politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With six weeks to go today’s Commons seats spreads
Comments
-
Me either. I have been thinking low teens, although if the Tory surge is maintained, or Lab remain stubbornly in the upper part of the 25-29 range, then even that could be hard. It's still possible - some tactical voting helps them grab 1-2 in Scotland maybe, hold all their current ones, a couple of remains London seats and a few pinched off Labour who are still doing badly too gets them close - but it won't be easy without a wider pool or very very efficient vote.HurstLlama said:
I quite agree, the Lib Dems seat numbers moving into the twenties, let alone the high twenties, would be a massive cause of celebration. However, let us be serious for a moment.kle4 said:
A LD revival into the 20s, should that occur, would surely be worthy of celebration, as it would no doubt also come with reemergence as principal opposition in many places and thus primed for yet more gains in 2022stodge said:
I don't know - you'll have to ask Mr Stonch who doesn't post here any more.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Mr Stodge,stodge said:My other thought on the above is whether how much upside there is for Conservative buyers at 390.
In 1983, Margaret Thatcher won 397 seats but that included 21 seats in Scotland on 28.5% of the vote and 14 seats in Wales.
I know there's a lot of talk about a Conservative revival in both Scotland and Wales but are we expecting a combined figure of 35 seats ?
In 2015, the Conservatives won 318 seats in England so assuming the Scottish/Welsh total is nearer 25 than 35 that means 365 seats in England so 47 English gains and that's just to reach 390.
Is the Finborough Arms organizing a GE all-nighter/piss-up this year?
I suspect unless you're a Conservative there won't be much to celebrate on the night of June 8/9.
If polling means anything then we are looking to a doubling or even tripling of the number of seats on the back of a lift from about 8-9% to 11-12%. I know that the Lib Dems have reputation for efficient voting but two or three times the number of seats on a vote share lift of maybe 4%? Not something that I would put money on.0 -
Yes, that's nicely put.Carolus_Rex said:
Good post.kle4 said:
Personally I find much of the dream of the EU to be quite appealing, but the reality of it wore me down over the years. It's why I hope they do manage to do well in years to come, and grapple with some of their issues. One of my issues was often they would acknowledge problems, say things needed doing, then do nothing. I hope Brexit means they will do something and achieve their potential. At present, though, its biggest cheerleaders are in hagiography mode and lashing out, seeking punishment rather than any hint of reflection. That may change. William will say it doesn't need to reflect, they are so awesome. But all entities need to continually justify their existence, and the eu got bad at that. For need of a good neighbour - which currently they are indicating they don't want to be - I hope for both our sales they start to embody thedream a bit more. It is a good dream.Peter_the_Punter said:
It might be going too far to say its structure was no longer fit for purpose but nobody should underestimate the part played by the EU itself in the Brexit fiasco. For a start, what kind of an authority sets up a border 3,000 miles long and makes no sensible arrangement for policing it?DavidL said:
It is absurd to blame one side only in such a scenario. If Cameron had been treated with respect and there had been a willingness to grasp any of the many issues screaming out for reform in an EU structure no longer fit for purpose after its expansion we would not be here. But there wasn't. So we are.williamglenn said:
I'm afraid that's the result of 30 years of propaganda against the EU. If you put at risk the constitutional framework that allowed the UK to maintain stability, don't be surprised if the whole thing breaks.DavidL said:
Not at all. I am however weary of the polarisation of our politics, principally in respect of Independence but also in respect of the EU.Theuniondivvie said:
Do I detect a touch of Ruth weariness?DavidL said:
f NI playing the part of Sinn Fein and the DUP respectively. Scottish politics is being driven to the extremes on both sides of the independence argument and it suits the main players for that to happen. Anyone in the middle gets squashed.Scott_P said:Remember folks, this election is not about Alex Salmond taking over from Nicola Sturgeon, honest...
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/857587646918512640
Its a slightly concerning development for those such as myself for whom the Union is more important than any party.
Madness.0 -
6 in scotland is too many - maybe 10+in Wales.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The conservatives won 331 seats in total in 2015 so to reach 390 they need 59 gains. On a modest 6 in Scotland and 8 in Wales that reduces it to 45 from labour, lib dems and green combinedMortimer said:
Agree. I won't be touching the spreads on CON just yet.stodge said:My other thought on the above is whether how much upside there is for Conservative buyers at 390.
In 1983, Margaret Thatcher won 397 seats but that included 21 seats in Scotland on 28.5% of the vote and 14 seats in Wales.
I know there's a lot of talk about a Conservative revival in both Scotland and Wales but are we expecting a combined figure of 35 seats ?
In 2015, the Conservatives won 318 seats in England so assuming the Scottish/Welsh total is nearer 25 than 35 that means 365 seats in England so 47 English gains and that's just to reach 390.0 -
Looks like "Vote Blue, Go Green" has been modified to "Vote Blue, Breath Toxic Air" as part of the transition from Cameron to May.surbiton said:
They should not have wasted time and done it earlier.Big_G_NorthWales said:
How can it do that with no mpsmarke09 said:Sky News NewsdeskVerified account @SkyNewsBreak 12m12 minutes ago
The Government has failed in its High Court bid to delay publishing plans to tackle illegal air pollution until after the General Election
(Not that Vote Blue Go Green was ever anything more than total BS)0 -
On and on and on.... and wrong and wrong and wrong.........williamglenn said:
They're absolutely right. We haven't come to terms with our place in the world and somehow have a feeling that history has all gone wrong for us to end up stuck in a Europe where Germany outranks us in economic power and political influence.Casino_Royale said:In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
The irony is that if we didn't have such a dysfunctional relationship with the EU, both the UK and the EU would have been much stronger.0 -
I would qualify that by they had to have a good constituency recordIanB2 said:
What evidence is there that someone who was the MP until two years ago, and certainly knows and is known by lots of local organisations and people for whom he did casework, doesn't get a bonus? There is no magic or immutable law that says it has to be the existing incumbent only. I haven't researched it myself but common sense suggests that a former recent incumbent almost certainly does get a significant bonus. Anecdotal reports coming in from Bermondsey and Eastbourne suggests this is very much the case.justin124 said:
But Huppert has lost the incumbency bonus and the Tories are less likely to vote tactically when riding so high in the polls. Cambridge was normally a Tory seat until 1992 and were only 13% behind the Libdems in 2010. It is a seat they could win from third plce - in the same way that Labour managed in 1992 and 2015.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi I think Cambridge deserves it's place up there. In an analysis of results Julian Huppert retained way more of his vote than the average Lib Dem (Save a few Scots).
He has a decent personal vote, and I think the Tory vote share could well go down in that constituency as he gets some tacticals.0 -
Good afternoon all. Just popping in to say hello and thank you to all for your very kind words to me. Much appreciated.Cyan said:Cyan said:The Rothermere press on Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte. If they are as happy together as they seem to be then good luck to them, but some of the pictures won't go down well with some voters.
"Brigitte has refused to reveal when the unlikely pair first became intimate, proclaiming it 'our secret'."
"'Nobody will ever know at what moment our story became a love story. That belongs to us. That is our secret,' she said."
The age of consent in France when one party has authority over the other - for instance, if they are their schoolteacher - is 18.
I am slowly recuperating. The garden is getting a lot of TLC and I am listening to much music. Really, what else does one need?
Just to be a tad waspish, Madame Macron would be well advised to wear dresses with sleeves.0 -
I agree. Corbyn does seem to be fixated on the point that all long-term settlements are ultimately political ones. He doesn't seem to be able to, or want to, accept that there is pretty broad consensus on that point.david_herdson said:
In Syria, it's not just Assad who has no interest in coming to the table; the Daesh groups have even less reason to do so. Talking about a political settlement now simply plays into the hands of the most extreme, as they're then able to dictate terms.
The real debate is how you get people to a place where they accept that they ought to come to a balanced political settlement now rather than strengthening their position via military means until such time as the inevitable negotiation consists of "sign this unconditional surrender document here, and initial here and here - but you can choose whether to do it in black or blue ink as a sign of our commitment to the spirit of compromise".
Corbyn won't engage in that debate because, I'm afraid, it inevitably means making messy compromises and offending some pacifists.
0 -
True, his vote dropped just over 1% when the Labour vote, both nationally and in the comparable nearby seat of Gedling rose by just over 1%. So a 2-3% difference. But maybe that MP was a lazy so-and-so who took his voters for granted?justin124 said:
The Labour candidate for Broxtowe in 2015 appeared to lose much of the incumbency bonus he enjoyed in 2010.IanB2 said:
What evidence is there that someone who was the MP until two years ago, and certainly knows and is known by lots of local organisations and people for whom he did casework, doesn't get a bonus? There is no magic or immutable law that says it has to be the existing incumbent only. I haven't researched it myself but common sense suggests that a former recent incumbent almost certainly does get a significant bonus. Anecdotal reports coming in from Bermondsey and Eastbourne suggests this is very much the case.justin124 said:
But Huppert has lost the incumbency bonus and the Tories are less likely to vote tactically when riding so high in the polls. Cambridge was normally a Tory seat until 1992 and were only 13% behind the Libdems in 2010. It is a seat they could win from third plce - in the same way that Labour managed in 1992 and 2015.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi I think Cambridge deserves it's place up there. In an analysis of results Julian Huppert retained way more of his vote than the average Lib Dem (Save a few Scots).
He has a decent personal vote, and I think the Tory vote share could well go down in that constituency as he gets some tacticals.
And five years is a longer time for people to forget than just two. Did he continue campaigning locally during those five years, and the LibDems have in Cambridge?
The other side of the question is how long it takes a new MP - in this case Labour's Mr Z - to build up an incumbency bonus? It can't all appear straight away.0 -
The other is that we can spell Labour properly.david_herdson said:
And that's one way in which the British Labour Party differs in culture from its rather more successful Australian brother.justin124 said:
When the Australian Labor party changed its leader in early 1983 following a similar snap election announcement by Malcolm Fraser the election of Bob Hawke to relace its existing leader had a very positive effect on its fortunes!david_herdson said:
No, there's a mechanism for dumping the leader against his will. It's cumbersome and requires a direct challenge: there is no provision to depose via a vote of no confidence. Labour cannot remove Corbyn now before the GE.surbiton said:
The NEC, in theory, could do anything, I guess. There will be an almighty rumpus but it can be done. The Aussies would have done it by now.TheScreamingEagles said:Right, is there any feasible way for Labour to ditch Corbyn and coronate Tom Watson or Yvette Cooper as leader 4 weeks before polling day?
In any case, even if they could, they'd be mad to do so. Firstly, the act of switching leaders at this stage would be chaotic and split the party from top to bottom; secondly, it would interfere massively with election preparations: literature, timetables, campaign events, the manifesto and so on; thirdly, it'd probably mean a shadow cabinet reshuffle because Corbyn being ousted would probably mean McDonnell, Abbott and others going too - and these new shadow ministers would have to be up to media interview standard within days; fourthly, and relatedly, it'd probably mean a reshuffle of Labour's backroom staff, so the planning, organisation and media-facing side would be thrown into even more chaos; and finally - and perhaps most importantly - the left would no longer own the election result come June 8.0 -
Apologies for mis-remembering the namestodge said:
I don't know - you'll have to ask Mr Stonch who doesn't post here any more.Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:
Mr Stodge,stodge said:My other thought on the above is whether how much upside there is for Conservative buyers at 390.
In 1983, Margaret Thatcher won 397 seats but that included 21 seats in Scotland on 28.5% of the vote and 14 seats in Wales.
I know there's a lot of talk about a Conservative revival in both Scotland and Wales but are we expecting a combined figure of 35 seats ?
In 2015, the Conservatives won 318 seats in England so assuming the Scottish/Welsh total is nearer 25 than 35 that means 365 seats in England so 47 English gains and that's just to reach 390.
Is the Finborough Arms organizing a GE all-nighter/piss-up this year?
I suspect unless you're a Conservative there won't be much to celebrate on the night of June 8/9.
0 -
-
Isn’t UK Music just a glorified lobbyist group?Scott_P said:@PolhomeEditor: BREAKING: Outgoing Labour MP Michael Dugher is the new chief executive of UK Music.
0 -
Anecdotal reports had the LDs keeping most of their MPs at the last election.IanB2 said:
What evidence is there that someone who was the MP until two years ago, and certainly knows and is known by lots of local organisations and people for whom he did casework, doesn't get a bonus? There is no magic or immutable law that says it has to be the existing incumbent only. I haven't researched it myself but common sense suggests that a former recent incumbent almost certainly does get a significant bonus. Anecdotal reports coming in from Bermondsey and Eastbourne suggests this is very much the case.justin124 said:
But Huppert has lost the incumbency bonus and the Tories are less likely to vote tactically when riding so high in the polls. Cambridge was normally a Tory seat until 1992 and were only 13% behind the Libdems in 2010. It is a seat they could win from third plce - in the same way that Labour managed in 1992 and 2015.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi I think Cambridge deserves it's place up there. In an analysis of results Julian Huppert retained way more of his vote than the average Lib Dem (Save a few Scots).
He has a decent personal vote, and I think the Tory vote share could well go down in that constituency as he gets some tacticals.0 -
Nuttall standing in a mystery seat!0
-
-
She was having a problem with her backbenchers both over Brexit but also grammar schools. She saw an opportunity and took it to get her own mandate. Of course it is very inconvenient for all the opposition who have been caught out and some are no doubt angry, even fearful of the resultYorkcity said:
There was no other reason to reverse her decision ruling out a snap election.If you believe that guff on the door of downing Street that she was facing opposition in parliament .It beggars believe.kle4 said:
If that was true wouldn't the party have been better prepared? The time table has been known and the deep trouble the party might be in too for a long while. I don't doubt it was a factor, but I find it hard to believe it was the main factor.Yorkcity said:
Very true her main consideration in calling the GE .justin124 said:
I don't see why the CPS should feel the need to be hurried along because May decided to call an election. She knew full well this was in the pipeline when she acted last week.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They need to be careful - they need to act before 11th May otherwise it will be seen as a political act.logical_song said:
The CPS have a job to do, but it will difficult for them to avoid political controversy.murali_s said:
One by one please - name and shame the Tories everyday for as long as it takes (a bit like the Labour front bench resignations) - popcorn time!TheScreamingEagles said:
Well Craig Mackinlay's file went to the CPS this week.logical_song said:
Could be embarrassing.TheScreamingEagles said:
Is a narrow window, would have to charge before May 11th.logical_song said:If 'CPS will have to decide before polling day' will they decide before the Tories choose their candidates in the affected seats?
Which is a fortnight away or 9 working days away.
I guess all current MPs would want re-stand.
This could get very messy.
What does Alison Saunders do if there are multiple MPs to be charged ?
Do it in one go or do it one by one and dominate a lot of news cycles.
Theresa May has no blame in this and I am certain she will state that all her mps deny all charges
At this point it becomes sub judice and comments made would have to be measured against contempt of court0 -
Near Hillsborough, I hope.Scott_P said:0 -
Miss Cyclefree, welcome back. Glad you're on the mend
0 -
To paraphrase the late Caroline Aherne: What was it that first attracted May into having an election while leading by 21% in the polls?kle4 said:
I don't believe her guff and have been wondering what changed her mind in so short a time, but it still seems like she knew before that bad news would be coming on this topic, and the timeline, so that cannot be 'the thing that changed' to do so either.Yorkcity said:
There was no other reason to reverse her decision ruling out a snap election.If you believe that guff on the door of downing Street that she was facing opposition in parliament .It beggars believe.kle4 said:
If that was true wouldn't the party have been better prepared? The time table has been known and the deep trouble the party might be in too for a long while. I don't doubt it was a factor, but I find it hard to believe it was the main factor.Yorkcity said:
Very true her main consideration in calling the GE .justin124 said:
I don't see why the CPS should feel the need to be hurried along because May decided to call an election. She knew full well this was in the pipeline when she acted last week.Big_G_NorthWales said:
They need to be careful - they need to act before 11th May otherwise it will be seen as a political act.logical_song said:
The CPS have a job to do, but it will difficult for them to avoid political controversy.murali_s said:
One by one please - name and shame the Tories everyday for as long as it takes (a bit like the Labour front bench resignations) - popcorn time!TheScreamingEagles said:
Well Craig Mackinlay's file went to the CPS this week.logical_song said:
Could be embarrassing.TheScreamingEagles said:
Is a narrow window, would have to charge before May 11th.logical_song said:If 'CPS will have to decide before polling day' will they decide before the Tories choose their candidates in the affected seats?
Which is a fortnight away or 9 working days away.
I guess all current MPs would want re-stand.
This could get very messy.
What does Alison Saunders do if there are multiple MPs to be charged ?
Do it in one go or do it one by one and dominate a lot of news cycles.
Theresa May has no blame in this and I am certain she will state that all her mps deny all charges
At this point it becomes sub judice and comments made would have to be measured against contempt of court0 -
Next week's news: "I never claimed I was going to stand at the election. It was merely put on my website by an enthusiastic volunteer, who I have reprimanded".Scott_P said:0 -
Yes, and to eurosceptics such as myself, the very fact it may consider the UK to be akin to an errant child that needs chastening, explains just why I wanted to leave.Peter_the_Punter said:
Yes, I was sure it wasn't an original thought, CR, but I'm gratified to find myself in such good company.Casino_Royale said:
Many Remainers (often reluctant Remainers) have made the same point, Peter.. Jossias Jessop, yourself, Pulpstar, and David Herdson. To name but a few. Hell, even Alastair Meeks had strong criticisms to make.Peter_the_Punter said:
ItDavidL said:
Itwilliamglenn said:
I'm afraid that's the result of 30 years of propaganda against the EU. If you put at risk the constitutional framework that allowed the UK to maintain stability, don't be surprised if the whole thing breaks.DavidL said:
Not at all. I am however weary of the polarisation of our politics, principally in respect of Independence but also in respect of the EU.Theuniondivvie said:
Do I detect a touch of Ruth weariness?DavidL said:
SScott_P said:Remember folks, this election is not about Alex Salmond taking over from Nicola Sturgeon, honest...
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/857587646918512640
Its a slightly concerning development for those such as myself for whom the Union is more important than any party.
Madness.
But the EU doesn't see itself as having played *any* role in Brexit. It thinks it's down to our Eurosceptic press, and the fringe loons of the Conservative Party. It hasn't been explained or listened to properly. That's why Brexit is happening: nothing more; nothing less.
In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
It would be unilke a politician to admit a mistake and I expect EU ones are no different to ours in that respect. What they may think privately could be a different matter. I expect there will be some however who consider that the UK is doing the EU a favor but showing the rest what happens to its errant children. It may be unfair to treat us as whipping boys, but they could at least argue we voted for it.
It would be tough to argue with that.
In the short-term, regarding the UK-EU relationship, we will have a lose-lose.
In the long term, who knows?0 -
Nutshell.Patrick said:
The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.williamglenn said:
They're absolutely right. We haven't come to terms with our place in the world and somehow have a feeling that history has all gone wrong for us to end up stuck in a Europe where Germany outranks us in economic power and political influence.Casino_Royale said:In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
The irony is that if we didn't have such a dysfunctional relationship with the EU, both the UK and the EU would have been much stronger.
And I wish the EU good fortune. Really. Because of the above. And I voted out.
Have difficulty explaining this to rellies in DE though, who BTW think the Euro was a disaster from the off and would abolish it tomorrow because, they say, it is ruining the good dream and damaging millions of people.
0 -
Indeed - but the point is that a last minute leadership change might still be very helpful for Labour.david_herdson said:
And that's one way in which the British Labour Party differs in culture from its rather more successful Australian brother.justin124 said:
When the Australian Labor party changed its leader in early 1983 following a similar snap election announcement by Malcolm Fraser the election of Bob Hawke to relace its existing leader had a very positive effect on its fortunes!david_herdson said:
No, there's a mechanism for dumping the leader against his will. It's cumbersome and requires a direct challenge: there is no provision to depose via a vote of no confidence. Labour cannot remove Corbyn now before the GE.surbiton said:
The NEC, in theory, could do anything, I guess. There will be an almighty rumpus but it can be done. The Aussies would have done it by now.TheScreamingEagles said:Right, is there any feasible way for Labour to ditch Corbyn and coronate Tom Watson or Yvette Cooper as leader 4 weeks before polling day?
In any case, even if they could, they'd be mad to do so. Firstly, the act of switching leaders at this stage would be chaotic and split the party from top to bottom; secondly, it would interfere massively with election preparations: literature, timetables, campaign events, the manifesto and so on; thirdly, it'd probably mean a shadow cabinet reshuffle because Corbyn being ousted would probably mean McDonnell, Abbott and others going too - and these new shadow ministers would have to be up to media interview standard within days; fourthly, and relatedly, it'd probably mean a reshuffle of Labour's backroom staff, so the planning, organisation and media-facing side would be thrown into even more chaos; and finally - and perhaps most importantly - the left would no longer own the election result come June 8.0 -
Is Nuttall a fighter, not a quitter?
If so, Hartlepool could be his choice.0 -
Which Paul Nutall is standing?Scott_P said:0 -
I really don't know why HMG is fighting the air pollution case.
Yes, politically, I feel it really is none of the EU's business, but don't we all want clean air?0 -
Surely Nuttall's "mystery seat" must be Stoke Central?
I understand he lives in the constituency, and is 100% committed to the area and its people.0 -
With my knowledge of Scotland and my extensive family there 6 is reasonable as it is a fight between the union and indy2. Indeed upto 10 may be possible if the north east, as expected, go bluefelix said:
6 in scotland is too many - maybe 10+in Wales.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The conservatives won 331 seats in total in 2015 so to reach 390 they need 59 gains. On a modest 6 in Scotland and 8 in Wales that reduces it to 45 from labour, lib dems and green combinedMortimer said:
Agree. I won't be touching the spreads on CON just yet.stodge said:My other thought on the above is whether how much upside there is for Conservative buyers at 390.
In 1983, Margaret Thatcher won 397 seats but that included 21 seats in Scotland on 28.5% of the vote and 14 seats in Wales.
I know there's a lot of talk about a Conservative revival in both Scotland and Wales but are we expecting a combined figure of 35 seats ?
In 2015, the Conservatives won 318 seats in England so assuming the Scottish/Welsh total is nearer 25 than 35 that means 365 seats in England so 47 English gains and that's just to reach 390.0 -
Yes but Aussie Labor is more ruthless to change leaders to win elections.SandyRentool said:
The other is that we can spell Labour properly.david_herdson said:
And that's one way in which the British Labour Party differs in culture from its rather more successful Australian brother.justin124 said:
When the Australian Labor party changed its leader in early 1983 following a similar snap election announcement by Malcolm Fraser the election of Bob Hawke to relace its existing leader had a very positive effect on its fortunes!david_herdson said:
No, there's a mechanism for dumping the leader against his will. It's cumbersome and requires a direct challenge: there is no provision to depose via a vote of no confidence. Labour cannot remove Corbyn now before the GE.surbiton said:
The NEC, in theory, could do anything, I guess. There will be an almighty rumpus but it can be done. The Aussies would have done it by now.TheScreamingEagles said:Right, is there any feasible way for Labour to ditch Corbyn and coronate Tom Watson or Yvette Cooper as leader 4 weeks before polling day?
In any case, even if they could, they'd be mad to do so. Firstly, the act of switching leaders at this stage would be chaotic and split the party from top to bottom; secondly, it would interfere massively with election preparations: literature, timetables, campaign events, the manifesto and so on; thirdly, it'd probably mean a shadow cabinet reshuffle because Corbyn being ousted would probably mean McDonnell, Abbott and others going too - and these new shadow ministers would have to be up to media interview standard within days; fourthly, and relatedly, it'd probably mean a reshuffle of Labour's backroom staff, so the planning, organisation and media-facing side would be thrown into even more chaos; and finally - and perhaps most importantly - the left would no longer own the election result come June 8.0 -
I think the vast majority of us have come to terms with the fact that Eire is not part of the United Kingdom, any longer.williamglenn said:
So rock solid that in the period covered by those two wars we fought an independence war on our own soil culminating in a partition of our territory where a frozen conflict was left to fester, and even 100 years later we still haven't noticed that the canary in the coal-mine has died.Patrick said:
The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.williamglenn said:
They're absolutely right. We haven't come to terms with our place in the world and somehow have a feeling that history has all gone wrong for us to end up stuck in a Europe where Germany outranks us in economic power and political influence.Casino_Royale said:In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
The irony is that if we didn't have such a dysfunctional relationship with the EU, both the UK and the EU would have been much stronger.
Most of simply don't see what we have to gain by bringing our national independence to an end.0 -
Couldn't make it up. Pathetic ! Incompetent !marke09 said:
Sandra Laville @sandralavillemarke09 said:Sky News NewsdeskVerified account @SkyNewsBreak 12m12 minutes ago
The Government has failed in its High Court bid to delay publishing plans to tackle illegal air pollution until after the General Election
Gov been refused leave to appeal so now has to apply to Appeal court for permission #airpollution
Judge said sec of state for environment Andrea Leadsom was in breach of court order0 -
I think we’re going to need a new thread just to list all of Nuttall’s possible seats and titles.SirNorfolkPassmore said:Surely Nuttall's "mystery seat" must be Stoke Central?
I understand he lives in the constituency, and is 100% committed to the area and its people.0 -
Will we see the return of the bizarre
man of the peoplecountry squire outfit?0 -
At least it will take the pressure off Tim Farron, he's had his week of hate from the mediaFrancisUrquhart said:Will we see the return of the bizarre
man of the peoplecountry squire outfit?0 -
There is no rule preventing someone standing in multiple seats, as has been done (most notably by Bill Boaks) in the past. It would suit Nuttall to stand in say ten or twenty different places? And it would be good use of Labour campaign funds to pay for the deposits, as you say!Pulpstar said:
Every single Labour MP in a strong leave constituency should hang out the bunting for him. He might just save their seat.IanB2 said:Nuttall standing in a mystery seat!
0 -
william contorting himself to proclaim how Scotland should be independent of Westminster but subservient to Brussels is a giggle.Sean_F said:
I think the vast majority of us have come to terms with the fact that Eire is not part of the United Kingdom, any longer.williamglenn said:
So rock solid that in the period covered by those two wars we fought an independence war on our own soil culminating in a partition of our territory where a frozen conflict was left to fester, and even 100 years later we still haven't noticed that the canary in the coal-mine has died.Patrick said:
The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.williamglenn said:
They're absolutely right. We haven't come to terms with our place in the world and somehow have a feeling that history has all gone wrong for us to end up stuck in a Europe where Germany outranks us in economic power and political influence.Casino_Royale said:In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
The irony is that if we didn't have such a dysfunctional relationship with the EU, both the UK and the EU would have been much stronger.
Most of simply don't see what we have to gain by bringing our national independence to an end.
0 -
What is No1..Twickenham?Pulpstar said:
Sorry but this sort of analysis is poor, you'd have been straight to the poorhouse in 2015 if you'd have gone off the back of "I can't see the Lib Dems losing Yeovil, Bath or Thornbury", or "I can't see Labour losing Coatsbridge".surbiton said:
I cannot see the LDs winning Bermondsey. Bermondsey is not a Liberal seat.
"I can't see x, y or z" happening is such a bad way to look at things.
Bermondsey is the Lib Dem target #2 in England.0 -
Casino_Royale said:Peter_the_Punter said:
You will be gratified to note that the same point was made by no less a luminary than Henry Kissinger.Casino_Royale said:
Yes, and to eurosceptics such as myself, the very fact it may consider the UK to be akin to an errant child that needs chastening, explains just why I wanted to leave.Peter_the_Punter said:
Yes, I was sure it wasn't an original thought, CR, but I'm gratified to find myself in such good company.DavidL said:
Many Remainers (often reluctant Remainers) have made the same point, Peter.. Jossias Jessop, yourself, Pulpstar, and David Herdson. To name but a few. Hell, even Alastair Meeks had strong criticisms to make.williamglenn said:
ItDavidL said:
ItTheuniondivvie said:
aintain stability, don't be surprised if the whole thing breaks.DavidL said:
SScott_P said:Remember folks, this election is not about Alex Salmond taking over from Nicola Sturgeon, honest...
https://twitter.com/politicshome/status/857587646918512640
Its a slightly concerning development for those such as myself for whom the Union is more important than any party.
Madness.
But the EU doesn't see itself as having played *any* role in Brexit. It thinks it's down to our Eurosceptic press, and the fringe loons of the Conservative Party. It hasn't been explained or listened to properly. That's why Brexit is happening: nothing more; nothing less.
In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
It would be unilke a politician to admit a mistake and I expect EU ones are no different to ours in that respect. What they may think privately could be a different matter. I expect there will be some however who consider that the UK is doing the EU a favor but showing the rest what happens to its errant children. It may be unfair to treat us as whipping boys, but they could at least argue we voted for it.
It would be tough to argue with that.
In the short-term, regarding the UK-EU relationship, we will have a lose-lose.
In the long term, who knows?
He thought everything turned on whether the EU adopted the 'naughty child' approach. If it didn't there was no reason why both should not prosper, if it did, both would suffer.
(I think I'm right in saying that Henry is not a big fan of the EU, but others may know better.)0 -
He's a modest man - no need for that. As Archbishop of Stoke, simply referring to him as "Your Grace" will be quite sufficient.SimonStClare said:
I think we’re going to need a new thread just to list all of Nuttall’s possible seats and titles.SirNorfolkPassmore said:Surely Nuttall's "mystery seat" must be Stoke Central?
I understand he lives in the constituency, and is 100% committed to the area and its people.0 -
On my recent sojourn, I had a discussion with some very conservative Americans about Brexit. They were very much taken with Dan Hannan and his arguments about Sovereignty, and tried to make the case that there are some things that are better handled at local levels rather than at an overarching level.Patrick said:The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.
And even if you accept that, what they failed to do was follow that to the logical conclusion that all the States should therefore secede...
There are some thing where it makes sense to group together in a larger block, with higher level control, and frictionless trade is one such example.
Even leaving the EU, we still need to be part of a larger trading organisation, with external judicial oversight, just one that gives us much crappier benefits at higher costs
Even the hardest Brexiteer has a hard time arguing that being part of the EU has not made us better off0 -
Good afternoon.
Regarding yesterday's YouGov numbers - apologies if anybody else has already pointed this out, but I'm reasonably confident that this poll is an outlier.
There's been a quite evident trend in the YouGov numbers recently of Labour support amongst men bumping along somewhere just above 20%. I've noticed that it's the support of women that appears to have been keeping Labour's VI numbers up as high as 24-25% recently and, given Labour's abysmal performance with older voters, I surmised that this was down mainly to younger women. Then, in a recent analysis (which was a subject of a posting on PB, IIRC,) YouGov said that they suspected as much themselves.
But now, we have this new poll in which Labour support amongst women remains static, but that amongst men has suddenly jumped by 8% relative to the last poll - accounting for Labour's entire 4% overall improvement. This is very strange.
If, by some chance, Labour's message is achieving cut-through then I can see no compelling reason why its support should jump by such a huge amount (equivalent to the entire Ukip total) amongst men, and yet have moved not one iota amongst women, in the space of a couple of days.
My expectation would therefore be that the next set of YouGov numbers will revert to somewhere close to the trend of the last month or so (he says, preparing to wipe egg from face...) Unless they've made a very large correction to their weighting of the responses of male voters between this latest poll and the one immediately prior to it, I can't see how the most recent survey is likely to be anything other than a rogue.0 -
He most certainly did not take his voters for granted and continued to be high profile after narrowly losing in 2010. I am - of course - referring to Nick Palmer who is a regular contributor here.IanB2 said:
True, his vote dropped just over 1% when the Labour vote, both nationally and in the comparable nearby seat of Gedling rose by just over 1%. So a 2-3% difference. But maybe that MP was a lazy so-and-so who took his voters for granted?justin124 said:
The Labour candidate for Broxtowe in 2015 appeared to lose much of the incumbency bonus he enjoyed in 2010.IanB2 said:
What evidence is there that someone who was the MP until two years ago, and certainly knows and is known by lots of local organisations and people for whom he did casework, doesn't get a bonus? There is no magic or immutable law that says it has to be the existing incumbent only. I haven't researched it myself but common sense suggests that a former recent incumbent almost certainly does get a significant bonus. Anecdotal reports coming in from Bermondsey and Eastbourne suggests this is very much the case.justin124 said:
But Huppert has lost the incumbency bonus and the Tories are less likely to vote tactically when riding so high in the polls. Cambridge was normally a Tory seat until 1992 and were only 13% behind the Libdems in 2010. It is a seat they could win from third plce - in the same way that Labour managed in 1992 and 2015.Pulpstar said:@Richard_Nabavi I think Cambridge deserves it's place up there. In an analysis of results Julian Huppert retained way more of his vote than the average Lib Dem (Save a few Scots).
He has a decent personal vote, and I think the Tory vote share could well go down in that constituency as he gets some tacticals. And five years is a longer time for people to forget than just two. Did he continue campaigning locally during those five years, and the LibDems have in Cambridge?
The other side of the question is how long it takes a new MP - in this case Labour's Mr Z - to build up an incumbency bonus? It can't all appear straight away.0 -
Nevertheless the US too has problems with its population deserting the rust belt states and moving to Arizona or San Diego.Scott_P said:
On my recent sojourn, I had a discussion with some very conservative Americans about Brexit. They were very much taken with Dan Hannan and his arguments about Sovereignty, and tried to make the case that there are some things that are better handled at local levels rather than at an overarching level.Patrick said:The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.
And even if you accept that, what they failed to do was follow that to the logical conclusion that all the States should therefore secede...
There are some thing where it makes sense to group together in a larger block, with higher level control, and frictionless trade is one such example.
Even leaving the EU, we still need to be part of a larger trading organisation, with external judicial oversight, just one that gives us much crappier benefits at higher costs
Even the hardest Brexiteer has a hard time arguing that being part of the EU has not made us better off0 -
Cambridge ought to be in my opinion.timmo said:
What is No1..Twickenham?Pulpstar said:
Sorry but this sort of analysis is poor, you'd have been straight to the poorhouse in 2015 if you'd have gone off the back of "I can't see the Lib Dems losing Yeovil, Bath or Thornbury", or "I can't see Labour losing Coatsbridge".surbiton said:
I cannot see the LDs winning Bermondsey. Bermondsey is not a Liberal seat.
"I can't see x, y or z" happening is such a bad way to look at things.
Bermondsey is the Lib Dem target #2 in England.0 -
Professor the Reverend Lord Nuttall, CH OMFrancisUrquhart said:
Which Paul Nutall is standing?Scott_P said:
0 -
Theoretically what happens if someone is elected to two different seats at the same time?IanB2 said:
There is no rule preventing someone standing in multiple seats, as has been done (most notably by Bill Boaks) in the past. It would suit Nuttall to stand in say ten or twenty different places? And it would be good use of Labour campaign funds to pay for the deposits, as you say!Pulpstar said:
Every single Labour MP in a strong leave constituency should hang out the bunting for him. He might just save their seat.IanB2 said:Nuttall standing in a mystery seat!
0 -
She who must be obeyed says Mm... she would. And would have back then, too. I am shocked. Shocked. You never really know people, do you?Cyclefree said:
Good afternoon all. Just popping in to say hello and thank you to all for your very kind words to me. Much appreciated.Cyan said:Cyan said:The Rothermere press on Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte. If they are as happy together as they seem to be then good luck to them, but some of the pictures won't go down well with some voters.
"Brigitte has refused to reveal when the unlikely pair first became intimate, proclaiming it 'our secret'."
"'Nobody will ever know at what moment our story became a love story. That belongs to us. That is our secret,' she said."
The age of consent in France when one party has authority over the other - for instance, if they are their schoolteacher - is 18.
I am slowly recuperating. The garden is getting a lot of TLC and I am listening to much music. Really, what else does one need?
Just to be a tad waspish, Madame Macron would be well advised to wear dresses with sleeves.
0 -
He had to delay it because of foot and mouth.1974 was a shock under the circumstances .Is it the only election since 1945 that Labour won that it was not expected to ? As the conservatives have won in 92 and 2015 when many did not predict a majority.justin124 said:
The only difference is that everyone expected the 2001 election whilst this has come out of the blue.In some ways it is more reminiscent of February 1974 - except that the campaign period is more than twice as long.Yorkcity said:I thought that nothing really changes during an election campaign ? If it is a reversal of the 2001 Labour victory it is a forgone conclusion .Even the excitement in the media of the DPM brawling with a member of the public changed nothing.However it was more exciting than listening to the current Tory mantras coalition of chaos ,which everyone knows is crap as there is no chance of it occurring If that is Crosby's best effort he is screwing the Tory party as a an unpaid official could have done better.
0 -
Lib Dem targets, ordered by percentage majority to be overturned:Pulpstar said:
Cambridge ought to be in my opinion.timmo said:
What is No1..Twickenham?Pulpstar said:
Sorry but this sort of analysis is poor, you'd have been straight to the poorhouse in 2015 if you'd have gone off the back of "I can't see the Lib Dems losing Yeovil, Bath or Thornbury", or "I can't see Labour losing Coatsbridge".surbiton said:
I cannot see the LDs winning Bermondsey. Bermondsey is not a Liberal seat.
"I can't see x, y or z" happening is such a bad way to look at things.
Bermondsey is the Lib Dem target #2 in England.
1. Cambridge
2. Eastbourne
3. Lewes
4. Thornbury & Yate
5. Twickenham
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat0 -
@BBCTimDonovan: Ukip not standing against Kate Hoey in Vauxhall - as trailed. Also not standing in Ilford North - to help Tories vs @wesstreeting0
-
There is a group-think and arrogance at the heart of the EU, particularly among its leadership. I don't think it's intentional and I suspect even Juncker has good intentions at heart, but the overall effect is one of an arrogant, dismissive elite.
The top bods lack accountability and any heavyweight opponents to challenge their federalist viewpoint. They see someone like Farage as a populist, quasi-fascist pipsqueak; someone to be ignored and sneered at, rather than an elected representative of people with concerns, worries and grievances. Yes, Farage is an arse, but he does have a point shared by many citizens.
I honestly believe there is a noble bent to a huge swathe of the Brexiteer camp - particularly among those who are concerned about the erosion of sovereignty - in that they believe strongly that Europe could be better; that the EU could perform far more effectively on the world stage, and that we could be part of it.
Sadly, reform was never on the agenda. After all, they like power, they are drunk on it.
It is all too anti-democratic for my liberal, anti-authority liking. I'm glad we are out.0 -
They have to stand down in (at least) all but one.Philip_Thompson said:
Theoretically what happens if someone is elected to two different seats at the same time?IanB2 said:
There is no rule preventing someone standing in multiple seats, as has been done (most notably by Bill Boaks) in the past. It would suit Nuttall to stand in say ten or twenty different places? And it would be good use of Labour campaign funds to pay for the deposits, as you say!Pulpstar said:
Every single Labour MP in a strong leave constituency should hang out the bunting for him. He might just save their seat.IanB2 said:Nuttall standing in a mystery seat!
0 -
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:0 -
I'm sure that that has been changed now so that that rule is a place.IanB2 said:
They have to stand down in (at least) all but one.Philip_Thompson said:
Theoretically what happens if someone is elected to two different seats at the same time?IanB2 said:
There is no rule preventing someone standing in multiple seats, as has been done (most notably by Bill Boaks) in the past. It would suit Nuttall to stand in say ten or twenty different places? And it would be good use of Labour campaign funds to pay for the deposits, as you say!Pulpstar said:
Every single Labour MP in a strong leave constituency should hang out the bunting for him. He might just save their seat.IanB2 said:Nuttall standing in a mystery seat!
0 -
Do we know if UKIP are going to stand in the Tory/LibDem marginals? Hard to see LibDems making any gains if UKIP step down (and in all probability if UKIP do run tbh).Black_Rook said:
Lib Dem targets, ordered by percentage majority to be overturned:Pulpstar said:
Cambridge ought to be in my opinion.timmo said:
What is No1..Twickenham?Pulpstar said:
Sorry but this sort of analysis is poor, you'd have been straight to the poorhouse in 2015 if you'd have gone off the back of "I can't see the Lib Dems losing Yeovil, Bath or Thornbury", or "I can't see Labour losing Coatsbridge".surbiton said:
I cannot see the LDs winning Bermondsey. Bermondsey is not a Liberal seat.
"I can't see x, y or z" happening is such a bad way to look at things.
Bermondsey is the Lib Dem target #2 in England.
1. Cambridge
2. Eastbourne
3. Lewes
4. Thornbury & Yate
5. Twickenham
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/liberal-democrat0 -
And I don't think our new found freedom to wave a flag is worth the economic price we will pay.Fenster said:I honestly believe there is a noble bent to a huge swathe of the Brexiteer camp - particularly among those who are concerned about the erosion of sovereignty - in that they believe strongly that Europe could be better; that the EU could perform far more effectively on the world stage, and that we could be part of it.
Sadly, reform was never on the agenda. After all, they like power, they are drunk on it.
It is all too anti-democratic for my liberal, anti-authority liking. I'm glad we are out.
c.f. Scotland...
YMMV.0 -
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
Goodness - I admire your optimism and would be thrilled but...Big_G_NorthWales said:
With my knowledge of Scotland and my extensive family there 6 is reasonable as it is a fight between the union and indy2. Indeed upto 10 may be possible if the north east, as expected, go bluefelix said:
6 in scotland is too many - maybe 10+in Wales.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The conservatives won 331 seats in total in 2015 so to reach 390 they need 59 gains. On a modest 6 in Scotland and 8 in Wales that reduces it to 45 from labour, lib dems and green combinedMortimer said:
Agree. I won't be touching the spreads on CON just yet.stodge said:My other thought on the above is whether how much upside there is for Conservative buyers at 390.
In 1983, Margaret Thatcher won 397 seats but that included 21 seats in Scotland on 28.5% of the vote and 14 seats in Wales.
I know there's a lot of talk about a Conservative revival in both Scotland and Wales but are we expecting a combined figure of 35 seats ?
In 2015, the Conservatives won 318 seats in England so assuming the Scottish/Welsh total is nearer 25 than 35 that means 365 seats in England so 47 English gains and that's just to reach 390.0 -
Hartlepool UKIP are selecting their candidate tonight from a shortlist of 3 , Nuttall is not one of them .Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:0 -
-
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere 0 -
I am beginning to think he must be trolling - no one really thinks like him do they?Casino_Royale said:
No, you exemplify the problem.williamglenn said:
They're absolutely right. We haven't come to terms with our place in the world and somehow have a feeling that history has all gone wrong for us to end up stuck in a Europe where Germany outranks us in economic power and political influence.Casino_Royale said:In other words, they think Brexit is our problem, not theirs.
The irony is that if we didn't have such a dysfunctional relationship with the EU, both the UK and the EU would have been much stronger.0 -
I think it is better to have a local who has fought the seat before. The UKIP fellow in Daggers is the candidate from 2010, Peter Harris. Thurrock hasn't been announced yet, but I think Tim Aker would probably do as well if not better.Pulpstar said:
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
Michael Dugher said UKIP got 10k* in his seat last time without trying.. he is standing down, could that be one?
*EDIT although they only got 9k!
0 -
0
-
An interesting defection. Helps slightly to bolster the Lib Dems as a safe choice for those wavering tory remainers.Scott_P said:0 -
Afternoon all
My final thought on the LDs for the moment.
After the debacle of 1970, the Feb 1974 election saw the party's vote share increase two and a half times to 19.3%. That was one of the few elections when BOTH Conservative and labour vote shares fell.
2017 isn't as yet February 1974. To even double the vote share from 2015 will be a huge achievement in 24 months. Realistically, 12-15% looks a solid step forward but that won't be strongly reflected in seats and 15 seats at best looks valid but progress to bring more into range.
The Conservatives will have nowhere to hide after the GE and will have to maintain a huge tent of a coalition through the Brexit process and beyond. Inevitably things will happen, things won't happen and mistakes will be made and the potential pool of disillusioned Conservatives on whom the LDs can draw from say mid 2018 onwards will be considerable.
When, not if, the May Government hits its midterm, the poll numbers could look very bad for the Conservatives for a while especially if Brexit doesn't look like delivering all things to all people.
We'll see - in the short term, it won't be easy being a non-Conservative and six weeks or so today the triumphalism will be unbearable but as night follows day that will change and it will be the Conservatives who will have to be on the defensive as they have to stand on the record and the promises and the expectations.
One day too Labour will get its act together and there will come an election where it will be the Conservatives who will be on the edge of disaster much as they were this time 20 years ago.0 -
Looks a great shot tbh.isam said:
I think it is better to have a local who has fought the seat before. The UKIP fellow in Daggers is the candidate from 2010, Peter Harris. Thurrock hasn't been announced yet, but I think Tim Aker would probably do as well if not better.Pulpstar said:
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
Michael Dugher said UKIP got 10k in his seat last time without trying.. he is standing down, could that be one?0 -
Heywood?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
If we had stayed in EFTA since 1973, and never joined the then EEC, I think there would be precious little difference in our net wealth.Scott_P said:
On my recent sojourn, I had a discussion with some very conservative Americans about Brexit. They were very much taken with Dan Hannan and his arguments about Sovereignty, and tried to make the case that there are some things that are better handled at local levels rather than at an overarching level.Patrick said:The real split is between the political and the economic. The rest of Europe had had a shitty century, constantly at war with itself. It didn't trust nation states not to do so again. So the EU emerged to supercede nation states and limit their power (to cause mischief). The UK was not in that place. We had had an entirely honourable two world wars, a centuries-long history of rock solid stability in our political system, common law, FPTP elections for seats, etc. We just didn't need the higher level control. We still don't. We are just not ever going to fit in a federal EU.
And even if you accept that, what they failed to do was follow that to the logical conclusion that all the States should therefore secede...
There are some thing where it makes sense to group together in a larger block, with higher level control, and frictionless trade is one such example.
Even leaving the EU, we still need to be part of a larger trading organisation, with external judicial oversight, just one that gives us much crappier benefits at higher costs
Even the hardest Brexiteer has a hard time arguing that being part of the EU has not made us better off
I think it would have been more likely the UK would have 'led' a looser outer ring of the British Isles, Scandinavian countries, and some Eastern European states, whilst the nations in central Europe would have more quickly federated via a smaller, tighter, core EU pivoting off the French-German axis.
The Council of Europe would have been much more important in coordinating responses to pan-European issues.0 -
It might be amusing if she gets adopted as a candidate. Otherwise I think the reaction is going to be "Didn't even know Boris had a sister."Paristonda said:
An interesting defection. Helps slightly to bolster the Lib Dems as a safe choice for those wavering tory remainers.Scott_P said:0 -
Mr. Prodicus, all men are unknowable, little islands connected by passing trade of thought and speech.
I'm quite sure Justinian would've been flabbergasted to learn his secretary Procopius was writing a secret history in which the emperor is compared directly to Satan.0 -
68% LeavePulpstar said:
Looks a great shot tbh.isam said:
I think it is better to have a local who has fought the seat before. The UKIP fellow in Daggers is the candidate from 2010, Peter Harris. Thurrock hasn't been announced yet, but I think Tim Aker would probably do as well if not better.Pulpstar said:
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
Michael Dugher said UKIP got 10k in his seat last time without trying.. he is standing down, could that be one?
UKIP 20/1
Oddschecker have constituency odds 0 -
LibDem top 30 existing seats and targets, sorted by forecast majority/the amount by which they fail to get a majority, based on the Electoral Calculus model's forecast as at today (which shows the LibDems ending up with 9 in total):
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Leeds North West
Sheffield Hallam
Ceredigion
Orkney and Shetland
Cambridge
Norfolk North
Dunbartonshire East
Burnley
--------------- Below this line the LibDems don't quite make it in the forecast --------
Bermondsey and Old Southwark
Edinburgh West
Carshalton and Wallington
Southport
Cardiff Central
Fife North East
Eastbourne
Twickenham
Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
Lewes
Bristol West
Thornbury and Yate
Birmingham Yardley
Ross Skye and Lochaber
Kingston and Surbiton
Bradford East
St Ives
Gordon
Torbay
Sutton and Cheam
Argyll and Bute
This is broadly similar to @Pulpstar's list but I don't think takes account of differential Leave/Remain flows.
Source data here:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/orderedseats.html0 -
Various SNP offices and MPs have been targeted by packages containing white powder.
https://stv.tv/news/politics/1386953-msps-on-alert-as-white-powder-sent-to-politicians/0 -
I agree with the first bit, not the second bit.stodge said:The Conservatives will have nowhere to hide after the GE and will have to maintain a huge tent of a coalition through the Brexit process and beyond. Inevitably things will happen, things won't happen and mistakes will be made and the potential pool of disillusioned Conservatives on whom the LDs can draw from say mid 2018 onwards will be considerable.
One day too Labour will get its act together and there will come an election where it will be the Conservatives who will be on the edge of disaster much as they were this time 20 years ago.
The referendum in Scotland has split the vote neatly on for or against lines. SNP or Tory. Scottish Labour couldn't decide, and were crushed, with no obvious revival in sight.
The referendum in the UK will have the same effect. For Brexit will vote Tory, against will vote Lib Dem. Labour have opted for the 0% strategy. Again. There is no reason to assume they will revive from that.0 -
https://twitter.com/guardiananushka/status/857626492334997504williamglenn said:Various SNP offices and MPs have been targeted by packages containing white powder.
https://stv.tv/news/politics/1386953-msps-on-alert-as-white-powder-sent-to-politicians/0 -
Poss yeah, Kippers only 4/1 there...good shoutGarethoftheVale2 said:
Heywood?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
The fact that UKIP are 3/1 to win Thurrock, 4/1 to win Heywood, 4/1 to win Clacton is at odds with the 7/2 to win a seat. Its either a fantastic bet or the seats are just plain wrong0 -
You mean the place that's two stops beyond Barking?Pulpstar said:
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
3!Peter_the_Punter said:
You mean the place that's two stops beyond Barking?Pulpstar said:
I'd have thought you'd want him to plump for Dagenhamisam said:
Could take on Remainer Tolhurst in Rochester?isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
How many kipper deposits retained? I reckon less than 5.isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
On present polling I think it likely that in no seat will the kippers get more than 15%0 -
Biggest news of the election so far: Boris's sister defects to the LDs over Brexit.0
-
I'm on Burnley, but also Cheadle, and Bath (the latter before candidate changed her mind).Richard_Nabavi said:LibDem top 30 existing seats and targets, sorted by forecast majority/the amount by which they fail to get a majority, based on the Electoral Calculus model's forecast as at today (which shows the LibDems ending up with 9 in total):
Westmorland and Lonsdale
Leeds North West
Sheffield Hallam
Ceredigion
Orkney and Shetland
Cambridge
Norfolk North
Dunbartonshire East
Burnley
--------------- Below this line the LibDems don't quite make it in the forecast --------
Bermondsey and Old Southwark
Edinburgh West
Carshalton and Wallington
Southport
Cardiff Central
Fife North East
Eastbourne
Twickenham
Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross
Lewes
Bristol West
Thornbury and Yate
Birmingham Yardley
Ross Skye and Lochaber
Kingston and Surbiton
Bradford East
St Ives
Gordon
Torbay
Sutton and Cheam
Argyll and Bute
This is broadly similar to @Pulpstar's list but I don't think takes account of differential Leave/Remain flows.
Source data here:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/orderedseats.html0 -
Woweee lets bet!foxinsoxuk said:
How many kipper deposits retained? I reckon less than 5.isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
On present polling I think it likely that in no seat will the kippers get more than 15%
What price they get more than 15% in any given seat???
You think its odds on, "likely", I will offer you as much as you like at EVS that they dont get 15% in any seat0 -
Ukip’s north-east regional chairman, Steve Turner, has defected to the Conservative party0
-
I'd say just Hartlepool, although perhaps the Tories are more likely to win it.isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere0 -
It is quite possible that Ukip will elect not to run in a great many seats, but in any event it is hard to know what difference this might make. A large chunk of the Ukip vote appears to be defecting to the Tories; would the residual vote also back the Tories if there were no Ukip candidate, or would some of them at least vote Labour, or would they stay at home? We don't know.DanSmith said:Do we know if UKIP are going to stand in the Tory/LibDem marginals? Hard to see LibDems making any gains if UKIP step down (and in all probability if UKIP do run tbh).
Anyhow, the chances of the Lib Dems standing in the target seats varies considerably, and I believe that the Leave/Remain balance, the state of the party locally and the votes available from parties that placed 3rd or lower last time around are all relevant. I would consider them to have a very good chance of recovering Twickenham from the Tories, for example, but very little in Torbay which is only a few places further down the target list. On the other hand, I think they've a much better chance of getting Fife North East off the SNP than they do of recovering Dunbartonshire East, which on paper ought to be easier to swing.
At the moment my prediction is that the Lib Dems will finish a little short of 20 seats in total after this election, but that assumes a lot of very effective campaigning on the ground and a good deal of tactical voting in their favour. Certainly if the Ukip collapse continues then I might revise my opinion, given how much defections could increase tight Tory majorities by, and also make it more likely that some existing Lib Dem seats could fall. Equally, if the Lib Dems stop flatlining in the polls and start to make more progress then I might shift a little in the other direction - but I'm not at all confident that the latter scenario will come to pass. Labour seems to have arrested its polling decline recently, and I strongly suspect that all of the Tory voters who feel strongly enough to dump the party over Brexit have already done so.0 -
Sion Simon not keep to endorse Corbyn in West Midlands Metro Mayoral Election.
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/labour-mayor-candidate-sion-simon-12951977
POCWAS.0 -
Ho ho ho.rottenborough said:Ukip’s north-east regional chairman, Steve Turner, has defected to the Conservative party
Bad news for Labour.0 -
I don't have a lot of hope for bbc fact checking...They have just done a piece about how many houses THE GOVERNMENT have built over past 20 years , but used figures for total homes built ie includes ones government have nothing to do with being built.0
-
good to see you back. Thinks she looks pretty good for her age doesn't she? Must be mid 60s.Cyclefree said:
Good afternoon all. Just popping in to say hello and thank you to all for your very kind words to me. Much appreciated.Cyan said:Cyan said:The Rothermere press on Emmanuel Macron and his wife Brigitte. If they are as happy together as they seem to be then good luck to them, but some of the pictures won't go down well with some voters.
"Brigitte has refused to reveal when the unlikely pair first became intimate, proclaiming it 'our secret'."
"'Nobody will ever know at what moment our story became a love story. That belongs to us. That is our secret,' she said."
The age of consent in France when one party has authority over the other - for instance, if they are their schoolteacher - is 18.
I am slowly recuperating. The garden is getting a lot of TLC and I am listening to much music. Really, what else does one need?
Just to be a tad waspish, Madame Macron would be well advised to wear dresses with sleeves.0 -
Turner by name, turncoat by nature.rottenborough said:Ukip’s north-east regional chairman, Steve Turner, has defected to the Conservative party
0 -
Do we want to be forced into expensive programs re diesel cars limiting their use in cities? I don't really see what else is going to work and it is not particularly politically friendly in an election period.Casino_Royale said:I really don't know why HMG is fighting the air pollution case.
Yes, politically, I feel it really is none of the EU's business, but don't we all want clean air?0 -
£20 at evens?isam said:
Woweee lets bet!foxinsoxuk said:
How many kipper deposits retained? I reckon less than 5.isam said:
IMO the only seats UKIP can win are Hartlepool, Thurrock and Dagenham. although I haven't really looked into other possibilities that hard.Pulpstar said:
I've got that as an almost certain Tory gain if either no, or a low profile kipper runs there.williamglenn said:
Aha Boston and Skegness... the Sitting Tory was a Remainer, 4.3k majority over UKIP, the rest nowhere
On present polling I think it likely that in no seat will the kippers get more than 15%
What price they get more than 15% in any given seat???
You think its odds on, "likely", I will offer you as much as you like at EVS that they dont get 15% in any seat
FWIW I am very bearish on the LDs too.
0
