politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s YouGov and ORB polls have the Tory lead in the singl
Comments
-
Perhaps I'll formally become a Gladstonian Liberal in the next few weeks.Alistair said:
I don't know if you count as a PB Tory anymore.TheScreamingEagles said:
I won't claim global Stalinst conspiracy, it'll be all down to Mrs May being crap.Alistair said:
The Labour polling strength is made up of a large number of DNVs.AndyJS said:
I think Matthew Goodwin is right. The polls are overestimating Labour, as usual.Scott_P said:@LadPolitics: This is good. Someone making a specific prediction. #GE2017 https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/868562780990959621
In my view there is only two options:
1) DNVs don't vote - like always. Labour massively underperforms the polls. PB Tories claim it was never in doubt.
2) DNVs vote, at which point the polls weighting criteria go out the window and Labour outperform the polls. PB Tories claim global Stalinist conspiracy.
I am still assuming 1.0 -
I don't like the term provincial as a descriptor - I prefer country bumpkin.0
-
Sounds fabulous.... I only hope I'll have internet access to fully admire and savour it when we land in Greece. Whilst there I may also take the opportunity as a fact-finding mission to see first hand how an economy can collapse just in case McDonnell should somehow get in to the Treasury.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scrapheap.
I may, may may be doing a thread tomorrow that you will enjoy.
It's comparing a North London pensioner whose team are the Reds who might still be in charge for another few years to somebody in the world of football.0 -
Scarily believable but you ruined it with the suggestion that May does an unscripted interview. Beyond the bounds of credibility I feel.Stereotomy said:
I think the scenario where the Tories do really badly (reduced majority or hung parliament) goes like:kyf_100 said:
Right place, right time. People aree projecting their hopes onto him. Some of the posts I see on my facebook and twitter feeds are quasi religious in the way they see him as the messiah, promising great change and ending all evil.kle4 said:
That's great, although I truly don't get it. Why him? His schtick is not new, he's got a kindly demeanour but he's not hugely charismatic, why are they so fired up by him rather than merely like him?Pulpstar said:Corbyn is a fucking revelation for the left. Cooked inside Cooperation atm will do a thread on this in due course. Expect turnout amongst youngsters to be well up
I'm starting to think that we may be on the wrong side of the zeitgeist. What if young people do actually vote this time round, sore and smarting from a year of having the fact that it was oldies wot won it for Brexit shared repeatedly on social media finally teaching them a lesson...
As Alistair says below if DNVs do vote this time round, all bets are off.
Right up until the registration deadline most of my lefty friends were sharing more 'you must register to vote, we lost Brexit, we can't afford to lose this time' stuff than they were stuff about their messiah JC...
- Corbyn pulls off a Trump and actually gets traditional non-voters to increase turnout
- At the other end of the spectrum, voters who traditionally have high turnout are turned off by the social care stuff. They keep telling pollsters they're voting Tory, their preference, but on the day not quite so many actually turn out as usual
- Somehow UKIP actually manage to capitalise on the Manchester attacks to the tune of three or four percent of the Tory vote (maybe May says something badly-worded about immigration during an interview)
- The Tories either fail to seize initiative and turn the spotlight on Corbyn, or it turns out that that truly is priced in, or the news cycle gets filled up with other events, or they mostly manage but get undermined by a leak or slip-up that puts attention back on their mistakes. Labour keeps up their surprisingly competent campaign.
If, say, 3 of those 4 thing happen, you could still have a huge upset. I doubt it's likely, but if it happens, I think that's how.0 -
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy0 -
Darlington 1983.kle4 said:If Copeland were to switch back to Lab that would have to be the shortest time in parliament for an MP for quite a long time.
UKIP managed to get Rochester and Strood in a by-election and then lost it by a large amount only 6 months later...
By election on 24th March 1983 won by Labour's Oswald O'Brien.
On June 9th 1983 he lost his seat in the general election to the Tories.
The Tory candidate, one Michael Fallon0 -
What are the figures regarding previous general elections for 18-24 year olds?MarkSenior said:
Yougov are consistently finding that 18-24 year olds have much higher certainty to vote figures than 25-44 year olds . I guess in many cases this is the novelty of having a vote for the first time , whereas the next age group have voted a couple of times and know that outside of marginal seats their vote does not really matter .kle4 said:
Perhaps not, but will they actually turn out this time is the critical question? Dozens of seats could be saved, and some gained, if they do for once.MaxPB said:
I honestly don't see it. I think Labour are leeching younger voters away from the greens and Lib Dems, but not engaging new young voters in large enough numbers.Pulpstar said:Corbyn is a fucking revelation for the left. Cooked inside Cooperation atm will do a thread on this in due course. Expect turnout amongst youngsters to be well up
0 -
I can see literally 0 eventualities where he fails to take BRS. Rock solid guaranteed Con gain, the odds on it were crazy, crazy, insanely good.kle4 said:
Bold of him to do that, but certainly would be worth a bitter laugh if it happened.Alistair said:In amongst the fantasing about who everyone would like to see fail on June the 8th I'd just like to say the the funniest result of election night would be for John Lamont to fail to take Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk.
He's resigned his Holyrood seat (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire which is the Holyrood equivalent of BRS) to contest BRS so I can't work out if it would be funnier if Rachael Hamilton lost ERB or if she held it for the Conservatives.
Whilst I would be personally poorer of wallet I would be richer in mirth.
Bad night for SCON if they cannot take it though, I'd have thought.0 -
It would be personally amusing if the Tories got 48% as I could then change my twitter/facebook etc profile picture to one of those "I'm with the 48%" graphics that so many of my friends have been sporting since June last year.ThreeQuidder said:
To an extent.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
But you also have to consider that in a mature multi-party democracy it's virtually impossible to break 50%. 44%, if that's borne out as the result, is solid but not spectacular. But it would be only a few percent away from a spectacular result, which I'd define (somewhat arbitrarily) as 48%+.
It's only because the minor parties have slumped that like the lead looks disappointing. But it's a bit harsh to blame May for people who would never vote Tory coalescing around one alternative.
WillS.0 -
I can never remember - will we get any figures on the the demographics of who is now registered to vote before the election? It must be a known set of facts by now and it's hard to see any harm in releasing it. That would tell us a lot.MarkSenior said:
Yougov are consistently finding that 18-24 year olds have much higher certainty to vote figures than 25-44 year olds . I guess in many cases this is the novelty of having a vote for the first time , whereas the next age group have voted a couple of times and know that outside of marginal seats their vote does not really matter .kle4 said:
Perhaps not, but will they actually turn out this time is the critical question? Dozens of seats could be saved, and some gained, if they do for once.MaxPB said:
I honestly don't see it. I think Labour are leeching younger voters away from the greens and Lib Dems, but not engaging new young voters in large enough numbers.Pulpstar said:Corbyn is a fucking revelation for the left. Cooked inside Cooperation atm will do a thread on this in due course. Expect turnout amongst youngsters to be well up
0 -
All the polling has the Lib Dems at close to double their 2015 vote share in London. To me, this feels right given the Lib Dem posters around the place. I suspect the SW London seats are still doable and so is Southwark and Bermondsey. I also think the party will get at least four seats in Scotland.kle4 said:
Oh, he'll have a few. It's always worth having an revisit on the assessment of LD chances.daodao said:
It will be Hobson's choice, but Farron won't have any other MPs to lead!Chris said:
Do people have any thoughts on the Lib Dem leadership after the election, if they do as badly as these polls are suggesting?Pulpstar said:Polls look horrendous for the Lib Dems
It looks as though the most credible alternative leaders (including Clegg) are the likeliest to lose their seats.
Carshalton - seen as tough for them to retain.
Orkney - despite being pretty close last time and the Carmichael factor, he should win pretty comfortably.
Hallam - Clegg's in real trouble, reliant on that there was a Labour surge in his seat last time, that was unusual for the constituency, not being repeated, and thus lack of Tory tacticals is not fatal to him. I see some saying he should be safe, others thinking he'll struggle, so it cannot be a certainty.
Westmoreland - some chatter about Farron under pressure, and he's had a bad campaign even with the poor hand he as LD leader has been dealt (I am genuinely frustrated Labour have surged at their expense), but should be safe.
North Norfolk - another tough one to retain. Some say local factors mean he is ok, strict models say its a goner.
Leeds - a toss up, apparently. More likely to retain than not perhaps.
Richmond - Another tough one to retain.
Southport - fight on their hands, could hold, might lose.
Ceredigion - Tough fight maybe, but should retain.
Target
Cambridge - I think it is safe to write this one off - Labour are surging somewhere and if it is anywhere surely it is a place like Cambridge?
Edinburgh West - They're probably still confident
SW London seats - relying on a campaigning surge that hasn't occurred? Unless they are going backwards elsewhere and rising here, not great chances
A couple other scottish seats - could get lucky, depends how well any tactical voting goes.
Most other places that were former LD seats? Don't make me laugh.
The rest of the country is a mystery to me. I hope Nick Clegg gets back in - there's been no finer leader of a UK political party in the last thirty years0 -
Or I might do a thread asking if Mrs May is a bit Spursy?Scrapheap_as_was said:
Sounds fabulous.... I only hope I'll have internet access to fully admire and savour it when we land in Greece. Whilst there I may also take the opportunity as a fact-finding mission to see first hand how an economy can collapse just in case McDonnell should somehow get in to the Treasury.TheScreamingEagles said:@Scrapheap.
I may, may may be doing a thread tomorrow that you will enjoy.
It's comparing a North London pensioner whose team are the Reds who might still be in charge for another few years to somebody in the world of football.0 -
-
Should I be backing the Nats to topple David Mundell?Alistair said:
I can see literally 0 eventualities where he fails to take BRS. Rock solid guaranteed Con gain, the odds on it were crazy, crazy, insanely good.kle4 said:
Bold of him to do that, but certainly would be worth a bitter laugh if it happened.Alistair said:In amongst the fantasing about who everyone would like to see fail on June the 8th I'd just like to say the the funniest result of election night would be for John Lamont to fail to take Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk.
He's resigned his Holyrood seat (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire which is the Holyrood equivalent of BRS) to contest BRS so I can't work out if it would be funnier if Rachael Hamilton lost ERB or if she held it for the Conservatives.
Whilst I would be personally poorer of wallet I would be richer in mirth.
Bad night for SCON if they cannot take it though, I'd have thought.0 -
Not in terms of outcomes for his party, though I do feel the public treated him and them more harshly than deserved.aschamberlain said:
All the polling has the Lib Dems at close to double their 2015 vote share in London. To me, this feels right given the Lib Dem posters around the place. I suspect the SW London seats are still doable and so is Southwark and Bermondsey. I also think the party will get at least four seats in Scotland.kle4 said:
Oh, he'll have a few. It's always worth having an revisit on the assessment of LD chances.daodao said:
It will be Hobson's choice, but Farron won't have any other MPs to lead!Chris said:
Do people have any thoughts on the Lib Dem leadership after the election, if they do as badly as these polls are suggesting?Pulpstar said:Polls look horrendous for the Lib Dems
It looks as though the most credible alternative leaders (including Clegg) are the likeliest to lose their seats.
Carshalton - seen as tough for them to retain.
Orkney - despite being pretty close last time and the Carmichael factor, he should win pretty comfortably.
Hallam - Clegg's in real trouble, reliant on that there was a Labour surge in his seat last time, that was unusual for the constituency, not being repeated, and thus lack of Tory tacticals is not fatal to him. I see some saying he should be safe, others thinking he'll struggle, so it cannot be a certainty.
Westmoreland - some chatter about Farron under pressure, and he's had a bad campaign even with the poor hand he as LD leader has been dealt (I am genuinely frustrated Labour have surged at their expense), but should be safe.
North Norfolk - another tough one to retain. Some say local factors mean he is ok, strict models say its a goner.
Leeds - a toss up, apparently. More likely to retain than not perhaps.
Richmond - Another tough one to retain.
Southport - fight on their hands, could hold, might lose.
Ceredigion - Tough fight maybe, but should retain.
Target
Cambridge - I think it is safe to write this one off - Labour are surging somewhere and if it is anywhere surely it is a place like Cambridge?
Edinburgh West - They're probably still confident
SW London seats - relying on a campaigning surge that hasn't occurred? Unless they are going backwards elsewhere and rising here, not great chances
A couple other scottish seats - could get lucky, depends how well any tactical voting goes.
Most other places that were former LD seats? Don't make me laugh.
The rest of the country is a mystery to me. I hope Nick Clegg gets back in - there's been no finer leader of a UK political party in the last thirty years0 -
Is that right? Just how do you get any tory vote much above 45%. The question you must ask how is Labour at 36% compared to Miliband? I see no Conservative leader not even the Archangel Gabriel getting better than 43 - 45 if Corbyn is really getting 36.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
What we have is a Labour manifesto promising the moon and sixpence and all with somebody else's money -- found from somewhere. Only the young are so gullible.0 -
It was a peculiar thing to claim. Were those his exact words on the topic? as it is strange given he chooses his words carefully on the subject and can and no doubt would explain that it was no big deal that he met or spoke with various figures.isam said:htt://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/868536614246658052
0 -
18-24 year olds are a relatively small cohort of the electorate though.MarkSenior said:
Yougov are consistently finding that 18-24 year olds have much higher certainty to vote figures than 25-44 year olds . I guess in many cases this is the novelty of having a vote for the first time , whereas the next age group have voted a couple of times and know that outside of marginal seats their vote does not really matter .kle4 said:
Perhaps not, but will they actually turn out this time is the critical question? Dozens of seats could be saved, and some gained, if they do for once.MaxPB said:
I honestly don't see it. I think Labour are leeching younger voters away from the greens and Lib Dems, but not engaging new young voters in large enough numbers.Pulpstar said:Corbyn is a fucking revelation for the left. Cooked inside Cooperation atm will do a thread on this in due course. Expect turnout amongst youngsters to be well up
0 -
Thats a fake picture or a tailors dummy. 'Corbyn' had got his tie properly done up.isam said:0 -
All of Corbyn's apologists keep reminding us that his back catalogue is 'priced in', and that the public do not care. So why do they keep mentioning it every time it is brought up?isam said:
Surely if it was counter-productive, they would encourage more of these attacks on their Messiah.... wouldn't they?
Unless.......0 -
Believe me its not being an apologist - I hope the public do care! I think he is disingenuous when he talks on the subject and he beefs up his 'role', and that what he said and did was qualitatively different from the actual peacemaking work that has gone on.Jason said:
All of Corbyn's apologists keep reminding us that his back catalogue is 'priced in', and that the public do not care. So why do they keep mentioning it every time it is brought up?isam said:
Unless............0 -
Yup, you've just described my fears exactly. I think 1 and 2 are already happening, from the anecdotal evidence I hear online and from friends - I know a few people who've been door-knocking.Stereotomy said:
I think the scenario where the Tories do really badly (reduced majority or hung parliament) goes like:
- Corbyn pulls off a Trump and actually gets traditional non-voters to increase turnout
- At the other end of the spectrum, voters who traditionally have high turnout are turned off by the social care stuff. They keep telling pollsters they're voting Tory, their preference, but on the day not quite so many actually turn out as usual
- Somehow UKIP actually manage to capitalise on the Manchester attacks to the tune of three or four percent of the Tory vote (maybe May says something badly-worded about immigration during an interview)
- The Tories either fail to seize initiative and turn the spotlight on Corbyn, or it turns out that that truly is priced in, or the news cycle gets filled up with other events, or they mostly manage but get undermined by a leak or slip-up that puts attention back on their mistakes. Labour keeps up their surprisingly competent campaign.
If, say, 3 of those 4 thing happen, you could still have a huge upset. I doubt it's likely, but if it happens, I think that's how.
The best thing that can be said about turning the spotlight on Corbyn is that it's polarising. I saw the attack ad on Facebook the Tories are running and all I thought was that it will harden opinion in both camps.
If you're already leaning towards Corbyn it just adds fuel to the fire that there is an enormous conspiracay against him to paint him as a terrorist sympathiser when he's really just a pacifist...
I just don't think this style of negative campaigning works. "Vote Corbyn Get Salmond" might, but "Don't Vote Corbyn, He Once Had Tea With The IRA" won't.
Where is the positivity in the Conservative campaign? Where is the vision for the future? Where is the hope?
0 -
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
She was a big fan of Barbara Castle,too. No I don't even want to think that!foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy0 -
He should go now, on a relative high.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's never won the European Cup and League Cup, the two most important trophies in football.tlg86 said:
Arsene Wenger, he's won more than you (okay, since he's been in charge of Arsenal in the case of Liverpool).TheScreamingEagles said:@Scrapheap.
I may, may may be doing a thread tomorrow that you will enjoy.
It's comparing a North London pensioner whose team are the Reds who might still be in charge for another few years to somebody in the world of football.
We've won them 4 times since Wenger became Arsenal manager.
(Honestly I'm a huge fan of Wenger, I just worry at the start of the next season Arsenal have a bad run, and he's forced out, he deserves better than that.)0 -
Special K not looking so Special in round 10!!0
-
I think the polls may be caught out this time by another change in the voting pattern, namely the most radical shift in the profile and identities of 'don't know' voters in any election for a long, long time. How exactly that plays, I cannot decide - I suspect LDs might get closer to 15% nationally than the polls suggest, although without gaining much benefit in their target seats, but how that tips the Lab / Con battle nationally is not at all clear to me.Stereotomy said:
I think the scenario where the Tories do really badly (reduced majority or hung parliament) goes like:kyf_100 said:
Right place, right time. People aree projecting their hopes onto him. Some of the posts I see on my facebook and twitter feeds are quasi religious in the way they see him as the messiah, promising great change and ending all evil.kle4 said:
That's great, although I truly don't get it. Why him? His schtick is not new, he's got a kindly demeanour but he's not hugely charismatic, why are they so fired up by him rather than merely like him?Pulpstar said:Corbyn is a fucking revelation for the left. Cooked inside Cooperation atm will do a thread on this in due course. Expect turnout amongst youngsters to be well up
I'm starting to think that we may be on the wrong side of the zeitgeist. What if young people do actually vote this time round, sore and smarting from a year of having the fact that it was oldies wot won it for Brexit shared repeatedly on social media finally teaching them a lesson...
As Alistair says below if DNVs do vote this time round, all bets are off.
Right up until the registration deadline most of my lefty friends were sharing more 'you must register to vote, we lost Brexit, we can't afford to lose this time' stuff than they were stuff about their messiah JC...
- Corbyn pulls off a Trump and actually gets traditional non-voters to increase turnout
- At the other end of the spectrum, voters who traditionally have high turnout are turned off by the social care stuff. They keep telling pollsters they're voting Tory, their preference, but on the day not quite so many actually turn out as usual
- Somehow UKIP actually manage to capitalise on the Manchester attacks to the tune of three or four percent of the Tory vote (maybe May says something badly-worded about immigration during an interview)
- The Tories either fail to seize initiative and turn the spotlight on Corbyn, or it turns out that that truly is priced in, or the news cycle gets filled up with other events, or they mostly manage but get undermined by a leak or slip-up that puts attention back on their mistakes. Labour keeps up their surprisingly competent campaign.
If, say, 3 of those 4 thing happen, you could still have a huge upset. I doubt it's likely, but if it happens, I think that's how.0 -
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
Do a constituency map by age. This isn't working vs middle class any more. This is young vs old.AndyJS said:
I think Matthew Goodwin is right. The polls are overestimating Labour, as usual.Scott_P said:@LadPolitics: This is good. Someone making a specific prediction. #GE2017 https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/868562780990959621
0 -
I'm guessing the people he met were no longer members or had never been proven to be.kle4 said:
It was a peculiar thing to claim. Were those his exact words on the topic? as it is strange given he chooses his words carefully on the subject and can and no doubt would explain that it was no big deal that he met or spoke with various figures.isam said:htt://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/868536614246658052
I feel like having enormous bets on labour to do badly but don't think I've got the bottle!0 -
Compared to May!!kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
OMG!!kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)
0 -
If you do then between us one of us will be the winner (barring an Lazarus like resurrection of Labour).TheScreamingEagles said:
Should I be backing the Nats to topple David Mundell?Alistair said:
I can see literally 0 eventualities where he fails to take BRS. Rock solid guaranteed Con gain, the odds on it were crazy, crazy, insanely good.kle4 said:
Bold of him to do that, but certainly would be worth a bitter laugh if it happened.Alistair said:In amongst the fantasing about who everyone would like to see fail on June the 8th I'd just like to say the the funniest result of election night would be for John Lamont to fail to take Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk.
He's resigned his Holyrood seat (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire which is the Holyrood equivalent of BRS) to contest BRS so I can't work out if it would be funnier if Rachael Hamilton lost ERB or if she held it for the Conservatives.
Whilst I would be personally poorer of wallet I would be richer in mirth.
Bad night for SCON if they cannot take it though, I'd have thought.0 -
I only ever bet peanuts, just in case. I have neverthless now tried to cover myself in the event of a very good night for Labour, as otherwise I'm mostly on positions which are at best moderately ad for them.isam said:
I'm guessing the people he met were no longer members or had never been proven to be.kle4 said:
It was a peculiar thing to claim. Were those his exact words on the topic? as it is strange given he chooses his words carefully on the subject and can and no doubt would explain that it was no big deal that he met or spoke with various figures.isam said:htt://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/868536614246658052
I feel like having enormous bets on labour to do badly but don't think I've got the bottle!0 -
He was comprehensively divorced once.kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
Dan Hodges on Press Preview, popcorn.0
-
I remember popping onto PB.com one Friday evening years ago, only to discover that the political debate had shifted onto the topic of which which Girls Aloud singer the boys on here preferred!Jason said:OK, if we have to talk about women we fancy, let's do it propery instead of salivating over history professors and weirdos -
https://forums.digitalspy.com/discussion/2208134/soaps-hottest-woman-includes-pictures/p15
0 -
You don't think a man with intense views on seemingly every political issue would not be equally intense on non-political issues in conversation, which would attract people?Jason said:
OMG!!kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
Has this been posted?
Con 46, Lab 32
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3666236/theresa-may-terror-crisis-general-election-poll-lead/0 -
Like Corbyn! :-)ThreeQuidder said:
He should go now, on a relative high.TheScreamingEagles said:
He's never won the European Cup and League Cup, the two most important trophies in football.tlg86 said:
Arsene Wenger, he's won more than you (okay, since he's been in charge of Arsenal in the case of Liverpool).TheScreamingEagles said:@Scrapheap.
I may, may may be doing a thread tomorrow that you will enjoy.
It's comparing a North London pensioner whose team are the Reds who might still be in charge for another few years to somebody in the world of football.
We've won them 4 times since Wenger became Arsenal manager.
(Honestly I'm a huge fan of Wenger, I just worry at the start of the next season Arsenal have a bad run, and he's forced out, he deserves better than that.)0 -
No amount of charm is going to make me see a 68 year old as sexy.kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)
He's more than 40 years older than me....just no.
I agree that's it's his message. Women have also been more likely to vote Labour than men for sometime now, I definitely recall this being case prior to Corbyn becoming leader.0 -
So the polls tonight have not been catastrophic for the Tories.
Majority 80-100.0 -
Blade Special K loses in Round 11.0
-
You mean: in one case you tell them it's their decision and you get paid for it, and in the other case you express a view and you don't get paid for it?AlastairMeeks said:...Along the way I've learned a bit about the difference between writing when giving advice and writing for a wider audience. They're very different processes.
0 -
Nope, it's ICM!JonW said:Has this been posted?
Con 46, Lab 32
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3666236/theresa-may-terror-crisis-general-election-poll-lead/0 -
I just look at the majority of 798 and think there's no way anyone should be nailed on to win.Alistair said:
If you do then between us one of us will be the winner (barring an Lazarus like resurrection of Labour).TheScreamingEagles said:
Should I be backing the Nats to topple David Mundell?Alistair said:
I can see literally 0 eventualities where he fails to take BRS. Rock solid guaranteed Con gain, the odds on it were crazy, crazy, insanely good.kle4 said:
Bold of him to do that, but certainly would be worth a bitter laugh if it happened.Alistair said:In amongst the fantasing about who everyone would like to see fail on June the 8th I'd just like to say the the funniest result of election night would be for John Lamont to fail to take Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk.
He's resigned his Holyrood seat (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire which is the Holyrood equivalent of BRS) to contest BRS so I can't work out if it would be funnier if Rachael Hamilton lost ERB or if she held it for the Conservatives.
Whilst I would be personally poorer of wallet I would be richer in mirth.
Bad night for SCON if they cannot take it though, I'd have thought.
No matter what the Scottish polling says.
I can see the Nats really motivated in toppling their Tory Viceroy.0 -
Well I imagine his intensity and inflexibility in politics is reflected at least in part in his private life, and that same intensity leads to issues later.TMA1 said:
He was comprehensively divorced once.kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
Unchanged from last week's INC at 14%RobD said:
Nope, it's ICM!JonW said:Has this been posted?
Con 46, Lab 32
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3666236/theresa-may-terror-crisis-general-election-poll-lead/0 -
If there is an appeal about him personally beyond his message, I would suspect it to be a cool grandad sort of vibe. He's an anti-authority, authority figure, he's right-on, he's old but he says how wonderful young people are and wants to give them free stuff.The_Apocalypse said:
No amount of charm is going to make me see a 68 year old as sexy.kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)
He's more than 40 years older than me....just no.
I agree that's it's his message. Women have also been more likely to vote Labour than men for sometime now, I definitely recall this being case prior to Corbyn becoming leader.
Grace Mugabe is 41 years young than her husband - power and wealth, not that's what is sexy!0 -
ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
UKIP surge.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
Finally (if Con win) must guarantee that Rudd keeps top Cabinet job.0 -
Same methodology as ComRes re turnout - ie based on 2015 actual - so would expect to be good for Con - but even so a massively reassuring poll for Con.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
That would be a bloodbath for Labour.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
Phew.....bit more like reality.0 -
Sun: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3666236/theresa-may-terror-crisis-general-election-poll-lead/
'ICM boss Martin Boon said: “Despite a bad look at the beginning of last week, it’s still hands-down Theresa May.
“The Tories are not shipwrecked after the storm. They have just had a bad week and the storm clouds always move on elsewhere.
“Labour has recovered and the figures imply a better performance than Ed Miliband managed two years ago. But they are still in second place by a country mile and all the fundamentals still point to a strong Tory win.”"0 -
Maybe they are baiting Labour to send Diane AbbottMikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
0 -
And on that cheerful note, goodnight.0
-
Curious that after surging into the low 30s they have not picked up a similar surge to the others into the mid and mid-late 30s.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
I didn't know the parties were not empty chairing if the leader's didn't come, not sure if that is good or bad for them. Why isn't May/Corbyn here to speak for themselves sort of thing.MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
I haven't seen much of Rudd, is she capable?0 -
Wonder if it's all a bluff and Corbyn is going after all?MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
Finally (if Con win) must guarantee that Rudd keeps top Cabinet job.
0 -
He should.RobD said:
Wonder if it's all a bluff and Corbyn is going after all?MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
Finally (if Con win) must guarantee that Rudd keeps top Cabinet job.0 -
Wow, ICM restoring sanity to the situation.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
In a few months, in the books that will have been written, this is the week when it will be said that the Tories put Crosby in charge and tightened their message.
The PM will show a touch of humility to a voter on the Monday interview or on QT, and Corbyn will have been seen to have had a gaff either related to terrorism or over the numbers (Paxman will want to see if he can add up, as he'll be briefed to death on PIRA and won't be expecting it).
Else this is the week Corbyn wins the election. But my money is on option A.0 -
Steady as she goes versus a bat-shit crazy crashing of the economy - that is a decent vision of the future....kyf_100 said:
Yup, you've just described my fears exactly. I think 1 and 2 are already happening, from the anecdotal evidence I hear online and from friends - I know a few people who've been door-knocking.Stereotomy said:
I think the scenario where the Tories do really badly (reduced majority or hung parliament) goes like:
- Corbyn pulls off a Trump and actually gets traditional non-voters to increase turnout
- At the other end of the spectrum, voters who traditionally have high turnout are turned off by the social care stuff. They keep telling pollsters they're voting Tory, their preference, but on the day not quite so many actually turn out as usual
- Somehow UKIP actually manage to capitalise on the Manchester attacks to the tune of three or four percent of the Tory vote (maybe May says something badly-worded about immigration during an interview)
- The Tories either fail to seize initiative and turn the spotlight on Corbyn, or it turns out that that truly is priced in, or the news cycle gets filled up with other events, or they mostly manage but get undermined by a leak or slip-up that puts attention back on their mistakes. Labour keeps up their surprisingly competent campaign.
If, say, 3 of those 4 thing happen, you could still have a huge upset. I doubt it's likely, but if it happens, I think that's how.
The best thing that can be said about turning the spotlight on Corbyn is that it's polarising. I saw the attack ad on Facebook the Tories are running and all I thought was that it will harden opinion in both camps.
If you're already leaning towards Corbyn it just adds fuel to the fire that there is an enormous conspiracay against him to paint him as a terrorist sympathiser when he's really just a pacifist...
I just don't think this style of negative campaigning works. "Vote Corbyn Get Salmond" might, but "Don't Vote Corbyn, He Once Had Tea With The IRA" won't.
Where is the positivity in the Conservative campaign? Where is the vision for the future? Where is the hope?0 -
Fieldwork for the ICM poll was the 24th to the 26th0
-
Gold standard as always. ... hoorar and good night.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
Didn't Rudd so some EU Ref debates? That line about not getting a taxi home with Boris or something...kle4 said:
Curious that after surging into the low 30s they have not picked up a similar surge to the others into the mid and mid-late 30s.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
I didn't know the parties were not empty chairing if the leader's didn't come, not sure if that is good or bad for them. Why isn't May/Corbyn here to speak for themselves sort of thing.MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
I haven't seen much of Rudd, is she capable?0 -
Must make Cabinet meetings awkward if so.KentRising said:
Didn't Rudd so some EU Ref debates? That line about not getting a taxi home with Boris or something...kle4 said:
Curious that after surging into the low 30s they have not picked up a similar surge to the others into the mid and mid-late 30s.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
I didn't know the parties were not empty chairing if the leader's didn't come, not sure if that is good or bad for them. Why isn't May/Corbyn here to speak for themselves sort of thing.MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
I haven't seen much of Rudd, is she capable?0 -
In that case, I can now reveal that the Queen has met the IRA.isam said:0 -
Ah yes... some no name with a chubby posterior. Night.kle4 said:If Copeland were to switch back to Lab that would have to be the shortest time in parliament for an MP for quite a long time.
UKIP managed to get Rochester and Strood in a by-election and then lost it by a large amount only 6 months later...0 -
That looks more like it?TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
I am READY, man! Ready to GET IT ON!TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)0 -
Was it not well known that McGuinness was provo IRA Chief of Staff?kle4 said:
It was a peculiar thing to claim. Were those his exact words on the topic? as it is strange given he chooses his words carefully on the subject and can and no doubt would explain that it was no big deal that he met or spoke with various figures.isam said:htt://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/868536614246658052
From the Saville Report, ''Before the soldiers of Support Company went into the Bogside he was probably armed with a Thompson sub-machine gun, and though it is possible that he fired this weapon, there is insufficient evidence to make any finding on this, save that we are sure that he did not engage in any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire''
Perhaps Corbyn is coming over all (Bill) Clintonesque in his hair splitting. When he said 'IRA' he really did mean 'IRA' and not 'Provo IRA'
0 -
UKIP surge.GIN1138 said:
That looks more like it?TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
Will all the polls herd together at the end again?
Just thought I'd ask.0 -
These relatively small differences in the polls imply very large variations in the likely scale of the Conservative victory - and we can make a good estimate of what those will be by looking at historical precedent.
What essentially appears to be happening in this election is that, with the squeeze being applied to the Lib Dems and the near-total collapse of Ukip, England and Wales are reverting to the post-War two-party system, i.e. that which prevailed in the General Elections from 1945 to 1970 inclusive. So, if we plot each election result on a graph with two axes - the percentage lead in vote share for the winning party, and the percentage lead in terms of the proportion of total Commons seats won by the winning party - then we can simply plot a line of best fit through the available data points, find any given vote share lead on the line, read across to the seat share lead and finally calculate the number of seats to which this equates. Easy! I ran a polynomial regression through the data points, and obtained a curve with R-squared = 0.957, indicating that the regression line fits the data quite well.
There are 573 seats in England and Wales, and I have made the (not unreasonable) assumption for the purposes of this exercise that the minor parties (LD, Green, Ukip, and Plaid, plus the Speaker) will win 14 seats in total, which is the same as at present. This leaves 559 to be allocated to the two main parties.
Based on historical precedent, here is what we ought to expect, approximately speaking, in terms of how the Tory lead over Labour might translate in terms of a Parliamentary majority. Please note that these figures assume the Conservatives win nothing at all in Scotland, so you can add an adjustment for Scotland onto the values given, according to taste:
Con-Lab lead: 4%
Con seats: 307
Majority: n/a (Con short by 18)
Con-Lab lead: 6%
Con seats: 327
Majority: 4
Con-Lab lead: 8%
Con seats: 355
Majority: 60
Con-Lab lead: 10%
Con seats: 394
Majority: 138
I'm reticent about projecting beyond a Tory lead of 10%, because the biggest lead in the 1945-1970 data set is Labour's 8.6% advantage in 1945, and so it's possible that the maths will begin to break down as any possible Conservative surge breaks against a firewall of extremely safe Labour seats in urban areas. However, the main point is clear: historical precedent suggests that, in a two-party scenario, relatively modest changes in the difference in vote share between the two largest parties can have wholly disproportionate effects on the majority of the Government.
(Footnote: Conservative totals in the historical data sets for 1945-1970 include the Unionist Party in Scotland, the National Liberals and the Ulster Unionist Party, where relevant.)0 -
I would imagine Barry GardinerPaulM said:
Maybe they are baiting Labour to send Diane AbbottMikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.0 -
It'll be John McDonnell won't it.RobD said:
Wonder if it's all a bluff and Corbyn is going after all?MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
Finally (if Con win) must guarantee that Rudd keeps top Cabinet job.0 -
Right I'm off to bed.
If we are getting a Survation, then I'll have to wait until the morning.
I'm not that much of a poll addict.0 -
BBC said they wanted all parties present.kle4 said:I didn't know the parties were not empty chairing if the leader's didn't come, not sure if that is good or bad for them. Why isn't May/Corbyn here to speak for themselves sort of thing.
I haven't seen much of Rudd, is she capable?
They invited leaders but said party can send alternative if they choose.
Sensible decision by BBC - ITV debate just had the five minor party leaders and got terrible rating (1.7m).
BBC debate will do better but won't rate very high as up against Britain's Got Talent on ITV.
Rudd is solid performer and I think the right choice for Con. ICM says NHS is number 1 issue - warm, reassuring, moderate woman is best placed to give Con reassurance on NHS and social care.
Boris too risky, Hammond too dry.0 -
Average of tonight's polls so far:
Con 45%
Lab 35%
LD 8%
UKIP 5%0 -
Lightweight... *tut*TheScreamingEagles said:Right I'm off to bed.
If we are getting a Survation, then I'll have to wait until the morning.
I'm not that much of a poll addict.0 -
Have posted similar before, but will again.
Re Labour surge. 2 factors are at play
1 The economy. Whatever happened to "long term economic plan?". Many people are really struggling. Their views are disproportionately unrepresented on this forum. You may not like it, but it is true. Real wages are falling again. Productivity is back below 2008 levels. Housing costs rising. More of the same is not working.
2 When you re-brand as the Brexit Party that is tactically astute. You hoover up the vast majority of Leave voters and establish a solid 45%. BUT, don't be surprised if the majority of the 48% then also coalesce. We saw a group promise "cake and eat it" and win. So now we have someone promising similar, and opposing the Brexiters, with a different view of a post-EU future. Sauce for the goose and all that.
It is a binary choice. IRA or no IRA. Many are genuinely fearful of a big Tory majority. If I were a Conservative I would be cheering every close poll, and downplaying every big lead. But I am not.0 -
ICM remains the gold standard!!!!0
-
Yes she did - she was one of the Remain team at the big BBC debate.KentRising said:
Didn't Rudd so some EU Ref debates? That line about not getting a taxi home with Boris or something...kle4 said:
Curious that after surging into the low 30s they have not picked up a similar surge to the others into the mid and mid-late 30s.TheScreamingEagles said:ICM for The Sun on Sunday
Con 46 (-1) Lab 32 (-1) LD 8 (-1) UKIP 5 (+1)
I didn't know the parties were not empty chairing if the leader's didn't come, not sure if that is good or bad for them. Why isn't May/Corbyn here to speak for themselves sort of thing.MikeL said:Not sure if posted yet but per Sunday Times - Amber Rudd is representing Con in the BBC1 Election Debate on Wed (7.30pm to 9pm).
Seven parties - five leaders; Corbyn said won't attend if May doesn't. So presumably another senior Lab person.
Sensible decision to go for Rudd - I guess they could have gone for Boris but maybe too much of wildcard and risk of challenge re "Brexit means £350m per week for NHS".
Rudd also more suitable to deliver reassuring message re social care - but her message must be focus grouped and agreed with Crosby.
I haven't seen much of Rudd, is she capable?0 -
Alastair,AlastairMeeks said:
That's very kind of you.SeanT said:
We're never going to agree on Brexit, so shall we agree to disagree? For me it isAlastairMeeks said:
While I simply regard views such as yours as straightforwardly deranged. You start from a premise and work backwards.Disraeli said:FPTf
And I maintain that the EU cannot reach it's final goal without destroying ALL its member nations, replacing them with a new structure which it believes is better.AlastairMeeks said:
.... but I have never (never mind continuously) insisted that Britain couldn't leave the EU without destroying the nation, either literally or metaphorically.
I don't believe that it would be better. I respect the idealism of the pan-europeans but think them dangerously naive. However, "your mileage may vary" (as the saying goes).
precious independence, for you it is socio-economic self-harm.
It's like asking a drunken Richard Dawkins to debate with Plymouth Brethren. It's not that they disagree, there is no shared ground on which they could profitably argue. So it's pointless.
That said, can I compliment you on your threaders. You write elegant, clever, well-informed and rather witty articles. If PB is getting your essays for nothing, that is an outrage. You should think about writing politics professionally. I hate to see good writers go unpaid. It's wrong.
Remember: Shakespeare wrote for money.
I mainly write to get my betting decisions right. My returns have improved since I started writing above the line. There's nothing like knowing that there are about 50 critical posters ready to pounce on any sloppy thinking for making you get your thoughts in order. So I get my rewards indirectly.
The.non-betting threads are for my own amusement. Given the abundance of online political writers, I expect a lot of others do too. I wouldn't worry too much about this particular writer starving in a garret. Along the way I've learned a bit about the difference between writing when giving advice and writing for a wider audience. They're very different processes.
Please can I also reinforce Sean T's endorsement.
We are on the opposite side of the Brexit argument and i have not always found your comments particularly fair or balanced on that subject but your threads over the last few weeks regarding the GE have been excellent and i have found them both thought provoking and challenging.
Thank you0 -
I'm tired, cranky, just written the morning thread, and I want go to bed before I call someone an obsessive dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Lightweight... *tut*TheScreamingEagles said:Right I'm off to bed.
If we are getting a Survation, then I'll have to wait until the morning.
I'm not that much of a poll addict.
Edit - Not calling a PBer an obsessive dickhead of course, you're all wonderful people, even you thicko leavers :lol0 -
Fascinating, brilliant and convincingBlack_Rook said:These relatively small differences in the polls imply very large variations in the likely scale of the Conservative victory - and we can make a good estimate of what those will be by looking at historical precedent.
What essentially appears to be happening in this election is that, with the squeeze being applied to the Lib Dems and the near-total collapse of Ukip, England and Wales are reverting to the post-War two-party system, i.e. that which prevailed in the General Elections from 1945 to 1970 inclusive. So, if we plot each election result on a graph with two axes - the percentage lead in vote share for the winning party, and the percentage lead in terms of the proportion of total Commons seats won by the winning party - then we can simply plot a line of best fit through the available data points, find any given vote share lead on the line, read across to the seat share lead and finally calculate the number of seats to which this equates. Easy! I ran a polynomial regression through the data points, and obtained a curve with R-squared = 0.957, indicating that the regression line fits the data quite well.
There are 573 seats in England and Wales, and I have made the (not unreasonable) assumption for the purposes of this exercise that the minor parties (LD, Green, Ukip, and Plaid, plus the Speaker) will win 14 seats in total, which is the same as at present. This leaves 559 to be allocated to the two main parties.
Based on historical precedent, here is what we ought to expect, approximately speaking, in terms of how the Tory lead over Labour might translate in terms of a Parliamentary majority. Please note that these figures assume the Conservatives win nothing at all in Scotland, so you can add an adjustment for Scotland onto the values given, according to taste:
Con-Lab lead: 4%
Con seats: 307
Majority: n/a (Con short by 18)
Con-Lab lead: 6%
Con seats: 327
Majority: 4
Con-Lab lead: 8%
Con seats: 355
Majority: 60
Con-Lab lead: 10%
Con seats: 394
Majority: 138
I'm reticent about projecting beyond a Tory lead of 10%, because the biggest lead in the 1945-1970 data set is Labour's 8.6% advantage in 1945, and so it's possible that the maths will begin to break down as any possible Conservative surge breaks against a firewall of extremely safe Labour seats in urban areas. However, the main point is clear: historical precedent suggests that, in a two-party scenario, relatively modest changes in the difference in vote share between the two largest parties can have wholly disproportionate effects on the majority of the Government.
(Footnote: Conservative totals in the historical data sets for 1945-1970 include the Unionist Party in Scotland, the National Liberals and the Ulster Unionist Party, where relevant.)0 -
Largely concentrated in very safe Labour seats.Pulpstar said:
Do a constituency map by age. This isn't working vs middle class any more. This is young vs old.AndyJS said:
I think Matthew Goodwin is right. The polls are overestimating Labour, as usual.Scott_P said:@LadPolitics: This is good. Someone making a specific prediction. #GE2017 https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/868562780990959621
0 -
True, it's always best to call someone that after a good night's rest I find.TheScreamingEagles said:
I want go to bed before I call someone an obsessive dickhead.GIN1138 said:
Lightweight... *tut*TheScreamingEagles said:Right I'm off to bed.
If we are getting a Survation, then I'll have to wait until the morning.
I'm not that much of a poll addict.
0 -
And Cambridge? (poor LDs)brokenwheel said:
Largely concentrated in very safe Labour seats.Pulpstar said:
Do a constituency map by age. This isn't working vs middle class any more. This is young vs old.AndyJS said:
I think Matthew Goodwin is right. The polls are overestimating Labour, as usual.Scott_P said:@LadPolitics: This is good. Someone making a specific prediction. #GE2017 https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/868562780990959621
0 -
Kle, you are clearly a thoughtful and interesting contributor here, but irony is not on your radar. You are drier than a Pharaoh's sock.kle4 said:
You don't think a man with intense views on seemingly every political issue would not be equally intense on non-political issues in conversation, which would attract people?Jason said:
OMG!!kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
I don't know. What was the situation? What was the occasion shown in that photo? When was it taken? Was it before Tony Blair met Martin McGuinness in 1997? Was it before Margaret Thatcher authorised talks with the IRA through Martin McGuinness in 1990? I would guess not.RobD said:
0 -
Martin McGuiness supposedly left the IrA, abandoned the armed struggle in favour of the ballot box in the late Seventies. Maybe not the whole truth but that is the story.TMA1 said:
Was it not well known that McGuinness was provo IRA Chief of Staff?kle4 said:
It was a peculiar thing to claim. Were those his exact words on the topic? as it is strange given he chooses his words carefully on the subject and can and no doubt would explain that it was no big deal that he met or spoke with various figures.isam said:htt://twitter.com/borisjohnson/status/868536614246658052
From the Saville Report, ''Before the soldiers of Support Company went into the Bogside he was probably armed with a Thompson sub-machine gun, and though it is possible that he fired this weapon, there is insufficient evidence to make any finding on this, save that we are sure that he did not engage in any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire''
Perhaps Corbyn is coming over all (Bill) Clintonesque in his hair splitting. When he said 'IRA' he really did mean 'IRA' and not 'Provo IRA'
0 -
Just a thought on the Con attacks on Corbyn re IRA.
Many people say it's already priced in - but could Crosby think that it'll nag away at people - some people may say Lab now but when it comes to the crunch in the ballot booth the IRA attacks may lead to cold feet at the last minute and the vote then switches to Con.0 -
Perhaps I should have included a smiley face?Jason said:
Kle, you are clearly a thoughtful and interesting contributor here, but irony is not on your radar. You are drier than a Pharaoh's sock.kle4 said:
You don't think a man with intense views on seemingly every political issue would not be equally intense on non-political issues in conversation, which would attract people?Jason said:
OMG!!kle4 said:
He's been married three times, he's probably quite charming. I imagine him to have a sort of intensity that is probably quite compelling, one on one. But really it's probably just women find his message more appealing, and young ladies in particular.The_Apocalypse said:
Okay, you're having a laugh now.foxinsoxuk said:
Jezza is quite a hit with the ladies, an example of the sexiness of the bad boy that your parents hate. The rebel with a cause, the British Che Guevara.dixiedean said:
There is definitely something in that. For my Mother (who is 75), he is the leader she has been waiting for her whole adult life.MarkSenior said:
The truth is that he is voter repellent mostly to people who would never vote anything but Conservative .AndyJS said:
I was just about to make the same point. Can't have it both ways.alex. said:
So is he a voter repellent, or isn't he? There seems to be some dispute on this thread. He is when people are having a go at May. He isn't when people try to explain the polls.glw said:
Against Corbyn is the thing, you have to account for that.AndyJS said:Theresa May is heading for the highest vote share for any party for more than 20 years, and yet people are calling her a failure. Amazing.
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/why-jeremy-corbyn-is-sexy
The Corbyn-supporting women I know don't feel that way about him.
I certainly don't (but then again I'm not a Corbynista)0 -
Summary: after a terrible week or so the Tories are, on average, 10 points ahead.0
-
There is one very good reason for the Conservatives to try and refocus their campaign on Brexit. It is because it is the one issue which works against the "don't give the Tories a landslide" line of opposition. It works for leavers (need a healthy majority to guarantee Brexit) and also for many traditional Tory remainers (need a healthy majority to improve the chances of a "good" Brexit).0
