politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tories take a stonking 21% lead with ComRes poll, up 4% in mon
Options
Comments
-
When was the last time the government had a 21% lead?TheScreamingEagles said:
Dave achieved a 28% lead in 2008.Sandpit said:Probably a holiday season outlier, but WOW!!!
When was a 21% lead last seen, sometime in the mid nineties under Blair?0 -
No, Blair won comfortable majorities in England in 1997, 2001 and 2005 in terms of seats as did Attlee in 1945 and Wilson in 1966DeClare said:
The number of MPs is going to be reduced from 650 to 600 next year, Wales will be hardest hit going from 40 MPs down to 21.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve itSeanT said:
Yes, that's the only thing saving them - especially UKIP being so utterly shite. But the LDs, Greens and UKIP could still nibble away, taking them down to 20.kle4 said:
Someone replaced them north of the border. Despite the suddenness of the end, when it came, the signs were there it might happen. There is no sign of that in England.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
That said, if they can make it through 2020 without being totally annihilated, then find a decent new leader, they will surely recover. But without Scotland (which seems permanently lost) a Labour majority is always going to be very hard to achieve, from now on.
With the boundary changes Labour would lose a total of 29 seats, the Tories only 12 based on 2005 results.
If Labour can't win in Scotland and the Tories can now win some seats there, Labour might never win a General Election again.
I think their floor is about 15%, Corbyn might be ousted in May next year if Labour lose a large number of London council seats.0 -
Similar to 2010, no?HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
During the winner's bounce after the 1997 election Labour actually polled at 62% with ICM - a 39% lead over the Tories. Crazy.SeanT said:
See below. Blair in 2002.TheWhiteRabbit said:
When was the last time the government had a 21% lead?TheScreamingEagles said:
Dave achieved a 28% lead in 2008.Sandpit said:Probably a holiday season outlier, but WOW!!!
When was a 21% lead last seen, sometime in the mid nineties under Blair?
Tories in power til 2025 or 2030.0 -
Perhaps April 2002 when Labour led by 23%.TheWhiteRabbit said:
When was the last time the government had a 21% lead?TheScreamingEagles said:
Dave achieved a 28% lead in 2008.Sandpit said:Probably a holiday season outlier, but WOW!!!
When was a 21% lead last seen, sometime in the mid nineties under Blair?0 -
Lets hopemit's only 2025, if it was until 2030 labour would thrash the dying tory government in May 2030 with a blair style landslide and remain in paower for 15 years causing immense damage to the country as they did last time they won 3 consecutive terms.SeanT said:
See below. Blair in 2002.TheWhiteRabbit said:
When was the last time the government had a 21% lead?TheScreamingEagles said:
Dave achieved a 28% lead in 2008.Sandpit said:Probably a holiday season outlier, but WOW!!!
When was a 21% lead last seen, sometime in the mid nineties under Blair?
Tories in power til 2025 or 2030.0 -
Wales has 3 M people according to http://ukpopulation2016.com/wales.HYUFD said:
No, Blair won comfortable majorities in England in 1997, 2001 and 2005 in terms of seats as did Attlee in 1945 and Wilson in 1966DeClare said:
The number of MPs is going to be reduced from 650 to 600 next year, Wales will be hardest hit going from 40 MPs down to 21.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve itSeanT said:
Yes, that's the only thing saving them - especially UKIP being so utterly shite. But the LDs, Greens and UKIP could still nibble away, taking them down to 20.kle4 said:
Someone replaced them north of the border. Despite the suddenness of the end, when it came, the signs were there it might happen. There is no sign of that in England.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
That said, if they can make it through 2020 without being totally annihilated, then find a decent new leader, they will surely recover. But without Scotland (which seems permanently lost) a Labour majority is always going to be very hard to achieve, from now on.
With the boundary changes Labour would lose a total of 29 seats, the Tories only 12 based on 2005 results.
If Labour can't win in Scotland and the Tories can now win some seats there, Labour might never win a General Election again.
I think their floor is about 15%, Corbyn might be ousted in May next year if Labour lose a large number of London council seats.
That's 5%.
5% of 600 gives it about 30 seats, surely?0 -
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
He's a Lib Dem - you forswear shame when you join.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
All the experts thought Clegg won that debate didn't they? The kind of people that never admit they're wrong even when proved wrong... and so they lostwilliamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
(If the experts didn't say Clegg won that debate, I will admit I was wrong!)0 -
Equivalent ComRes from four years ago:
Lab 38
Con 30
UKIP 15
LibD 8
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention
0 -
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.0 -
Extinction Level Erection - Labour dying on the job.TheScreamingEagles said:
Extinction Level Election.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, extinction level event? Erotic legume experience? Elephantine love eruption?
0 -
Compare and contrast Cameron and Clegg - both offering an In/Out referendum that they thought they would never have to deliver.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
Blair is a europhile with passion and conviction - he doesn't seem to have done much to further the EU's cause. You can't polish a turd. The first chance people got to vote on 50 years of Eurobollocks, they (the sensible ones) voted flush.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
That is not my recollection, but someone will dig out the reports I amsure.isam said:
All the experts thought Clegg won that debate didn't they? The kind of people that never admit they're wrong even when proved wrong... and so they lostwilliamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
(If the experts didn't say Clegg won that debate, I will admit I was wrong!)0 -
The lowest that Scottish Labour has sub-sampled at is 6%.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of an election campaign, and with Corbyn prone to weird angry outbursts and simple, calamitous errors, alongside the poisonous Labour Left backstory of anti-Semitism, Islamism and Irish terrorism, I can see lifelong Labour voters abstaining, even if they express support now.
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
In terms of Labour's core vote, the lowest they polled in an opinion poll was 18%, under Brown, just before the 2009 European elections, in which they polled 15.7%. True, that was a Euro-Election which had a low turnout, boosted the UKIP share because of the issue and other minor party shares because of the voting system, but it still gives an indicator as to where the floor might be.0 -
IIRC OGH used to have a golden rule that the lowest Labour poll rating was the most accurate.Andy_Cooke said:Interestingly, if, in 2015, you'd taken the highest Conservative score from all of the "final call" polls, married it up with the lowest Labour score from all of them and the average Lib Dem and UKIP scores, you'd have been pretty close. It would have been Con 36, Lab 31, LD 9, UKIP 13 as against Con 37.7, Lab 31.1, LD 8, UKIP 12.9.
Of course, methodologies have changed. But it's striking nonetheless.
0 -
I think he will hang on though Simon may lose in West Midlandsbrokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.0 -
You are quite right, it should have been a wakeup call for the pro EU side. My thinking is that the Remainers had got so used to remaining silent in order to not scare the horse and letting mission creep achieve their aims, that when it came to cheering on the EU, they’d forgotten all the reasons why they were pro EU.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:ttps://twitter.com/nick_clegg/status/853314650741624834
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
Your figure sounds more realisticrural_voter said:
Wales has 3 M people according to http://ukpopulation2016.com/wales.HYUFD said:
No, Blair won comfortable majorities in England in 1997, 2001 and 2005 in terms of seats as did Attlee in 1945 and Wilson in 1966DeClare said:
The number of MPs is going to be reduced from 650 to 600 next year, Wales will be hardest hit going from 40 MPs down to 21.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve itSeanT said:
Yes, that's the only thing saving them - especially UKIP being so utterly shite. But the LDs, Greens and UKIP could still nibble away, taking them down to 20.kle4 said:
Someone replaced them north of the border. Despite the suddenness of the end, when it came, the signs were there it might happen. There is no sign of that in England.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
That said, if they can make it through 2020 without being totally annihilated, then find a decent new leader, they will surely recover. But without Scotland (which seems permanently lost) a Labour majority is always going to be very hard to achieve, from now on.
With the boundary changes Labour would lose a total of 29 seats, the Tories only 12 based on 2005 results.
If Labour can't win in Scotland and the Tories can now win some seats there, Labour might never win a General Election again.
I think their floor is about 15%, Corbyn might be ousted in May next year if Labour lose a large number of London council seats.
That's 5%.
5% of 600 gives it about 30 seats, surely?0 -
"The most enjoyable thing about the Nigel-Farage vs Nick Clegg debate was the difference between the reaction to it by the ‘mainstream’ pundits, and the reaction of the public.
As the Guardian’s Rowena Mason reports here http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/26/nigel-farage-victory-snap-poll-surprises-political-insiders , these insiders were surprisedt o find that a snap poll handed the debate to Mr Farage by 57% to 36%."
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2014/03/some-thoughts-on-the-great-debate-clegg-vs-farage.html
0 -
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.0 -
I think he changed his mind following the 2010 election.another_richard said:
IIRC OGH used to have a golden rule that the lowest Labour poll rating was the most accurate.Andy_Cooke said:Interestingly, if, in 2015, you'd taken the highest Conservative score from all of the "final call" polls, married it up with the lowest Labour score from all of them and the average Lib Dem and UKIP scores, you'd have been pretty close. It would have been Con 36, Lab 31, LD 9, UKIP 13 as against Con 37.7, Lab 31.1, LD 8, UKIP 12.9.
Of course, methodologies have changed. But it's striking nonetheless.0 -
Democracy part seems optional tooLuckyguy1983 said:
He's a Lib Dem - you forswear shame when you join.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
The EU as a whole has done a poor job of justifying itself, relying on platitudes in the face of technical criticisms of specifics. So when the big arguments came, they came too late.SimonStClare said:
You are quite right, it should have been a wakeup call for the pro EU side. My thinking is that the Remainers had got so used to remaining silent in order to not scare the horse and letting mission creep achieve their aims, that when it came to cheering on the EU, they’d forgotten all the reasons why they were pro EU.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:ttps://twitter.com/nick_clegg/status/853314650741624834
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
... in 1967!justin124 said:
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?
They would be a laughing stock, but I guess you were joking.0 -
Sorry my mistake, the number of MPs is going to be reduced to 29 in Wales not 21 and it won't be until the first election after 2018 when this is likely to be finally approved.HYUFD said:
Your figure sounds more realisticrural_voter said:
Wales has 3 M people according to http://ukpopulation2016.com/wales.HYUFD said:
No, Blair won comfortable majorities in England in 1997, 2001 and 2005 in terms of seats as did Attlee in 1945 and Wilson in 1966DeClare said:
The number of MPs is going to be reduced from 650 to 600 next year, Wales will be hardest hit going from 40 MPs down to 21.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve itSeanT said:
Yes, that's the only thing saving them - especially UKIP being so utterly shite. But the LDs, Greens and UKIP could still nibble away, taking them down to 20.kle4 said:
Someone replaced them north of the border. Despite the suddenness of the end, when it came, the signs were there it might happen. There is no sign of that in England.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
That said, if they can make it through 2020 without being totally annihilated, then find a decent new leader, they will surely recover. But without Scotland (which seems permanently lost) a Labour majority is always going to be very hard to achieve, from now on.
With the boundary changes Labour would lose a total of 29 seats, the Tories only 12 based on 2005 results.
If Labour can't win in Scotland and the Tories can now win some seats there, Labour might never win a General Election again.
I think their floor is about 15%, Corbyn might be ousted in May next year if Labour lose a large number of London council seats.
That's 5%.
5% of 600 gives it about 30 seats, surely?0 -
The only thing that would have helped the EU would have been to have a genuinely patriotic PM who both stood up for the national interest against EU excesses, and was prepared to welcome and exploit concessions when they were offered, such as Juncker offering 'associate membership' for Britain. Sadly (or not sadly depending on your pov) we didn't have that, we had a lazy, complacent, arch-insider, whose aim was to shackle Britain permanently to the EU on the worst possible terms, and thought he could get away with it.0
-
They did say Clegg had won.. then a poll came out showing Farage won quite easily according to the publickle4 said:
That is not my recollection, but someone will dig out the reports I amsure.isam said:
All the experts thought Clegg won that debate didn't they? The kind of people that never admit they're wrong even when proved wrong... and so they lostwilliamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
(If the experts didn't say Clegg won that debate, I will admit I was wrong!)0 -
I guess soisam said:
They did say Clegg had won.. then a poll came out showing Farage won quite easily according to the publickle4 said:
That is not my recollection, but someone will dig out the reports I amsure.isam said:
All the experts thought Clegg won that debate didn't they? The kind of people that never admit they're wrong even when proved wrong... and so they lostwilliamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
(If the experts didn't say Clegg won that debate, I will admit I was wrong!)0 -
If I was running the Tory campaign in Gorton I would be delivering leaflets for Corbyn Labour!justin124 said:
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
Thanks for the confirmationDeClare said:
Sorry my mistake, the number of MPs is going to be reduced to 29 in Wales not 21 and it won't be until the first election after 2018 when this is likely to be finally approved.HYUFD said:
Your figure sounds more realisticrural_voter said:
Wales has 3 M people according to http://ukpopulation2016.com/wales.HYUFD said:
No, Blair won comfortable majorities in England in 1997, 2001 and 2005 in terms of seats as did Attlee in 1945 and Wilson in 1966DeClare said:
The number of MPs is going to be reduced from 650 to 600 next year, Wales will be hardest hit going from 40 MPs down to 21.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve itSeanT said:
Yes, that's the only thing saving them - especially UKIP being so utterly shite. But the LDs, Greens and UKIP could still nibble away, taking them down to 20.kle4 said:
Someone replaced them north of the border. Despite the suddenness of the end, when it came, the signs were there it might happen. There is no sign of that in England.SeanT said:21. lol
I'm not sure I agree 25 is the floor for Labour. Remember this is midterm, when the opposition it at its strongest (stop laughing at the back).
Under the sustained assault of
Labour could go down to 20, or below.
Remember, Labour once dominated Scotland. They were impregnable. Today they are on ten percent - yes, a subsample, but still. TEN PERCENT. They're dead, north of the border. There is no law that says they must nonetheless survive south of the border.
That said, if they can make it through 2020 without being totally annihilated, then find a decent new leader, they will surely recover. But without Scotland (which seems permanently lost) a Labour majority is always going to be very hard to achieve, from now on.
With the boundary changes Labour would lose a total of 29 seats, the Tories only 12 based on 2005 results.
If Labour can't win in Scotland and the Tories can now win some seats there, Labour might never win a General Election again.
I think their floor is about 15%, Corbyn might be ousted in May next year if Labour lose a large number of London council seats.
That's 5%.
5% of 600 gives it about 30 seats, surely?0 -
They hadn't forgotten the reasons - the reasons were unsayable. Namely that most relied upon EU patronage in some form. They were happy with the proles taxes going to the EU, then raining back down on their committee, charity, quango, etc. like manna from heaven. Many hoped for a lucrative second career in Brussels. These aren't things you can say in a referendum.SimonStClare said:
You are quite right, it should have been a wakeup call for the pro EU side. My thinking is that the Remainers had got so used to remaining silent in order to not scare the horse and letting mission creep achieve their aims, that when it came to cheering on the EU, they’d forgotten all the reasons why they were pro EU.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:ttps://twitter.com/nick_clegg/status/853314650741624834
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.0 -
One day Britain will recognise Cameron for the amazing difference he had made to this country:
Brexit.
Massive Tory leads.
Annihilating the LibDems.
0 -
Looking at old ComRes polls the Conservatives reached 46% in the summer of 2008 and Labour fell to 21% in May 2009.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate
So there's still some scope for Corbyn yet.
I wonder where Labour are doing better now than in 2009 - London, Merseyside and Manchester I'd say but anywhere else ?
0 -
I was not being entirely serious but it is the kind of tactic I could imagine the LibDems trying!logical_song said:
... in 1967!justin124 said:
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?
They would be a laughing stock, but I guess you were joking.0 -
It was also the beginning of the end for UKIP I believe, as that and the EU elections that followed led to those in authority waking up to the UKIP threat. The campaign of vilification that followed in the GE and since was truly terrible and not something any party could easily recover from. Farage and UKIP for their part have started to enjoy their pariah status and be deliberately outrageous. So those debates with Clegg were peak UKIP respectability and viability.isam said:
They did say Clegg had won.. then a poll came out showing Farage won quite easily according to the publickle4 said:
That is not my recollection, but someone will dig out the reports I amsure.isam said:
All the experts thought Clegg won that debate didn't they? The kind of people that never admit they're wrong even when proved wrong... and so they lostwilliamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
(If the experts didn't say Clegg won that debate, I will admit I was wrong!)0 -
Yes, of course, Burnham is rightly the favourite.HYUFD said:
I think he will hang on though Simon may lose in West Midlandsbrokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter0 -
Bristol, Brighton and Hove, Cambridge ie anywhere with a university which voted strongly Remainanother_richard said:Looking at old ComRes polls the Conservatives reached 46% in the summer of 2008 and Labour fell to 21% in May 2009.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate
So there's still some scope for Corbyn yet.
I wonder where Labour are doing better now than in 2009 - London, Merseyside and Manchester I'd say but anywhere else ?0 -
If Labour had been taken over by the Militant Tendency, even they would attract more support than the Corbynistas, not because they are better or the Corbynistas are nasty. But because they were not as utterly incompetent as the Corbynistas.
We are told that it is the time of anti-politician. Corbyn could hardly claim that as he has been an MP since 1983. He is simply useless at this game.0 -
The presence of alligators does make golf a more exciting game.0
-
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
tlg86 said:
The presence of alligators does make golf a more exciting game.
Putt your ball in the hole... and make it snappy.
0 -
and Labour have no chance in the West Of England mayoral contestsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
Some amazing pictures from the golf in S. Carolina of an alligator eyeing up Poulter as he tries to make shot and caddy waving club to shoo it away.0
-
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
Delivering leaflets for the Conservatives would be sufficient. Keeping tactical votes away from the Lib Dems should see Labour home.HYUFD said:
If I was running the Tory campaign in Gorton I would be delivering leaflets for Corbyn Labour!justin124 said:
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
Provided free movement was not a cornerstone of the single market as nowdavid_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
I am not surprised. By giving up the 75% of Labour voters to the Lib Dems, is it really a surprise ?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Just because many Labour seats voted Leave, it does not follow that the majority of Labour voters in those seats voted Leave.0 -
You could do that in the middle class areas and deliver for Labour in the working class and Muslim areasdavid_herdson said:
Delivering leaflets for the Conservatives would be sufficient. Keeping tactical votes away from the Lib Dems should see Labour home.HYUFD said:
If I was running the Tory campaign in Gorton I would be delivering leaflets for Corbyn Labour!justin124 said:
If I was running the Tory campaign , I would be putting out leaflets with relevant bar charts showing how close to winning they were the last time Gorton had a by election - '557 votes from victory!'logical_song said:
It's a by election, everybody but the two main contenders are liable to be squeezed. The secret is being one of the two contenders and convincing the electorate that this is the case.justin124 said:
But given that the Greens were runners up in 2015 and that the Tories have come close to winning in the more distant past, how likely are they to end up with 5 or 6% each?logical_song said:
... and in Newbury 1993, it was 92% between the LibDems/Tories.logical_song said:
In Richmond LibDem/Zac got 95% of the vote between them.justin124 said:
The LibDem claim implies that the Tories , Greens, UKIP and Galloway will only manage15% - 18% in total. How likely is that?TheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
So 15% to 18% for everybody else would be possible for a by election.
More to the point the LibDem claim shows Labour still 20% ahead.
All those who want Corbyn gone should hope that they can overcome that gap, surely (?) he couldn't survive the loss of Gorton?0 -
Melenchon's price swinging around like Tarzan.0
-
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
One thing that struck me on the... Could referendum have been different?... question....
You look at people like Carswell, Hannnan, Farage.... They've basically dedicated their lives to getting Britain out of the UK. They've spent decades arguing on this. Practicing. No one on the remain side has comparable experience.
There's a video of Farage making a speech back in 2005 on the EU to Blair (arguably the most talented political communicator of our time)
And Blair's reply is so dismissive... He clearly sees Farage as an evolutionary throwback - not even worth engaging with the argument... I think that complacency did hurt Remain.
0 -
With Opinium Labour would win most of the Mayoralty contests.HYUFD said:
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
I was referring to the LD 'poll' of Gorton which still had Labour 20% aheadsurbiton said:
With Opinium Labour would win most of the Mayoralty contests.HYUFD said:
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
I see that Lib Dem commentator Mark Pack is suggesting the Yellows may be getting an even bigger swing from Labour than they did in Witney. He's been up there and is calling on activists to head up there...sounds like there may be some value in the 6/1 on offer0
-
Luckyguy1983 said:
The only thing that would have helped the EU would have been to have a genuinely patriotic PM who both stood up for the national interest against EU excesses, and was prepared to welcome and exploit concessions when they were offered, such as Juncker offering 'associate membership' for Britain. Sadly (or not sadly depending on your pov) we didn't have that, we had a lazy, complacent, arch-insider, whose aim was to shackle Britain permanently to the EU on the worst possible terms, and thought he could get away with it.
When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry, but then he came back and announced he was going to campaign for Remain, the man must have absolutely no self respect.Luckyguy1983 said:The only thing that would have helped the EU would have been to have a genuinely patriotic PM who both stood up for the national interest against EU excesses, and was prepared to welcome and exploit concessions when they were offered, such as Juncker offering 'associate membership' for Britain. Sadly (or not sadly depending on your pov) we didn't have that, we had a lazy, complacent, arch-insider, whose aim was to shackle Britain permanently to the EU on the worst possible terms, and thought he could get away with it.
In the campaign all the Remain side could offer were scare tactics, nobody could say why the EU was so good that we must stay in it and what great things it was going to do for us in the future if we stayed in.
None of the leaders of the EU appeared concerned either, one would have thought that as we were the second or third largest member, Junker, Tusk and the like would be on our TV saying 'look don't vote to leave, we hear what you say and if you vote to remain, we'll try to get things changed and stop doing this and that which you don't like and start doing XYZ in the future'
But nope they hardly said a word, only piping up when Boris compared them to the Nazis which leads me to conclude that most of the EU wanted us out anyway and the there was no point us staying in the club.0 -
And the reason the die-hard Remainers still have a fighting chance of turning things around is that there's a now similar complacency on the other side. They're used to arguing with people who evade the issues and obfuscate instead of taking them head on without apology.rkrkrk said:One thing that struck me on the... Could referendum have been different?... question....
You look at people like Carswell, Hannnan, Farage.... They've basically dedicated their lives to getting Britain out of the UK. They've spent decades arguing on this. Practicing. No one on the remain side has comparable experience.
There's a video of Farage making a speech back in 2005 on the EU to Blair (arguably the most talented political communicator of our time)
And Blair's reply is so dismissive... He clearly sees Farage as an evolutionary throwback - not even worth engaging with the argument... I think that complacency did hurt Remain.
The crucial question is how the great mass of Euro-agnostic voters will perceive developments over the next 18 months.0 -
Opinium have taken 2% of the Libs and have given it to Labour.
Before reweighting the Tories lead 38-27.0 -
Oh ! Labour will lose Gorton. Guaranteed.HYUFD said:
I was referring to the LD 'poll' of Gorton which still had Labour 20% aheadsurbiton said:
With Opinium Labour would win most of the Mayoralty contests.HYUFD said:
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
DeClare said:Luckyguy1983 said:
The only thing that would have helped the EU would have been to have a genuinely patriotic PM who both stood up for the national interest against EU excesses, and was prepared to welcome and exploit concessions when they were offered, such as Juncker offering 'associate membership' for Britain. Sadly (or not sadly depending on your pov) we didn't have that, we had a lazy, complacent, arch-insider, whose aim was to shackle Britain permanently to the EU on the worst possible terms, and thought he could get away with it.
When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry, but then he came back and announced he was going to campaign for Remain, the man must have absolutely no self respect.Luckyguy1983 said:The only thing that would have helped the EU would have been to have a genuinely patriotic PM who both stood up for the national interest against EU excesses, and was prepared to welcome and exploit concessions when they were offered, such as Juncker offering 'associate membership' for Britain. Sadly (or not sadly depending on your pov) we didn't have that, we had a lazy, complacent, arch-insider, whose aim was to shackle Britain permanently to the EU on the worst possible terms, and thought he could get away with it.
In the campaign all the Remain side could offer were scare tactics, nobody could say why the EU was so good that we must stay in it and what great things it was going to do for us in the future if we stayed in.
None of the leaders of the EU appeared concerned either, one would have thought that as we were the second or third largest member, Junker, Tusk and the like would be on our TV saying 'look don't vote to leave, we hear what you say and if you vote to remain, we'll try to get things changed and stop doing this and that which you don't like and start doing XYZ in the future'
But nope they hardly said a word, only piping up when Boris compared them to the Nazis which leads me to conclude that most of the EU wanted us out anyway and the there was no point us staying in the club.
I'm not sure any of them even considered that Leave would win.
"Inconceivable" was their cry.
Well pride comes before a fall. And arrogance comes before a shellacking.
0 -
Scotland subsamples
Opinium: SNP 48 Con 30 Lab 10 LD 4
Comres: SNP 43 Con 24 Lab 15 LD 70 -
That highlights perfectly Cameron's huge presentational failing in the run-up to the referendum. He thought the charade of pretending to renegotiate would get people on his side but instead he just insulted their intelligence.DeClare said:When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry...
Sadly I believe the humiliation and anger will be magnified many times over when the EU is similarly unmoved by our demands for an exit deal all on our terms so we can continue to buy their BMWs and prosecco...0 -
Agreed. Labour are very lucky that UKIP is now in a worse state than they are, and so unable to capitilise on their decline while memories of the Libdems in Coalition with the Tories remain fresh in voters minds.SimonStClare said:+fourth.
If association with Corbyn appears to have little impact, there's little point in changing the party leader, looks as though it is the Labour brand that's tarnished.0 -
Labour on 51% the LDs on 31% is not a sign Labour will lose Gorton even if its majority fallssurbiton said:
Oh ! Labour will lose Gorton. Guaranteed.HYUFD said:
I was referring to the LD 'poll' of Gorton which still had Labour 20% aheadsurbiton said:
With Opinium Labour would win most of the Mayoralty contests.HYUFD said:
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
FWIW the Comres LD figure is 10% in Scotlandchestnut said:Scotland subsamples
Opinium: SNP 48 Con 30 Lab 10 LD 4
Comres: SNP 43 Con 24 Lab 15 LD 70 -
They will wake up when they find that the EU is not budging on the single market. Our Leave liars kept on telling their electorate that with the trade deficit and what not the EU will have no choice but give us non tariff entry.williamglenn said:
That highlights perfectly Cameron's huge presentational failing in the run-up to the referendum. He thought the charade of pretending to renegotiate would get people on his side but instead he just insulted their intelligence.DeClare said:When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry...
Sadly I believe the humiliation and anger will be magnified many times over when the EU is similarly unmoved by our demands for an exit deal all on our terms so we can continue to buy their BMWs and prosecco...
Bollocks, they will. How many BMW cars will not be sold here even with a 10% tariff. I will still buy it.0 -
You are indeed correct.MarkSenior said:
FWIW the Comres LD figure is 10% in Scotlandchestnut said:Scotland subsamples
Opinium: SNP 48 Con 30 Lab 10 LD 4
Comres: SNP 43 Con 24 Lab 15 LD 70 -
It's not like they didn't have plenty of time to sort it out...
https://twitter.com/EquusontheBuses/status/8533340190602280970 -
Here was I thinking Greece needed to devalue......williamglenn said:
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
Devaluation is no answer . The UK has been devaluing the £ for 70 years without success .Floater said:
Here was I thinking Greece needed to devalue......williamglenn said:
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
Free movement has always been a cornerstone, ever since 1958. But I take your point. Even so, I don't think that large-scale immigration from E Europe would have been enough by itself.HYUFD said:
Provided free movement was not a cornerstone of the single market as nowdavid_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
We should start manufacturing good quality cars over here and exporting them where we can and tell the Germans we don't want their cars thanks and tell the Italians we don't want that over rated fizzy crap. Plenty of other alcoholic drinks are available, bring back Babycham.surbiton said:
They will wake up when they find that the EU is not budging on the single market. Our Leave liars kept on telling their electorate that with the trade deficit and what not the EU will have no choice but give us non tariff entry.williamglenn said:
That highlights perfectly Cameron's huge presentational failing in the run-up to the referendum. He thought the charade of pretending to renegotiate would get people on his side but instead he just insulted their intelligence.DeClare said:When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry...
Sadly I believe the humiliation and anger will be magnified many times over when the EU is similarly unmoved by our demands for an exit deal all on our terms so we can continue to buy their BMWs and prosecco...
Bollocks, they will. How many BMW cars will not be sold here even with a 10% tariff. I will still buy it.0 -
-
Sorry Mark, you are the last person I would listen to on Economics.MarkSenior said:
Devaluation is no answer . The UK has been devaluing the £ for 70 years without success .Floater said:
Here was I thinking Greece needed to devalue......williamglenn said:
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project (snip). But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.
Hell, you missed the mother of all recessions if I recall.
Greece needed to devalue, they can't.
Then they were sacrificed to save German banks.
That's your EU in a nutshell.0 -
It was not BMW owners who voted Leave on the whole but lower middle class and working class voters who wanted to regain sovereignty and end free movementsurbiton said:
They will wake up when they find that the EU is not budging on the single market. Our Leave liars kept on telling their electorate that with the trade deficit and what not the EU will have no choice but give us non tariff entry.williamglenn said:
That highlights perfectly Cameron's huge presentational failing in the run-up to the referendum. He thought the charade of pretending to renegotiate would get people on his side but instead he just insulted their intelligence.DeClare said:When Cameron went to the EU early last year and asked for a few puny concessions that didn't nearly go far enough anyway and he was more or less told to F-Off I personally felt humiliated and angry...
Sadly I believe the humiliation and anger will be magnified many times over when the EU is similarly unmoved by our demands for an exit deal all on our terms so we can continue to buy their BMWs and prosecco...
Bollocks, they will. How many BMW cars will not be sold here even with a 10% tariff. I will still buy it.0 -
I just wish it could be closer :-)HYUFD said:0 -
Do you fancy a bet on either of your contentions?surbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
It was that immigration from Eastern Europe which took Leave over the line, especially after Blair failed to impose any transition controlsdavid_herdson said:
Free movement has always been a cornerstone, ever since 1958. But I take your point. Even so, I don't think that large-scale immigration from E Europe would have been enough by itself.HYUFD said:
Provided free movement was not a cornerstone of the single market as nowdavid_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project the EEC (initially) was keen on - it was a stated objective before Britain joined - but it had been kicked into the long grass for while over a decade before Delors resurrected it. It's also true that Mitterrand and Kohl were keen on the Euro due to what they perceived as the consequences of the end of the Cold War and of German reunification. But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
Had the EC decided that the Single Market was the limit of its realistic ambitions, whatever the treaties might say, then Britain would still be a member. And given that it took 40 years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.0 -
And to them sovereignty is largely perceived through the prism of national pride. Having it made brutally clear that the UK doesn't have much leverage strikes at the heart of that feeling.HYUFD said:It was not BMW owners who voted Leave on the whole but lower middle class and working class voters who wanted to regain sovereignty and end free movement
0 -
At this stage the LibDems simply need to be the clear challengers. The poll figures are otherwise unimportant. With luck they will have some artwork on file with two horses in it.HYUFD said:
Labour on 51% the LDs on 31% is not a sign Labour will lose Gorton even if its majority fallssurbiton said:
Oh ! Labour will lose Gorton. Guaranteed.HYUFD said:
I was referring to the LD 'poll' of Gorton which still had Labour 20% aheadsurbiton said:
With Opinium Labour would win most of the Mayoralty contests.HYUFD said:
Not on tonight's poll they won'tsurbiton said:
I don't think outside Cambridgeshire Labour would lose any Mayoral contests including West Midlands.david_herdson said:
A point I made in this morning's piece: that while Gtr Manchester ought to be Labour's (and even on these numbers, it still should be), it might be far too close for Labour's comfort given that it's supposed to be a core area.brokenwheel said:
It would be very similar to 2010, one wild extrapolation from this; If Labour support across GM has roughly declined ~6 percentage points to the 40% they got in 2010 under Brown, then Burnham is theoretically beatable.HYUFD said:
Same polling has Labour on 51% in GortonTheScreamingEagles said:Lib Dems make serious gains in Manchester Gorton byelection
The contest on 4 May has so far seen Lib Dems zoom from 4.2% of vote in 2015 to 31% because of issues around Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/15/lib-dems-make-serious-gains-in-manchester-gorton-byelection?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
And if Manchester was squeaky bum time then all the rest of the mayoral contests bar Liverpool and probably Doncaster would be lost.
But they will lose Gorton.0 -
Looks like the Tories might be favourites to win the mayoralty in the West Midlands. Burnham should be okay in Greater Manchester though.0
-
Very late to the thread, but the abuse is one of the many things that puts me off voting for a party whose supporters behave like that.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jayfdee, see similar things on Twitter. Regular, casual abuse of the Conservatives (or Leave...) and then astonishment the Enemy won.
Good evening, everyone.0 -
That is your EU in the nutshell that is your headFloater said:
Sorry Mark, you are the last person I would listen to on Economics.MarkSenior said:
Devaluation is no answer . The UK has been devaluing the £ for 70 years without success .Floater said:
Here was I thinking Greece needed to devalue......williamglenn said:
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project (snip). But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.
Hell, you missed the mother of all recessions if I recall.
Greece needed to devalue, they can't.
Then they were sacrificed to save German banks.
That's your EU in a nutshell.0 -
TORY SURGE!!!!0
-
43 dead in Syria today. But no posts here on PB. The "wrong" people died. And Jabhat-Al-Nusra are now our allies !0
-
It's neck and neck... Corbyn is cutting through.... Labour must stay strong.....
Opinium are the new gold standard.0 -
As SO and I have been saying for months, Labour will not win in the West Midlands with the current Labour leadership. Many voters will not forgive the past of Corbo and McMao.AndyJS said:Looks like the Tories might be favourites to win the mayoralty in the West Midlands. Burnham should be okay in Greater Manchester though.
0 -
No, this is me in a nutshell: "Help, I'm in a nutshell!"MarkSenior said:
That is your EU in the nutshell that is your headFloater said:
Sorry Mark, you are the last person I would listen to on Economics.MarkSenior said:
Devaluation is no answer . The UK has been devaluing the £ for 70 years without success .Floater said:
Here was I thinking Greece needed to devalue......williamglenn said:
We don't have an alternative history to judge but I think that if there had been no Eurozone at the time of the 2008 crisis, the idea would have been resurrected at that point as a way of shielding the likes of Greece from being attacked by currency speculators.david_herdson said:
No, I don't think it was inevitable. There was no inevitability about Delors embarking on either the social programme or the single currency. Sure, the single currency had long been a project (snip). But again, would it have happened without Delors' guiding hand (and Delors was the exception - no other EU Commission president has gained such power)?GeoffM said:
And I give you 1 January 1973david_herdson said:
That might have been a strong clue but it really just revealed a reality that went back years. Yes, pro-Europeans should have been making a more positive case but I doubt that even that would have worked.williamglenn said:
You could make a case that the real turning point that led to Brexit was that debate he did with Farage in 2014 in which his approach was found wanting. That should have been a wake up call that mealy-mouthed platitudes wouldn't cut it and the pro-Europeans needed some passion and conviction.SeanT said:
What a cocksucker Clegg is. Leader of the party which proudly promised an in/out referendum it knew it would never have to deliver, because they would never win. Then, when just such a referendum was offered, it was suddenly a loathsome error and morally wrong?williamglenn said:
He is the most odious hypocrite. He should leave politics in shame.
If you want a date for when the Brexit process began, I give you 8 September 1988.
Leaving was inevitable. It was just the timing.
years just to complete most of the Single Market - a process that still isn't complete in some sectors - that's far from unrealistic.
Hell, you missed the mother of all recessions if I recall.
Greece needed to devalue, they can't.
Then they were sacrificed to save German banks.
That's your EU in a nutshell.0 -
Point of pedantry, but they were just short of a majority in October 1974. 283 were needed for a majority in E&W, they had 278, just ahead of the Tories on 271. That would probably not have been quite enough to let them form a government.HYUFD said:
Labour won a majority of seats in England and Wales in 1945, 1950, 1966, October 1974, 1997, 2001 and 2005 so even without many seats in Scotland with a credible leader they could achieve it0
This discussion has been closed.