NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Sherelle Jacobs, the excellent Telegraph columnist (who correctly and candidly predicted the collapse of the Red Wall in 2019) is saying she feels that Hartlepool is "very tight", and this definitely does NOT feel like 2019
I suspect residual anti-Toryism will prevail, and Labour will just about hold it. As they should, of course
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Re: postals, wasn't it reported here, that returns are lagging, which MAY mean many voters are waiting until the last minute to return their ballots?
Which would mitigate the "baked in" factor but NOT eliminate it.
Looks like the story of Covid-19 will be a nasty first wave, hitting the West worst, a really nasty 2nd wave, hitting the West and LatAm, then a 3rd wave almost as bad as the 2nd, but shifting, somewhat, to Asia
Presumably there will be multiple extra waves, but they will be like the aftershocks you get after a terrible earthquake. Relatively minor (one hopes), but the odd destabilised building topples to the ground
Dunno. India is almost 50% of new cases. If that keeps on going up the rest of the world has some heavy lifting to do. Smile. You're welcome.
India will burn out, in a fortnight or so, and then that will be it for Covid. The end of the Glory Days of the Micro-pathogen SARS-CoV-2
Looks like the story of Covid-19 will be a nasty first wave, hitting the West worst, a really nasty 2nd wave, hitting the West and LatAm, then a 3rd wave almost as bad as the 2nd, but shifting, somewhat, to Asia
Presumably there will be multiple extra waves, but they will be like the aftershocks you get after a terrible earthquake. Relatively minor (one hopes), but the odd destabilised building topples to the ground
Dunno. India is almost 50% of new cases. If that keeps on going up the rest of the world has some heavy lifting to do. Smile. You're welcome.
India will burn out, in a fortnight or so, and then that will be it for Covid. The end of the Glory Days of the Micro-pathogen SARS-CoV-2
I sincerely hope I don't regret this comment
Excellently bold prediction. I like the cut of your going big out on a limb jib. And, like Fox Mulder himself, I want to believe.
Looks like the story of Covid-19 will be a nasty first wave, hitting the West worst, a really nasty 2nd wave, hitting the West and LatAm, then a 3rd wave almost as bad as the 2nd, but shifting, somewhat, to Asia
Presumably there will be multiple extra waves, but they will be like the aftershocks you get after a terrible earthquake. Relatively minor (one hopes), but the odd destabilised building topples to the ground
A comparison between the officially reported figures, and the excess death figures, in terms of the global timeline, would be interesting.
Russia has reported probably only one quarter of its Covid deaths. Trying to create a coherent story for the pandemic globally on the reported figures is a fool's errand. It would be like trying to reconstruct Pride and Prejudice from one-third of the words, with the proportion missing varying according to an unknown pattern.
What we do know is that the number of vaccinations given continues to increase. The virus is slowly being denied of space to spread.
Politico.com - 'Disgusting' robocall accuses Texas candidate Wright of causing husband's death Wright supporters reported receiving the calls the day before the special election in Texas' 6th District.
Texas Republican congressional candidate Susan Wright is seeking help from federal law enforcement the day before her special election, after supporters reported receiving robocalls that accused her of being responsible for the death of her late husband.
Wright’s campaign reached out to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice on Friday after discovering robocalls baselessly alleging that she had “murdered” her husband, the late GOP Rep. Ron Wright. Wright is running in the special election to succeed Wright, who passed away in February after being diagnosed with coronavirus.
Wright aides say they found out about the robocalls on Friday morning, a day before Saturday's crowded all-party primary.
"This is illegal, immoral, and wrong. There’s not a sewer too deep that some politicians won’t plumb," Wright said in a statement.
A female voice begins the minute-long robocall by saying that Wright “murdered her husband,” and that “she’s now running for Congress to cover it up.” The robocalls do not have a "paid-for" attribution saying who is paying for the attacks.
The robocall then claims that “according to confidential sources,” Wright “obtained a $1 million life insurance policy on the life of her husband…six months before his death.” It then says that Wright “tearfully confided in a nurse that she had purposely contracted the coronavirus.”
It adds that the hospital “has made a formal criminal referral to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and they have now opened a formal criminal inquiry into the matter,” before concluding: “It is clear that the voters of Texas’ 6th Congressional District deserve to know the truth about Susan Wright and her involvement in the death of her husband.” . . .
comment - Politico article includes audio of actual robocall.
Note that this is a TYPICAL GOP campaign tactic, used over and over and over all over the US.
Yuck. What's important here is that people get used to stuff. Just as in Britain, people overlook a degree of sleaze because they think all politicians are sleazy, in the US there's a risk that the GOP tactics will be normalised and the Democrats will have to match them. There comes a point where it ceases to be a democracy, just a question of who can invent the most effective anonymous lies.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Sherelle Jacobs, the excellent Telegraph columnist (who correctly and candidly predicted the collapse of the Red Wall in 2019) is saying she feels that Hartlepool is "very tight", and this definitely does NOT feel like 2019
I suspect residual anti-Toryism will prevail, and Labour will just about hold it. As they should, of course
The 2.76 available on Betfair for Labour should appear generous to you then ?
Labour still a point behind despite endless wallpaper paste being thrown over the government. Suspect things will settle down to Tory +5 soon enough, and in any case postal votes are baked in.
Storm in a teacup: Anabob’s Golden Rule remains: midterm polls are a waste of pixels.
They are certainly a waste of pixels in terms of predicting the next general election.
For giving political nerds something to obsess about in between, though, they're priceless.
Looks like the story of Covid-19 will be a nasty first wave, hitting the West worst, a really nasty 2nd wave, hitting the West and LatAm, then a 3rd wave almost as bad as the 2nd, but shifting, somewhat, to Asia
Presumably there will be multiple extra waves, but they will be like the aftershocks you get after a terrible earthquake. Relatively minor (one hopes), but the odd destabilised building topples to the ground
Dunno. India is almost 50% of new cases. If that keeps on going up the rest of the world has some heavy lifting to do. Smile. You're welcome.
India will burn out, in a fortnight or so, and then that will be it for Covid. The end of the Glory Days of the Micro-pathogen SARS-CoV-2
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
Looks like the story of Covid-19 will be a nasty first wave, hitting the West worst, a really nasty 2nd wave, hitting the West and LatAm, then a 3rd wave almost as bad as the 2nd, but shifting, somewhat, to Asia
Presumably there will be multiple extra waves, but they will be like the aftershocks you get after a terrible earthquake. Relatively minor (one hopes), but the odd destabilised building topples to the ground
Dunno. India is almost 50% of new cases. If that keeps on going up the rest of the world has some heavy lifting to do. Smile. You're welcome.
India will burn out, in a fortnight or so, and then that will be it for Covid. The end of the Glory Days of the Micro-pathogen SARS-CoV-2
I sincerely hope I don't regret this comment
Excellently bold prediction. I like the cut of your going big out on a limb jib. And, like Fox Mulder himself, I want to believe.
I believe cases have already peaked in Mumbai, are thought to be close to doing so in New Delhi, but are still increasing in Kolkata, where they would be expected to then peak later.
You'd expect this to lead to a broad peak, but they will be able to really crush it with vaccinations on the way down.
Hey Charles & Robert, what's your take on the recall? More to the point, what do your family & friends who are CA voters think?
What about yours, SSI? Can you fill us in on what's happening?
Am not in California (thank God!) so my take is less immediate and informed.
Based on polling, think that Gov. Newsom will NOT be recalled.
As to question #2, who to replace him if he IS recalled, don't have a clue. But then IF I'm correct about #1, it won't matter diddly squat.
EDIT - Situation was QUITE different in 2003. Then, incumbent Gov Gray Davis was seriously underwater in the polls. And his chief alternative was a mega-movie star, a proven path to the Governor's office in the Great Bear Republic.
FURTHER EDIT - Caitlyn Jenner is a celebrity, but NOT in Arnold S's league, not by a longshot. Plus she's running to get votes from the anti-LQBT party.
The thing with postals is. The most committed and partisan eagerly anticipate their arrival. It is X ed and returned forthwith. Those less enervated, it sits forlornly on the coffee table for days. To be dealt with later or not at all. Like the back hedge. So. If most of the postals have been sent, it is those of the ones least likely to ever change their minds.
O/T - I've just been harangued by my Sainsbury deliveryman on the evils of Biden. "Did you see his rambling speech?" "No." "It was terrible! The Yanks made such a blunder when they picked him over Trump." "He seems quite popular, though." "I don't believe that. Still, their problem. They can't be as good as us." I glanced at him to look for a hint of irony. Not a bit of it. He was glaring and red-faced. Perhaps I should have argued, but it's like racist taxi-drivers - it never seems worth the effort...
I wouldn't want reactionary vox pop with my groceries. Can't you tick a box to opt out of it?
I must admit I am amazed by anyone who thinks it is appropriate to discuss politics with a stranger (cue ironic comments about PB but you know what I mean). I just consider it the height of bad manners to put anyone in a position where they might feel they cannot answer because they disagree with what I have said. The assumption that anyone agrees with my own personal politics is just crass in the extreme.
Yes. I assume you don't mean me? I didn't start the discussion, and barely replied, except to say politely that I'd heard Biden was in fact popular.
I imagine he just thinks that everyone agrees with his views, and was breaking the monotony of his job by having a chat about the Biden speech. I was somewhere halfway between amused and bemused. He wasn't angry at me, just at the stupid Yanks for not electing Trump.
But I agree with you about not pressing political views on people who you meet in another setting. I have little idea how my neighbours vote, and would prefer not to know. We need to rub along.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Sherelle Jacobs, the excellent Telegraph columnist (who correctly and candidly predicted the collapse of the Red Wall in 2019) is saying she feels that Hartlepool is "very tight", and this definitely does NOT feel like 2019
I suspect residual anti-Toryism will prevail, and Labour will just about hold it. As they should, of course
If absent of Richard Tice the Conservatives had won Hartlepool in 2019 it would have been only by a very tight margin.
And the Red Wall did not collapse in 2019 - many holes were knocked through it but many more could have been and might be in the future.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 4h The Tories now have a 19-point lead over Labour with working class voters. Something has gone badly wrong here. The current messaging from the left simply doesn’t resonate with normal decent working class people. It’s so frustrating.
While many on here will disagree, Labour gives the impression of hating the values of many working class voters, and despising those voters. Why would anyone vote for someone that openly shows their contempt for you?
Yours truly agrees with you on this point, and ditto for US Democrats.
Do NOT have to embrace racism and xenophobia. Just act like Average White People are people too.
My daughter has just been forced to read a deeply disturbing book at school
All about a black race car and a white race car who have a race… but when the black car wins the race committee change the runs to make it harder for him to win next year…
Next week's lesson is much more interesting, when they talk about how to monopolise committees, so you get to set the rules.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Labour still a point behind despite endless wallpaper paste being thrown over the government. Suspect things will settle down to Tory +5 soon enough, and in any case postal votes are baked in.
Storm in a teacup: Anabob’s Golden Rule remains: midterm polls are a waste of pixels.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Strewth. That was an appalling Labour score. Even in unfriendly territory. Gives hope that my dysfunctional Council may be unseated. Well. Just a glimmer anyways.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable.
The data tables are now out and confirm that, Survation has Labour ahead 43% to 31% amongst working class voters earning under £20,000, the Tories lead by 7% amongst middle income voters earning £20,000-£40,000 by 43% to 37% and the Tories lead by just 1%, 37% to 36% amongst higher income voters earning over £40,000
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable.
The data tables are now out and confirm that, Survation has Labour ahead 43% to 31% amongst working class voters earning under £20,000, the Tories lead by 7% amongst middle income voters earning £20,000-£40,000 by 43% to 37% and the Tories lead by just 1%, 37% to 36% amongst higher income voters earning over £40,000
Local tourist board will prefer YOUR submission to Sunil's.
My own nomination - Aberdare to be Great!
Aberdare: City of Discovery
That's Tacoma!
The Tacoma Aroma. As I recall
Yes! The Aroma that's Tacoma, as Seattleites like to say.
In retaliation, the citizens of Tacoma tried to get the name of Mt Rainier changed, to Mt. Tacoma. Which is much closer to the native name (another variant is Tehoma).
Seattle had to deploy a mega political clout - plus White privilege - in DC to slap THAT idea down!
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
This is all good fun, but it feels like an outlier - I don't see why opinion would have suddenly focused on sleaze after weeks of indifference.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
Different areas can have different swings.
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
Different areas can have different swings.
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
There was a nationwide Tory lead of 12% in 2019, there is tonight a nationwide Tory lead of just 1% with goldstandard Survation.
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
This is all good fun, but it feels like an outlier - I don't see why opinion would have suddenly focused on sleaze after weeks of indifference.
It may well be, however we all thought Survation was the outlier in 2017 too before the results came in.
Survation's final poll of the 2019 general election campaign had a Tory lead of 11%, which was also almost spot on
Local tourist board will prefer YOUR submission to Sunil's.
My own nomination - Aberdare to be Great!
Aberdare: City of Discovery
That's Tacoma!
The Tacoma Aroma. As I recall
I was referring to the seminal UK TV Comedy series Absolutely. The town council of Stoneybridge make a promotional video. They adopt the Dundee city motto as their own - "Stoneybridge: City of Discovery".
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
Different areas can have different swings.
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
There was a nationwide Tory lead of 12% in 2019, there is tonight a nationwide Tory lead of just 1% with goldstandard Survation.
It is a totally different scenario
So as usual you recite your dogma without thinking.
Different places can have different political trends which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop reciting what the latest opinion poll says and consider the trends which drive them.
"Australians stuck in COVID-ravaged India could face up to five years in jail and heavy fines if they breach a travel ban to return home. It is understood to be the first time Australia has banned its own citizens from returning, to the point of there being criminal sanctions for those who make it home. Health Minister Greg Hunt said the new measures were due to an "unmanageable" number of arrivals from the country who have tested positive to COVID-19. Breaches of the travel ban could lead to five years' imprisonment, a $66,000 fine or both.
Australia's vaccination rollout 13.6m — current phase target 2,179,544 — doses given
At our current pace of roughly 324,000 doses a week, we can expect to reach the 40 million doses needed to fully vaccinate Australia’s adult population in late July 2023."
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
Different areas can have different swings.
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
There was a nationwide Tory lead of 12% in 2019, there is tonight a nationwide Tory lead of just 1% with goldstandard Survation.
It is a totally different scenario
So as usual you recite your dogma without thinking.
Different places can have different political trends which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop reciting what the latest opinion poll says and consider the trends which drive them.
Putney was in London, the only region of England and Wales the Tories did not make net gains in 2019, though in London they still avoided a net loss.
Tonight's Survation also has Labour ahead by 50% to 33% for the Tories in the North (in which case Hartlepool would comfortably stay red) and the Tories only 7% ahead in the South and Labour are still comfortably ahead in London by 12%.
The only bright spot for the Tories is in the Midlands, where they lead by 14% and Wales where they are ahead, they are also doing better in Scotland where they are up to 28% so the Holyrood and Senedd elections may prove better for the Tories ironically than the results in London and English councils (outside the Midlands)
NEW: Survation poll for the Mail finds Tory lead down to one point over Labour (Con 39, Lab 38) as Boris Johnson’s popularity suffers in the wake of the Downing Street flat affair
Not a great result from the Tory perspective, a 1% Tory lead if repeated in the county council elections would see a 5% swing to Labour and the loss of a number of Tory county councillors.
Though would not see much change in the districts on 2016.
Labour would also comfortably hold Hartlepool
Too late was the sad cry
Postals already in
Postals will only amount to about half the vote at most, the on the day vote will swing it still in a large number of wards, the postal vote may merely just save the Tories from heavy losses at county council level if Survation is right, however they would still be losses all the same
You need to take into account differential swing.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
The Tories led in the 2017 county council elections by 11%, if they now lead by just 1% then Labour will get a 5% swing from the Tories and gain Tory county council seats, that may differ a bit between Remain and Leave areas for instance but nationwide it would be the same
Not all of the country will be voting will it.
And there are different trends in different areas.
In England alone the voteshares in 2017 were Tory 46.5%, Labour 19.9% and LDs 17.8% and UKIP 4% (albeit that excluded London and the big cites and was for county councils only but those are the council seats up again next week).
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
Alternatively the political trends mean that the working class wards the Conservatives gained in 2017 are retained while the safe middle class wards of 2017 swing to Labour but not enough to be lost.
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
No ward is purely middle class or working class.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable
Different areas can have different swings.
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
There was a nationwide Tory lead of 12% in 2019, there is tonight a nationwide Tory lead of just 1% with goldstandard Survation.
It is a totally different scenario
So as usual you recite your dogma without thinking.
Different places can have different political trends which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop reciting what the latest opinion poll says and consider the trends which drive them.
Putney was in London, the only region of England and Wales the Tories did not make net gains in 2019, though in London they still avoided a net loss.
Tonight's Survation also has Labour ahead by 50% to 33% for the Tories in the North (in which case Hartlepool would comfortably stay red) and the Tories only 7% ahead in the South and Labour are still comfortably ahead in London by 12%.
The only bright spot for the Tories is in the Midlands, where they lead by 14% and Wales where they are ahead, they are also doing better in Scotland where they are up to 28% so the Holyrood and Senedd elections may prove better for the Tories ironically than the results in London and English councils (outside the Midlands)
Local tourist board will prefer YOUR submission to Sunil's.
My own nomination - Aberdare to be Great!
Aberdare: City of Discovery
That's Tacoma!
The Tacoma Aroma. As I recall
I was referring to the seminal UK TV Comedy series Absolutely. The town council of Stoneybridge make a promotional video. They adopt the Dundee city motto as their own - "Stoneybridge: City of Discovery".
Local tourist board will prefer YOUR submission to Sunil's.
My own nomination - Aberdare to be Great!
Aberdare: City of Discovery
That's Tacoma!
The Tacoma Aroma. As I recall
I was referring to the seminal UK TV Comedy series Absolutely. The town council of Stoneybridge make a promotional video. They adopt the Dundee city motto as their own - "Stoneybridge: City of Discovery".
Sad that Dundee had to steal their slogan from Tacoma! OR was it the other way around?
Both rather gritty but proud seaports, with very cool names.
Never been to Dundee, but do visit Tacoma every once and a while, mainly going to the Pierce County election office (2nd biggest in WA State). Cheap housing (compared with Seattle) and some great views. Site of one end of the 2nd (and now 3rd) Tacoma Narrows Bridge, the replacement(s) for "Galloping Gertie" which famously collapsed into the Narrows during a wind storm in 1940.
Re: burning question, who gets Bermuda, upon mature consideration the answer is obvious.
Ireland!
Why? Two reasons
1) As reparations for centuries of oppression, genocide, tyranny, etc, etc, etc, etc ad infinitum - your golden opportunity to answer the dread Irish Question for all time (or thereabouts);
2) In return, Brits can keep retain your palsied grip on Northern Ireland, provided the fuss over the border (by land or sea) is quietly dropped;
3) as special bonus just cause yer neighbors and all, you can have Rockall but NOT of course the seafloor around it which is the natural birthright of the Irish People (a just compromise, Irish get the oil (mere bagatelle) Brits get the shit (a pearl beyond price to your top organic gardeners);
4) plus Ireland will support the just aspirations of the Heligolanders to once again become lackeys of the British Empire IF they're fool enough to wish it upon themselves, via a free & fair vote (fat chance!)
The thing with postals is. The most committed and partisan eagerly anticipate their arrival. It is X ed and returned forthwith. Those less enervated, it sits forlornly on the coffee table for days. To be dealt with later or not at all. Like the back hedge. So. If most of the postals have been sent, it is those of the ones least likely to ever change their minds.
This is the other key point people overlook.
Postal votes don’t all get returned the minute they arrive (indeed 20-25% don’t get returned at all). And postal voters, particularly early returning postal voters, are much less likely to be the floating voters who decide elections.
The thing with postals is. The most committed and partisan eagerly anticipate their arrival. It is X ed and returned forthwith. Those less enervated, it sits forlornly on the coffee table for days. To be dealt with later or not at all. Like the back hedge. So. If most of the postals have been sent, it is those of the ones least likely to ever change their minds.
This is the other key point people overlook.
Postal votes don’t all get returned the minute they arrive (indeed 20-25% don’t get returned at all). And postal voters, particularly early returning postal voters, are much less likely to be the floating voters who decide elections.
In WA State, early vote-by-mail returns also tend to skew heavily toward the geezers, much higher percent of older versus younger voters.
Mr. B2, might it have the effect of shoring up a core vote, though, and making GOTV a bit less critical?
For sure, which is why, where they are well organised, all the parties try to sign up their committed supporters with postal votes, further biasing the PV population towards those whose minds are already made up.
The key point is that it makes little difference to the electoral swing whether these people vote early or on the day. Whereas those who are undecided, even with postal votes, do tend to hang back, at least until the last weekend. I know several such here, who are ‘waiting to see all the leaflets’.
And anyone who has been a teller knows that, pre-pandemic at least, a surprising number of postal voters trot down to the polling station on the day, carrying their postal vote. A mixture of the last minute folks, people who don’t trust the post, people who never really wanted a postal vote in the first place, and people who for whatever reason prefer to fill in the ballot paper at leisure at home, but still want to drop it into the box.
Politico.com - Stringer's support crumbles as assault allegations scramble New York mayor’s race
Mayoral candidate Scott Stringer’s campaign continued to lose marquee supporters Friday following accusations he sexually assaulted a campaign volunteer 20 years ago — but the long-time Democratic politician vowed to stay in the race.
Two days after city-based lobbyist Jean Kim came forward with allegations Stringer groped her in a taxicab — an account he has vehemently denied — progressive backers, some of whom had flanked him from the start of his campaign, walked away.
The Working Families Party, which had ranked Stringer first in its three-way endorsement, yanked its support Friday afternoon in a statement that lumped the city comptroller in with a “culture of sexual harassment” pervasive in New York politics. The news was first reported by POLITICO. . . .
Then a group of lawmakers, whose endorsements Stringer had built his campaign upon, announced they could no longer stand with him either. . . .
“We are rescinding our endorsement of Scott Stringer’s mayoral campaign,” is all the legislators wrote. They followed state Sen. Jessica Ramos, an enthusiastic Stringer supporter who told POLITICO in an emotional interview Wednesday night that she was concerned his weakened candidacy would embolden the candidacy of Andrew Yang.
Sunrise Movement NYC, an environmental group, also pulled its endorsement a day after Food and Water Action shut down a PAC it had launched to promote the Stringer campaign.
Shortly before Friday’s news went public, Stringer issued a statement portending the loss of support and vowing to march on.
"I understand that this is a difficult moment for my supporters, and I know that some of them will feel compelled to withdraw their endorsement of my candidacy," he said. "This campaign was always going to be about the people. I've received a lot of support on campaign stops over the last two days, and I'm going to be campaigning in every neighborhood, in every borough for the next two months.”
“I look forward to seeing my opponents on the campaign trail and at the debates,” he added. . . .
Comment - do you like your toast well burnt?
Stringer's immolation in theory may help coalesce the progressive vote. But takes some pressure (at least for a few days) off of Yang, who's been targeted by all his rivals as the clear front runner
AND while in the new ranked-choice voting system (with voters able to designate up to five choices for Mayor in their order of preference) in theory (that word again) should facilitate an effective "progressive primary" it will also allow Yang to accumulate his own second-choice support, starting from poll position with the most first preferences.
Mr. B2, might it have the effect of shoring up a core vote, though, and making GOTV a bit less critical?
For sure, which is why, where they are well organised, all the parties try to sign up their committed supporters with postal votes, further biasing the PV population towards those whose minds are already made up.
The key point is that it makes little difference to the electoral swing whether these people vote early or on the day. Whereas those who are undecided, even with postal votes, do tend to hang back, at least until the last weekend. I know several such here, who are ‘waiting to see all the leaflets’.
And anyone who has been a teller knows that, pre-pandemic at least, a surprising number of postal voters trot down to the polling station on the day, carrying their postal vote. A mixture of the last minute folks, people who don’t trust the post, people who never really wanted a postal vote in the first place, and people who for whatever reason prefer to fill in the ballot paper at leisure at home, but still want to drop it into the box.
Excellent report, very similar in WA State, except we don't have neighborhood polling places with all vote-by-mail elections, just a few voting centers in each county for people with specific voting problems. Vast majority of ballots are returned via the mail OR at drop boxes which are distributed across the landscape in accord with population density.
Since the introduction of pre-paid return ballot postage a few years ago, most ballots had been coming back in the mail. Last fall, however, Trumpsky's public assault against the United States Postal Service caused a BIG surge in the percentage (and raw number) of ballot returned via drop boxes.
Indeed, I call it the Great Fear of 2020, gripping AND motivating Democratic voters. Cannot tell you how many I talked with who were afraid that Trumpsky would eat their ballot in the mail, so they voted via the box.
Irony being that a) virtually every voter in the state had RECEIVED their ballot in their mail box, with zero difficulty or delay in all but relative handful of cases; b) mail to voters sent out by candidates & others never went through so fast or so smoothly; and c) ditto for ballots that voters DID return via the mail.
Bright, cheerful-looking morning here, and Mrs C and I are looking forward to meeting one of our sons and his family. And Grandson Two has now finished his A level substitutes, is now old enough to buy his own beer so needs to find a job so he can afford to.
The leader of the Scottish Greens was on BBC Breakfast this morning. Reckon he helps Boris a lot. When asked about a hard border between between Scotland and England he said it was Boris’s fault for his extreme form of Brexit (I guess he meant that he actually implemented Brexit).
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 4h The Tories now have a 19-point lead over Labour with working class voters. Something has gone badly wrong here. The current messaging from the left simply doesn’t resonate with normal decent working class people. It’s so frustrating.
While many on here will disagree, Labour gives the impression of hating the values of many working class voters, and despising those voters. Why would anyone vote for someone that openly shows their contempt for you?
Yours truly agrees with you on this point, and ditto for US Democrats.
Do NOT have to embrace racism and xenophobia. Just act like Average White People are people too.
My daughter has just been forced to read a deeply disturbing book at school
All about a black race car and a white race car who have a race… but when the black car wins the race committee change the runs to make it harder for him to win next year…
Welcome to the real world, where the black car - let’s call him Lewis - keeps winning, and the people in charge keep changing the rules to try and let the other cars win sometimes.
Bright, cheerful-looking morning here, and Mrs C and I are looking forward to meeting one of our sons and his family. And Grandson Two has now finished his A level substitutes, is now old enough to buy his own beer so needs to find a job so he can afford to.
Will they accept such a PM now when millions have received massive furlough payments and we are near the top of the league for vaccines, is quite different to will they accept one in 2024 by which time we will be facing tax rises and the costs/benefits of Brexit become clearer. With Starmer a safe but dull option the 2024 election will be won or lost on the record of the government, and especially the PM, including his sleaze.
James Melville Cherry blossom @JamesMelville · 4h The Tories now have a 19-point lead over Labour with working class voters. Something has gone badly wrong here. The current messaging from the left simply doesn’t resonate with normal decent working class people. It’s so frustrating.
While many on here will disagree, Labour gives the impression of hating the values of many working class voters, and despising those voters. Why would anyone vote for someone that openly shows their contempt for you?
Yours truly agrees with you on this point, and ditto for US Democrats.
Do NOT have to embrace racism and xenophobia. Just act like Average White People are people too.
My daughter has just been forced to read a deeply disturbing book at school
All about a black race car and a white race car who have a race… but when the black car wins the race committee change the runs to make it harder for him to win next year…
Next week's lesson is much more interesting, when they talk about how to monopolise committees, so you get to set the rules.
Doesn’t matter. The only that is important is who writes the minutes
An interesting polling divide is emerging. Seven polls have been published this week. Three showed the Tory/Labour gap at 4 points or under - Ipsos MORI, BMG and now Survation - the rest had very comfortable Tory leads. It's the latter that have absolutely dominated the narrative.
Allies of Dominic Cummings say they have a “grid” of new disclosures ready - and other civil servants are also leaking, knowing Cummings will be blamed.
I'd be pretty certain that if Scotland becomes independent that every UK citizen will become either an rUK or a Scottish citizen. Most will be simply allocated the new citizenship but some may well have a choice (e.g. born in England living in Scotland and vice versa). The relevant state will pay pensions of citizens independent of residence. If you are English in Scotland you may lose the right to vote (and vice versa) unless there is some agreement on this. Dual citizenship will no doubt be something that can be applied for but that doesn't confer or change pension rights as far as I know.
Why wouldn't every person left in Scotland (and there would be a big exodus) not in that consideration then choose to have a rUk passport as it would assure you a pension.
Would anyone give up their assured pension to have a vote in an Indy Scotland ?
Hard to believe the amount of thick know it all numpties on here.
A Nigerian qualifies for a UK state pension having worked in London for 30 years and has recently retired and moved to Edinburgh.
Scotland becomes independent.
Who pays his future pension liability?
Who pays if he then moves to New York?
That would depend entirely on his status if he became a Scottish citizen it would be Scotland , etc, etc
No, he's a Nigerian. Who is eligible for and receives a UK state pension due to his years of qualifying NIC payments. He is neither a Scottish nor British citizen.
Who pays his UK state pension?
As I said earlier, this is an obligation jointly assumed by all current UK citizens. The provenance going forward of jointly assumed obligations will no doubt be part of the complex divorce negotiations. It is naive to assume that all such jointly assumed obligations will be left entirely to rUK.
This is the crucial point. It's not the case that - if one part of the UK splits off - that it keeps its share of the assets but loses the liabilities.
The reality is that it would be a part of the negotiation, just as pensions for Eurocrats were part of the negotiations between the EU and the UK.
But the precedent is that the departing state took on the liabilities, which was fair. I don't see any scenario where the UK government continues to pay pensions for Scottish citizens after independence. It really does become their problem.
Unless the pensioner has dual nationality, though that would be limited to people with an English parent I imagine.
Even then, I expect dual national to need England/Wales/NI residency to qualify. I think anyone voting for independence should come to terms with these simple facts. You should still do it anyway, but don't vote to leave the UK on the basis that the UK will continue to fund and independent Scotland in any way. Any party that proposes this will simply get voted out and any party which promises to end any legacy payments immediately and permanently will win.
So you are demanding to treay rUK nationals like terrorists just because they happen to live in Scotland?
You really do need to wind your neck in.
If you vote to depart the UK you will plunge Scotland into Depression and England into a very deep recession. And the whole nation will be torn apart and hurled into a decade of constitutional chaos. Again
Right now, I love Scotland. You are part of me, you are British. I am happy for us to continue to subsidise you, because you have subsidised us in the past, that's how unions work. We are brothers.
But if you vote to smash all this up? Hell yes, I will want you punished. I will want you to suffer. The idea I will vote for any government that promises to indulge this vandalism - with MY money - is absurd. The party that promises to make Scotland moan in pain will get my vote. Millions will do likewise.
Reckon with this, because it is true
I'm simply pointing out that the PBTories are actually saying that rUK subjects who happen to live in Scvotland should have their pensions withdrawn.
How does that make sense?
Your argument appears to be that on day 1 of an independent Scotland all pensions for Scottish residents would be paid by rUK, and Scottish taxpayers would have to pay nothing.
That's completely illogical.
It's magical thinking of the worst kind.
No, no - only rUK subjects who have retained rUK citizenship, like in Australia etc.
But I would think everyone in Scotland would initially still hold British passports wouldn't they? Or would everyone be forced to choose one or the other?
I think everybody ought to choose one or the other. We have far too much of this dual nationality nonsense. If Scots knew that after independence they would have to be Scottish or English-Wesh-Irish British it might help them to make up their minds about independence.
And after independence, they ought to be treated as foreigners, reporting at the police station from time to time to sign the necessary documents, and all that.
THat's an interesting idea. Did the Irish have to do that? The Americans? The Australians?
The leader of the Scottish Greens was on BBC Breakfast this morning. Reckon he helps Boris a lot. When asked about a hard border between between Scotland and England he said it was Boris’s fault for his extreme form of Brexit (I guess he meant that he actually implemented Brexit).
That cannot be true as we were assured by Johnson that there were no Non Tariff Barriers or Tarrifs on goods crossing to the EU, nor customs at either the Irish border or the Irish Sea in his Deal.
I accept the possibility that Johnson may have been bullshitting.
A Nigerian qualifies for a UK state pension having worked in London for 30 years and has recently retired and moved to Edinburgh.
Scotland becomes independent.
Who pays his future pension liability?
Who pays if he then moves to New York?
That would depend entirely on his status if he became a Scottish citizen it would be Scotland , etc, etc
No, he's a Nigerian. Who is eligible for and receives a UK state pension due to his years of qualifying NIC payments. He is neither a Scottish nor British citizen.
Who pays his UK state pension?
As I said earlier, this is an obligation jointly assumed by all current UK citizens. The provenance going forward of jointly assumed obligations will no doubt be part of the complex divorce negotiations. It is naive to assume that all such jointly assumed obligations will be left entirely to rUK.
This is the crucial point. It's not the case that - if one part of the UK splits off - that it keeps its share of the assets but loses the liabilities.
The reality is that it would be a part of the negotiation, just as pensions for Eurocrats were part of the negotiations between the EU and the UK.
But the precedent is that the departing state took on the liabilities, which was fair. I don't see any scenario where the UK government continues to pay pensions for Scottish citizens after independence. It really does become their problem.
Unless the pensioner has dual nationality, though that would be limited to people with an English parent I imagine.
Even then, I expect dual national to need England/Wales/NI residency to qualify. I think anyone voting for independence should come to terms with these simple facts. You should still do it anyway, but don't vote to leave the UK on the basis that the UK will continue to fund and independent Scotland in any way. Any party that proposes this will simply get voted out and any party which promises to end any legacy payments immediately and permanently will win.
So you are demanding to treay rUK nationals like terrorists just because they happen to live in Scotland?
You really do need to wind your neck in.
If you vote to depart the UK you will plunge Scotland into Depression and England into a very deep recession. And the whole nation will be torn apart and hurled into a decade of constitutional chaos. Again
Right now, I love Scotland. You are part of me, you are British. I am happy for us to continue to subsidise you, because you have subsidised us in the past, that's how unions work. We are brothers.
But if you vote to smash all this up? Hell yes, I will want you punished. I will want you to suffer. The idea I will vote for any government that promises to indulge this vandalism - with MY money - is absurd. The party that promises to make Scotland moan in pain will get my vote. Millions will do likewise.
Reckon with this, because it is true
I'm simply pointing out that the PBTories are actually saying that rUK subjects who happen to live in Scvotland should have their pensions withdrawn.
How does that make sense?
Your argument appears to be that on day 1 of an independent Scotland all pensions for Scottish residents would be paid by rUK, and Scottish taxpayers would have to pay nothing.
That's completely illogical.
It's magical thinking of the worst kind.
No, no - only rUK subjects who have retained rUK citizenship, like in Australia etc.
But I would think everyone in Scotland would initially still hold British passports wouldn't they? Or would everyone be forced to choose one or the other?
I think everybody ought to choose one or the other. We have far too much of this dual nationality nonsense. If Scots knew that after independence they would have to be Scottish or English-Wesh-Irish British it might help them to make up their minds about independence.
And after independence, they ought to be treated as foreigners, reporting at the police station from time to time to sign the necessary documents, and all that.
THat's an interesting idea. Did the Irish have to do that? The Americans? The Australians?
The UK’s acquiescence of dual or even triple nationalities is one of the things that makes it great. Namely that just about all of us on these isles have complex heritages and personal relationships. To forfeit this as a clumsy weapon in any Scotland referendum would be a sad day indeed.
A Nigerian qualifies for a UK state pension having worked in London for 30 years and has recently retired and moved to Edinburgh.
Scotland becomes independent.
Who pays his future pension liability?
Who pays if he then moves to New York?
That would depend entirely on his status if he became a Scottish citizen it would be Scotland , etc, etc
No, he's a Nigerian. Who is eligible for and receives a UK state pension due to his years of qualifying NIC payments. He is neither a Scottish nor British citizen.
Who pays his UK state pension?
As I said earlier, this is an obligation jointly assumed by all current UK citizens. The provenance going forward of jointly assumed obligations will no doubt be part of the complex divorce negotiations. It is naive to assume that all such jointly assumed obligations will be left entirely to rUK.
This is the crucial point. It's not the case that - if one part of the UK splits off - that it keeps its share of the assets but loses the liabilities.
The reality is that it would be a part of the negotiation, just as pensions for Eurocrats were part of the negotiations between the EU and the UK.
But the precedent is that the departing state took on the liabilities, which was fair. I don't see any scenario where the UK government continues to pay pensions for Scottish citizens after independence. It really does become their problem.
Unless the pensioner has dual nationality, though that would be limited to people with an English parent I imagine.
Even then, I expect dual national to need England/Wales/NI residency to qualify. I think anyone voting for independence should come to terms with these simple facts. You should still do it anyway, but don't vote to leave the UK on the basis that the UK will continue to fund and independent Scotland in any way. Any party that proposes this will simply get voted out and any party which promises to end any legacy payments immediately and permanently will win.
So you are demanding to treay rUK nationals like terrorists just because they happen to live in Scotland?
You really do need to wind your neck in.
If you vote to depart the UK you will plunge Scotland into Depression and England into a very deep recession. And the whole nation will be torn apart and hurled into a decade of constitutional chaos. Again
Right now, I love Scotland. You are part of me, you are British. I am happy for us to continue to subsidise you, because you have subsidised us in the past, that's how unions work. We are brothers.
But if you vote to smash all this up? Hell yes, I will want you punished. I will want you to suffer. The idea I will vote for any government that promises to indulge this vandalism - with MY money - is absurd. The party that promises to make Scotland moan in pain will get my vote. Millions will do likewise.
Reckon with this, because it is true
I'm simply pointing out that the PBTories are actually saying that rUK subjects who happen to live in Scvotland should have their pensions withdrawn.
How does that make sense?
Your argument appears to be that on day 1 of an independent Scotland all pensions for Scottish residents would be paid by rUK, and Scottish taxpayers would have to pay nothing.
That's completely illogical.
It's magical thinking of the worst kind.
No, no - only rUK subjects who have retained rUK citizenship, like in Australia etc.
But I would think everyone in Scotland would initially still hold British passports wouldn't they? Or would everyone be forced to choose one or the other?
I think everybody ought to choose one or the other. We have far too much of this dual nationality nonsense. If Scots knew that after independence they would have to be Scottish or English-Wesh-Irish British it might help them to make up their minds about independence.
And after independence, they ought to be treated as foreigners, reporting at the police station from time to time to sign the necessary documents, and all that.
THat's an interesting idea. Did the Irish have to do that? The Americans? The Australians?
Carnyx, it is just more bigoted crap from the usual morons on here. Thick as mince as twice as daft.
Which decade was the least censorious in the UK. 80s or 90s?
Do you mean of the 2 choices? Or more broadly? Cos I'd say the 2010's was the go to decade for spouting any old shite without consequence.
Genuinely think it was the 2000s. Noone gave a monkeys.
1988 gave us Section 28, repealed in 2003, so that period was pretty censorious if you were gay.
Personally, I think that we are in an era of outspoken uproarious free speech* where any sort of bile and crap can be freely spouted on public platforms, readily accessed by anyone with a smartphone.
*not consequence free of course, but that is a different issue.
A Nigerian qualifies for a UK state pension having worked in London for 30 years and has recently retired and moved to Edinburgh.
Scotland becomes independent.
Who pays his future pension liability?
Who pays if he then moves to New York?
That would depend entirely on his status if he became a Scottish citizen it would be Scotland , etc, etc
No, he's a Nigerian. Who is eligible for and receives a UK state pension due to his years of qualifying NIC payments. He is neither a Scottish nor British citizen.
Who pays his UK state pension?
As I said earlier, this is an obligation jointly assumed by all current UK citizens. The provenance going forward of jointly assumed obligations will no doubt be part of the complex divorce negotiations. It is naive to assume that all such jointly assumed obligations will be left entirely to rUK.
This is the crucial point. It's not the case that - if one part of the UK splits off - that it keeps its share of the assets but loses the liabilities.
The reality is that it would be a part of the negotiation, just as pensions for Eurocrats were part of the negotiations between the EU and the UK.
But the precedent is that the departing state took on the liabilities, which was fair. I don't see any scenario where the UK government continues to pay pensions for Scottish citizens after independence. It really does become their problem.
Unless the pensioner has dual nationality, though that would be limited to people with an English parent I imagine.
Even then, I expect dual national to need England/Wales/NI residency to qualify. I think anyone voting for independence should come to terms with these simple facts. You should still do it anyway, but don't vote to leave the UK on the basis that the UK will continue to fund and independent Scotland in any way. Any party that proposes this will simply get voted out and any party which promises to end any legacy payments immediately and permanently will win.
So you are demanding to treay rUK nationals like terrorists just because they happen to live in Scotland?
You really do need to wind your neck in.
If you vote to depart the UK you will plunge Scotland into Depression and England into a very deep recession. And the whole nation will be torn apart and hurled into a decade of constitutional chaos. Again
Right now, I love Scotland. You are part of me, you are British. I am happy for us to continue to subsidise you, because you have subsidised us in the past, that's how unions work. We are brothers.
But if you vote to smash all this up? Hell yes, I will want you punished. I will want you to suffer. The idea I will vote for any government that promises to indulge this vandalism - with MY money - is absurd. The party that promises to make Scotland moan in pain will get my vote. Millions will do likewise.
Reckon with this, because it is true
I'm simply pointing out that the PBTories are actually saying that rUK subjects who happen to live in Scvotland should have their pensions withdrawn.
How does that make sense?
Your argument appears to be that on day 1 of an independent Scotland all pensions for Scottish residents would be paid by rUK, and Scottish taxpayers would have to pay nothing.
That's completely illogical.
It's magical thinking of the worst kind.
No, no - only rUK subjects who have retained rUK citizenship, like in Australia etc.
But I would think everyone in Scotland would initially still hold British passports wouldn't they? Or would everyone be forced to choose one or the other?
I think everybody ought to choose one or the other. We have far too much of this dual nationality nonsense. If Scots knew that after independence they would have to be Scottish or English-Wesh-Irish British it might help them to make up their minds about independence.
And after independence, they ought to be treated as foreigners, reporting at the police station from time to time to sign the necessary documents, and all that.
THat's an interesting idea. Did the Irish have to do that? The Americans? The Australians?
The UK’s acquiescence of dual or even triple nationalities is one of the things that makes it great. Namely that just about all of us on these isles have complex heritages and personal relationships. To forfeit this as a clumsy weapon in any Scotland referendum would be a sad day indeed.
Only clowns suggesting it , no chance it could ever happen given how integrated people are between the countries. It would be same as Ireland where you would have option of dual nationality.
Comments
I suspect residual anti-Toryism will prevail, and Labour will just about hold it. As they should, of course
Which would mitigate the "baked in" factor but NOT eliminate it.
My own nomination - Aberdare to be Great!
I sincerely hope I don't regret this comment
I like the cut of your going big out on a limb jib.
And, like Fox Mulder himself, I want to believe.
Russia has reported probably only one quarter of its Covid deaths. Trying to create a coherent story for the pandemic globally on the reported figures is a fool's errand. It would be like trying to reconstruct Pride and Prejudice from one-third of the words, with the proportion missing varying according to an unknown pattern.
What we do know is that the number of vaccinations given continues to increase. The virus is slowly being denied of space to spread.
For giving political nerds something to obsess about in between, though, they're priceless.
You'd expect this to lead to a broad peak, but they will be able to really crush it with vaccinations on the way down.
Based on polling, think that Gov. Newsom will NOT be recalled.
As to question #2, who to replace him if he IS recalled, don't have a clue. But then IF I'm correct about #1, it won't matter diddly squat.
EDIT - Situation was QUITE different in 2003. Then, incumbent Gov Gray Davis was seriously underwater in the polls. And his chief alternative was a mega-movie star, a proven path to the Governor's office in the Great Bear Republic.
FURTHER EDIT - Caitlyn Jenner is a celebrity, but NOT in Arnold S's league, not by a longshot. Plus she's running to get votes from the anti-LQBT party.
Those less enervated, it sits forlornly on the coffee table for days. To be dealt with later or not at all. Like the back hedge.
So. If most of the postals have been sent, it is those of the ones least likely to ever change their minds.
I imagine he just thinks that everyone agrees with his views, and was breaking the monotony of his job by having a chat about the Biden speech. I was somewhere halfway between amused and bemused. He wasn't angry at me, just at the stupid Yanks for not electing Trump.
But I agree with you about not pressing political views on people who you meet in another setting. I have little idea how my neighbours vote, and would prefer not to know. We need to rub along.
We had no idea what was to come. It all seemed ascendant. As did the West, after the fall of communism
And the Red Wall did not collapse in 2019 - many holes were knocked through it but many more could have been and might be in the future.
Or more broadly? Cos I'd say the 2010's was the go to decade for spouting any old shite without consequence.
Parts of the country have relatively swung towards the Conservatives since 2017 and parts relatively towards Labour.
The marginal wards in the county council elections are probably trending Conservative.
And there are different trends in different areas.
JUSTICE FOR HELIGOLAND!
Justice + Patriotism + Tory Incompetence (or was it Sleaze?)
= something for everyone who does NOT dye themselves Blue!
He seemed a bit of a Grub Smith type.
The Welsh council elections up at the same time masked the dire Labour performance then so on that basis the swing in England could be even more pronounced, though the Tories will be able to squeeze some of that remaining UKIP vote to save a few vulnerable seats
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_United_Kingdom_local_elections
Result being good Conservative results in terms of gains and losses but less so in terms of national equivalent vote.
Well. Just a glimmer anyways.
To get to a Tory lead of just 1% tonight there will have clearly been a swing to Labour with working class voters as well as middle class voters, any Tory county council seat with a lead of 10% or less would be vulnerable.
The data tables are now out and confirm that, Survation has Labour ahead 43% to 31% amongst working class voters earning under £20,000, the Tories lead by 7% amongst middle income voters earning £20,000-£40,000 by 43% to 37% and the Tories lead by just 1%, 37% to 36% amongst higher income voters earning over £40,000
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/30202446/Survation-Daily-Mail-Politics-Poll-Tables.xlsx
In retaliation, the citizens of Tacoma tried to get the name of Mt Rainier changed, to Mt. Tacoma. Which is much closer to the native name (another variant is Tehoma).
Seattle had to deploy a mega political clout - plus White privilege - in DC to slap THAT idea down!
Which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop being so dogmatic, be more open minded and try to think more flexibly.
It is a totally different scenario
Survation's final poll of the 2019 general election campaign had a Tory lead of 11%, which was also almost spot on
Enjoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTsvLjAzozE
Different places can have different political trends which is why Labour were able to gain Putney in 2019.
You need to stop reciting what the latest opinion poll says and consider the trends which drive them.
Australia's vaccination rollout
13.6m — current phase target
2,179,544 — doses given
At our current pace of roughly 324,000 doses a week, we can expect to reach the 40 million doses needed to fully vaccinate Australia’s adult population in late July 2023."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-01/crime-to-fly-from-india-to-australia-covid-federal-government/100108898
Tonight's Survation also has Labour ahead by 50% to 33% for the Tories in the North (in which case Hartlepool would comfortably stay red) and the Tories only 7% ahead in the South and Labour are still comfortably ahead in London by 12%.
The only bright spot for the Tories is in the Midlands, where they lead by 14% and Wales where they are ahead, they are also doing better in Scotland where they are up to 28% so the Holyrood and Senedd elections may prove better for the Tories ironically than the results in London and English councils (outside the Midlands)
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/30202446/Survation-Daily-Mail-Politics-Poll-Tables.xlsx
It’s a 5-8% Tory lead. And meaningless
🇵🇱🇪🇺
*stares*
*third gender*
*EU identity cards*
https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1388049070858571776?s=21
Both rather gritty but proud seaports, with very cool names.
Never been to Dundee, but do visit Tacoma every once and a while, mainly going to the Pierce County election office (2nd biggest in WA State). Cheap housing (compared with Seattle) and some great views. Site of one end of the 2nd (and now 3rd) Tacoma Narrows Bridge, the replacement(s) for "Galloping Gertie" which famously collapsed into the Narrows during a wind storm in 1940.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)
Tacoma Narrows Bridge Collapse (advise turning off the cheesy sound track)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXSxnw
(Third Gender version)
Ireland!
Why? Two reasons
1) As reparations for centuries of oppression, genocide, tyranny, etc, etc, etc, etc ad infinitum - your golden opportunity to answer the dread Irish Question for all time (or thereabouts);
2) In return, Brits can keep retain your palsied grip on Northern Ireland, provided the fuss over the border (by land or sea) is quietly dropped;
3) as special bonus just cause yer neighbors and all, you can have Rockall but NOT of course the seafloor around it which is the natural birthright of the Irish People (a just compromise, Irish get the oil (mere bagatelle) Brits get the shit (a pearl beyond price to your top organic gardeners);
4) plus Ireland will support the just aspirations of the Heligolanders to once again become lackeys of the British Empire IF they're fool enough to wish it upon themselves, via a free & fair vote (fat chance!)
Postal votes don’t all get returned the minute they arrive (indeed 20-25% don’t get returned at all). And postal voters, particularly early returning postal voters, are much less likely to be the floating voters who decide elections.
Mr. B2, might it have the effect of shoring up a core vote, though, and making GOTV a bit less critical?
The key point is that it makes little difference to the electoral swing whether these people vote early or on the day. Whereas those who are undecided, even with postal votes, do tend to hang back, at least until the last weekend. I know several such here, who are ‘waiting to see all the leaflets’.
And anyone who has been a teller knows that, pre-pandemic at least, a surprising number of postal voters trot down to the polling station on the day, carrying their postal vote. A mixture of the last minute folks, people who don’t trust the post, people who never really wanted a postal vote in the first place, and people who for whatever reason prefer to fill in the ballot paper at leisure at home, but still want to drop it into the box.
Mayoral candidate Scott Stringer’s campaign continued to lose marquee supporters Friday following accusations he sexually assaulted a campaign volunteer 20 years ago — but the long-time Democratic politician vowed to stay in the race.
Two days after city-based lobbyist Jean Kim came forward with allegations Stringer groped her in a taxicab — an account he has vehemently denied — progressive backers, some of whom had flanked him from the start of his campaign, walked away.
The Working Families Party, which had ranked Stringer first in its three-way endorsement, yanked its support Friday afternoon in a statement that lumped the city comptroller in with a “culture of sexual harassment” pervasive in New York politics. The news was first reported by POLITICO. . . .
Then a group of lawmakers, whose endorsements Stringer had built his campaign upon, announced they could no longer stand with him either. . . .
“We are rescinding our endorsement of Scott Stringer’s mayoral campaign,” is all the legislators wrote. They followed state Sen. Jessica Ramos, an enthusiastic Stringer supporter who told POLITICO in an emotional interview Wednesday night that she was concerned his weakened candidacy would embolden the candidacy of Andrew Yang.
Sunrise Movement NYC, an environmental group, also pulled its endorsement a day after Food and Water Action shut down a PAC it had launched to promote the Stringer campaign.
Shortly before Friday’s news went public, Stringer issued a statement portending the loss of support and vowing to march on.
"I understand that this is a difficult moment for my supporters, and I know that some of them will feel compelled to withdraw their endorsement of my candidacy," he said. "This campaign was always going to be about the people. I've received a lot of support on campaign stops over the last two days, and I'm going to be campaigning in every neighborhood, in every borough for the next two months.”
“I look forward to seeing my opponents on the campaign trail and at the debates,” he added. . . .
Comment - do you like your toast well burnt?
Stringer's immolation in theory may help coalesce the progressive vote. But takes some pressure (at least for a few days) off of Yang, who's been targeted by all his rivals as the clear front runner
AND while in the new ranked-choice voting system (with voters able to designate up to five choices for Mayor in their order of preference) in theory (that word again) should facilitate an effective "progressive primary" it will also allow Yang to accumulate his own second-choice support, starting from poll position with the most first preferences.
Since the introduction of pre-paid return ballot postage a few years ago, most ballots had been coming back in the mail. Last fall, however, Trumpsky's public assault against the United States Postal Service caused a BIG surge in the percentage (and raw number) of ballot returned via drop boxes.
Indeed, I call it the Great Fear of 2020, gripping AND motivating Democratic voters. Cannot tell you how many I talked with who were afraid that Trumpsky would eat their ballot in the mail, so they voted via the box.
Irony being that a) virtually every voter in the state had RECEIVED their ballot in their mail box, with zero difficulty or delay in all but relative handful of cases; b) mail to voters sent out by candidates & others never went through so fast or so smoothly; and c) ditto for ballots that voters DID return via the mail.
Bright, cheerful-looking morning here, and Mrs C and I are looking forward to meeting one of our sons and his family. And Grandson Two has now finished his A level substitutes, is now old enough to buy his own beer so needs to find a job so he can afford to.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Armada
My @telegraph column on the network of adversaries now facing Boris Johnson: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/04/29/cummingss-new-anti-boris-alliance-aims-topple-prime-minister/
Read the full story here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/flat-refurbishment-row-behind-closed-doors-this-farrago-has-boris-johnson-panicked-blnp26rfl
I accept the possibility that Johnson may have been bullshitting.
Personally, I think that we are in an era of outspoken uproarious free speech* where any sort of bile and crap can be freely spouted on public platforms, readily accessed by anyone with a smartphone.
*not consequence free of course, but that is a different issue.