Skip to content
Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New PB / Polling Matters podcast. And they’re off! General Ele

SystemSystem Posts: 12,598
edited October 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New PB / Polling Matters podcast. And they’re off! General Election 2019 kicks off.

Keiran Pedley and Leo Barasi look at the numbers as a December 12th election is announced. Who is best placed? What is the path to victory for each party and what should we look out for in the coming weeks?

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 56,000
    Oh first?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

    When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

    A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

    That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

    All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    edited October 2019
    New podcast? Splendid
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Watch that LD number plummet!

    (Actually I do think they'll double their vote from last time - they did surprisingly poorly - but they'll do what they need to do stop the Tories. Because stopping Brexit requires it).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,534
    kle4 said:

    New podcast? Splendid

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Watch that LD number plummet!

    (Actually I do think they'll double their vote from last time - they did surprisingly poorly).
    But the squeeze is on.....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    edited October 2019
    Oh phew, I've not violated an embargo.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Is this the first national VI poll since it became obvious we weren't Brexiting on Halloween?

    If so, I think the Tories will be mildly encouraged. No damage incurred.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    Byronic said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Is this the first national VI poll since it became obvious we weren't Brexiting on Halloween?

    If so, I think the Tories will be mildly encouraged. No damage incurred.
    Boris getting a deal that had better PR than Mays has certainly helped. If he had not got a deal, i think he would be in a lot more trouble.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
  • ByronicByronic Posts: 3,578
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    edited October 2019
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Eh, it was one where they only had an 8% lead before. While I'm sure they'd like all the polls to match the ones with larger leads, if 8% is on the lower end of their leads I'm sure they'll be happy. So long as it actually manifests of course.

    But that BXP and LD share is pretty high for both Lab and Con to be very happy.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712

    That 80% tactical voting is shockingly good for the Tories.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,275
    edited October 2019
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Oh phew, I've not violated an embargo.

    I read it in my online copy hence why I posted the numbers earlier

    But there is a lot in the individual questions that should worry labour
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 5,703
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 66,275
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
    The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris
  • RH1992RH1992 Posts: 788
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    I would be too. Labour are starting from roughly the same position as 2017 at around 25%, but the Tories in 2017 were averaging 40-42%. Granted, the Tories are dampened by the Brexit Party to a degree so we'll see if a squeeze happens on that side too.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    1923 was the last time my area elected a non Tory. Purely for variety it might be nice for the next December election to see things change, but I doubt it.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    Looking around my local seats BXP candidates seem to be selected for most. 14 days though to see if they all get nomination forms signed.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    edited October 2019
    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
    The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris
    The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
    The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris
    The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.
    It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    kle4 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
    The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris
    The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.
    It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.
    And for leave voters?
  • glwglw Posts: 10,470
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    That's my view too. God alone knows how a more divided House of Commons is meant to help getting Brexit done. Not that Brexit will be done anytime soon anyway.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,989
    When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 86,197
    glw said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    That's my view too. God alone knows how a more divided House of Commons is meant to help getting Brexit done. Not that Brexit will be done anytime soon anyway.
    Another GE in 2020....
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682494725087236
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682501897400320
    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189682509623283712

    Im not shore how legit these tactical question are. 68% of Lib Dem would vote tactically to stop Con and 39% would vote tactical to stop Lab so that 107% who are the 7 % who would vote tactically to stop both Con and Lab, planing on voting for THE BREXIT PARTY???
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,378
    The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.
  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,736
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

    When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

    A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

    That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

    All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

    That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

    The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.
  • glwglw Posts: 10,470
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
    I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    kle4 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Big_G_NorthWales said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Byronic said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    Why?? Survation is one of the worst pollsters for the Tories (IIRC), we have just come through the broken do-or-die pledge, and the Tories maintain their lead?

    This is pleasing for Boris, if I read it right.
    Worst pollsters for the Tories = Most accurate at the last GE.
    The detailed questions are fascinating and very good for Boris
    The worst one for labour is their brexit policy. Basically nobody thinks they have a good one and ultimately despite other issues brexit has to be sorted one way or another.
    It's fine. LDs will attack it, but local candidates will be explicit that they are Remainers through and through, and we'll see the 'I'm not sure about Corbyn/Labour policy, but my MP/candidate is trustworthy on this'.
    And for leave voters?
    They'll cling to the official policy as reason they can stick with their traditional labour vote and not throw in with Boris
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    Gabs2 said:

    68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?

    Surely it just depends on what constituency they are in. SNP, PC are also options.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    moonshine said:

    When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

    June 2017.

    YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    glw said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
    I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.
    I think someone's trying to bounce BXP into a small scale strategy. But even if Farage were not so ego driven, it's a lot of candidates who would need to stand down, he might not be able to persuade the party. He might stick to his guns rather than see candidates say they'll stand as indys or something.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,271
    Election fever hitting my Facebook feed



  • Gabs2Gabs2 Posts: 1,268
    Foxy said:

    Gabs2 said:

    68% of Lib Dems would vote tactically to stop the Tories getting in and 39% would do so to stop Labour. So at least 7% would vote tactically to stop either getting in. Who are they thinking of tactically voting for? The Brexit Party? The Greens?

    Surely it just depends on what constituency they are in. SNP, PC are also options.
    Ah the nationalists make more sense. Still, it is hard to imagine a Lib Dem that despises Labour and the Tories but is fine with the SNP or Plaid.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,316
    glw said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
    I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.
    Nige has had seven failed shots at gaining a Westminster seat and counting...
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    edited October 2019
    If 80% of TBP voters would vote tactically to stop Labour then there is clearly a sizeable portion of their 12% up for grabs if they only field candidates in a limited number of seats.



  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    NickPalmer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

    When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

    A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

    That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

    All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

    That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

    The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.
    That as many Lab voters are willing to vote tactically as LD is a hopeful sign. That should bring a lot more LD target seats into prospects across Shire England.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    https://twitter.com/Survation/status/1189683301549826048?s=20
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,989
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    moonshine said:

    When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

    June 2017.

    YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.
    MRP = FMUMSP ?
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,942
    edited October 2019
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    If that was Opinium or YouGov it would be somewhat concerning but for Survation it's not bad for Con.

    Though it goes without saying its very, very early days with this general election.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 99,232
    Foxy said:

    NickPalmer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    67% of current Labour voters told Survation tin tomorrow's poll they would vote for another party to stop the Conservatives from winning vs only 20% who said they would not. Similarly, 68% of current Lib Dem voters would also vote tactically to stop the Conservatives vs 29% who said they would not.

    When the question is posed in terms of “stopping the Labour party from winning” while 69% of Conservative party voters in tomorrow's poll would vote for another party, most 2017 seats in England and Wales that were marginal in 2017 were of course Conservative / Labour contests.

    A lower amount (39%) of current Lib Dem voters would vote for another party if it stopped Labour from winning (46% would not - the "would" is a lower figure than the 68% that would vote differently to stop a Conservative win.

    That said, 80% of Brexit Party voters said they would vote tactically to stop a Labour win, and squeezing the Brexit Party vote, which looks soft in this scenario, will be an important underpinning of the quest to secure an overall majority.

    All these factors will play out differently depending on geography, and local factors providing the potential for non uniform swings in regions and small geographies with different characteristics.

    That's a LOT of tactical voting willingness. LibDem voters markedly more pro-Labour than pro-Tory. And with the gradual strengthening of the duopoly, I'd feel a bit more comfortable as either a Labour or Tory MP. With respect to Curtice (pbuh, indeed) early in an election I look at the trend, not the share.

    The unpopularity of all party leaders shown on the last thread is striking. We know that the LibDems are featuring Swinson heavily anyway; Labour featuring Corbyn less, and Johnson didn't feature on the first Tory leaflet here at all.
    That as many Lab voters are willing to vote tactically as LD is a hopeful sign. That should bring a lot more LD target seats into prospects across Shire England.
    Requires labour voters to accept they are not the best placed despite being second in many of them though. It makes sense, but is a harder sell.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,022
    moonshine said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    moonshine said:

    When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

    June 2017.

    YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.
    MRP = FMUMSP ?
    Oui.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    isam said:

    Election fever hitting my Facebook feed



    If I were you, I would get some new friends...
  • glwglw Posts: 10,470
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    glw said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
    I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.
    Nige has had seven failed shots at gaining a Westminster seat and counting...
    Still a way to go before the takes the record from Lord Sutch then.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    If we do end up with a Lib dem and Labour coalition will there be another referendum?
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,989
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    moonshine said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    moonshine said:

    When was the last time Yougov did that fancy massive unorthodox marginal seat poll that got the 2017 election bang on right?

    June 2017.

    YouGov have said that the MRP only works properly when they know all of the parties standing/the candidates in every constituency.
    MRP = FMUMSP ?
    Oui.
    Polling people in December should be a good laugh for the pollsters.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    42% of voters would have been more likely to vote Labour without Corbyn as leader, only 18% less likely.

    51% would fear a Corbyn premiership, only 23% feel joy.

    44% blame Parliament for us still being in the EU, 32% blame Boris, 11% blame the EU.

    52% oppose a 2nd indyref in Scotland, only 27% for.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,972
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

    The entire third reich was knocking back Pervitin (more or less the same thing) throughout most of WWII. Plenty of people use speed as a productivity aid, as it makes mind numbingly repetitive tasks enjoyable. I've known brickies, shelf stackers and van drivers who've used it on the job... Not condoning it, just saying it's rife, particularly with a lot of blue collar / manual work.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Survation with Flavible:

    Con 338
    Lab 188
    LD 53
    SNP 48
    PC 4
    Grn 1

    https://flavible.co.uk/userprediction/gb/34/26/19/12/1/3.1/0.5/0.7
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    BigRich said:

    If we do end up with a Lib dem and Labour coalition will there be another referendum?

    Yes, that is both parties policy.

    I wouldn't expect coalition though, just a minority government, with cross party support on some issues, at least while Jezza is leader.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    Preferred PM

    Boris 42%
    Corbyn 19%
    Swinson 15%

    Tories lead Labour on the economy, defence, jobs, foreign relations, trade and even the NHS. Labour just lead on welfare

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html
  • isamisam Posts: 42,271
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    Election fever hitting my Facebook feed



    If I were you, I would get some new friends...
    Most of my friends aren’t on it!
  • nunu2nunu2 Posts: 1,538
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

    Look at the number of homeless on CA and you'll see where that number comes from.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

    Seems to be a case of meth addicts on the west coast and opioid addicts elsewhere in the US.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    In the latest bit of weirdness from across the pond, Donald has tweeted a fake picture of himself giving a medal to a dog...

    https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/1189630141401571328?s=19
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    nico67 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    That’s before the BP only stand in a handful of seats . Things could look a lot different next week .

    Surely the pollsters will have to remove them from the main question . Or at least have an additional question which asks what would people choose if there’s no BP candidate.
    That is far from confirmed. Farage is no fan of the tories.
    I find it hard to believe that Farage is going to do anything that benefits anyone other than himself.
    I think someone's trying to bounce BXP into a small scale strategy. But even if Farage were not so ego driven, it's a lot of candidates who would need to stand down, he might not be able to persuade the party. He might stick to his guns rather than see candidates say they'll stand as indys or something.
    But if he says “you’re not a BXP candidate” presumably they can’t claim to be? At that point they are just another independent without a personal vote
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,358
    nunu2 said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Totally off topic...apparently there are 500,000 meth addicts in California. How can you have a functioning society when so many people are addicted to those kind of drugs.

    Look at the number of homeless on CA and you'll see where that number comes from.
    The third episode of Simon Reeve in the Americas is worth seeing, and has quite a big section on homelessness in LA. It's on Sunday nights and iplayer.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 9,242
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Link to mail polling

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

    Headline figures are 34/26/19

    In the data:

    Trustworthy

    Johnson -30
    Corbyn -37
    Swinson +20

    Now that's interesting
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    That picture of Rees-mogg is terrible. Born to rule pose! :wink:
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,784
    edited October 2019
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

    34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

    What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    Barnesian said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Link to mail polling

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

    Headline figures are 34/26/19

    In the data:

    Trustworthy

    Johnson -30
    Corbyn -37
    Swinson +20

    Now that's interesting
    That is dreadful for Johnson given he is peak honeymoon. LD upto 2010 were usually seen as trustworthy, so that is interesting that Swinson has a positive score as up to a few months ago they were tainted by post 2010. I am surprised that JC has not got worse figures compared to BJ given the Tory/Brexit supporting media output. If I were still a Tory -30 would worry me...
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,942
    edited October 2019
    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

    34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

    What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.
    Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

    Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris... ;)
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    GIN1138 said:

    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

    34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

    What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.
    Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

    Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris... ;)
    Not surprising given the Brexit supporting media. I would caution your glee. When Black Wednesday occured i seem to remember the Tories had a poll lead. It was only later things deteriorated and then when Blair became leader a couple of years later the Tories plumbed depths that were catastrophic for the Tories...
  • AramintaMoonbeamQCAramintaMoonbeamQC Posts: 3,905
    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1189698619844288512
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    AramintaMoonbeamQC said:

    https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1189698619844288512

    Swing to the LD! :smiley:

    Interesting that I was just thinking you don't hear much about the Windsor MP. Wonder if he will stand again? I think TM is standing again in neighbouring Maidenhead.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,629
    MaxPB said:

    The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.

    This might help: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/30/brexit-party-could-help-tories-general-election-not-fighting/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    The_Taxman said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    If i was the tories i would be somewhat concerned with only an 8% lead.

    As Sir John Curtice (pbuh) told me, watch the share not the lead.

    Both the Blue Meanies and Labour should be worried that they are on 34% and 26% respectively.

    He's going to be right, we're going to see an awful lot of non Con/Lab MPs elected in December.
    I think better advice would be "watch the share after discounting the house effect".

    34% for the Conservatives would be really lousy news for them if the poll were from Opinium. But it's from Survation and from them 34% represents a polling high for the Conservatives under Johnson's leadership. (Note also that 34% in UK = approx 35% in GB). Only a month ago Survation had the Conservatives on 27%.

    What that poll does therefore do is to suggest that the trend of the Conservatives gradually strengthening their position has continued into the start of the GE period. I don't think your Blue Meanies should be worried by that.
    Also no sign of Con collapsing after Boris had to ditch his "do or die" Brexit on 31/10/19.

    Voters clear who they blame for us no leaving and the majority don't blame Boris... ;)
    Not surprising given the Brexit supporting media. I would caution your glee. When Black Wednesday occured i seem to remember the Tories had a poll lead. It was only later things deteriorated and then when Blair became leader a couple of years later the Tories plumbed depths that were catastrophic for the Tories...
    After 14 years in power, the Tories have only been in 9 years
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    The_Taxman said:

    Barnesian said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Link to mail polling

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

    Headline figures are 34/26/19

    In the data:

    Trustworthy

    Johnson -30
    Corbyn -37
    Swinson +20

    Now that's interesting
    That is dreadful for Johnson given he is peak honeymoon. LD upto 2010 were usually seen as trustworthy, so that is interesting that Swinson has a positive score as up to a few months ago they were tainted by post 2010. I am surprised that JC has not got worse figures compared to BJ given the Tory/Brexit supporting media output. If I were still a Tory -30 would worry me...
    Corbyn has a 7% worse rating than Boris on trustworthy, trails Boris by 23% as best PM and 51% fear a Corbyn Premiership.

    That is great for Boris and abysmal for Corbyn on any measure
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
    On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    edited October 2019
    RobD said:

    MaxPB said:

    The Tories need 37+ to get a majority. It means squeezing the brexit party down to mid single figures. It's definitely possible on the basis of that poll.

    This might help: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/10/30/brexit-party-could-help-tories-general-election-not-fighting/
    I suspect it is just postering by TBP. Due to them being a new party with no GE track record, they have to be creative in how they get media attention. Another way to look at TBP is they are saying they are similar to the Tories, so it is safe to vote TBP instead of Tory. In the EU elections TBP engaged in this strategy and the Brexit supporting media assisted in presenting this view. The Tories could be screwed as they are going after Leave Labour voters...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
    On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.
    Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

    The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,080
    I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

    Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
    On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.
    Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

    The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency
    I don't disagree with much of that.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
    On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.
    Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

    The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency
    The current sea change in scottish politics could wipe out the advantage of incumbency. Given Scotland voted 62% remain. That is a big pool of anti-tory tactical voting! The Tories could be gubbed! :smiley:
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 1,125
    Chris said:

    I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

    Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.

    Surely there's no MV and the way it gets through is the WAB?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,080
    Drutt said:

    Chris said:

    I put a small amount on the "Brexit - Meaningful Vote to pass in 2019?" market today, currently at 12.5-17.5.

    Feel free to tell me I'm stupid, but as Johnson has reportedly been claiming we could leave on 1 January - which doesn't seem likely - I wonder if he may at least contrive to get the MV passed this year. If he wins a majority, of course.

    Surely there's no MV and the way it gets through is the WAB?
    By law there has to be a MV in the prescribed form, as well as the WAB.

    My thought is that if he can by any means start the new session before 1 January, a MV will take only a few hours and will be of huge symbolic significance (especially as the Letwin amendment must still rankle).
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,080
    Talking of betting, I wonder why Betfair still haven't settled the Brexit by 31/10/2019 and No Deal in 2019 markets, despite their own rules saying they would be settled when a extension was agreed, which it was (formally) yesterday.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    The_Taxman said:

    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/1189681696825913344

    Electoral Calculus gives a Tory majority of 50 on those numbers from Survation.

    Tories 350
    Labour 208
    LDs 33
    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=34&LAB=26&LIB=19&Brexit=12&Green=1&UKIP=1&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
    On a UNS basis , this implies 27 gains from Labour offset by 13 losses to LDs and circa 8 to SNP - giving the Tories 324 seats. Of the Labour seats at risk, 5 might well be saved as a result of first term incumbency.
    Even 324 seats though would give the Tories a majority effectively with SF not taking their seats and would be enough to get the Boris Deal through without the DUP.

    The Tory MPs in Scotland would also benefit from first term incumbency
    The current sea change in scottish politics could wipe out the advantage of incumbency. Given Scotland voted 62% remain. That is a big pool of anti-tory tactical voting! The Tories could be gubbed! :smiley:
    The latest Scotland only poll had the Tories losing 8 seats and holding 5 which was already factored in the 324 Tory total
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,198
    edited October 2019
    justin124 said:

    It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.

    The Brexit Party were not around in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze either.

    That 8% Tory lead is with the Brexit Party still on 12%
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,314
    Does anyone know what Baker is referring to?

    https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1189603578584977409?s=21
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,080
    HYUFD said:

    justin124 said:

    It may be worth pointing out that in the 2017 campaign no poll showed a Tory lead as low as 8% until less than two and a half weeks before Polling Day.

    The Brexit Party were not around in 2017 for the Tories to squeeze either.

    That 8% Tory lead is with the Brexit Party still on 12%
    Surely you've done enough now to become Lord Hyufd of Hyufd in the Principality of Wales and can stop trying now.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 12,080
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
    And if I remember the rules correctly, they'll need to keep standing all the way to closing time.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
    I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,979
    williamglenn said:

    Does anyone know what Baker is referring to?

    https://twitter.com/stevebakerhw/status/1189603578584977409?s=21

    From looking at the comments Baker seems to be upset the LD have said BJ broke his promise to leave EU on the 31st oct 2019. Also some references to the LD being a local candidate. To be honest unless mainstream media pick it up i dont know why he is bothering as his twitter feed will change no votes in wycombe. Not unless he gets shit faced and starts saying things in intemperate language, which i doubt he will do! Seems a bit of a dull MP!
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    Barnesian said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Link to mail polling

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7632443/Boris-Johnson-trusted-Jeremy-Corbyn-new-poll-voters-reveals.html

    Headline figures are 34/26/19

    In the data:

    Trustworthy

    Johnson -30
    Corbyn -37
    Swinson +20

    Now that's interesting
    Not really. No one knows much about Swinson yet.

    One thing I'm quite confident about this campaign, is the longer it goes on, the weaker the LD position will look, and it will be largely because of negative reactions to Swinson. The LDs have been suckered into thinking she's a vote winner because of positive reaction to the cancel Brexit policy and how all over the place Labour are on the issue. It won't last.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
    I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play
    The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
    I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play
    The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .
    I’m drawing a distinction between media coverage and the official OFCOM status
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Charles said:

    Yellow_Submarine said:

    Only standing in 30 or so seats means (a) polling companies will stop including them ( b ) OFCOM won't let them get major party status for Broadcasting ( c ) no leaders debate slots (d ) no PPB. It would kill the Brexit Party's air war. It's akin to ending as a national political party.

    If Farage does that it's not a tactic it's shutting up shop altogether. Maybe they will do that but the threshold for taking that decision is a lot higher than you think due to the consequences.

    Stand in 56 then and you should get as much exposure as the SNP
    The SNP gets its OFCOM coverage because it's a major party for Scotland and anything broadcast there has to treat them as such. As we have a heavily centralised media that means UK wide coverage. But the SNP designation is just based on candidates stood. They are the Scottish government, have a majority of MPs, loads of councillors, MEPs etc.

    The Brexit Party has 1 MEP in Scotland and that's that.

    If the Brexit Party wants an air war it needs OFCOM designation as a major party in at least England. Given it's legally not continuity UKIP and has no previous electoral mandate than means hundreds of candidates need to stand.
    I suspect that if they treated them differently to the LibDems there will be cries of foul play
    The OFCOM decision is judiciable. The Brexit Party can go to court if it doesn't like it. Just as all the other parties will if OFCOM grant a party with 30 candidates ' major party ' status .
    I’m drawing a distinction between media coverage and the official OFCOM status
    Yes, which is why I disagree with you. OFCOM regulated broadcasters use tge OFCOM party statuses to meet their statutory duty to provide ' balanced ' coverage during campaign periods. If the Brexit Party isn't designated a major party broadcasters won't be able to give them the same volume of coverage as those that are designated.
  • Yellow_SubmarineYellow_Submarine Posts: 647
    Labour Party affliate won't campaign for the Labour Party. The times we live in.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/31/jewish-group-removes-campaigning-support-for-labour-in-election
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025