politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB/Polling Matters podcast: Election eve special

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

On Wakefield, I don't think that's an accurate reflection of DH's post. What he said was:

david_herdson said:

Just come back from last-minute leafleting. Change of mind on earlier. I think Corbyn is just going to do this. The polls are right. Con 300.

Still think we'll take Wakefield due to Creagh's idiocy/principled stand (delete as preferred) over triggering A50.

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

brokenwheel said:

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

Piling up where though?

kyf_100 said:

Andrew said:

Alistair said:

I'm not a whisky drinker but I have two miniatures in the pantry: a 10 year old Laphroaig and a 18 year old Glenfiddich. Which one for the exit poll tomorrow?

Glenfiddy is smooth but boring. Laphroaig kicks you in the nuts but leaves you wanting more.

The 18 year old Glenfiddich is a bit of a disappointment compared to the 15, which is softer and sweeter. It doesn't have a very distinctive character.

If you're not a fan of peated whiskies, the Laphroaig may well knock you off your feet. I've grown to enjoy it over the years but I would recommend adding just a few drops of water.

I am a lover of the Laphroaig and have been for many, many years. But it is not a Whisky suitable for drinking on all occasions. Late in the evening, after a good meal, it is hard to beat or late on a cold winter's afternoon after a day in the open air. It is not, in my view, an all day whisky; I would not, for example, fill my flask with it when going out for a morning on the local shoot (the Grouse is good enough for those sort of events).

I don't hold with putting water in it either. A separate glass of still mineral water and take them in alternate sips seems the best way to of drinking a fine whisky to me.

https://twitter.com/daily_record/status/872569460422569984

Gallowgate said:

brokenwheel said:

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

Piling up where though?

Home counties etc.

Interesting that unlike 2015 no-one on here ca be accused of herding. Mr Herdson, cyclefree doubtful of majority, Bigjohnowls at 100+ (A feeling I share). What a weird election! I expect some shocking gains and losses, with wild swings.
Swinging like Cap d'Agde on a sunny day!

RobinWiggs said:

Sophie Walker, of the Women's Equality Party.

https://goo.gl/images/BN1Ak0

Got my vote!, if that is permitted...

chrisb said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

On Wakefield, I don't think that's an accurate reflection of DH's post. What he said was:

david_herdson said:

Just come back from last-minute leafleting. Change of mind on earlier. I think Corbyn is just going to do this. The polls are right. Con 300.

Still think we'll take Wakefield due to Creagh's idiocy/principled stand (delete as preferred) over triggering A50.

Winning Wakefield and losing seats (net) would take some doing.

Just a further anecdote, from the doorstep, but I have not seen new Labour voters so fired up by anyone since TB. They will come out to vote in numbers. Not enough to win back Preseli, but enough to see of challenges in many marginals, and even gaining one or two.

Philip_Thompson said:

WhisperingOracle said:

The Daily Mail sincerely believes Corbyn will be taxing your garden, poor loves.

He would.

Each gnome and azelia will feel the force of the evil marxist hordes, and their "accounting books".

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/daily_record/status/872569460422569984

I chose not to choose hope: I chose something else.

Sean_F said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

But, but - what about Bootle?

I stick to my prediction of a 1979-type result, if you add SNP to Labour.

Part of me wonders if the voters might deliver some poetic justice, and return May with an almost identical majority to Dave in GE2015.

Cheers for the kind words this evening and yes, I am going off for some rest after typing this post - though I will be up ready for a 5am delivery start tomorrow and will probably have a baby feed between now and then too.

And yes, I am just one person reporting from one part of one constituency and it's certainly possible to over-extrapolate a small sample. However, in theory, everyone I was contacting today should be Con supporters (which is why we're contacting them) and while there were clearly some positive remarks, I felt that there were too many silences or outright negative comments. I didn't feel like the tide was moving the right way.

That said, I also know that we should do well out of the ex-UKIP vote and in Wakefield that has particular potency given Creagh's A50 vote and the Leave/Remain split. I'd also say that the true baseline is the 2010 election and not the 2015 one, as last time we only picked a candidate in March and gave Labour two years headstart. This time, as in 2010, we fought on roughly level terms.

However, it's clear that policing, pensions, social care and other 'spend other people's money' issues have cut through and are switching votes. Hence my prediction.

However, just as one should never tweet when drunk or exhausted (unless SeanT, perhaps), so one probably shouldn't post in such a condition and almost certainly shouldn't bet. (For clarification, I'm not drunk, by the way - I've barely had time for a drink since the campaign began, bar a friend's mini stag do a couple of weekends ago).

But trying to view it with a clear head, I still don't like it. We're ignoring the polls because - ? Because until not long ago they didn't accord with experience. But tonight, for me, they did. The polls were right at the local elections a month ago. A Con lead of 4-5 would produce a knife-edge Con majority, if that. And I'm not convinced the lead will be that big.

And with that, I'm signing off until tomorrow. All the best, and if I can't wish you all good luck politically, at least I hope I can wish a profitable day. If it's as bad a result as it might be, you'll need the money.

Cyclefree said:

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

Good evening all.

I have been at a family funeral, the second in two weeks. It was a magnificent Brideshead-style Anglo-Irish Catholic service followed by a brilliant, funny and boozy wake that my much beloved cousin would have loved!

I see that @david_herdson has joined me in thinking that Corbyn might just do it.

I don't claim anything approaching your combined predictive value, but I feel similarly.

OTOH the Tories are now sending leaflets out highlighting Labour's garden/council tax increases and what it will cost the average NW6 homeowner - about £12,000 p.a.

I do think a Tory win probable - but also that there is more than enough uncertainty to justify covering the possibility of a hung Parliament.

TheScreamingEagles said:

"If it's promoting the national party and national policies, then regardless of whether it mentions the constituency name or not then it's national spend," an Electoral Commission spokesperson told BuzzFeed News, adding that the situation is different if it talks "about a candidate's views and a candidate's policies".

The end result is that Conservative paid-for Facebook ads that only appear to voters in a single targeted constituency and look remarkably like localised adverts can be legally counted as national spending.

In one example from Westminster North, obtained by BuzzFeed News, the advert repeatedly mentions "your constituency", features the words "Westminster North" in the graphic, and emphasises that local voters in the constituency could determine who gets into Downing Street.

I got a leaflet this morning warning me that a vote for UKIP would mean Jeremy Corbyn would be Prime Minister, allegedly targeted for the constituency where UKIP aren't even fielding a candidate.

NickPalmer said:

OK, so YouGov pre-turnout and special tweaks is a lead of 3, ICM pre-turnout and special tweaks is a lead of 4. These turn into 7 and 12 respectively after the tweaks. I remain a bit sceptical about them, but a key point is that Tory voters look like getting out anyway, Labour voters are less certain, so a lot may depend on thr gound game tomorrow.

Yougov's final 2015 poll had it tied, ICM had Labour ahead by 1, the Tories won by 7

To reply to Mike L re the bombing impact: the figures shown by Wikipedia give the Tories

41, 40, [attack], 45, 43,42,43,44,42,46

and Labour

40,39, [attack],34, 36, 38, 38,34, 35, 34

Could be coincidence, but it looks like a clearish pattern.

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

But, but - what about Bootle?

I stick to my prediction of a 1979-type result, if you add SNP to Labour.

Part of me wonders if the voters might deliver some poetic justice, and return May with an almost identical majority to Dave in GE2015.

Which would be funnier, a majority of

Exactly Dave
Dave+1
Dave -1

surbiton said:

foxinsoxuk said:

RobinWiggs said:

Sophie Walker, of the Women's Equality Party.

https://goo.gl/images/BN1Ak0

Got my vote!, if that is permitted...

Oh yes ! For me, it's a swing from Leanne to Sophie.

Are we the oldest swingers in town?

The political affiliation of WEP is listed on wikipedia as 'nonpartisan'. Colour me skeptical.

david_herdson said:

And with that, I'm signing off until tomorrow. All the best, and if I can't wish you all good luck politically, at least I hope I can wish a profitable day. If it's as bad a result as it might be, you'll need the money.

My house comes off the market immediately, and I hunker down for the next 5 years, if the worst happens.

BenedictWhite said:

chrisb said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

On Wakefield, I don't think that's an accurate reflection of DH's post. What he said was:

david_herdson said:

Just come back from last-minute leafleting. Change of mind on earlier. I think Corbyn is just going to do this. The polls are right. Con 300.

Still think we'll take Wakefield due to Creagh's idiocy/principled stand (delete as preferred) over triggering A50.

Winning Wakefield and losing seats (net) would take some doing.

Perhaps, but there are particular circumstances in that seat which means the swing there is unlikely to mirror the country as a whole.

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

But, but - what about Bootle?

I stick to my prediction of a 1979-type result, if you add SNP to Labour.

Part of me wonders if the voters might deliver some poetic justice, and return May with an almost identical majority to Dave in GE2015.

Which would be funnier, a majority of

Exactly Dave
Dave+1
Dave -1

Any of them mean au revoir surely

https://twitter.com/iainmcgill/status/872575827438968837

AndyJS said:

Good evening again. Been out for a while.

Just read the last two hours' worth of posts in about 10 minutes. The David Herdson conundrum was probably the highlight of it all.

We've had fun!

Has been a nice appetizer for tomorrow night's main course...

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

Actually, I think we will win Wakefield but it will be against trend and it will be down to local factors, both demographic and political.

There are now 3 Tory majority spreads (50-74, 75-99 and 100-124) with better odds than no majority. Only 3 or 4 days ago no majority was shorter odds than any of the majority spreads. Punters are obviously increasingly confident but are they just following the trend blindly?

I feel a lot of JC supporters will be fired up, but also feel a lot of trad Labour supporters just won't be able to hold their nose enough to vote for him, Theresa just isn't enough of a Tory toff or City spiv that lukewarmLabour supporters will drag themselves to the polling booth to try and stop her.

david_herdson said:

However, it's clear that policing, pensions, social care and other 'spend other people's money' issues have cut through and are switching votes. Hence my prediction.

There's an argument that exhaustion with austerity drove both Brexit over the line, and possibly might do so tomorrow (mathematically) for Corbyn too.

In which case, the fundamentals are really economic and we really are addicted to state spending, and believe we can have our cake and eat it.

It might have been better for Osborne to cut deeper, faster, in the 2010-2015 parliament, and get it largely over with in 5 years, rather than chipping away at it for 10 years+.

david_herdson said:

Cheers for the kind words this evening and yes, I am going off for some rest after typing this post - though I will be up ready for a 5am delivery start tomorrow and will probably have a baby feed between now and then too.

(snip)

Thanks, David - sympathies for a rough day, and that's very clear. I remember feeling just like that when going round the day before the election in 2015, and (notoriously) I didn't share the impression here (as a candidate I didn't feel I could), so hats off for the honesty, and we all wish you well regardless.

I think that Tory WWC votes sometims have a mirage-like element - they seem to be coming over for the first time ever, but on the day habit reasserts itself.

GIN1138 said:

valleyboy said:

Just a further anecdote, from the doorstep, but I have not seen new Labour voters so fired up by anyone since TB. They will come out to vote in numbers. Not enough to win back Preseli, but enough to see of challenges in many marginals, and even gaining one or two.

70% turnout?

Easily in my patch

another_richard said:

brokenwheel said:

numbertwelve said:

brokenwheel said:

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

That would not seem to fit the narrative of this election - I.e, Ukippy areas swinging more to the Tories and Labour advancing in London/the South

Half of UKIP's vote in 2015 was in the South inc. London.

But how many of them were previously Labour and / or LibDem voters ?

The Conservatives are not going to pick up that many former UKIP voters in southern England.

To take an example, South West Wiltshire in 2010 was

Con 51.7
LD 30.5
Lab 11.5
UKIP 5.5
IND 0.9

In 2015 it was

Con 52.7 (+1.0)
UKIP 17.5 (+12.0)
Lab 13.5 (+2.0)
LD 10.6 (-19.9)
Green 5.8 (+5.8)

The LDs are not trying as hard as usual (probably over in Bath), UKIP are not standing this time, Labour are well organised, so I'm betting a higher proportion of UKIP in this seat go Labour than in most other areas, pushing them into second.

hunchman said:

HurstLlama said:

kyf_100 said:

Andrew said:

Alistair said:

I'm not a whisky drinker but I have two miniatures in the pantry: a 10 year old Laphroaig and a 18 year old Glenfiddich. Which one for the exit poll tomorrow?

Glenfiddy is smooth but boring. Laphroaig kicks you in the nuts but leaves you wanting more.

The 18 year old Glenfiddich is a bit of a disappointment compared to the 15, which is softer and sweeter. It doesn't have a very distinctive character.

If you're not a fan of peated whiskies, the Laphroaig may well knock you off your feet. I've grown to enjoy it over the years but I would recommend adding just a few drops of water.

I am a lover of the Laphroaig and have been for many, many years. But it is not a Whisky suitable for drinking on all occasions. Late in the evening, after a good meal, it is hard to beat or late on a cold winter's afternoon after a day in the open air. It is not, in my view, an all day whisky; I would not, for example, fill my flask with it when going out for a morning on the local shoot (the Grouse is good enough for those sort of events).

I don't hold with putting water in it either. A separate glass of still mineral water and take them in alternate sips seems the best way to of drinking a fine whisky to me.

I picked up a £25 bottle of Talisker Skye tonight with £7 knocked off it for tomorrow night. I promptly gave £2 of it back when I walked out of the store to help a driver short on petrol to get back home. Laphroaig is lovely, but my favourite is Caol Isla, the bottle I had was simply divine.

Caol Isla is the best for me too, though all Islay whisky is divine.

I am a little short of brandy for tommorow, only a little Metaxa left. Does it go with popcorn?

When I Baxter YouGov I get a con majority of 48, so all in the clear for the Tories basically?

chrisb said:

BenedictWhite said:

chrisb said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

On Wakefield, I don't think that's an accurate reflection of DH's post. What he said was:

david_herdson said:

Just come back from last-minute leafleting. Change of mind on earlier. I think Corbyn is just going to do this. The polls are right. Con 300.

Still think we'll take Wakefield due to Creagh's idiocy/principled stand (delete as preferred) over triggering A50.

Winning Wakefield and losing seats (net) would take some doing.

Perhaps, but there are particular circumstances in that seat which means the swing there is unlikely to mirror the country as a whole.

Yes I know Wakefield is a bit special however there are loads of seats with UKIP voters who will move Conservative. So I think it unlikely that many seats will be lost. I do see at least as many gains as losses so I will stick with a 70 to 100 majority.

Alistair said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sean_F said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

But, but - what about Bootle?

I stick to my prediction of a 1979-type result, if you add SNP to Labour.

Part of me wonders if the voters might deliver some poetic justice, and return May with an almost identical majority to Dave in GE2015.

Which would be funnier, a majority of

Exactly Dave
Dave+1
Dave -1

All of the above.

I'd have to take back about 500 posts about her superior electoral appeal...

david_herdson said:

Ave_it said:

So:

David Herdson (who I regard as a top level poster on here) is concerned we (CON) won't win Wakefield.

He is correct in this analysis. We won't win Wakefield. But that was always the case. We were never going to win a seat that LAB has held since 1931. But that doesn't justify a projection that we will get 325 max.

JackW and JohnO are top level analysts here. They have both projected a CON maj 100. But that won't happen because again it is dependent on CON winning lots of seats which we haven't won since 1931. That won't happen.

BUT we are 10% clear. We may struggle in London and South although I am feeling more comfortable now. We will do ok in Midlands and North eg will win Wolverhampton SW, Barrow, Chester maybe Copeland. We will also win at least 10 seats in Scotland.

Ave it has always projected a 10% lead and around a 40 maj - it might be slightly better than that.

Actually, I think we will win Wakefield but it will be against trend and it will be down to local factors, both demographic and political.

If Wakefield goes, it's hard to see anything other than a Tory lead, even if only a small one.

The polling is still pretty solid for the Tories at 43/44%.

brokenwheel said:

Gallowgate said:

brokenwheel said:

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

Piling up where though?

Home counties etc.

IMO if anything the Tory vote will become more efficiently distributed in the Home Counties compared to last time. Brexit will cost them votes in safe seats in many areas in the SE.

kle4 said:

another_richard said:

brokenwheel said:

numbertwelve said:

brokenwheel said:

The thing is both the pollsters and Herdson could be right, Con increase their lead but piling it up in the wrong places.

That would not seem to fit the narrative of this election - I.e, Ukippy areas swinging more to the Tories and Labour advancing in London/the South

Half of UKIP's vote in 2015 was in the South inc. London.

But how many of them were previously Labour and / or LibDem voters ?

The Conservatives are not going to pick up that many former UKIP voters in southern England.

To take an example, South West Wiltshire in 2010 was

Con 51.7
LD 30.5
Lab 11.5
UKIP 5.5
IND 0.9

In 2015 it was

Con 52.7 (+1.0)
UKIP 17.5 (+12.0)
Lab 13.5 (+2.0)
LD 10.6 (-19.9)
Green 5.8 (+5.8)

The LDs are not trying as hard as usual (probably over in Bath), UKIP are not standing this time, Labour are well organised, so I'm betting a higher proportion of UKIP in this seat go Labour than in most other areas, pushing them into second.

Exactly.

Richard_Nabavi said:

Still, everyone agrees on one thing: the LibDems.

apart from Mark Senior of course.....

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/DamianSurvation/status/872573142186815488

Has Diane Abbot been hired by Survation?

GIN1138 said:

AndyJS said:

Good evening again. Been out for a while.

Just read the last two hours' worth of posts in about 10 minutes. The David Herdson conundrum was probably the highlight of it all.

We've had fun!

Has been a nice appetizer for tomorrow night's main course...

Booked Friday off and got the beer and popcorn in

I am ready

I am also calm unlike some on here :-)

Interesting Matthew Parris bit about May on Newsnight.
Eric Pickles seriously off message on how bad May is at negotiation.

NickPalmer said:

To reply to Mike L re the bombing impact: the figures shown by Wikipedia give the Tories

41, 40, [attack], 45, 43,42,43,44,42,46

and Labour

40,39, [attack],34, 36, 38, 38,34, 35, 34

Could be coincidence, but it looks like a clearish pattern.

But the 41, 40 and 40, 39 are just one pollster.

If you take the averages of all pollsters pre and post attack they are very similar.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Ultimately it is the judges not the EC that decides, and the law can't be changed retrospectively. And, if the Supreme Court eventually found against the Conservatives, would we not face a rerun of the general election in every marginal constituency up and down the country?

Very unlikely that a party or any individuals would get into trouble for following Electoral Commission guidelines, even if the court decides the guidelines were wrong.

RobinWiggs said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Caol Isla is the best for me too, though all Islay whisky is divine.

Bunnahabhain for me. Delicious,

It's one of the better ones, agreed.

The betting has gone massively towards the Tories today

Con maj 1.15 from 1.25
Nom 9.6 from 6.6