politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Motivating Labour’s huge volunteer army can be at odds with ma
Comments
-
She would be a .lot happier if she gave up the cesspit that is Twitter.williamglenn said:
0 -
"a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.
0 -
Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
Control of the issue is not the gift of the party. It is driven by:justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
1 The Complainant
2 Elements of the Media
3 Opposition Parties
1 is aggrieved and may seek to damage the perpetrator
2 some elements have a connected agenda, see Jewish Chronicle, others may be hostile
3 Will seek maximum damage
Finally some sensible Labour members will try to distance themselves, hence party disunity.
0 -
The people damaging Corbyn are those making anti-Semitic comments, not those fighting racism in the Labour Party.justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.0 -
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
You know Labour Could have treated the issue seriously.justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
They deserve everything they are reaping over this0 -
My favourite Star Trek episode is the Corbynite ManoeuvreMarkHopkins said:
"a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.
(I'll get me coat...)0 -
And then there is this lotEl_Sid said:
Yeah, that's politics - but if ever a clear statement was needed on an issue, this was it. Instead we get Corbyn supping with Jewdas and half-hearted apologies for the offence caused.david_herdson said:
Either way, the likelihood is that the issue won't go away.El_Sid said:
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
http://hurryupharry.org/2018/05/03/jonathan-rosenhead-the-evil-zionist-conspiracy-that-never-was/0 -
South Cambs is witnessing a political earthquake.One of the safest Tory and councils seats in the country could be going LibDem .Remainers taking revenge? Heidi Allen must be alarmed.0
-
Jess Phillips comment on Boris, "Well nobody mentioned Customs Unions to me".
Genuine LOL.0 -
I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.RobD said:
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
Hold on. Doesn't Redbridge have a fairly large Jewish population? Is it concentrated in one or two wards or do we need to be slightly careful about ascribing every Labour setback to antisemitism?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Redbridge loses its three LibDems.stodge said:
The Liberal Democrats gained five seats in Merton including seats from the Conservatives in Dundonald and Trinity Ward as well as regaining all three West Barnes seats.AndyJS said:
The Tories gained a couple of seats from Labour in Merton which I don't think anyone was expecting.
Was anyone expecting that ?
As recently as 2010, Redbridge Council was Con 30, Lab 26, LD 7.
Now Lab 51 (+16), Con 12 (-13)0 -
That is a non sequitur. Labour was defending quite a strong baseline from 2014 - particularly in London - and now appears to have made net gains of circa 60 seats. That is not a landslide win - but neither is it a defeat. These results are certainly in line with what I expected - indeed ,if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.MarkHopkins said:
"a non-Corbynite myself" vs "denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections"justin124 said:
No I would never do that - but this is not a new issue which has suddenly burst on to the political scene. There will be suspicions from some - and I say that as a non-Corbynite myself - that it was an issue seized upon at that particular time with a view to denying Corbyn a greater triumph in these elections.TheWhiteRabbit said:
Justin - would you EVER tell the victim of racism to "move along, come back in three months"??El_Sid said:
They were just being honest? "The Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing" - do you expect Labour members to compromise their values by standing by and saying nothing? Sounds rather Blairite to me...justin124 said:
I don't disagree at all , but that begs the question as to why the critics spoke out when they did.El_Sid said:
The timing is irrelevant - "historically local elections four years before a general election are no better or worse predictors of future elections than those only one year before."justin124 said:1995 was also a mere two years before a General Election - ie truly midterm - whilst May 2022 is still four years away....
Whilst it is entirely appropriate that criticisms be made of Anti-Semitic conduct in Labour ranks, those who made such damning comments might now be vulnerable - in the light of Labour's underperformance in Barnet - to the charge of having deliberately sought to undermine Corbyn by an act of electoral sabotage. Why were such comments - and the resultant row - not delayed until mid- May to the post election period?
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The anti-semitic thing is entirely on the Labour leadership - they could have shut it down quickly, but instead keep making lily-livered excuses that has allowed it to fester. Either they're incompetent or sympathisers.
Only a Corbynite would think that Corbyn had a triumph here.0 -
A Sacha Baron Cohen biopic of a Corbyn lookalike is what we need.0
-
Round 1 Sheffield Metro Region
Dan Jarvis 47.1%
Con 14.5
LD 10.4
Yorkshire Party 8.6
Greens 7.8
Save Our NHS 4.2
Labour 66% in Barnsley, 44.7% in Rotherham, 43.9% in Doncaster, 42.1% in Sheffield
0 -
God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.0
-
Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
"Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....0 -
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
0 -
BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM0 -
Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0 -
Projected shares leads to Labour being 3 ahead of the Tories on 283 vs 280. Reflects what I was saying earlier. The bias that Cameron managed to build into the current seats in favour of the Tories has gone. I fear trouble ahead....0
-
Good luck to him.bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM0 -
Not sure that HM will appoint him based on a BBC projectionRazedabode said:
Good luck to him.bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
0 -
So you have placed bets accordingly?bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/0 -
Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.DavidL said:
I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.RobD said:
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
Understanding NEV is well beyond the pay grade of a humble lawyer but my best guess is that the Tories are doing a lot less well in the marginals than they are in safe seats, the results in the midlands notwithstanding.Bob__Sykes said:
Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
"Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....0 -
Kevin Schofield
Verified account @PolhomeEditor
20m20 minutes ago
Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.
0 -
Yes, level pegging for oppositions at the locals is not nearly good enough.El_Sid said:
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/05/27/guest-slot-rod-crosby-the-bell-tolls-for-labour-and-miliband/0 -
Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-20180 -
Doesn't this pre-announcement rather give the game away?marke09 said:
Kevin Schofield
Verified account @PolhomeEditor
20m20 minutes ago
Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.0 -
Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.El_Sid said:
So you have placed bets accordingly?bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/0 -
The Tories somehow need to steer their own voters and members towards allowing them to take positions which will enable them to outflank their progressive opponents. If UKIP is dead, this should make the task easier.DavidL said:
I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.RobD said:
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
The Tories are screwed, at some point, for sure - but I don't think you can say a GE is remotely likely to result in a national vote going anything like Con 35, Lab 35, LD 16, others 14. One or both of the top two is going to be a good few points higher than that in a GE.DavidL said:Projected shares leads to Labour being 3 ahead of the Tories on 283 vs 280. Reflects what I was saying earlier. The bias that Cameron managed to build into the current seats in favour of the Tories has gone. I fear trouble ahead....
0 -
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.AndyJS said:
Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0 -
But these are not mid term elections!. To repeat my earlier comment Labour - under Gaitskell - did far worse than this back in 1960 & 1961 and still went on to win the 1964 election. Labour's position is also stronger than at the same stage of the 1983 and 1987 Parliaments. The Tories also performed far better at the 2005 election than appeared probable in mid-2002!El_Sid said:
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
0 -
You are thinking pre the referendum Trump and Corbyn.Maybe it has changed.El_Sid said:
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
0 -
Just not in a referendum.....JonathanD said:
Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.DavidL said:
I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.RobD said:
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
But it is based on the assumption that people would vote the same way at a General Election - and, as John Curtice would say, all the evidence suggests that to be unlikely.DavidL said:
I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.AndyJS said:
Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0 -
https://twitter.com/RadicalAssoc/status/992403156125519872 Lib Dem Gain !
However Heidi has a 22,000 vote cushion over them in the general0 -
Good afternoon, fellow voters.
Just a week to go until we discover what or whom Max Verstappen will crash into at the Spanish Grand Prix.0 -
On the flip side losses in West Oxfordshire/Aylesbury/Winchester etc indicate that they could be underperforming in traditional safe seats, while strong performances in the midlands equals strong performances in the marginals.DavidL said:
Understanding NEV is well beyond the pay grade of a humble lawyer but my best guess is that the Tories are doing a lot less well in the marginals than they are in safe seats, the results in the midlands notwithstanding.Bob__Sykes said:
Is it because they are simply projecting a national GB wide share of the vote based on swings in key English wards, based on the same wards in 2014 last time these seats voted - so it is not saying the actual number of votes cast across all of those English seats that voted yesterday is Con up 6, Lab up 4, LD up 3?DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
"Just a bit of fun..." as someone used to say....0 -
The Barnet councillor was making a similar point in saying that many local issues influenced the result there although the antisemitism scandal of course had an impact. Although I have to say, I didn’t get the comment about identity politics re Jewish voters turning away from Labour. After the antisemitism scandal it’s perfectably understandable; its a consequence of racism, not identity politics. Plus Jewish voters have been turning to the Tories even prior to the scandal.DecrepitJohnL said:
Hold on. Doesn't Redbridge have a fairly large Jewish population? Is it concentrated in one or two wards or do we need to be slightly careful about ascribing every Labour setback to antisemitism?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Redbridge loses its three LibDems.stodge said:
The Liberal Democrats gained five seats in Merton including seats from the Conservatives in Dundonald and Trinity Ward as well as regaining all three West Barnes seats.AndyJS said:
The Tories gained a couple of seats from Labour in Merton which I don't think anyone was expecting.
Was anyone expecting that ?
As recently as 2010, Redbridge Council was Con 30, Lab 26, LD 7.
Now Lab 51 (+16), Con 12 (-13)0 -
Yorkshire out for 50,where's Oldkingcole ;-)
Day 3 looking in danger ;-)0 -
But are those figures going to happen?Yorkcity said:
Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.El_Sid said:
So you have placed bets accordingly?bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/0 -
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
The numbers after Big Ben goes bong are always a massive surprise !RobD said:
But are those figures going to happen?Yorkcity said:
Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.El_Sid said:
So you have placed bets accordingly?bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
The next election could be anywhere from Lab 330 to Con 400 still I think.0 -
Ultimately it's a figure arrived at from local election results. Everyone knows that large numbers of people in, say, Hertfordshire vote LD in local elections and Con in general elections. So it can't be accurate for an actual general election. It's interesting nonetheless.DavidL said:
I think that is exactly what it means. Whether it is true of course is another question entirely.AndyJS said:
Of course that figure doesn't mean that if there was a general election tomorrow the LDs would be likely to get 16%.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0 -
I’ve been having fun and enjoying myself.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
I’ll save the nuanced analysis for another day which is, I grant you, more complicated.0 -
Osborne did warn the referendum would be a catastrophe.MarqueeMark said:
Just not in a referendum.....JonathanD said:
Yes, its why being the party of Brexit is such a dead-end. Cameron and Osborne knew what they were doing in terms of how to win a majority.DavidL said:
I think it is going to get harder for the Tories to win a majority. They are going to need a bigger lead.RobD said:
Yeah, we're in for a drubbing at the locals next year unless things change.DavidL said:Taking a step back UKIP are down 121 seats at the moment and the Tories are up zero. And yet we are being told that the Tory vote is up 6%, Labour 4% and Lib Dem 3%.
Its a bit weird isn't it? Why has the Tory vote been so inefficient? I think it is a reverse of the 2015 effect where the UKIP vote did almost no damage to the Tories because they were winning more important votes elsewhere (typically Lib Dem seats). What seems to have happened this time is that those votes coming home to the Tories has simply piled up fairly useless majorities.
I think it is something the Tories are going to have to be pretty careful about going forward. Cameron won a majority because he won votes and voters where they actually count. Not sure the Tories did that yesterday.0 -
Yes but up 56 CouncillorsAndyJS said:Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-20180 -
Absolutely. But they'd prefer to get in a positive position with councils as well as councillors.BigRich said:
Yes but up 56 CouncillorsAndyJS said:Only 14 councils to declare and Labour are still down one.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cz3nmp2eyxgt/england-local-elections-20180 -
0
-
Congrats to Prof Thrasher who predicted Con 36%,Lab 36%,LD 18% and current standings show he will be right on the mark.The truth is, as the othe JC said,nothing has changed,nothing has changed,and Tory and Lab are level pegging.0
-
Well.RobD said:
But are those figures going to happen?Yorkcity said:
Yes Corbyn would be PM on those figures.El_Sid said:
So you have placed bets accordingly?bigjohnowls said:BBC LAB 283 CON 280
JEZZA is PM
You might want to read this first though http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/
Quite.0 -
A year since I last posted and May is - as I predicted - still in post, and the Tories are gaining councils. What crisis?0
-
It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
Mr. Pete, is it Rallings[sp] and Thrasher who do the exit polling?
And yes, congrats to Thrasher.0 -
The one's I am seeing there are pretty good for the Tories?AndyJS said:Harrow results:
https://twitter.com/harrow_council0 -
Birmingham results?0
-
Can’t say I blame you for enjoying yourself today! I wonder whether Watford’s results have been declared yet....Casino_Royale said:
I’ve been having fun and enjoying myself.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
I’ll save the nuanced analysis for another day which is, I grant you, more complicated.0 -
I’ve enjoyed the hubris in London though.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
I’ve got to have my fun.0 -
0
-
Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.
There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.0 -
I don't think Labour do have much to crow about, however well they spin these results. Level-pegging with the government is not where an Opposition wants to be in local elections.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
Oh absolutely, its all good fun.Casino_Royale said:
I’ve enjoyed the hubris in London though.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.
I’ve got to have my fun.0 -
That loud banging sound you might have heard....Trump's lawyers after his rambling to the media 2 minutes ago.0
-
Do you remember how many years there were between local and general?BannedInParis said:Classic Rod Crosby
https://politicalbetting.s3.amazonaws.com/Rod2.jpg0 -
And I'll repeat my earlier quote from the British Election Survey - 1 year or 4 years before a GE, doesn't matter. These are mid-term elections - and let's face it, it's not like the Government have had a good year, a competent Opposition would be wiping the floor against this lot. The opposition parties did well in 2005 thanks to unpopularity of the Gulf War, Labour won in 1964 in no small part thanks to "fresh faces" after their leader died the year before at the age of 56 - are you suggesting that is what Labour should rely on now?justin124 said:
But these are not mid term elections!. To repeat my earlier comment Labour - under Gaitskell - did far worse than this back in 1960 & 1961 and still went on to win the 1964 election. Labour's position is also stronger than at the same stage of the 1983 and 1987 Parliaments. The Tories also performed far better at the 2005 election than appeared probable in mid-2002!El_Sid said:
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
Sure you can cherry-pick all you like, but the historical averages are what they are. We can't predict GE2022 in detail, but we can look at what history says will happen _on average_, and say that history tends to repeat itself in an average sort of way. Now obviously we have Brexit ahead which is a black swan kind of event, but there's always "something".0 -
Recount in Harrow, Kenton East where Labour are defending 3 seats.
2014 result:
Lab 1695, 1561, 1550
Con 1310, 1200, 1178
Ind Lab 534, 459, 377
UKIP 4530 -
It is true they won't be worried overmuch because they know they can do better at GEs, and who cares about the PLP, but they clearly do care about media narratives, since Corbyn's team played the expectation management game to the hilt in May 2017, relatively successfully. They knew they were in for a bad night, and tried to limit the damage of that. This year they have been far more upbeat generally, so got a bit carried away.The_Apocalypse said:
It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
Harrow is beginning to look interesting.AndyJS said:Harrow results:
https://twitter.com/harrow_council0 -
Occam's Razor suggests that it hasn't. Neither Juncker nor Trump get the bins emptied.Yorkcity said:
You are thinking pre the referendum Trump and Corbyn.Maybe it has changed.El_Sid said:
But those have been national polls for GE2022- and traditionally mid-term local elections see people kick the governing party a bit relative to how they vote in a general election. If you were an Opposition election planner you really want 15+% leads in mid-term local elections to feel happy about your prospects of an outright victory at the next GE.justin124 said:if anything, parity with the Tories is slightly better than most recent polls have been recording.
0 -
Maybe I am not just used to twitter but have the Tories not won every seat so far? Obviously depends what wards these are.Sean_F said:
Harrow is beginning to look interesting.AndyJS said:Harrow results:
https://twitter.com/harrow_council0 -
Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.0
-
Ah, I forgot about that (re May 2017 expectation management). I do think that the morale of parliamentary parties is important: I just don’t think Corbyn does.kle4 said:
It is true they won't be worried overmuch because they know they can do better at GEs, and who cares about the PLP, but they clearly do care about media narratives, since Corbyn's team played the expectation management game to the hilt in May 2017, relatively successfully. They knew they were in for a bad night, and tried to limit the damage of that. This year they have been far more upbeat generally, so got a bit carried away.The_Apocalypse said:
It does seem that Labour have messed up re expectation management. I remember reading an article in the New Statesmen which said that would happen. That said, I get the sense that Corbyn’s team do not care too much about media narratives. They don’t seem to affect Momentum activists morale very much, and it does appear that Corbyn’s team sees them as more important to Labour’s goals of winning a GE rather than the PLP, whose morale is more impacted by these narratives.DavidL said:
Just saying the way I see it. If Labour had been smarter up front they would have more to crow about instead of being all defensive. And the underlying picture for the Tories is troubling.The_Apocalypse said:
Bilmey, your posts today really have been different from every other Tory on this site, and probably every other Tory on social media! You seem much more sceptical about the results than many others.DavidL said:God Kemi Badenoch is tiresome. And unpersuasive.
For my part I think that these results are disappointing for Labour, although I don’t see them as neccessarily predictive of how they’ll do in 2022.0 -
Doesn't matter : http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/RobD said:
Do you remember how many years there were between local and general?BannedInParis said:Classic Rod Crosby
https://politicalbetting.s3.amazonaws.com/Rod2.jpg0 -
Why can't more people who stand down as MPs be in competitive seats? I don't need to expect a change, but it'd be nice if so many of them were not capable of declaring the new MP five minutes after the last one steps down. I guess parties really work to discourage people in competitive seats from standing down though.marke09 said:
Kevin Schofield
Verified account @PolhomeEditor
20m20 minutes ago
Heidi Alexander waiting until the Lewisham count is over later tonight before announcing she is standing down as an MP, I'm told.0 -
How has Wandsworth managed to keep council tax so low ? I hear about car park charges and raking it in on business rates for Westminster.peter_from_putney said:Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.
0 -
Well.El_Sid said:
Doesn't matter : http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/what-do-the-2016-local-elections-tell-us-about-what-might-happen-in-2020/RobD said:
Do you remember how many years there were between local and general?BannedInParis said:Classic Rod Crosby
https://politicalbetting.s3.amazonaws.com/Rod2.jpg
Quite.0 -
An unwisely vague choice of phrase perhaps - she's given up trying to convince them so is going to join the Tories?williamglenn said:0 -
It has got better and better for them I think. Slightly flattered by a catastrophe in 2014 but definitely more progress than they might have feared with Kingston to come.rcs1000 said:
And they also gained three, maybe four, councils.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0 -
Jo Swinson has been touted, but I get the sense she isn’t that popular on here. I’m struggling to think of any potential LD leaders who really grabs your attention, but they have done well in these elections despite Vince, so who knows what could happen with even a marginally better leader.Morris_Dancer said:Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.
There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.0 -
She'd be better off joining the Liberals in Yardley!kle4 said:
An unwisely vague choice of phrase perhaps - she's given up trying to convince them so is going to join the Tories?williamglenn said:0 -
Harrow
Pinner South Tories hold x 3
Harrow Weald Tories hold x 3
Stanmore Park Tories hold x 3
Hatch End Tories hold x 3
Wealdstone Labour hold x 3
Roxeth Labour hold x 3
Harrow on the Hill Labour hold x 1 Lab gain x 20 -
-
A Labour minority government on the basis of this highly satisfactory result for Labour has emerged as a real possibility but these elections will be remembered for the Tory shambles of Voter ID,which could well have swung it for the Tories in Swindon where it was so close.0
-
I think most of the LD MPs are either not leadership material (or they would have been seriously touted before now, given they were down to a handful before) or do not have high enough profiles for us to really know how they might do in a leadership position. Swinson has a little more profile than the others, and at the least seems more on the ball than Cable, so is probably worth a shout, but perhaps someone like Moran could spring a surprise and be prett good, it is hard to say.The_Apocalypse said:
Jo Swinson has been touted, but I get the sense she isn’t that popular on here. I’m struggling to think of any potential LD leaders who really grabs your attention, but they have done well in these elections despite Vince, so who knows what could happen with even a marginally better leader.Morris_Dancer said:Ms. Apocalypse, a potential problem there is that if Corbyn does nothing about anti-Semitism, or standing up against those who call Javid a coconut (for that matter), then it'll play more and more with the electorate. If he does something about it, then his Soviet guard might kick off.
There will be at least two massive differences come the General Election. Fear of Corbyn will motivate a lot of people, and the potential huge embuggerance of May's indecisiveness over the EU could seriously harm the Conservatives. The Lib Dems could really do with a new leader who can just stand there and be nice without the difficulties of being in power, to get votes by being neither Bolshevik nor incompetent.0 -
Although every council has pockets of poverty I think in Wandsworth those pockets are really quite small.Pulpstar said:
How has Wandsworth managed to keep council tax so low ? I hear about car park charges and raking it in on business rates for Westminster.peter_from_putney said:Surprising how many Council Tax Turkeys in Wandsworth voted for Christmas.
0 -
Ms. Apocalypse, if he were in better health, I'd still advocate Lamb. Sensible, intelligent, been in government (unlike Farron who deliberately avoided it by being LD president [chairman] to avoid dirtying his ambitions with the grubbiness of office). They should've gone for him instead of Farron.
I quite like Swinson, although that may be coloured by her incredibly helpful timing to rule herself out of the last leadership election.0 -
Looks like Labour have gained a couple of seats in Harrow on the Hill.0
-
If Labour lose Kenton East, they probably lose the Council.DavidL said:
Maybe I am not just used to twitter but have the Tories not won every seat so far? Obviously depends what wards these are.Sean_F said:
Harrow is beginning to look interesting.AndyJS said:Harrow results:
https://twitter.com/harrow_council0 -
At what time is Tower Hamlets expected to finish the count?
Sorry, rephrasing, which day TH is expected to finish?0 -
0
-
Shambles?volcanopete said:A Labour minority government on the basis of this highly satisfactory result for Labour has emerged as a real possibility but these elections will be remembered for the Tory shambles of Voter ID,which could well have swung it for the Tories in Swindon where it was so close.
0 -
Is he standing down or not?Scott_P said:0 -
Don't be snappish - it's a hard job counting a 132% turnout electionAndreaParma_82 said:At what time is Tower Hamlets expected to finish the count?
Sorry, rephrasing, which day TH is expected to finish?0 -
Early results from the good ol' RBK are looking good for the LDs: by my reckoning they've picked up 5 seats from the Tories and 2 from Labour in the first five wards to declare.DavidL said:
It has got better and better for them I think. Slightly flattered by a catastrophe in 2014 but definitely more progress than they might have feared with Kingston to come.rcs1000 said:
And they also gained three, maybe four, councils.DavidL said:Have to say I am no fan of uncle Vince but a NEV share of 16% does seem a real step forward and back into the game for the Lib Dems. It is roughly double what they have been polling of late.
0
