politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The tide is high. How many Labour MPs will be holding on after
Comments
-
Curious diplomacy. It's fair game I guess, but in other ways a declaration of war.williamglenn said:Verhofstadt talking about a special status for Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/8615778676412006400 -
And, more to the point, we're on him at 8/1!TheScreamingEagles said:
There's a special interest in Aaron Bell.SirNorfolkPassmore said:I do find the re-posts on here of rather dull and uninformative campaign tweets quite tiresome. I'm not sure what it adds to the conversation.
He's one of us. One of us.0 -
Indeed. Canvassing for a Tory candidate and winning money on him is my ideal GE campaign.Richard_Nabavi said:
And, more to the point, we're on him at 8/1!TheScreamingEagles said:
There's a special interest in Aaron Bell.SirNorfolkPassmore said:I do find the re-posts on here of rather dull and uninformative campaign tweets quite tiresome. I'm not sure what it adds to the conversation.
He's one of us. One of us.0 -
MY current working theory on Holyrood and Council elections is differential turnout. Both saw big rises in turnout compared to last time with the SNP vote share holding steady but the Tories rising substantially s that suggests to me SNP voters stayed home (because both prior elections occured pre-2014).Pulpstar said:
We need a Scotland GE poll. I suspect the SNP will do better in the GE than the locals.DavidL said:
The swing in Scotland that matters is Lab/SNP because the SNP currently hold pretty much all the seats, certainly the ones that Labour are looking at recovering. As the SNP is also a remain party I don't think that explains the result. This may indeed make Scotland different but those betting on the bands should be aware that there is a chance of a small handful of Labour MPs from north of the border being added in. Its one of the reasons I am nervous about 170.JonathanD said:DavidL said:If so the swing will be nearer 5% than the 7.5% on Alastair's central projection.
But Scotland was a more remainy area which would suggest less of a Lab to Tory swing than Alistair's central projection, so a 5% swing would probably be predicted.
They may or may not stay at home for the GE. I don't know.0 -
It is alright to wear brown shoes out of Town, isn't it? He would look better if he actually polished the things though.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was just thinking that he looks rather scruffy for a Tory candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:Hurrah, I'm not the only PBer to wear (brown) loafers.
Still I suppose we have to make compromises in those parts.0 -
Mr. Eagles, no Betfair (Sportsbook) Don Valley offering, Ladbrokes has Con 4.5. Worth a shot?0
-
I'm going to persuade Shadsy to stand as an MP, just imagine the ricks his stand in might make.Pulpstar said:
He's also left a SLAB present up at 365 today.TheScreamingEagles said:
There's a special interest in Aaron Bell.SirNorfolkPassmore said:I do find the re-posts on here of rather dull and uninformative campaign tweets quite tiresome. I'm not sure what it adds to the conversation.
He's one of us. One of us.
#MakeDoncasterGreatAgain0 -
More importantly have you had a tickle on the Slabbers in East Lothian at 10-1 with 365 ?Alistair said:
MY current working theory on Holyrood and Council elections is differential turnout. Both saw big rises in turnout compared to last time with the SNP vote share holding steady but the Tories rising substantially s that suggests to me SNP voters stayed home (because both prior elections occured pre-2014).Pulpstar said:
We need a Scotland GE poll. I suspect the SNP will do better in the GE than the locals.DavidL said:
The swing in Scotland that matters is Lab/SNP because the SNP currently hold pretty much all the seats, certainly the ones that Labour are looking at recovering. As the SNP is also a remain party I don't think that explains the result. This may indeed make Scotland different but those betting on the bands should be aware that there is a chance of a small handful of Labour MPs from north of the border being added in. Its one of the reasons I am nervous about 170.JonathanD said:DavidL said:If so the swing will be nearer 5% than the 7.5% on Alastair's central projection.
But Scotland was a more remainy area which would suggest less of a Lab to Tory swing than Alistair's central projection, so a 5% swing would probably be predicted.
They may or may not stay at home for the GE. I don't know.0 -
The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.justin124 said:
I think the SNP will struggle to hold 40 seats.FF43 said:
That seems right to me.rcs1000 said:
Too high for the SNP: I reckon they'll lose three seats to the Libs and Labs before we even get to any Tory gains.
A more likely Scottish result is SNP 47, down 11. With LD +2, Lab +1, and Con +6.
(edit per previous poster: Median 9 seat loss for the SNP)0 -
The odds look about right to me.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, no Betfair (Sportsbook) Don Valley offering, Ladbrokes has Con 4.5. Worth a shot?
If you think Don Valley will fall to Con, there are better value bets elsewhere.
Good luck Aaron!
I doubt i'd vote for you if I were a local, but you're not one of those tories i'd go out of my way to vote against.0 -
I say again, look at the Tory campaign sloganFF43 said:The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.
"Leading Scotland's Fightback"
Against?
It can only be the SNP. Scotland fighting back against the SNP.
Astonishing0 -
Mr. Pong, cheers.0
-
This time round Scottish Labour don't have the bother of defending 40 odd seats, they can target the three or four where they have half a chance.
If anyone from their campaign is paying attention BLT, I'd highly recommend All SLAB resources to head to East Lothian.0 -
And what the actual f*ck has it got to do with him may one ask?williamglenn said:Verhofstadt talking about a special status for Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/861577867641200640
0 -
If UKIP stand in only 100 seats - as has been suggested - leaving most Tory MPs a clear run, that has huge implications for the overall Tory vote and the seat markets. 50% in GB must be possible.isam said:Tories to get over 50% of the vote a good bet at 3/1?
This poll has Tories unweighted at 51 and is upgrading Lab and LD (So I read) UKIP are being over estimated as they aren't standing in lots of seats0 -
Because I know Aaron and I'll be most likely campaigning a lot for him in Don Valley, I'm not going to to be giving a running commentary on the odds, lest other people might take them out of context.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, no Betfair (Sportsbook) Don Valley offering, Ladbrokes has Con 4.5. Worth a shot?
0 -
His greatest contribution was to produce a compelling social and economic theory that identified the economic base as the determining force of human affairs rather than ideas, or ideology, which had previously been the widely prevailing Hegelian view. This is the sense in which it often said that 'Marx turned Hegel on his head'.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Whilst plainly a dumb thing to say politically, he did also mention David Ricardo and Adam Smith. And I think most economists would put Marx up there as highly influential. The man wasn't some thick Dave Spart-figure, yelling leftie slogans... he was a serious economist who had novel and well thought-through ideas, and who quite clearly influenced the economic debate. None of that is to say he was right.FrancisUrquhart said:
Jezza is either taking the piss now or the labour private polling has picked up that karl Marx is secretly dead popular with the public.williamglenn said:
To the best of my knowledge this aspect of his thinking still prevails, although with some qualification. His admirer Max Weber, for example, argued for a more reciprocal relationship between the ideological superstructure and the economic base, and I think that would be the orthodox view now, but the original model still holds good, if only as a standard against which to examine and test more qualified theories and the complexities of societies which have moved on a bit since Marx himself moved on to Highgate Cemetery.
PB may not be the ideal place to start a symposium on the various contributions of KM to modern economic theory, but if we are going to do so, let's start from what he actually wrote, and not the Daily Mail version.0 -
I will not be surprised if Labour and the Tories end up on 6 each with the LDs on 3or4.FF43 said:
The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.justin124 said:
I think the SNP will struggle to hold 40 seats.FF43 said:
That seems right to me.rcs1000 said:
Too high for the SNP: I reckon they'll lose three seats to the Libs and Labs before we even get to any Tory gains.
A more likely Scottish result is SNP 47, down 11. With LD +2, Lab +1, and Con +6.
(edit per previous poster: Median 9 seat loss for the SNP)0 -
Mr. Eagles, fair enough.
May your electoral campaigning prove more successful than your attempts to grasp classical history0 -
Its about all they can afford.Scott_P said:twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/861575318670331904
0 -
?justin124 said:
Labour was also understated for Holyrood.calum said:
Low turnout overlaid with the SCON demographic more likely to vote - could well explain a fair bit of the discrepancy with the polls. If turnout is again c.70% the polls should be accurate as they were for Scotland in GE 2015.tlg86 said:
The polls overstated the SNP and understated the Tories in the Holyrood elections last year. Do you think they'll be right this time?calum said:
I think the SNP are still pretty much set to hit c.43-45%.Pulpstar said:
We need a Scotland GE poll. I suspect the SNP will do better in the GE than the locals.DavidL said:
The swing in Scotland that matters is Lab/SNP because the SNP currently hold pretty much all the seats, certainly the ones that Labour are looking at recovering. As the SNP is also a remain party I don't think that explains the result. This may indeed make Scotland different but those betting on the bands should be aware that there is a chance of a small handful of Labour MPs from north of the border being added in. Its one of the reasons I am nervous about 170.JonathanD said:DavidL said:If so the swing will be nearer 5% than the 7.5% on Alastair's central projection.
But Scotland was a more remainy area which would suggest less of a Lab to Tory swing than Alistair's central projection, so a 5% swing would probably be predicted.
As SCON move into a similar % share as the infamous Jim Murphy - I'm seeing some very similar MSN over exuberance from back then - plus the usual PB.com calls that we've passed "Peak SNP" etc etc.
Already we have some unseemly squabbles breaking out between SCON & SLAB in the likes of Edinburgh South & East Ren - much of it on social media. Ruth and SCON appear to have caught a case of "decapitationitis" as they publicly target high profile SNP scalps.
The SNP will defend aggressively - expect some pretty hard hitting attack ads - SCON & SLAB will see their loose words used against them.
Final Panelbase, YouGov and Survation Constituency polls were 21, 22 and 23 respectively.
They got 22.6
On the list the final polls were 19,19 & 22 for Labour. Labour got 19.10 -
He's entitled to his opinion.JonCisBack said:
And what the actual f*ck has it got to do with him may one ask?williamglenn said:Verhofstadt talking about a special status for Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/8615778676412006400 -
I would be, especially Labour. 10-1 East Lothian is still huge regardless.justin124 said:
I will not be surprised if Labour and the Tories end up on 6 each with the LDs on 3or4.FF43 said:
The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.justin124 said:
I think the SNP will struggle to hold 40 seats.FF43 said:
That seems right to me.rcs1000 said:
Too high for the SNP: I reckon they'll lose three seats to the Libs and Labs before we even get to any Tory gains.
A more likely Scottish result is SNP 47, down 11. With LD +2, Lab +1, and Con +6.
(edit per previous poster: Median 9 seat loss for the SNP)0 -
That had me wondering whether, if you are ever knighted, you would refuse to be known as "Sir Nick" lest somebody challenged you to a joust?NickPalmer said:
I try not to use Dr - always afraid of being asked to deliver a baby.0 -
More to the point, isn't he the European Parliament's Brexit lead?John_M said:
He's entitled to his opinion.JonCisBack said:
And what the actual f*ck has it got to do with him may one ask?williamglenn said:Verhofstadt talking about a special status for Northern Ireland.
https://twitter.com/guyverhofstadt/status/8615778676412006400 -
Only 8/1 now.Pulpstar said:
I would be, especially Labour. 10-1 East Lothian is still huge regardless.justin124 said:
I will not be surprised if Labour and the Tories end up on 6 each with the LDs on 3or4.FF43 said:
The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.justin124 said:
I think the SNP will struggle to hold 40 seats.FF43 said:
That seems right to me.rcs1000 said:
Too high for the SNP: I reckon they'll lose three seats to the Libs and Labs before we even get to any Tory gains.
A more likely Scottish result is SNP 47, down 11. With LD +2, Lab +1, and Con +6.
(edit per previous poster: Median 9 seat loss for the SNP)0 -
I've helped several people become Tory MPs with my campaigning skills.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, fair enough.
May your electoral campaigning prove more successful than your attempts to grasp classical history
Edit: I was one of my many many people campaigning.
0 -
Unfortunately, Marxists have given Marx a bad name.Peter_the_Punter said:PB may not be the ideal place to start a symposium on the various contributions of KM to modern economic theory, but if we are going to do so, let's start from what he actually wrote, and not the Daily Mail version.
0 -
Where did you get that from? Presumably Tory trolls and spinners.felix said:
They are now suggesting an alliance with Corbyn's Labour against some of their own candidates.SimonStClare said:
The Lib Dems are leaving it rather late for an election campaign surge. Where’s the Timgasm?RWP said:CON: 49% (+3)
LAB: 27% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
UKIP: 6% (-2)
GRN: 3% (-1)
ICM0 -
Only 49 with ICM? A shame.0
-
FWIW, I've just crunched the regional numbers from today's ICM poll via Electoral Calculus and it predicts:
Con 426
Lab 154
SNP 43
LD 8
Grn 1
NI 18
Con maj: 2020 -
I dare you to listen.PClipp said:
Where did you get that from? Presumably Tory trolls and spinners.felix said:
They are now suggesting an alliance with Corbyn's Labour against some of their own candidates.SimonStClare said:
The Lib Dems are leaving it rather late for an election campaign surge. Where’s the Timgasm?RWP said:CON: 49% (+3)
LAB: 27% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
UKIP: 6% (-2)
GRN: 3% (-1)
ICM
https://order-order.com/2017/05/08/cable-and-olney-recorded-secretly-plotting-to-help-labour/0 -
I hope yours see a lick more of polish than those.TheScreamingEagles said:
Hurrah, I'm not the only PBer to wear (brown) loafers.Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/aaron4donvalley/status/861586405146980352ThreeQuidder said:Not Don Valley though. The PB Tory activist surge will see TP over the line
Standards, old boy, standards.0 -
How can BBC do a live Question Time on June 8th at 8.30 to 9.30 when broadcasters are suposedly banned from talking anything to do with polling or campaigning?0
-
Indeed - for the Constitueny vote Labour was understated a bit - though to a lesser extent than the Tories. For last week's elections Labour was underestimated more than the Tories.Alistair said:
?justin124 said:
Labour was also understated for Holyrood.calum said:
Low turnout overlaid with the SCON demographic more likely to vote - could well explain a fair bit of the discrepancy with the polls. If turnout is again c.70% the polls should be accurate as they were for Scotland in GE 2015.tlg86 said:
The polls overstated the SNP and understated the Tories in the Holyrood elections last year. Do you think they'll be right this time?calum said:
I think the SNP are still pretty much set to hit c.43-45%.Pulpstar said:
We need a Scotland GE poll. I suspect the SNP will do better in the GE than the locals.DavidL said:
The swing in Scotland that matters is Lab/SNP because the SNP currently hold pretty much all the seats, certainly the ones that Labour are looking at recovering. As the SNP is also a remain party I don't think that explains the result. This may indeed make Scotland different but those betting on the bands should be aware that there is a chance of a small handful of Labour MPs from north of the border being added in. Its one of the reasons I am nervous about 170.JonathanD said:DavidL said:If so the swing will be nearer 5% than the 7.5% on Alastair's central projection.
But Scotland was a more remainy area which would suggest less of a Lab to Tory swing than Alistair's central projection, so a 5% swing would probably be predicted.
As SCON move into a similar % share as the infamous Jim Murphy - I'm seeing some very similar MSN over exuberance from back then - plus the usual PB.com calls that we've passed "Peak SNP" etc etc.
Already we have some unseemly squabbles breaking out between SCON & SLAB in the likes of Edinburgh South & East Ren - much of it on social media. Ruth and SCON appear to have caught a case of "decapitationitis" as they publicly target high profile SNP scalps.
The SNP will defend aggressively - expect some pretty hard hitting attack ads - SCON & SLAB will see their loose words used against them.
Final Panelbase, YouGov and Survation Constituency polls were 21, 22 and 23 respectively.
They got 22.6
On the list the final polls were 19,19 & 22 for Labour. Labour got 19.10 -
Hence the oft quoted 'Je ne suis pas Marxiste!' which Karl is reported to have exclaimed when he saw some of the things being done in his name.Richard_Nabavi said:
Unfortunately, Marxists have given Marx a bad name.Peter_the_Punter said:PB may not be the ideal place to start a symposium on the various contributions of KM to modern economic theory, but if we are going to do so, let's start from what he actually wrote, and not the Daily Mail version.
(No, I don't know why he said it in French. Maybe he was in France at the time.)0 -
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.
0 -
But Labour won East Lothian last week and in the Holyrood elections!Pulpstar said:
I would be, especially Labour. 10-1 East Lothian is still huge regardless.justin124 said:
I will not be surprised if Labour and the Tories end up on 6 each with the LDs on 3or4.FF43 said:
The upside is higher for the Conservatives than the LDs and Labour. The key is the degree to which supporters of those parties are willing to vote tactically for the Tories. Something remarkable happened at the 2016 Holyrood election in Edinburgh where the SNP lost 3 out of 7 seats purely as a result of tactical voting.justin124 said:
I think the SNP will struggle to hold 40 seats.FF43 said:
That seems right to me.rcs1000 said:
Too high for the SNP: I reckon they'll lose three seats to the Libs and Labs before we even get to any Tory gains.
A more likely Scottish result is SNP 47, down 11. With LD +2, Lab +1, and Con +6.
(edit per previous poster: Median 9 seat loss for the SNP)0 -
wales opinion poll
Conservatives: 41% (+1)
Labour: 35% (+5)
Plaid Cymru: 11% (-2)
Liberal Democrats: 7% (-1)
UKIP: 4% (-2)
Others: 2% (-1)
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-05-08/labour-support-increases-but-conservatives-still-ahead/0 -
New all Wales poll
Conservatives: 41% (+1)
Labour: 35% (+5)
Plaid Cymru: 11% (-2)
Liberal Democrats: 7% (-1)
UKIP: 4% (-2)
Others: 2% (-1)0 -
Wales poll:
Conservatives: 41% (+1)
Labour: 35% (+5)
Plaid Cymru: 11% (-2)
Liberal Democrats: 7% (-1)
UKIP: 4% (-2)
Others: 2% (-1)0 -
wales opinion polll would suggest seats as follows
Conservatives: 20 seats (+9)
Labour: 16 seats (-9)
Plaid Cymru: 3 seats (no change)
Liberal Democrats: 1 seat (no change)0 -
Huq seems to think along the right lines, and presumably would be much happier with the Lib Dems that as part of the Corbyn nightmare. May or maynot happen...felix said:
I dare you to listen.PClipp said:
Where did you get that from? Presumably Tory trolls and spinners.felix said:
They are now suggesting an alliance with Corbyn's Labour against some of their own candidates.SimonStClare said:
The Lib Dems are leaving it rather late for an election campaign surge. Where’s the Timgasm?RWP said:CON: 49% (+3)
LAB: 27% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
UKIP: 6% (-2)
GRN: 3% (-1)
ICM
https://order-order.com/2017/05/08/cable-and-olney-recorded-secretly-plotting-to-help-labour/
But I thought all fixated Tory expatriates like yourself wanted only to see the end of the Labour Party.0 -
What's the average error in the polls to a General Election? Is it not normally roughly overstating Lab by 2 and understating the Tories by 2?david_herdson said:FWIW, I've just crunched the regional numbers from today's ICM poll via Electoral Calculus and it predicts:
Con 426
Lab 154
SNP 43
LD 8
Grn 1
NI 18
Con maj: 202
For a bit of fun and games, if we do that adjustment what would the result be?0 -
So you don't deny it - coalition of chaos - officially promoted by the LDs. Vote LD get Corbyn.PClipp said:
Huq seems to think along the right lines, and presumably would be much happier with the Lib Dems that as part of the Corbyn nightmare. May or maynot happen...felix said:
I dare you to listen.PClipp said:
Where did you get that from? Presumably Tory trolls and spinners.felix said:
They are now suggesting an alliance with Corbyn's Labour against some of their own candidates.SimonStClare said:
The Lib Dems are leaving it rather late for an election campaign surge. Where’s the Timgasm?RWP said:CON: 49% (+3)
LAB: 27% (-1)
LDEM: 9% (-1)
UKIP: 6% (-2)
GRN: 3% (-1)
ICM
https://order-order.com/2017/05/08/cable-and-olney-recorded-secretly-plotting-to-help-labour/
But I thought all fixated Tory expatriates like yourself wanted only to see the end of the Labour Party.
i a not an expat I am an immigrant from the UK living in Spain. I voted remain but I believe in democracy0 -
Not from Guido or his ilk: http://news.sky.com/story/senior-lib-dems-urge-pro-remain-collaboration-10868912?dcmp=snt-sf-twitterstodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.
Sarah Olney, who is standing for the Lib Dems in neighbouring Richmond Park, and who was heard on the recording of the event saying: "We want Rupa to win in Ealing."0 -
Suggests the Lab 30 score last time was a bit of an outlier.llef said:wales opinion poll
Conservatives: 41% (+1)
Labour: 35% (+5)
Plaid Cymru: 11% (-2)
Liberal Democrats: 7% (-1)
UKIP: 4% (-2)
Others: 2% (-1)
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2017-05-08/labour-support-increases-but-conservatives-still-ahead/0 -
-
Lab would still hold Bootle, if that's what you are askingPhilip_Thompson said:
What's the average error in the polls to a General Election? Is it not normally roughly overstating Lab by 2 and understating the Tories by 2?david_herdson said:FWIW, I've just crunched the regional numbers from today's ICM poll via Electoral Calculus and it predicts:
Con 426
Lab 154
SNP 43
LD 8
Grn 1
NI 18
Con maj: 202
For a bit of fun and games, if we do that adjustment what would the result be?0 -
The Liberal candidates in Huq's seats has already expressed his displeasure. If this is the policy why has Farron not owned it.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.0 -
the welsh poll just seems to confirm the general pattern - UKIP voters are deserting on mass to Tories, whilst Labour, Plaid and Libs are essentially marginally down or unchanged.
in 2015
labour 37
cons 27
ukip 14
plaid 13
libs 7
now
labour 35
cons 41
ukip 4
plaid 11
libs 70 -
Who was it who said (or did anyone?): "I'm not a socialist because I love the poor; I'm a socialist because I hate the poor"?Peter_the_Punter said:
Hence the oft quoted 'Je ne suis pas Marxiste!' which Karl is reported to have exclaimed when he saw some of the things being done in his name.Richard_Nabavi said:
Unfortunately, Marxists have given Marx a bad name.Peter_the_Punter said:PB may not be the ideal place to start a symposium on the various contributions of KM to modern economic theory, but if we are going to do so, let's start from what he actually wrote, and not the Daily Mail version.
(No, I don't know why he said it in French. Maybe he was in France at the time.)0 -
In town on Fridays, provided you are going to the country that weekend.HurstLlama said:
It is alright to wear brown shoes out of Town, isn't it? He would look better if he actually polished the things though.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was just thinking that he looks rather scruffy for a Tory candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:Hurrah, I'm not the only PBer to wear (brown) loafers.
Still I suppose we have to make compromises in those parts.0 -
There were two earlier in the year_Pulpstar said:
Was there a Scottish local election poll done ?justin124 said:For last week's elections Labour was underestimated more than the Tories.
I don't recall seeing one.
Mori - end of Feb /early March - SNP 46 Con 19 Lab 17 LD 6
Panelbase - Mid Feb - SNP 47 -Con 26 Lab 14 - LD 50 -
The article makes one huge assumption and , in my opinion, it is misleading. Alastair is not the first person to do so.
For example, it is commonly believed that in Leave Labour seats , it was the Labour voters that won it for Leave. Partly correct, but no more than that.
Take a Sunderland seat. Labour 56% and Leave 60% [ I am just taking a random seat; it does not have to be Sunderland ]
My assumption is that the crossover happened like this:
Labour 56 x 35% = 19.6
Others 44 x 90% = 39.6
Total 59.2
It also does not follow that ALL the Labour leavers will go elsewhere or even one party.
If only 20% left for Tories and others, 56 x 80% = 44.8. In my opinion, enough to win comfortably.
By the way 20% leaving for the Tories, is a 10% swing. No opinion poll has given that sort of swing.
So many Northern seats with high Labour vote and high Leave vote probably will still be reasonably safe for Labour. Where Labour will be in trouble, as is normal, is where the majority is small. In other words, no different from any other election.
0 -
This might explain it:Peter_the_Punter said:
Hence the oft quoted 'Je ne suis pas Marxiste!' which Karl is reported to have exclaimed when he saw some of the things being done in his name.Richard_Nabavi said:
Unfortunately, Marxists have given Marx a bad name.Peter_the_Punter said:PB may not be the ideal place to start a symposium on the various contributions of KM to modern economic theory, but if we are going to do so, let's start from what he actually wrote, and not the Daily Mail version.
(No, I don't know why he said it in French. Maybe he was in France at the time.)
"“Je ne suis pas marxiste,” stated Marx, rather annoyed, to his son-in-law Paul Lafargue, when the latter reported the doings of French “Marxists.”"0 -
The actual results were , I think, SNP 43, Con 24, Lab 22justin124 said:
There were two earlier in the year_Pulpstar said:
Was there a Scottish local election poll done ?justin124 said:For last week's elections Labour was underestimated more than the Tories.
I don't recall seeing one.
Mori - end of Feb /early March - SNP 46 Con 19 Lab 17 LD 6
Panelbase - Mid Feb - SNP 47 -Con 26 Lab 14 - LD 50 -
Somehow they did not vote like that last Thursday. Oh, people vote differently in local elections !!!!llef said:the welsh poll just seems to confirm the general pattern - UKIP voters are deserting on mass to Tories, whilst Labour, Plaid and Libs are essentially marginally down or unchanged.
in 2015
labour 37
cons 27
ukip 14
plaid 13
libs 7
now
labour 35
cons 41
ukip 4
plaid 11
libs 70 -
Picking up the discussion downthread about the left/right balance of a reduced Labour Parliamentary Labour Party, I had a look at the list of 67 Labour MPs Iain Dale reckons will lose their seats, against the MPs' nominations list for the 2015 leadership election.
Kendall and Burnham each lose about 27% of their nominations, Cooper about 32%, and Corbyn just 22%, or actually just 18% allowing for a couple who I believe nominated him just for the fun of seeing him lose.
So it does appear that proportionally more of Corbyn's people may well be protected from the Tory swing. Allow for a few more supporters he may pick up from Corbynites replacing retiring MPs, and there'll probably be over 25 of them post-GE; enough to comprise 15% of any parliamentary party (ignoring the MEPs) of 165 or fewer.0 -
Depending on how many candidates UKIP manage to stand, a chunk of that 4% should go to the Tories.llef said:the welsh poll just seems to confirm the general pattern - UKIP voters are deserting on mass to Tories, whilst Labour, Plaid and Libs are essentially marginally down or unchanged.
in 2015
labour 37
cons 27
ukip 14
plaid 13
libs 7
now
labour 35
cons 41
ukip 4
plaid 11
libs 70 -
I do not want anything interfering with the safe refuge for remainers/anti-Corbynistas/whathaveyou in ECA.felix said:
The Liberal candidates in Huq's seats has already expressed his displeasure. If this is the policy why has Farron not owned it.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.
For all those put off by a) Brexit, there will be those put off by b) Jezza and as far as I'm concerned as long as a) < b) I am happy. Even if it's the same there is a fighting chance Huq will be ousted. Although it is of course far from a certainty, no matter the polls.0 -
-
Who on earth wouldn't be?!MTimT said:
In town on Fridays, provided you are going to the country that weekend.HurstLlama said:
It is alright to wear brown shoes out of Town, isn't it? He would look better if he actually polished the things though.Richard_Nabavi said:
I was just thinking that he looks rather scruffy for a Tory candidate.TheScreamingEagles said:Hurrah, I'm not the only PBer to wear (brown) loafers.
Still I suppose we have to make compromises in those parts.0 -
Well there's a surprise.0
-
How many 'rural' constituencies will Labour have left after June? My guess is that Bassetlaw could be about it.0
-
I tend to agree with this. That's why my model (below) is based on 2015 UKIP vote share rather than the referendum results.surbiton said:The article makes one huge assumption and , in my opinion, it is misleading. Alastair is not the first person to do so.
For example, it is commonly believed that in Leave Labour seats , it was the Labour voters that won it for Leave. Partly correct, but no more than that.
I am not convinced - other than in a handful of extreme Remain or Leave seats - that the referendum result is key to differential swings, for the reasons you indicate.
However, the fate of the (presumably collapsing) UKIP vote is, and the evidence we have is that it's strongly breaking Tory whether it originally came from them or not. So I'm assuming an above average swing in seats where the UKIP vote was well above the national average, balanced by a below average swing where it was well below average. Because of the distribution of results in 2015, this tends to favour the Tories because they pull in more high-UKIP seats than they miss out on low-UKIP seats.
On a back-of-a-fag-packet basis, I'm reckoning a 5.5% (basically a 17% lead in line with recent polls) gives something like 48 gains from Labour (106 maj) on UNS, but 59 or so on UNS varied for past UKIP vote (128 majority).
0 -
Nope. Vince has blundered and handed the Tories a dream attack line.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.0 -
So now the LibDems are going to have to protest that they're not going to prop up Corbyn in a Coalition of Chaos, thereby looking even more confused and disgruntling both sides.
Well done, Vince.0 -
There are 6 seats which Labour could win. Some SNP to Con swing actually helps Labour.Pulpstar said:This time round Scottish Labour don't have the bother of defending 40 odd seats, they can target the three or four where they have half a chance.
If anyone from their campaign is paying attention BLT, I'd highly recommend All SLAB resources to head to East Lothian.0 -
IDS.
Eminem.
Oh my.0 -
I'm sure this will have been posted, but it's difficult to keep up:
This poll is remarkable, and historic. It puts the Conservatives on 49%, and Labour on 27%, implying that 22-point lead. Not only is the lead an outright record for any ICM poll, but the Conservative share is a record in the Guardian/ICM series. It is only beaten by a 49.5% share that we recorded for the Sunday Mirror in May 1983, when ICM was called Marplan. Also noteworthy is the continued decline of UKIP, now measured at 6%, its lowest share from ICM since January 2013.
http://www.icmunlimited.com/polls/0 -
And I suspect Scottish Tories will vote tactically in some seats.surbiton said:
There are 6 seats which Labour could win. Some SNP to Con swing actually helps Labour.Pulpstar said:This time round Scottish Labour don't have the bother of defending 40 odd seats, they can target the three or four where they have half a chance.
If anyone from their campaign is paying attention BLT, I'd highly recommend All SLAB resources to head to East Lothian.0 -
ELBOW for week ending 7th May
Lab 33.50
Con 33.45
UKIP 13.23
LibDem 9.00
Tory lead -0.050 -
That would be fun and games but I'd caution against it. The only time that Con was overstated was in 1983, so a 'shy loser' factor may be more important when the Con lead is this large.Philip_Thompson said:
What's the average error in the polls to a General Election? Is it not normally roughly overstating Lab by 2 and understating the Tories by 2?david_herdson said:FWIW, I've just crunched the regional numbers from today's ICM poll via Electoral Calculus and it predicts:
Con 426
Lab 154
SNP 43
LD 8
Grn 1
NI 18
Con maj: 202
For a bit of fun and games, if we do that adjustment what would the result be?0 -
2015, right?Sunil_Prasannan said:ELBOW for week ending 7th May
Lab 33.50
Con 33.45
UKIP 13.23
LibDem 9.00
Tory lead -0.050 -
All parties have paper candidates.Stark_Dawning said:
Nope. Vince has blundered and handed the Tories a dream attack line.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.0 -
The pollsters are of course already adjusting Labour up and the Tories and LibDems down to "allow" for factors such as this. Assuming they know what they are doing....david_herdson said:
That would be fun and games but I'd caution against it. The only time that Con was overstated was in 1983, so a 'shy loser' factor may be more important when the Con lead is this large.Philip_Thompson said:
What's the average error in the polls to a General Election? Is it not normally roughly overstating Lab by 2 and understating the Tories by 2?david_herdson said:FWIW, I've just crunched the regional numbers from today's ICM poll via Electoral Calculus and it predicts:
Con 426
Lab 154
SNP 43
LD 8
Grn 1
NI 18
Con maj: 202
For a bit of fun and games, if we do that adjustment what would the result be?0 -
I think that sounds very reasonable.SirNorfolkPassmore said:....
On a back-of-a-fag-packet basis, I'm reckoning a 5.5% (basically a 17% lead in line with recent polls) gives something like 48 gains from Labour (106 maj) on UNS, but 59 or so on UNS varied for past UKIP vote (128 majority).0 -
If you put YG's latest switcher numbers in with abstentions from past voters Sunderland Central becomes very very marginal.surbiton said:The article makes one huge assumption and , in my opinion, it is misleading. Alastair is not the first person to do so.
For example, it is commonly believed that in Leave Labour seats , it was the Labour voters that won it for Leave. Partly correct, but no more than that.
Take a Sunderland seat. Labour 56% and Leave 60% [ I am just taking a random seat; it does not have to be Sunderland ]
My assumption is that the crossover happened like this:
Labour 56 x 35% = 19.6
Others 44 x 90% = 39.6
Total 59.2
It also does not follow that ALL the Labour leavers will go elsewhere or even one party.
If only 20% left for Tories and others, 56 x 80% = 44.8. In my opinion, enough to win comfortably.
By the way 20% leaving for the Tories, is a 10% swing. No opinion poll has given that sort of swing.
So many Northern seats with high Labour vote and high Leave vote probably will still be reasonably safe for Labour. Where Labour will be in trouble, as is normal, is where the majority is small. In other words, no different from any other election.
The Tory gains from UKIP are about 3500 - but 8000 Labour supporters do not turn up. They just sit on their vote.0 -
LD postergone rather quiet about their role in the Coalition of Chaos?
https://twitter.com/Conservatives/status/861601882548076544/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http://www.conservativehome.com/category/frontpage0 -
In any case, the commitment is only to not join a coalition. If the Lib Dems found that they were the swing vote, they'd still have to decide whether to kick the Tories out, leading inevitably to a Labour government, or sustain the Conservatives in place. Every confidence vote, budget, Queen's Speech and so on would present that dilemma.Richard_Nabavi said:So now the LibDems are going to have to protest that they're not going to prop up Corbyn in a Coalition of Chaos, thereby looking even more confused and disgruntling both sides.
Well done, Vince.0 -
I think there is value in the 4-1 Labour for the Cambridge seat.After the local election results it looks like another very close Lab-Lib contest and on the ground Labour is very strong with a good constituency MP who may well get a bit of an incumbency bonus.0
-
The charge is incoherent, surely? You have the potential for a coalition if you have ld MPs and Labour MPs to coalish, but not if you have only Labour MPs because the ld voters have switched to Labour.Richard_Nabavi said:So now the LibDems are going to have to protest that they're not going to prop up Corbyn in a Coalition of Chaos, thereby looking even more confused and disgruntling both sides.
Well done, Vince.
Not that I'm complaining, mind.0 -
Yeah, but they don't usually come out and say "we want X-from-a-different-party" to win...logical_song said:
All parties have paper candidates.Stark_Dawning said:
Nope. Vince has blundered and handed the Tories a dream attack line.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.0 -
Mr. Nabavi, are you suggesting Cable's nuclear missile has misfired a second time?0
-
The poster is presumably aimed at Con/LD battlegrounds.Ishmael_Z said:
The charge is incoherent, surely? You have the potential for a coalition if you have ld MPs and Labour MPs to coalish, but not if you have only Labour MPs because the ld voters have switched to Labour.Richard_Nabavi said:So now the LibDems are going to have to protest that they're not going to prop up Corbyn in a Coalition of Chaos, thereby looking even more confused and disgruntling both sides.
Well done, Vince.
Not that I'm complaining, mind.0 -
0
-
Each of those paper candidates, be assured, campaigns as though it is a super-marginal with everything to play for.logical_song said:
All parties have paper candidates.Stark_Dawning said:
Nope. Vince has blundered and handed the Tories a dream attack line.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.0 -
Is he running as indie?ThreeQuidder said:0 -
-
I'm not convinced Marx would be voting labour in this election.0
-
Yep! Two years ago, already, wowThreeQuidder said:
2015, right?Sunil_Prasannan said:ELBOW for week ending 7th May
Lab 33.50
Con 33.45
UKIP 13.23
LibDem 9.00
Tory lead -0.050 -
Most parties don't have former big beasts suggesting members vote against their party's candidate after the current leader has been very clear about not doing coalitions and such.logical_song said:
All parties have paper candidates.Stark_Dawning said:
Nope. Vince has blundered and handed the Tories a dream attack line.stodge said:
One or two on here getting a little overexcited:felix said:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/general-election-2017-liberal-democrats-paper-candidates-constituencies-tactical-voting-vince-cable-a7724276.html
Yes, the LDs will run "paper candidates", lots of them I suspect. These will be in seats where the party is a remote third, fourth or fifth and it isn't an instruction to LD supporters to vote for any party against the Conservatives. These candidates will be in both Labour and Conservative seats.
It's a recognition the party has to concentrate its limited resources on, I would guess, 50 seats where it has any kind of chance. I doubt for instance the LDs will do much campaigning in East Ham but there's a candidate selected.
Will the Conservatives do any campaigning in East Ham - if not, isn't their candidate also a "paper candidate" and, if so, what's the problem ?
This is a desperate attempt by Guido and those of his ilk to build a story out of a non-story.
The curious saga of the Lib Dems running a more gaffe-prone campaign than Labour continues.0 -
Big sigh of relief from LHQ I’d have thought, he’d become the Kim Kardashian of the tabloids.TheScreamingEagles said:Simon Danczuk✔@SimonDanczuk
My resignation letter from the Labour Party.
4:37 PM - 8 May 20170