With the current crop of local polls in LD targets showing LD gains higher than the national average and Lab losses higher the national average do we: a) think the LDs are doing better nationally and Lab are doing worse or b) that the losses and gains of LD and Lab are localised and therefore their vote shares will lead to more efficient distribution of seats? I have to say the general consensus amongst the knowing seems to be option b, which gives hope to Remain.
Or they selected the most flattering polls to publish....
I'm a bit sceptical, as Survation is polling Lib Dems above 20% (higher than most pollsters), this is very possible but combined with the specific seats published it suggests the results are very much at the top end of expectations, and rely on some proper tactical voting and a Tory decline at the expense of BXP.
South Cambs is 50/50 in my eyes, Wokingham 25/75 in Redwood's favour (would be a very impressive result) and Raab and Mogg are going nowhere.
If we are working purely on a leave/remain basis then I believe the Tories only hold 6 seats (Rushcliffe, St Albans, Winchester, Guildford, Southwest Surrey and Hendon) that are more remainy than Esher or Wokingham. So if they aren't winning the latter where will all the gains come from? They are certainly better positioned in other slightly less remainy constituencies like Cheltenham and South Cambs but even with a good campaign, huge tactical voting this election seems more a stepping stone for the yellows than a return to 2001/2005 numbers.
As a detached Tory remainer and prime target voter I'd guess for Buckingham (we got our Swinson for PM card in the post today), I'm rather concerned to see Lib Dems now supporting an independent Wales?
This is an anti Brexit alliance only, the LDs are still pro Union and aiming for gains from the SNP in Scotland but Plaid are much weaker than the SNP
Why should a Plaid voter support the LD Unionists in Cardiff Central rather than vote Labour or abstain? Is the main attraction supposed to be that the LDs are promising to revoke Brexit without a referendum, something they obviously won't be in a position to do, their real aim being their age-old one of holding the balance of power in a hung parliament? Why not just vote Labour, hope for a Labour majority in the Commons - a far more realistic prospect than an LD majority - and look forward to voting Remain in the subsequent referendum? Plaid voters who are annoyed at Plaid pulling out may not flock to vote LD on Plaid leadership instructions.
But what they do is a bit of an academic question given that there were fewer than 1000 Plaid voters in Cardiff Central in 2017 and Labour won a 17000 majority. They could all vote Tory for all the difference it will make to Labour.
I think that is correct.
The LibDem vote in most of these Welsh seats is tiny.
I think the only seats that this ***cound*** have tipped are Montgomeryshire are Brecon & Radnorshire and Montgomeryshire where there is a hardcore Plaid Cymru vote of ~ 2000 per seat.
But, I don't think Plaid Cymru voters see much reason to vote LibDem.
It might have been different if the LibDems had REALLY given something up -- say agreed not to stand in Ceredigion.
But, they haven't, so I think those seats will be two TORY holds.
With the current crop of local polls in LD targets showing LD gains higher than the national average and Lab losses higher the national average do we: a) think the LDs are doing better nationally and Lab are doing worse or b) that the losses and gains of LD and Lab are localised and therefore their vote shares will lead to more efficient distribution of seats? I have to say the general consensus amongst the knowing seems to be option b, which gives hope to Remain.
Or they selected the most flattering polls to publish....
Sure, but there was an interesting discussion a few weeks back about geographical distribution of votes.
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
Yes, this GE Corbyn may finally get the sub Foot 1983 trouncing he should have got in 2017 if it was not for May's dementia tax gaffe and Remainers tactically voting Labour. Labour will be down to its socialist core
If all Tory strategists agree with that analysis it will be the Tory party that gets booted to kingdom come in this election, and once the manifestos are out and the TV debates start happening the move to Labour in the polls will be as sharp and sustained as it was last time. Labour didn't win a seat such as Canterbury because of dementia tax and tactically donated "Remainer" votes.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard here, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
The Tories have a 3.6% majority over Labour - not the largest, but given UNS is currently a swing to the Tories over Labour they should be safe. And Labour voters won't be squeezed to the Lib Dems here.
The Tories have a 36.1% majority over the Lib Dems. Pretty considerable!
EDIT: If you think the Tories will lose it, who do you think will gain it? If you're not sure, that's not the best indicator for tactical voting.
The most interesting one for me is the LDs have stood down in Bristol West. Got to now give the Greens a real shot of getting a second seat.
Quite surprised at why Cannock Chase is included in the pact though - seems to me the last place that is ever likely to vote Green!
Debbonaire will walk Bristol West. She has a personal vote over and above Labour. A slightly more interesting seat for the Greens is the Isle of Wight where Vix Lowthion has a serious personal vote, there are a lot of Labour and LD votes to take, and Bob Seeley has not set the world on fire. She will not take it but she could surprise people with a strong second and a base for next time.
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
Yes, this GE Corbyn may finally get the sub Foot 1983 trouncing he should have got in 2017 if it was not for May's dementia tax gaffe and Remainers tactically voting Labour. Labour will be down to its socialist core
If all Tory strategists agree with that analysis it will be the Tory party that gets booted to kingdom come in this election, and once the manifestos are out and the TV debates start happening the move to Labour in the polls will be as sharp and sustained as it was last time. Labour didn't win a seat such as Canterbury because of dementia tax and tactically donated "Remainer" votes.
It is the arrogance of Labour supporters like you that will finally get its comeuppance.
Labour is losing Leavers to the Brexit Party, unlike 2017, as well as the Tories, losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, unlike 2017 and is set to lower the IHT threshold to £125 000 which will be Labour's own dementia tax in the suburbs.
Canterbury admittedly it won by the student vote but even that is now shifting LD or Green
I think the most important aspect of Unite To Remoan will prove to be that it means the Brexit Party stepping down from a bunch of seats will now just play as tit for tat without it harming the Tories as being in league with Farage.
There are times when wishful thinking mounts to the heights of full-blown fantasy.
Any minute now, Gandalf will be leading a battalion of Ents to defend Cannock Chase for the Tories, and Jorek Byrnison and his armoured bears will be securing the Costa Geriatrica.
John Woodcock didn't resign the Labour whip. He had it removed from him following allegations of sexual harassment. Yet he calls Jeremy Corbyn, who has always retained the Labour whip, a disgrace to the party?
Was anything proven in the end?
I thought he resigned because there wasn't a proper investigation, but since he had resigned there could not be an investigation, and so there's no conclusion made.
The party removed the whip and suspended his membership.
Three months later he resigned his membership, at which time he denounced Jeremy Corbyn as a "national security risk" and "anti-Semite".
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
LDs standing aside for the greens or vice versa in Norwich South might have made things interesting but the LDs held it 2010 to 15 and Norwich council has a strong green presence. The Tories will get their reliable 20 to 25% here leaving the other two a max of probably 35% to split between them with Lewis on (I'd estimate) a min of 40 to 45%
The Tories have a 3.6% majority over Labour - not the largest, but given UNS is currently a swing to the Tories over Labour they should be safe. And Labour voters won't be squeezed to the Lib Dems here.
The Tories have a 36.1% majority over the Lib Dems. Pretty considerable!
EDIT: If you think the Tories will lose it, who do you think will gain it? If you're not sure, that's not the best indicator for tactical voting.
Richard Harrington had a 36.1% majority over the Lib Dems in 2017. That's not the same as the Tories having a 36.1% majority over the Lib Dems, for the reasons I gave. In addition, look at 2015 and 2010. This is seat which has shown large swings between the three contenders in recent elections.
To be clear, I'm not saying it won't be Con hold, but that it's not a slam dunk. My hunch is that the LibDems will be second, but frankly the three could be in any order.
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
Yes, this GE Corbyn may finally get the sub Foot 1983 trouncing he should have got in 2017 if it was not for May's dementia tax gaffe and Remainers tactically voting Labour. Labour will be down to its socialist core
If all Tory strategists agree with that analysis it will be the Tory party that gets booted to kingdom come in this election, and once the manifestos are out and the TV debates start happening the move to Labour in the polls will be as sharp and sustained as it was last time. Labour didn't win a seat such as Canterbury because of dementia tax and tactically donated "Remainer" votes.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
Lots of people I know is St A who vote LD at local and Con at national are saying they'll vote for the LDs this time around. I think a lot of Cameroonian and Wets will.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
And (I think) there are material differences between the council boundaries (where LDs are strong) and constituency boundaries.
John Woodcock didn't resign the Labour whip. He had it removed from him following allegations of sexual harassment. Yet he calls Jeremy Corbyn, who has always retained the Labour whip, a disgrace to the party?
Was anything proven in the end?
I thought he resigned because there wasn't a proper investigation, but since he had resigned there could not be an investigation, and so there's no conclusion made.
The party removed the whip and suspended his membership.
Three months later he resigned his membership, at which time he denounced Jeremy Corbyn as a "national security risk" and "anti-Semite".
Well yes, since he had escaped the cult he could start telling the truth about it.
In many ways hes a repulsive character but he has 'it' when around people. People like him and like his bumbling along way
No love for pyramids or other complex shapes?
Only socialists overcomplicate like that
Socialists, favouring communal activities, make tea properly, in a pot with loose-leaf tea to be shared.
I had to chuckle. I watched a video the other day of a British guy travelling first class on a Russian train.
He asked the guard why the TV wasn't working in his private cabin, and they said the rules state that TV shall not be watched after x pm at night. Food consisted of retrieving dried packages from a store, where you then took it to a boiling hot water dispenser that you poured into the container. And upon arrival, he then had to clean his own bedding away, where it was dumped in large piles with everybody elses. All while the staff stood around.
I can't wait for Jezza and his mates to implement their revolution here.
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
Yes, this GE Corbyn may finally get the sub Foot 1983 trouncing he should have got in 2017 if it was not for May's dementia tax gaffe and Remainers tactically voting Labour. Labour will be down to its socialist core
The most interesting one for me is the LDs have stood down in Bristol West. Got to now give the Greens a real shot of getting a second seat.
Quite surprised at why Cannock Chase is included in the pact though - seems to me the last place that is ever likely to vote Green!
Also the LDs used to be regarded as the main opposition to Labour in Cannock Chase local elections, which means a lot of Tory-minded voters used to support them. (Although the Greens do have a number of councillors there).
Depends very much if the student vote gets out in Bristol west or votes where they live with Mummy and Daddy
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
I was a little bit involved in 2010. Richard Harrington did an absolutely fantastic job winning it given the history with the previous candidate and the near-total collapse of the local party at the time. But yes, as you say, LibDem in local elections and Con in GEs has been a major feature here - I just wonder whether it will hold this time.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
And (I think) there are material differences between the council boundaries (where LDs are strong) and constituency boundaries.
There are, but the wards that are added from Three Rivers are generally Lib Dem-leaning.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
Lots of people I know is St A who vote LD at local and Con at national are saying they'll vote for the LDs this time around. I think a lot of Cameroonian and Wets will.
I think that's possible, this time around. But, the Lib Dems always seem to punch below their weight in this seat. I expected them to win in 1997, when they dominated the local council, but they ended up a poor third.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
I was a little bit involved in 2010. Richard Harrington did an absolutely fantastic job winning it given the history with the previous candidate and the near-total collapse of the local party at the time. But yes, as you say, LibDem in local elections and Con in GEs has been a major feature here - I just wonder whether it will hold this time.
Yes, I did think that having a candidate who ran a false flag operation, alleging that the Lib Dem candidate was a paedophile would be fatal to Conservative chances, but it turned out not.
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
Lots of people I know is St A who vote LD at local and Con at national are saying they'll vote for the LDs this time around. I think a lot of Cameroonian and Wets will.
I think that's possible, this time around. But, the Lib Dems always seem to punch below their weight in this seat. I expected them to win in 1997, when they dominated the local council, but they ended up a poor third.
I assume the expectation is Remain trumps Tory (and from my understanding of local groups, that seems to be the case). I also think lost of local Tories don't exactly like Anne Main, who is seen as a questionable local MP to say the least.
John Woodcock didn't resign the Labour whip. He had it removed from him following allegations of sexual harassment. Yet he calls Jeremy Corbyn, who has always retained the Labour whip, a disgrace to the party?
Was anything proven in the end?
I thought he resigned because there wasn't a proper investigation, but since he had resigned there could not be an investigation, and so there's no conclusion made.
The party removed the whip and suspended his membership.
Three months later he resigned his membership, at which time he denounced Jeremy Corbyn as a "national security risk" and "anti-Semite".
Well yes, since he had escaped the cult he could start telling the truth about it.
Are there no MPs who have escaped the Blue Boris Cult?
If the Lib Dems were serious about stopping Brexit they would be standing aside in every seat where they are not in the top two to give Labour the best chance of holding / gaining seats against the Bozo Tories.
They may do if it was reciprocated. The labour attitude unfortunately is non-labour means Tory, which is the height of arrogance!
No, if they were serious about stopping Brexit, they'd do it even if it wasn't reciprocated
This feels like the day when the Corbyn surge of 2017 failed to rematerialise. The narrative is so different.
We are seeing the consequence of so many Labour MPs walking away from the party due to Corbyn. They are now free to criticise him in a way that a Labour MP standing for re-election is not.
On the other hand, the 2017 surge didn't really gather momentum until after the manifestos were published, and that is still in our future.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
I mean, depends. They could make the same argument they did under Cameron; "imagine how bad they would have been without us". But probably no. But they can't positively help a Con government form, either. Which means a hung parliament will likely result in another election or a Lab minority. A Con minority gov seems untenable; Johnson and co can't claim the previous parliament was intractable, therefore an election was needed, and then claim any hung parliament equally corpsey.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
The most interesting one for me is the LDs have stood down in Bristol West. Got to now give the Greens a real shot of getting a second seat.
Quite surprised at why Cannock Chase is included in the pact though - seems to me the last place that is ever likely to vote Green!
Debbonaire will walk Bristol West. She has a personal vote over and above Labour. A slightly more interesting seat for the Greens is the Isle of Wight where Vix Lowthion has a serious personal vote, there are a lot of Labour and LD votes to take, and Bob Seeley has not set the world on fire. She will not take it but she could surprise people with a strong second and a base for next time.
Debbs safe as houses I agree. However Bristol North West will change hands, Drutt getting his wish as it goes red blue only change in Bristol, so not much to see here. 45 minutes down road swindon will stay blue, bath stays yellow. The only interesting one that could be surprise is the put the moggy out campaign.
If the Lib Dems were serious about stopping Brexit they would be standing aside in every seat where they are not in the top two to give Labour the best chance of holding / gaining seats against the Bozo Tories.
They'd be standing aside for a party that neither has a policy of stopping Brexit, nor has any intention of reciprocating. They'd be killing themselves in all contests against the Tories where they'd be portrayed as Corbyn's helpers (further setting back their chances of stopping Brexit). They'd annihilate their chances of getting reasonable media coverage due to standing too few candidates, reducing their scope for gains/holds And, as Mike has said, the 2017 result is often an appalling guide, as constituency polls for example have demonstrated.
Apart from that, good idea.
I think it would be plausible to find a middle ground. Remain alliance voluntarily stand down in 20 Labour seats where the MP is standing again and demonstrated clear will for remain outside of the Labour whips. Shows a gesture to Labour remainers, whilst keeping well away from the Labour leadership.
Fool me once...
"Despite the Greens standing down in 31 seats in 2017 to give Labour a free run, that was not reciprocated and Labour will not be standing aside in any seats at this election."
I'm a bit surprised that the betting markets indicate that the Conservatives are unlikely to lose Watford. From what I gather, departing Tory/ex-Tory/Tory MP Richard Harrington doesn't think that. The local party is in a mess - Harrington, who is a strong Remainer, fell out with the local party even well before he lost the whip, because it had become infiltrated by ex-Kippers. He was easily able to raise donations himself, and decided to decamp from the constituency party office and set up his own rival office. A substantial part of the Conservative vote in this seat will have been for his brand of Conservatism, not for the ERGish/BXP style.
Meanwhile, both Labour (who were a fairly close second last time) and the LibDems (who have been strong here in the past and who are very strong in local elections) will fancy their chances here. Clearly they could knock each other out, allowing the Tories to win again, but this is far from certain. Note that Jo Swinson swung her battlebus through here yesterday; the LibDems will be trying hard, and I think have a much better chance than would appear from the raw 2017 figures. The Greens aren't a big presence here but their standing aside for the LibDems will help if it's close.
I was surprised that the Conservatives won it in the first place in 2010, given their local weakness.
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
And (I think) there are material differences between the council boundaries (where LDs are strong) and constituency boundaries.
The main difference is that St Albans Council includes Harpenden, whereas the constituency doesn't. Given that Harpenden is hugely Tory, the constituency is on the face of it better for the LibDems than the council. Its the LDcouncilCon GE switchers that cause them the difficulty.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
It depends what their ambitions are. If they want to run a Corbynite set of policies on a minority govt from day one they wont last more than a month (to get the next extension or possibly referendum through).
If they are content with getting a referendum, spending some more cash but not changing much, then it could last until after the referendum has been decided, but probably not much beyond that.
Either way they would be in a better position than they are now.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
With the current crop of local polls in LD targets showing LD gains higher than the national average and Lab losses higher the national average do we: a) think the LDs are doing better nationally and Lab are doing worse or b) that the losses and gains of LD and Lab are localised and therefore their vote shares will lead to more efficient distribution of seats? I have to say the general consensus amongst the knowing seems to be option b, which gives hope to Remain.
Or they selected the most flattering polls to publish....
I'm a bit sceptical, as Survation is polling Lib Dems above 20% (higher than most pollsters), this is very possible but combined with the specific seats published it suggests the results are very much at the top end of expectations, and rely on some proper tactical voting and a Tory decline at the expense of BXP.
South Cambs is 50/50 in my eyes, Wokingham 25/75 in Redwood's favour (would be a very impressive result) and Raab and Mogg are going nowhere.
If we are working purely on a leave/remain basis then I believe the Tories only hold 6 seats (Rushcliffe, St Albans, Winchester, Guildford, Southwest Surrey and Hendon) that are more remainy than Esher or Wokingham. So if they aren't winning the latter where will all the gains come from? They are certainly better positioned in other slightly less remainy constituencies like Cheltenham and South Cambs but even with a good campaign, huge tactical voting this election seems more a stepping stone for the yellows than a return to 2001/2005 numbers.
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
What I don't understand is the lack of due diligence in the candidates department of all parties. There are people out there who can trawl and find out what skeletons are in peoples closets.
Its almost as though the parties fly by the seat of their pants....
With the current crop of local polls in LD targets showing LD gains higher than the national average and Lab losses higher the national average do we: a) think the LDs are doing better nationally and Lab are doing worse or b) that the losses and gains of LD and Lab are localised and therefore their vote shares will lead to more efficient distribution of seats? I have to say the general consensus amongst the knowing seems to be option b, which gives hope to Remain.
Or they selected the most flattering polls to publish....
I'm a bit sceptical, as Survation is polling Lib Dems above 20% (higher than most pollsters), this is very possible but combined with the specific seats published it suggests the results are very much at the top end of expectations, and rely on some proper tactical voting and a Tory decline at the expense of BXP.
South Cambs is 50/50 in my eyes, Wokingham 25/75 in Redwood's favour (would be a very impressive result) and Raab and Mogg are going nowhere.
If we are working purely on a leave/remain basis then I believe the Tories only hold 6 seats (Rushcliffe, St Albans, Winchester, Guildford, Southwest Surrey and Hendon) that are more remainy than Esher or Wokingham. So if they aren't winning the latter where will all the gains come from? They are certainly better positioned in other slightly less remainy constituencies like Cheltenham and South Cambs but even with a good campaign, huge tactical voting this election seems more a stepping stone for the yellows than a return to 2001/2005 numbers.
Richmond Park is the ultimate in remainy seats.
Sorry, already assumed that one as a Lib Dem seat!
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
You may recall what Liberal Democrat guarantees have been worth in the past.
Rather more than Boris';
I will die in a ditch I will lie down in front of the bulldozer Of course I did not make up those stories for the Telegraph No, I did not have an affair with Petronella Wyatt Of course I will not stand for Mayor when I represent Henley Of course I will not stand for parliament while I am Mayor etc etc
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
You may recall what Liberal Democrat guarantees have been worth in the past.
Rather more than Boris';
I will die in a ditch I will lie down in front of the bulldozer Of course I did not make up those stories for the Telegraph No, I did not have an affair with Petronella Wyatt Of course I will not stand for Mayor when I represent Henley Of course I will not stand for parliament while I am Mayor etc etc
If you'd reordered that and indented some of the lines, you could have had an inverted pyramid of piffle...
No one knows what is bad news or good news for anybody at the moment.
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
Farage has declared open warfare on labour and as HYUFD points out where UKIP stood against labour in 2015 they took votes from labour, but it did not happen in 2017 when they did not stand
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
If the Lib Dems were serious about stopping Brexit they would be standing aside in every seat where they are not in the top two to give Labour the best chance of holding / gaining seats against the Bozo Tories.
They'd be standing aside for a party that neither has a policy of stopping Brexit, nor has any intention of reciprocating. They'd be killing themselves in all contests against the Tories where they'd be portrayed as Corbyn's helpers (further setting back their chances of stopping Brexit). They'd annihilate their chances of getting reasonable media coverage due to standing too few candidates, reducing their scope for gains/holds And, as Mike has said, the 2017 result is often an appalling guide, as constituency polls for example have demonstrated.
Apart from that, good idea.
It's almost as if all the terrible side-effects you just listed were the feature of SandyRentool's suggestion, not the bug!
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
If the Lib Dems end up a slew of SW and SE "shire" seats, there is no way on God's green earth they can stick Corbyn in ?
Swinson has already promised not to stick Corbyn in.
Has she actually said she will always VONC Corbyn?
My interpretation is she wont give any supply and confidence and of course wont join a coalition with him, but that is different to stopping him being PM.
I've no real issue with Unite to Remain or its attempt to maximise the anti-Leave vote in some seats. As to whether it will work with the voters, that remains to be seen.
We've yet to see how many seats BXP will contest - some of their intended PPCs have walked away fearing a split in the LEAVE vote but we'll see.
East Ham is an atypical Labour seat with Newham having voted 53-47 to REMAIN. There wasn't much evidence of a strong anti-Labour Leave vote despite Stephen Timms having opposed initiating A50 back in the day.
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
Well, yes, but once you're in government stopping what the other lot want is no longer enough, you've landed the problem and then have to try to get support for what you want. It's naive to assume it would be any easier for Labour reliant on a rag-bag of hostile minor parties than it was for Theresa May, who had only one other party to try to keep on side, and one which wasn't an electoral rival.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
But once Corbyn is in power and isn't immediately Stalinesque and the world doesn't collapse, I feel the attacks that he is dangerous become pretty self evidently preposterous.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
Until people see the tax being taken off them on their wage slips. And their Council Tax bills. And that they're being forced to pay for "Green" improvements on their house they neither want or need. And taxes on everything soar.
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
And Remainers are Project Fear.
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
Corbyn is not a Social Democrat. To pretend otherwise is deceitful.
Comments
Surprising no Brexit Party candidates as well........
In many ways hes a repulsive character but he has 'it' when around people. People like him and like his bumbling along way
South Cambs is 50/50 in my eyes, Wokingham 25/75 in Redwood's favour (would be a very impressive result) and Raab and Mogg are going nowhere.
If we are working purely on a leave/remain basis then I believe the Tories only hold 6 seats (Rushcliffe, St Albans, Winchester, Guildford, Southwest Surrey and Hendon) that are more remainy than Esher or Wokingham. So if they aren't winning the latter where will all the gains come from? They are certainly better positioned in other slightly less remainy constituencies like Cheltenham and South Cambs but even with a good campaign, huge tactical voting this election seems more a stepping stone for the yellows than a return to 2001/2005 numbers.
The LibDem vote in most of these Welsh seats is tiny.
I think the only seats that this ***cound*** have tipped are Montgomeryshire are Brecon & Radnorshire and Montgomeryshire where there is a hardcore Plaid Cymru vote of ~ 2000 per seat.
But, I don't think Plaid Cymru voters see much reason to vote LibDem.
It might have been different if the LibDems had REALLY given something up -- say agreed not to stand in Ceredigion.
But, they haven't, so I think those seats will be two TORY holds.
Does he have some photos of Southgate wearing a waistcoat with the German flag on or something?
The Tories have a 36.1% majority over the Lib Dems. Pretty considerable!
EDIT: If you think the Tories will lose it, who do you think will gain it? If you're not sure, that's not the best indicator for tactical voting.
Labour is losing Leavers to the Brexit Party, unlike 2017, as well as the Tories, losing Remainers to the LDs and Greens, unlike 2017 and is set to lower the IHT threshold to £125 000 which will be Labour's own dementia tax in the suburbs.
Canterbury admittedly it won by the student vote but even that is now shifting LD or Green
Any minute now, Gandalf will be leading a battalion of Ents to defend Cannock Chase for the Tories, and Jorek Byrnison and his armoured bears will be securing the Costa Geriatrica.
Three months later he resigned his membership, at which time he denounced Jeremy Corbyn as a "national security risk" and "anti-Semite".
But, I have a bit of local knowledge. Like St. Alban's, and SW Herts., quite a few people who vote Lib Dem in local elections vote Conservative at national level. And, the seat does tend to be a bellwether.
To be clear, I'm not saying it won't be Con hold, but that it's not a slam dunk. My hunch is that the LibDems will be second, but frankly the three could be in any order.
It was 76 before.
https://web.archive.org/web/20191102003338/https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
He asked the guard why the TV wasn't working in his private cabin, and they said the rules state that TV shall not be watched after x pm at night. Food consisted of retrieving dried packages from a store, where you then took it to a boiling hot water dispenser that you poured into the container. And upon arrival, he then had to clean his own bedding away, where it was dumped in large piles with everybody elses. All while the staff stood around.
I can't wait for Jezza and his mates to implement their revolution here.
https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/lib-dems-not-stand-broxtowe-3511936
Which might or might not make a difference.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50333081
Top tip for all parties: Stop selecting idiots.
https://archive.ph/BshNU
Lab 39, Con 38.
I wonder if Watson had seen which way the wind was blowing. (Always something we cyclists are very aware of.)
Johnson really needs a big majority to do as he wants. Labour / Remain only need a hung parliament to stop what the Tories want.
In particular, having to rely on the support of sworn-enemies the SNP would be, shall we say, interesting.
Unless, of course, you simply refer to the use of pseudonyms ?
If they are content with getting a referendum, spending some more cash but not changing much, then it could last until after the referendum has been decided, but probably not much beyond that.
Either way they would be in a better position than they are now.
A lot of his policy positions are popular with the public. Votes on renationalising the railways, or kicking out privatisation from the NHS and rejigging welfare so it's less draconian will look good to the public, and those policies are the stick to beat opposition from SNP and LDs back. If LDs want to be a party that voted for welfare cuts and austerity and refuse to reverse them when even the Tories are arguing austerity should end, they will get hammered in another election.
And 6 months of PM Corbyn, who then decides to try and call another general election post whatever the Brexit referendum promised delivers, will be interesting because Labour will have all those policy votes to beat everyone else around the head with.
There wasn't even a 'historic' angle to it - the candidate has made the posts in the last few weeks, when she had already been selected. Moronic.
https://wingsoverscotland.com/a-letter-to-the-jo-cox-foundation/
It certainly looks BP will suck up more Tories than thought few weeks ago now, but that doesn’t mean anything, HY reckons 12 to 15% BP can still be Boris majority. I don’t suspect BP as high as 12% PV what do you think?
There are people out there who can trawl and find out what skeletons are in peoples closets.
Its almost as though the parties fly by the seat of their pants....
I will die in a ditch
I will lie down in front of the bulldozer
Of course I did not make up those stories for the Telegraph
No, I did not have an affair with Petronella Wyatt
Of course I will not stand for Mayor when I represent Henley
Of course I will not stand for parliament while I am Mayor
etc etc
I'm pretty sure they watch the Youtube "I'm sorry" video once in a while to remind themselves not to repeat the mistake.
Farage is specifically targetting labour voters who would never vote conservative and this action reduces the labour vote with Boris receiving the benefit
This is mainly effective in the north labour heartlands
And until the strikes start. And the Unions run rampant. And the lights go out. And the overseas investment stops. And the entrepreneurs don't try or leave. And companies start to collapse. And unemployment soars. And the bread lines creep round corners.
And until the riots start. And the country defaults. And until the IMF come in.
And privatise the NHS.
https://twitter.com/hantschronicle/status/1192432908591489024
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q1NzDdro77WgglG7dhlE6c8ORK6xjWOfx0i1L5FUkPk/edit#gid=0
http://vote-2012.proboards.com
A slight move towards democratic socialism, as is currently practised by many countries including the Scandiwegian ones, will cause Libyan style civil wars.
But Brexit, an act of economic self harm no country would even contemplate and many are actively warning us against, will be sunflowers and roses.
My interpretation is she wont give any supply and confidence and of course wont join a coalition with him, but that is different to stopping him being PM.
I've no real issue with Unite to Remain or its attempt to maximise the anti-Leave vote in some seats. As to whether it will work with the voters, that remains to be seen.
We've yet to see how many seats BXP will contest - some of their intended PPCs have walked away fearing a split in the LEAVE vote but we'll see.
East Ham is an atypical Labour seat with Newham having voted 53-47 to REMAIN. There wasn't much evidence of a strong anti-Labour Leave vote despite Stephen Timms having opposed initiating A50 back in the day.
My guess is he is counting the money-bags, having put his skills in mendacity to more profitable use.