a new leader, still with radical policies but with fresh leadership.
Labour need a more centrist leader and policies to be able to win in the future.
What sort of policies? For example?
Not the politics of fantasy economics. It's a much bigger turn off than you realise.
Are we expecting a post-election Ed Miliband to pose in front of it?
David Miliband!
He is in the US, or so I thought. I was referring to the possibility the remaining Miliband is reported to be trailing electorally and may need a new outlet for his abilities after next week.
What, EdM under threat? I don't buy it. If he can't even hold on then that would imply an utter marmalisation of the Labour Party. They're not that unpopular, not by a long chalk.
🚨 Huge. Reddit security team believes the Reddit post of leaked US-UK trade documents used by Jeremy Corbyn and Labour was part of a co-ordinated campaign coming from Russia https://t.co/AjWMJcObhD
The Russians want to thwart Brexit by electing Corbyn on a wave of NHS alarm? But I thought they were the ones behind Brexit in the first place? I wish they'd make up our minds.
Agreed. This makes no sense. The Soviet.... ahem.. the Russians want Brexit to weaken the EU. Electing Corbyn almost certainly delays that, if not actually cancels it.
A week is a long time in politics. What about 5 days?
5 days before the 1992 election the polls were showing Neil Kinnock 7% ahead and heading for a majority.
A thought has passed my mind, if the pollsters where 10% off in 1992, then Thatcher was still beating Kinnock when she was forced to resign in 1990.
If the pollsters had provided accurate figures Thatcher might have stayed on as Conservative leader, how different would things have been.
Blair would still have become PM but at the 2000 general election.
How would the election have been in 2000?
If Mrs Thatcher had not been defenestrated in 1990, then the general election would likely still have been in 1992. My best guess is that the Conservatives would have been the largest party, but short of a majority. Maybe she'd have lost to Kinnock, in which case it would have been Labour that would have had to deal with the exit of the UK from the ERM.
For what it's worth, if we do end up leaving with Johnson I have no interest in a rejoin campaign. Labour should campaign for a softer relationship and move onto the issues that actually matter, with a new leader, still with radical policies but with fresh leadership.
Labour need a more centrist leader and policies to be able to win in the future.
What sort of policies? For example?
Not the politics of fantasy economics. It's a much bigger turn off than you realise.
Sure - but what kind of policies instead?
Would you be against scrapping tuition fees for instance? Nationalising the railways? What if Labour offered only those two policies and was centrist on everything else?
For what it's worth, I think the next leader will be only slightly less radical than Corbyn. Even Starmer is not going to be centrist.
Re the Russian interference, seems pretty obvious to me Labour got the documents from Reddit, as did the Telegraph. I highly doubt they would have known the origin or been able to find out the origin.
The Government verified the documents - the concern surely be how they got leaked in the first place. We have a right to know what they say, even if they were leaked on dodgy grounds. We should tackle the interference absolutely.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
Plus add heavily Remain Wimbledon, where the LDs trail the Tories 36% to 38% with Deltapoll, Kensington where they trail 33% to 36%, Esher and Walton where they trail 46% to 41% and Cities of London and Westminster where they trail 33% to 39%. In the London seats there is a Labour vote over 20% for them to squeeze.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
I agree and YouGov MRP agrees Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne will go Tory, maybe Carshalton and Wallington too.
My gut is that there'll be less turnover in those seats than you might expect. I'd expect the LDs to fall 5-10 points short in all their London targets bar Richmond Park (which I expect them to take by a healthy margin).
Carshalton, by contrast, will I think be a Tom Brake hold. (A Tom Brake hold is not the same as a LibDem hold...) Although it's far from inconceivable that it could fall.
I can't help think that the LDs might hold North Norfolk and Eastbourne, but lose Westmoreland & Lonsdale.
I think the LDs will take at least 3 of their London targets on top of Richmond Park due to heavy Remainer tactical voting in these strong Remain seats.
YouGov has the LDs ahead just 41% to 40% in Leave voting Carshalton and Wallington.
Are we expecting a post-election Ed Miliband to pose in front of it?
David Miliband!
He is in the US, or so I thought. I was referring to the possibility the remaining Miliband is reported to be trailing electorally and may need a new outlet for his abilities after next week.
What, EdM under threat? I don't buy it. If he can't even hold on then that would imply an utter marmalisation of the Labour Party. They're not that unpopular, not by a long chalk.
Are Tory losses to the Lib Dems really going to be a big issue?
Or is that just Lib Dem propaganda?
Probably the latter, although you would only expect them to talk up their chances. Most likely they'll just rack up a load of decent second places, which are useless under our system of course (though they'll create a longer list of viable targets to go for in the election after this one.)
FWIW, the YouGov MRP has St Albans, Richmond Park and Cheltenham going Con>LD, and North Norfolk and Eastbourne going LD>Con, so a net movement of precisely one seat in the Lib Dems' favour in that particular head-to-head.
Plus add heavily Remain Wimbledon, where the LDs trail the Tories 36% to 38% with Deltapoll, Kensington where they trail 33% to 36%, Esher and Walton where they trail 46% to 41% and Cities of London and Westminster where they trail 33% to 39%. In the London seats there is a Labour vote over 20% for them to squeeze.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
I agree and YouGov MRP agrees Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne will go Tory, maybe Carshalton and Wallington too.
My gut is that there'll be less turnover in those seats than you might expect. I'd expect the LDs to fall 5-10 points short in all their London targets bar Richmond Park (which I expect them to take by a healthy margin).
Carshalton, by contrast, will I think be a Tom Brake hold. (A Tom Brake hold is not the same as a LibDem hold...) Although it's far from inconceivable that it could fall.
I can't help think that the LDs might hold North Norfolk and Eastbourne, but lose Westmoreland & Lonsdale.
I'm still convinced that North Norfolk is going to go Tory, but then again it is one of my hobby horses.
Having it and Eastbourne staying LD but Westmorland going Con would also be a somewhat peculiar outcome in the context of an election where Brexit has, of course, received so much attention.
Here's my North Norfolk staying Yellow thesis:
- like it or not, the LDs are up five points or so on 2017, that has to go somewhere - UKIP didn't stand in the seat in 2017, but BXP is standing in 2019. Even if they only get 2-3%, that's going to come off the Conservative total - the LDs absolutely hammered the Conservatives in the local elections there last year, gaining about 13 seats - the LDs often keep seats for a single parliamentary session after a change of MPs
I'd have voted for New Labour, I wouldn't touch this Labour with a bargepole.
Scrapping tuition fees is stupid, but lowering them to £3k is fair. Nationalising railways will achieve nothing it just replaces a private line monopoly with a public monopoly, it's still a monopoly.
Ultimately Labour trying to get my vote is as futile as the Tories trying to get your vote. However, they don't need to win my vote, they do need to win votes slightly to my left that they aren't getting right now with these Marxist policies and fantasy economics.
I had a 24 year old junior lecture me (of all people) today on how this idea that only the top 5% will pay more tax was complete bullshit and Labour would have to raise taxes on basic rate payers to make their numbers work. She's on a low to modest wage, rents and has a very large amount of student debt, you're not getting her vote because of fantasy economics, she's voting for the Greens.
Comments
The combined CON+BRX vote has been around 46-48%.
The combined LAB+LD+GRN share of the vote is around 48-51%.
For the result to end 46:29, the Brexit party would have needed to have standed down in all seats, and the LD to score around 17-18%.
Barry Gardiner is currently on Newsnight.
The current net favourability gap between Corbyn and Johnson is 24 points, which by the same method of reckoning would indicate a Tory lead of 8%. Again, if this is adrift by the same amount as last time then we might expect a final Conservative lead in terms of vote share of about 9%.
The current average of all nationwide polls with fieldwork completed on or after November 25th (which would appear to be around the point at which the final significant movement, the Labour squeeze of the Lib Dem vote, ended) gives a Conservative lead of 9.75%.
Consequently, the national VI numbers appear broadly to stack up with the Tory lead that might be implied from the favourability ratings.
If the pollsters had provided accurate figures Thatcher might have stayed on as Conservative leader, how different would things have been.
That is something that can be seen during election day.
Be interested to see the undecideds score in the poll this time
Roll on Thursday 10pm....
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/dec/06/whatsapp-rumours-gibbo-of-queens-death-came-from-yeovil-military-drill
There is a chance that she could have won the 1992 election like Major did, since the polls where wrong by that much.
She would have vetoed Maastricht and be vindicated over the ERM fiasco, the EU would have never existed it would still be the EEC, and Yugoslavia could still have been intact as she would have gone hard on the Germans.
Indeed she could have lasted as long as Kohl in Germany.
It's not pretty but is it art? Yes if it's value is 120k.
(If the banana rotts, will that reduce it's value to zero?)
Bananas do not keep well. I wonder how often they change it? And who decides the "artisticness" of the replacement banana?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50695593
You can’t fool all the people all the time.
I regret all of this, but better to recognise facts than bury heads in the sand.
Finchley and Golders Green and Chelsea and Fulham are a bit safer for the Tories with the Tories ahead 46% to 32% and 48% to 25%.
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/cities-london-westminster
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/esher
http://www.deltapoll.co.uk/polls/finchley-golders-poll
I agree and YouGov MRP agrees Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne will go Tory, maybe Carshalton and Wallington too.
I'm working on the assumption no party would be stupid enough to offer another referendum on the subject.
I went to the University Young Labour do on election night, and one of my mate's brothers lost the seat he had recently gained in a by-election from the Tories, straight back to the Tories.
https://www.channel4.com/news/whos-most-likely-to-win-the-general-election-politics-where-next-podcast
Then he was predicting a 2-to-1 on chance of a Tory majority.
Carshalton, by contrast, will I think be a Tom Brake hold. (A Tom Brake hold is not the same as a LibDem hold...) Although it's far from inconceivable that it could fall.
I can't help think that the LDs might hold North Norfolk and Eastbourne, but lose Westmoreland & Lonsdale.
Having it and Eastbourne staying LD but Westmorland going Con would also be a somewhat peculiar outcome in the context of an election where Brexit has, of course, received so much attention.
If Betfair had a market on him taking a swing at someone live on tv before 0300 Friday i'd be a backer.
I wonder if this itself is misinformation.
If Mrs Thatcher had not been defenestrated in 1990, then the general election would likely still have been in 1992. My best guess is that the Conservatives would have been the largest party, but short of a majority. Maybe she'd have lost to Kinnock, in which case it would have been Labour that would have had to deal with the exit of the UK from the ERM.
Would you be against scrapping tuition fees for instance? Nationalising the railways? What if Labour offered only those two policies and was centrist on everything else?
For what it's worth, I think the next leader will be only slightly less radical than Corbyn. Even Starmer is not going to be centrist.
The Government verified the documents - the concern surely be how they got leaked in the first place. We have a right to know what they say, even if they were leaked on dodgy grounds. We should tackle the interference absolutely.
YouGov has the LDs ahead just 41% to 40% in Leave voting Carshalton and Wallington.
Leave voting North Norfolk and Eastbourne are likely Tory gains, the Tories lead by a big 10% margin in Eastbourne and 6% in North Norfolk with YouGov MRP.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/11/27/key-findings-our-mrp
Remain voting Westmoreland and Lonsdale is close but leans LD 47% to 42% with YouGov MRP.
But I should warn you all now: he isn't a centrist.
- like it or not, the LDs are up five points or so on 2017, that has to go somewhere
- UKIP didn't stand in the seat in 2017, but BXP is standing in 2019. Even if they only get 2-3%, that's going to come off the Conservative total
- the LDs absolutely hammered the Conservatives in the local elections there last year, gaining about 13 seats
- the LDs often keep seats for a single parliamentary session after a change of MPs
I think it'll be close.
Scrapping tuition fees is stupid, but lowering them to £3k is fair. Nationalising railways will achieve nothing it just replaces a private line monopoly with a public monopoly, it's still a monopoly.
Ultimately Labour trying to get my vote is as futile as the Tories trying to get your vote. However, they don't need to win my vote, they do need to win votes slightly to my left that they aren't getting right now with these Marxist policies and fantasy economics.
I had a 24 year old junior lecture me (of all people) today on how this idea that only the top 5% will pay more tax was complete bullshit and Labour would have to raise taxes on basic rate payers to make their numbers work. She's on a low to modest wage, rents and has a very large amount of student debt, you're not getting her vote because of fantasy economics, she's voting for the Greens.
Leaving me a liability of around £1000 @ 1.78 (currently 1.78 to back).
I've got another £300 liability on Con Maj @ 1.65 (currently 1.38 to back so i'm deep underwater).
I'm trying to get some more lays matched on Lab sub 206.5 but liquidity is thin which is frustrating.
My only back is a comedy value £25 @60-1 on Tories exactly 317.
How's everyone else's book looking?