politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Consolation for Theresa – in spite of the Tory turmoil LAB isn
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Consolation for Theresa – in spite of the Tory turmoil LAB isn’t pulling away
We get so few voting polls these days that any new one is something of an event and today we had ICM for the Guardian which once again has the two main parties level pegging.
Comments
-
First.0
-
Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Consider it an early Xmas present Mrs May. Although it's hard to see a recession and fractious Brexit negotiation leading to the Tories pulling away either. It'll be interesting to see if a decent deal is reached and if that mollifies some of the currently despondent Tories.0
-
0 -
ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again0 -
But Mike, you and I both know leadership ratings are a better predictor.
In this ICM poll Corbyn has a 10% lead over May.
That's enough to knock a few points off the Tories and add a couple of points to Labour.0 -
The last sentence sums it up. I don't think the polls say very much about the current state of politics because it is all rather fluid.0
-
Yawnbigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
What takes longer. LAB GE win or Sheffield Wednesday promotion to Premier League?0 -
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again0 -
Looking forward to the Budget!
I'm sure that will go well - have faith in Philip!!
0 -
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/99510 -
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Even on Survation Labour would be about 12 seats short of an overall majority.Ave_it said:
Yawnbigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
What takes longer. LAB GE win or Sheffield Wednesday promotion to Premier League?0 -
Bearing in mind how Labour gained ground in the last campaign, they are in an excellent starting position.
May had no swingback, she achieved swingaway!0 -
Labour gained ground mainly by squeezing the LD, UKIP and SNP vote rather than the Tory vote so they have already squeezed that.foxinsoxuk said:Bearing in mind how Labour gained ground in the last campaign, they are in an excellent starting position.
May had no swingback, she achieved swingaway!
The Tories are also unlikely to be pushing another manifesto debacle like the one including the dementia tax but will go on the attack on tax etc.0 -
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Support for Brexit and fear of Corbyn keeps the Coservatives at c.40%.0
-
If that were genuinely true, the nation state would be in a far weaker position all over Europe than it is. I very much believe some people feel that way, and more say they feel that way, but nationalism would be dead if many young people felt no attachment to their country of origin that was not matched or exceeded by a wider sense of european community. And while the young were much more pro that community that others, millions still were not, and can we equate being pro that community to necessarily equating thinking themselves as much european as british? Plenty of people say the feel English/Scottish/Welsh/Irish while also being British, but not all who do place those two positions as equal (some much more strongly the former than the latter, personally I prioritise the latter).Benpointer said:
Many of them are widely travelled at a young age and think of themselves as European as much as British.The_Apocalypse said:
If I’m really being honest, I haven’t read/am not familiar with Our Island Story, so I can’t talk about that. But ethnic minorities/young people are unreachable for the Conservatives then the Conservatives have big issues in the future.Sean_F said:
I'll refer to another point raised by @Nick C earlier. It does not relate specifically to ethnic minorities, but it does does relate to values.The_Apocalypse said:
No one is suggesting that the Conservatives win over individuals who believe that though. There are many minorities (such as myself) who don’t believe those things. For a start not all minorities believe in a specific kind of interpretation of the Muslim faith.Sean_F said:The_Apocalypse said:And r22.
One comment I've heard several times in relation to child rape cases, involving Muslim men, is that while these are bad, they should be "punished by the community" rather than through the criminal justice system. Which translates as, they should be swept under the carpet.
That represents a very huge difference in outlook between Conservatives and these communities.
But the Conservatives are going to have win over more minorities in the future if they want to win, that’s the reality.
He said some young people simply view support for Brexit as being a sign of bad character. They hate the idea of Britain espoused by a book like Our Island Story which they identify with the Conservatives.
Now, I don't see how any right wing party worth its name could appeal to such voters, unless they radically alter their opinions. Some voters are unreachable..0 -
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.0 -
If they revert to four Belfast seats, then the DUP will probably support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Labour 35/Tories 34 was ICM's final 2015 poll which would probably have produced an Ed Miliband minority government.bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM did correctly predict Leave would win the EU referendum though, even Survation did not do that.0 -
Strong 'n Stable Theresa!
0 -
People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
0 -
Has it not? There must have been provisional proposals out already, surely?AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
At this point I just tend to assume anything difficult will not get through.0 -
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap. 0 -
I look forward to parties reversing their positions on criticising concessions made/cash provided for support deals.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government, but that's a different issue.0 -
I can't see the DUP going for the boundary changes, personally.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/99510 -
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.0 -
I hope the boundary changes go through but am not overly hopeful0
-
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you
0 -
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/99510 -
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you
0 -
Bet it wouldn't lose a vote 299 to nil thoughHYUFD said:
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.0 -
EIC???Ave_it said:
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you0 -
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/99510 -
Depends what it was forbigjohnowls said:
Bet it wouldn't lose a vote 299 to nil thoughHYUFD said:
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.0 -
The provisional proposals were very good for Sinn Fein. Belfast would go from 3:1 DUP to 2:1 SF. Other changes would make Upper Bann very marginal and convert East Londonderry into an SF seat.kle4 said:
Has it not? There must have been provisional proposals out already, surely?AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
At this point I just tend to assume anything difficult will not get through.
0 -
I did say big assumptions. Which is unfortunate, as I really wanted the ridiculous situation in my own constituency sorted (you have 'villages' which are contiguous with a town, and in the same community area, in a different parliamentary constituency - which I'm sure isn't unique but riles me up).Benpointer said:
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/99510 -
No Cornyn Govt would ever treat Parliament with such contempt. Although to me it has set an interesting precedent that could be very handy.HYUFD said:
Depends what it was forbigjohnowls said:
Bet it wouldn't lose a vote 299 to nil thoughHYUFD said:
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.0 -
That's awfully optimistic- I'll defer to a historian, but I'd have though a lesson of history is, where they think they can get away with it, all governments eventually treat parliament with contempt. It gets in their way after all.bigjohnowls said:
No Corbyn Govt would ever treat Parliament with such contempt.HYUFD said:
Depends what it was forbigjohnowls said:
Bet it wouldn't lose a vote 299 to nil thoughHYUFD said:
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.
0 -
Good question.Ave_it said:
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you0 -
Not Corbyn!!!!!Jonathan said:
Good question.Ave_it said:
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you0 -
Isn't that a bit of a red herring whilstever SF doesn't take its seats?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Great expose on Aaron Banks on Newsnight....who could have guessed0
-
The other point to bear in mind is the seat reduction from 650 to 600... That means quite a few MPs in 'safe seats' are at risk. Several of those will abstain or vote against, possibly under the guise of 'principle' (e.g. North Dorset shouldn't be merged with part of Wiltshire https://www.ndca.org.uk/news/parliamentary-boundary-changes)Sean_F said:
The provisional proposals were very good for Sinn Fein. Belfast would go from 3:1 DUP to 2:1 SF. Other changes would make Upper Bann very marginal and convert East Londonderry into an SF seat.kle4 said:
Has it not? There must have been provisional proposals out already, surely?AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
At this point I just tend to assume anything difficult will not get through.0 -
Exactly.nielh said:The last sentence sums it up. I don't think the polls say very much about the current state of politics because it is all rather fluid.
FPT:
@Cyclefree
I’m not stating that the Conservative party should appeal to those who ‘do not have the values of the majority’. Where the hell I have said that? This is what I say when I disagree with your framing. I’ve said the Conservatives need to improve with ethnic minorities - and you’ve taken that and interpreted to ‘how far should the Conservative party go to appeal to those who don’t share British values?’ Don’t you see how that statement implies that appealing to minorities means automatically having to appeal to anti-British values? Don’t you see how that statement implies that there are no minorities with the values of the majority in general, so that means that the Conservative party would somehow have to go against the values of the majority to appeal to them?
Can’t you see that? Why assume that when it is said the Conservative party needed to improve with ethnic minorities that meant appealing to those who believe in gender segregation? The Conservative party has more ethnic minority MPs than it did prior to Cameron’s leadership: surely, that should demonstrate to you that ‘appeal to ethnic minorities’ does not mean appeal to misogynists? Especially given that you are talking to a mixed woman right now, who on this blog site had long written posts against misogyny, homophobia etc.0 -
Doesn't sound from the DUP submission to the initial consultation that they are close to agreeing with it so long as some minor stuff happens.
This submission does not accept both the underlying precepts of the Commission’s
Provisional Recommendations and the out-workings that flow from it. The Commission
needs to revisit both its broad approach and its detailed proposals. The DUP has
consistently criticised the present legislation as much more likely to produce poor
boundaries and the Commission’s proposals appear to have gone out of their way to fulfil
our concerns. The end result of this flawed approach is an unnecessary level of change and
constituencies that make statistical sense but very little else.
While we appreciate it is not a consideration of the Commission, we must state that the
proposals would produce an unrepresentative political result that would have the potential
to have far reaching and negative political consequences for the constitutional stability of
Northern Ireland
Given one of the main concerns is not supposed to be a consideration of the Commission, and the others involve fundamental problems with underlying precepts and approach which apparently were not taken on board previously, it seems fair to conclude they will not budge unless the boundaries are majorly different when they are next published.
https://www.boundarycommission.org.uk/sites/boundarycommission.org.uk/files/media-files/Democratic Unionist Party (DUP).PDF0 -
Swings and roundabouts...kle4 said:
I did say big assumptions. Which is unfortunate, as I really wanted the ridiculous situation in my own constituency sorted (you have 'villages' which are contiguous with a town, and in the same community area, in a different parliamentary constituency - which I'm sure isn't unique but riles me up).Benpointer said:
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9951
https://www.ndca.org.uk/news/parliamentary-boundary-changes0 -
No, because it still would mean less DUP guys and girls in jobs. What's the incentive for them to support that?MarqueeMark said:
Isn't that a bit of a red herring whilstever SF doesn't take its seats?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.0 -
Do we get three guesses.Ave_it said:
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you0 -
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!0 -
It's a trick question!Yorkcity said:
Do we get three guesses.Ave_it said:
Who is PM?bigjohnowls said:
The YG model and Survation. Oh and whoever did the Exit Poll.Ave_it said:
Who won the election?bigjohnowls said:
46/34 resulting in Tory overall maj of 96 in GE 2017TheScreamingEagles said:
In 2015 it overestimated Labour, so not always.bigjohnowls said:ICM always underestimates Lab doesn't it?
How wrong was it at GE 2017 again
Oh how we laughed How is Kaboom Boon still getting paid for such crap.
ICM completely underestimated Jezza just like you0 -
Lulling the Frenchies into complacency before springing Eirexit on them I daresay.
https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/9229459192717557760 -
A Corbyn government would do whatever it could to get a Corbyn agenda through and whatever deals it needed to do with other parties to achieve it.bigjohnowls said:
No Cornyn Govt would ever treat Parliament with such contempt. Although to me it has set an interesting precedent that could be very handy.HYUFD said:
Depends what it was forbigjohnowls said:
Bet it wouldn't lose a vote 299 to nil thoughHYUFD said:
It would be the weakest government since the war, even Cameron in 2010 and May in 2017 needed only 1 party supporting the Tories for a majority, Corbyn would likely need at least 2, probably the SNP and LDs.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
It is perfectly possible to imagine, say Davis succeeding May as PM, winning most seats at the general election but lacking enough support even with the DUP for a majority, Corbyn then doing a deal with the SNP and LDs to lead a minority government and Boris taking over as opposition leader with the Tories still on around 300 seats.0 -
That is in fact the seat created by the redrawing of the one I live in, with the larger portion of it merging with Dorset. Apparently we were only a few thousand electors short of not needing to lose a seat in Wiltshire.Benpointer said:
Swings and roundabouts...kle4 said:
I did say big assumptions. Which is unfortunate, as I really wanted the ridiculous situation in my own constituency sorted (you have 'villages' which are contiguous with a town, and in the same community area, in a different parliamentary constituency - which I'm sure isn't unique but riles me up).Benpointer said:
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9951
https://www.ndca.org.uk/news/parliamentary-boundary-changes0 -
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.0 -
The DUP got more votes than SF!Benpointer said:
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!0 -
Or anyone to stay in government if it is merely a 1% swing! The LD/CON coalition may have made it look pretty easy, but the terrible polling position for the LDs always gave them incentive not to abandon ship, but a three-way? One of the groups would probably feel like taking a gamble at some point.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.0 -
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.0 -
£300 a day signing in allowance in the HoL?Danny565 said:
No, because it still would mean less DUP guys and girls in jobs. What's the incentive for them to support that?MarqueeMark said:
Isn't that a bit of a red herring whilstever SF doesn't take its seats?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
0 -
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.0 -
The proposed Boundary changes would give the DUP huge, useless, majorities, and SF small, useful ones.Sunil_Prasannan said:
The DUP got more votes than SF!Benpointer said:
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!0 -
The challenge for the DUP is to deliver as much pork as they can to NI ahead of the next election. Which is the primry reason why they won't want to crash this Govt. The more tonnage of pork, the greater their status as heroes back home....
And after all that has been said, Labour aren't going to be giving them any deal to stay inside the tent. Because that would make them hypocrites....
Oh.0 -
It's not something that particularly gets me worked up. So long as I can vote somewhere and I have confidence the constituencies are all boradly the same size I don't care whether I'm voting in 'North Dorset' or 'Shaftesbury and Warminster'.kle4 said:
That is in fact the seat created by the redrawing of the one I live in, with the larger portion of it merging with Dorset. Apparently we were only a few thousand electors short of not needing to lose a seat in Wiltshire.Benpointer said:
Swings and roundabouts...kle4 said:
I did say big assumptions. Which is unfortunate, as I really wanted the ridiculous situation in my own constituency sorted (you have 'villages' which are contiguous with a town, and in the same community area, in a different parliamentary constituency - which I'm sure isn't unique but riles me up).Benpointer said:
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9951
https://www.ndca.org.uk/news/parliamentary-boundary-changes
But the current MPs seem to care (quelle surprise!) and I suspect up and down the country quite a few 'at risk' Tories will end up absenting themselves during a key vote, due to 'pressing constituency matters', leaving the opposition parties free to defeat the new proposals. (That's assuming it ever gets near a vote.)0 -
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
-
Unless it is unavoidable I suspect it won't, for that very reason.Benpointer said:
It's not something that particularly gets me worked up. So long as I can vote somewhere and I have confidence the constituencies are all boradly the same size I don't care whether I'm voting in 'North Dorset' or 'Shaftesbury and Warminster'.kle4 said:
That is in fact the seat created by the redrawing of the one I live in, with the larger portion of it merging with Dorset. Apparently we were only a few thousand electors short of not needing to lose a seat in Wiltshire.Benpointer said:
Swings and roundabouts...kle4 said:
I did saup).Benpointer said:
The boundary changes are not going through this side of a GE - no way.kle4 said:
So making some big assumptions, if they went through, and if Labour can improve a bit, but not get away (like current polling, for what that is worth), then the Tories would have a decent shot of being largest party under those boundaries as with the current ones.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9951
https://www.ndca.org.uk/news/parliamentary-boundary-changes
But the current MPs seem to care (quelle surprise!) and I suspect up and down the country quite a few 'at risk' Tories will end up absenting themselves during a key vote, due to 'pressing constituency matters', leaving the opposition parties free to defeat the new proposals. (That's assuming it ever gets near a vote.)
On cross county seats, I don't mind them, housing market areas, functional economic market areas, these things go across ancient administrative boundaries and local authorities are required to work with each other on such things as a result, so while in the absence of compelling reason I'd want them to try to stick to such boundaries, it doesn't bother me if they do not. Splitting up contiguous areas (except in cities, obviously) does annoy though, since those are not essentially arbitrary lines on maps.0 -
I am a big supporter of Corbyn, but even I realise that 42% is probably a glass ceiling for him, because of the personal animosity a large wedge of the electorate has for him. I think he will realise that before the next election and also realise that with a new leader, chosen and supported by him, a left leaning Labour Party would easily win the next election.
He didn't set out to be leader and he always said it was more about creating a movement. He has boosted membership to such an extent that a left wing leader will be elected by the membership and given that leader an excellent base to push on from. I think he will put Party before any personal ambition he might have to become PM, when the time comes.0 -
Plenty of examples to the contrary as well. See Joe Clark.foxinsoxuk said:
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
Wilson thought the same in October 1974 after failing to win a majority in February and ended up with a majority of just 3.foxinsoxuk said:
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
A leader with his approval, and without the drawbacks which at least had some effect (on me for one), would probably get a workable majority at the least unless the Tories pull a Brexit hat out of the bag, as it were.BudG said:I am a big supporter of Corbyn, but even I realise that 42% is probably a glass ceiling for him, because of the personal animosity a large wedge of the electorate has for him. I think he will realise that before the next election and also realise that with a new leader, chosen and supported by him, a left leaning Labour Party would easily win the next election.
He didn't set out to be leader and he always said it was more about creating a movement. He has boosted membership to such an extent that a left wing leader will be elected by the membership and given that leader an excellent base to push on from. I think he will put Party before any personal ambition he might have to become PM, when the time comes.0 -
True, but the LDs are now pretty much down to their base who presumably accepted what being a junior partner is like in a coalition.kle4 said:
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
So I don’t think they have that many voters left to lose....0 -
So it worked then.HYUFD said:
Wilson thought the same in October 1974 after failing to win a majority in February and ended up with a majority of 3.foxinsoxuk said:
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
If this story gains traction in the US then Brexit will have even fewer friends in Washington.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-24/lawmaker-asks-facebook-for-detail-on-brexit-related-russian-ads0 -
I wouldn't underestimate the egomania that can take hold of even the humblest man. Let's not forget, this is a man who addressed an adoring crowd to a rockstar's welcome at Glastonbury this year and confidently stated he would be PM by the end of the year... not to mention hearing his name chanted wherever he goes.BudG said:I am a big supporter of Corbyn, but even I realise that 42% is probably a glass ceiling for him, because of the personal animosity a large wedge of the electorate has for him. I think he will realise that before the next election and also realise that with a new leader, chosen and supported by him, a left leaning Labour Party would easily win the next election.
He didn't set out to be leader and he always said it was more about creating a movement. He has boosted membership to such an extent that a left wing leader will be elected by the membership and given that leader an excellent base to push on from. I think he will put Party before any personal ambition he might have to become PM, when the time comes.
Corbyn strikes me as the kind of person who is very quietly smug that his moment has come at last. FWIW, I think a more palatable leader would have stormed home to victory on Labour's 2017 manifesto. But as the last two years have proven, Corbyn isn't going anywhere any time soon..0 -
Well you'd think, but they went down in 2017! Great showings in Scotland with a much more concentrated vote and some good targeting in other areas have kind of covered up what a terrible situation they could well be in - as I've noted before, in this south western region they have now not even been the second place, 'anyone but Tory' vote since 2010, it could be 12 years by the time of the next election, and they lost out in most of the towns where many of their county seats were too in May this year. SNP or SLAB recovery effect, and not many fertile areas to target elsewhere, and they would be wise to be wary of being labour's eager helpers. Particularly as unlike the Coalition they'd probably be on so few seats they wouldn't get anywhere near as many high profile ministers, if any.The_Apocalypse said:
True, but the LDs are now pretty much down to their base who presumably accepted what being a junior partner is like in a coalition.kle4 said:
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
So I don’t think they have that many voters left to lose....0 -
I see the DUP are arguing the reduction to three Belfast seats is based on a misinterpretation of the law, using a rule not applicable in NI. That will be an interesting one if the Commission agrees.0
-
It would probably be a confidence and supply deal. You’re right though: there aren’t many places where the LDs have significant majorities. Farron’s seat will probably go Tory next time.kle4 said:
Well you'd think, but they went down in 2017! Great showings in Scotland with a much more concentrated vote and some good targeting in other areas have kind of covered up what a terrible situation they could well be in - as I've noted before, in this south western region they have now not even been the second place, 'anyone but Tory' vote since 2010, it could be 12 years by the time of the next election, and they lost out in most of the towns where many of their county seats were too in May this year. SNP or SLAB recovery effect, and not many fertile areas to target elsewhere, and they would be wise to be wary of being labour's eager helpers. Particularly as unlike the Coalition they'd probably be on so few seats they wouldn't get anywhere near as many high profile ministers, if any.The_Apocalypse said:
True, but the LDs are now pretty much down to their base who presumably accepted what being a junior partner is like in a coalition.kle4 said:
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
So I don’t think they have that many voters left to lose....
0 -
One good idea Labour have had the last couple of manifestos is a Constitutional Convention to look at a tranche of issues, although it is always a bit odd as that is suggested, but obviously they then state a preference for specific solutions in advance of said convention. If they were to recommend PR, the LDs would probably suffer a lot to get it.0
-
Worse: it would make SF a bigger party than the DUP, despite the DUP getting 25% more votes.Danny565 said:
No, because it still would mean less DUP guys and girls in jobs. What's the incentive for them to support that?MarqueeMark said:
Isn't that a bit of a red herring whilstever SF doesn't take its seats?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour0 -
As OGH will no doubt confirm a majority of 3 is not defined as a working majority even if it is a technical one.kle4 said:
So it worked then.HYUFD said:
Wilson thought the same in October 1974 after failing to win a majority in February and ended up with a majority of 3.foxinsoxuk said:
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
Part of the problem with the boundary commission was the requirement of excessively tight contituency sizes. Yes, we all agree that the current situation where the largest constituency is FIVE times bigger than the smallest is wrong.Sean_F said:
The proposed Boundary changes would give the DUP huge, useless, majorities, and SF small, useful ones.Sunil_Prasannan said:
The DUP got more votes than SF!Benpointer said:
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!
But surely it would be better to have constituencies which represented a coherent group of people rather than trying to make them all exactly the same size. I'd have 65,000 +/- 10,000 and try and fit in with existing town and county boundaries, which would allow the boundary commission a little more leeway to respect geography and history.0 -
I was being a bit tongue in cheek, but even though the plan was not as successful as hoped, it still moved in the right direction, that's something.HYUFD said:
As OGH will no doubt confirm a majority of 3 is not defined as a working majority even if it is a technical one.kle4 said:
So it worked then.HYUFD said:
Wilson thought the same in October 1974 after failing to win a majority in February and ended up with a majority of 3.foxinsoxuk said:
It would be very possible that such an outcome would result in a swift second election "give us the tools to do the job" etc.HYUFD said:
If Corbyn is going to be the PM that would be the least worst way I suppose.The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
Though it would also mean the Tories would effectively have the role of opposition all to themselves which would be a help if the government soon became unpopular, they would receive all the protest votes.
Corbyn majority in his honeymoon.0 -
President Trump has little time for Russia conspiracies for obvious reasons, if Hillary had won maybe.williamglenn said:If this story gains traction in the US then Brexit will have even fewer friends in Washington.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-24/lawmaker-asks-facebook-for-detail-on-brexit-related-russian-ads
0 -
Things are not working out the way the DUP wished following their backing of Brexit, and despite holding the balance of power in Westminster.
Ian Paisley's article here shows how detached they are from the realities of the negotiations.
http://brexitcentral.com/dublin-denial-brexit-irish-politicians-new-strategy/0 -
One of my favourite Trump quotes is the following:HYUFD said:
President Trump has little time for Russia conspiracies for obvious reasons, if Hillary had won maybe.williamglenn said:If this story gains traction in the US then Brexit will have even fewer friends in Washington.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-24/lawmaker-asks-facebook-for-detail-on-brexit-related-russian-ads
You've been hearing me say it's a rigged system, but now I don't say it anymore because I won. It's true. Now I don't care
Albeit that was in relation to the primary system, which is a confusing mess for both parties.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-gop-rigged-but-i-dont-care-because-i-won/article/2590545
Incidentally, I do love the summary on that page:
Trump continued to talk about a number of different subjects, including earning former Indiana University basketball coach Bobby Knight's endorsement, the fact that his hair was real, and that his decision to run for president was "not something that I really wanted to do."0 -
Robert am I on for £10 at 20s on a by-election in Sheffield Hallam?rcs1000 said:
Part of the problem with the boundary commission was the requirement of excessively tight contituency sizes. Yes, we all agree that the current situation where the largest constituency is FIVE times bigger than the smallest is wrong.Sean_F said:
The proposed Boundary changes would give the DUP huge, useless, majorities, and SF small, useful ones.Sunil_Prasannan said:
The DUP got more votes than SF!Benpointer said:
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!
But surely it would be better to have constituencies which represented a coherent group of people rather than trying to make them all exactly the same size. I'd have 65,000 +/- 10,000 and try and fit in with existing town and county boundaries, which would allow the boundary commission a little more leeway to respect geography and history.
It would buy you 1/4 a bottle of local California wine I would imagine.0 -
Although they very nearly won St Ives back.kle4 said:
Well you'd think, but they went down in 2017! Great showings in Scotland with a much more concentrated vote and some good targeting in other areas have kind of covered up what a terrible situation they could well be in - as I've noted before, in this south western region they have now not even been the second place, 'anyone but Tory' vote since 2010, it could be 12 years by the time of the next election, and they lost out in most of the towns where many of their county seats were too in May this year. SNP or SLAB recovery effect, and not many fertile areas to target elsewhere, and they would be wise to be wary of being labour's eager helpers. Particularly as unlike the Coalition they'd probably be on so few seats they wouldn't get anywhere near as many high profile ministers, if any.The_Apocalypse said:
True, but the LDs are now pretty much down to their base who presumably accepted what being a junior partner is like in a coalition.kle4 said:
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
So I don’t think they have that many voters left to lose....0 -
Silver lining in every storm cloud.rcs1000 said:
Although they very nearly won St Ives back.kle4 said:
Well you'd think, but they went down in 2017! Great showings in Scotland with a much more concentrated vote and some good targeting in other areas have kind of covered up what a terrible situation they could well be in - as I've noted before, in this south western region they have now not even been the second place, 'anyone but Tory' vote since 2010, it could be 12 years by the time of the next election, and they lost out in most of the towns where many of their county seats were too in May this year. SNP or SLAB recovery effect, and not many fertile areas to target elsewhere, and they would be wise to be wary of being labour's eager helpers. Particularly as unlike the Coalition they'd probably be on so few seats they wouldn't get anywhere near as many high profile ministers, if any.The_Apocalypse said:
True, but the LDs are now pretty much down to their base who presumably accepted what being a junior partner is like in a coalition.kle4 said:
Both of them better make sure they can sell that to their electorate though - as the LDs made the same argument, and the public gave a resounding opinion of how well a job they thought they did reining in the Tories. They either said they did terribly, or they considered the Tories weren't so bad after all (at least in LD held seats).The_Apocalypse said:
I wouldn’t be unhappy with that, it would constrain Corbyn’s more extreme instincts for a start.HYUFD said:
Though Labour would be reliant on SNP and LD support.The_Apocalypse said:
Yes. A 1% swing to Labour would already make it hard for the Tories to stay in government.Danny565 said:People forget that Corbyn essentially only needs to gain about 10 seats off the Tories to become PM, if you assume all the other parties stay the same. In other words, only a third of the gains he made from the Tories this time.
It might not be a very "strong and stable" government in that scenario, but that's a different issue.
So I don’t think they have that many voters left to lose....0 -
By June 2018, sure.TOPPING said:
Robert am I on for £10 at 20s on a by-election in Sheffield Hallam?rcs1000 said:
Part of the problem with the boundary commission was the requirement of excessively tight contituency sizes. Yes, we all agree that the current situation where the largest constituency is FIVE times bigger than the smallest is wrong.Sean_F said:
The proposed Boundary changes would give the DUP huge, useless, majorities, and SF small, useful ones.Sunil_Prasannan said:
The DUP got more votes than SF!Benpointer said:
You mean by calling on the services of Mr Gerry Mander?HYUFD said:
If the Tories can get it adjusted so the DUP are at least level pegging with SF they might support it.AndyJS said:
I think the Tories will vote for it. The question is what the DUP will do, and the Northern Ireland review hasn't been published yet so we can't know.HYUFD said:
A majority yes, though that is a big if.AndyJS said:
If the boundary review is accepted, the Tories would start on 307 seats out of 600.HYUFD said:Based on the 1% swing to Labour since June suggested by ICM Labour would gain 22 seats in a general election tomorrow, 14 from the Tories, 7 from the SNP and 1 from PC. That would take them to 284 seats.
However the Tories would still be the largest party on 303 seats, therefore Labour would need support from both the SNP and PC and the LDs on a confidence and supply basis to form a minority government.
http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour
Tut tut!
But surely it would be better to have constituencies which represented a coherent group of people rather than trying to make them all exactly the same size. I'd have 65,000 +/- 10,000 and try and fit in with existing town and county boundaries, which would allow the boundary commission a little more leeway to respect geography and history.
It would buy you 1/4 a bottle of local California wine I would imagine.0 -
Apparently jezza is going on gogglebox next week.0
-
https://mobile.twitter.com/bbcnews/status/922954507172171776FrancisUrquhart said:Apparently jezza is going on gogglebox next week.
0 -
Oh, the irony of that post.williamglenn said:Things are not working out the way the DUP wished following their backing of Brexit, and despite holding the balance of power in Westminster.
Ian Paisley's article here shows how detached they are from the realities of the negotiations.
http://brexitcentral.com/dublin-denial-brexit-irish-politicians-new-strategy/0 -
Modest as everkle4 said:
One of my favourite Trump quotes is the following:HYUFD said:
President Trump has little time for Russia conspiracies for obvious reasons, if Hillary had won maybe.williamglenn said:If this story gains traction in the US then Brexit will have even fewer friends in Washington.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-24/lawmaker-asks-facebook-for-detail-on-brexit-related-russian-ads
You've been hearing me say it's a rigged system, but now I don't say it anymore because I won. It's true. Now I don't care
Albeit that was in relation to the primary system, which is a confusing mess for both parties.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-gop-rigged-but-i-dont-care-because-i-won/article/2590545
Incidentally, I do love the summary on that page:
Trump continued to talk about a number of different subjects, including earning former Indiana University basketball coach Bobby Knight's endorsement, the fact that his hair was real, and that his decision to run for president was "not something that I really wanted to do."0 -
I see all the horseshit from American colleges is spreading across the pond...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/10/24/cambridge-university-caves-student-demands-decolonise-english/
We don’t want to do Plato on a philosophy course cos he was white and it’s all racialist.0 -
Please can we have the sensible, measured world of the 1990s back again. Around 1993/1994 would be nice.FrancisUrquhart said:I see all the horseshit from American colleges is spreading across the pond...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/10/24/cambridge-university-caves-student-demands-decolonise-english/
We don’t want to do Plato on a philosophy course cos he was white and it’s all racialist.0
