Well that's what really matters in this election - not Brexit, not the NHS, not Pensions, NATO, not anything like that. It's The Queen's Speech!
But it's not really about the Queens Speech per se is it? Its about the fact that even on something as trivial as what he watches on Christmas Day Jezza appears evasive and untrustworthy...
This is the sort of thing that will cut through with voters (much more so than the ins and outs of Brexit etc)
If only Boris could be caught on fibbing in a similar way.
Unfortunately Boris gets away with being a bit of a fibber. Jezza doesn't.
That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes and lets face it Labur had a good run with Teflon Tony and his "pretty straight kinda guy" shtick.
Boris gets away with it, because he never claims to be whiter than whiter. Everybody knows at the very least Boris is a cad that you wouldn't leave your wife alone with and that he loves to tell a tale that is wouldn't even pass the CCHQ fact check service.
The problem Jezza has is he loves to preach about his morals, and his cult talk up his absolute purity. That's why when he lies over finding a train seat it become a story.
Should both parties decide it optimal to reduce barriers to trade, precedent says it is perfectly possible to agree a trade deal with the US that will not lead to rampant inflation in drugs prices for the NHS.
So we can conclude that this component of Labour’s campaign is a concocted nonsense.
Canada is America's next door neighbour. US businesses have millions of reasons for wanting no friction within their US/Canada trade area. So US Big Pharma has to take its place in the queue of US businesses wanting concessions out of Canada. US businesses are less fussed about most British sales opportunities. But the NHS is the world's biggest single customer for drugs, and US Big Pharma wants to make more money - because the NHS treats US Big Pharma the same way that WalMart treats Coca-Cola. It negotiates. So making more money out of pharma sales to the UK (by making buyer-led price negotiation as illegal in the UK as it is in the US) is high on America's list of objectives from any UK trade deal: indeed the only other two of any substance are: - for US agribusiness to sell the UK food made in conformity with US rules, which are incompatible with the EU's rules - for US aerospace - heavily subsidised by the US government - not to have to cope with competition from Airbus, which receives more or less the same subsidies from Euro-governments that US planemakers get from theirs.
Without UK concessions on planes, pharma or agribusiness, there's no UK-US trade deal. Trump has no countervailing concessions to offer back.
So the commercial illiterates who see a US trade deal (NOT a US free trade deal, because Trump's insistent on LESS free trade) simply don't understand the damage the US wants to do to the UK.
So we can conclude that this element of Brexiteers' campaign is the kind of nonsense you have to be astronomically ignorant of commercial realities to believe.
I am not saying this will change anything, but the strangest things do....think Ed and his bacon sandwich and the Ed Stone definitely hurt Labour.
The daft thing is that I reckon even most supporters of the Queen don't watch it...I think she's fantastic but I find it boring.
It isn't the not watching that smells bad, it's the obvious porky telling...I mean, who the hell doesn't know it's on in the afternoon?
Bugger all people watch it live these days, that's why he had nothing to fear from saying so. The fact that a) he lied and b) he is just a dunce he doesn't even know roughly what time it is on, is the story.
Been out - what's the Queen's Speech thing please?
An stupid blunder by Corbyn which normally would have been a matter for slight hilarity but which is now being blown up into something major because we are all bored waiting for the next polls.
And I DETEST Corbyn and would sell my own children* if it meant he wouldn't end up as PM. But even I think it is all a but silly.
*If my children are reading this don't worry, I would only sell one of you, picked at random by shortest straw.
Very well said. This is not a story and won't swing votes but its symptomatic of it being a slow news day and we have little else to talk about.
And that in itself matters. Because we are 8 days from polling day with the polls as they are and today is the big NATO summit that some on the left were pinning their hopes on for a gaffe. Instead we are talking about this.
Well that's what really matters in this election - not Brexit, not the NHS, not Pensions, NATO, not anything like that. It's The Queen's Speech!
But it's not really about the Queens Speech per se is it? Its about the fact that even on something as trivial as what he watches on Christmas Day Jezza appears evasive and untrustworthy...
This is the sort of thing that will cut through with voters (much more so than the ins and outs of Brexit etc)
Yes, much more influential than somebody saying they would never allow Brexit to put our border in the Irish Sea and then doing just that. That sort of lie is much more difficult for people to get their heads around.
What I am of course saying, Gin, is what I am sure you understand already. People who don't want to vote for one side will seize on anything, however trivial, to justify it whilst ignoring the most preposterous lies on their own side.
Cuts both ways of course. You would accept that, no?
You're prepared to put an avowed anti-Semite in power, just because you want to reverse a democratic vote to Brexit.
Buy a mirror. This is not your noblest hour.
Not putting anybody in power. Just voting LD because I don't care for Corbyn or Johnson. Forgive me for being so bold.
Twitter really is like an alternative reality....I just gone on and absolutely Queen's speech is a huge media smear about how Jezza doesn't watch the it.
Too many people on it forget how exceptional their/our interest levels are. You could put this on the front page of tomorrow's Sun and most people wouldn't care, and unless it gets that kind of coverage almost no-one will even know it happened.
Most likely....although as I say, the weirdest things cut through. It is often the non-political lies that seem to get some traction. Brown biscuit gate / arctic monkeys, Cameron West Ham Villa.
True. And fond memories of the Cameron one. Not a huge deal but I did feel it was oddly revealing about how much he'd built a persona up.
Scottish Labour are currently FAV in just 2 of the country’s 59 seats (3.4%):
Edinburgh South 3/10 Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath 8/11
In the other 5 current SLab seats the SNP are FAV. Here are the SLab prices:
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill 2/1 East Lothian 3/1 Glasgow North East 7/2 Midlothian 7/2 Rutherglen and Hamilton West 7/2
East Lothian stands out as a great price, due to the huge residual /SLD vote (18,278 at GE17) in that area. Surely a few thousand will hold their noses and cast a vote for their Better Together pals?
I'm pretty sure East Lothian is Labour's second-best prospect rather than Kilmarnock.
East Lothian is one of only three constituencies that Labour holds in the Scottish Parliament (Iain Gray) so I agree that it must be one of their better chances for a hold. Just wonder whether SCon voters would be able to bear voting for Corbyn. Will be an interesting one - as SCon had a v good result in a fairly recent council by-election in this seat, going from third to first.
Almost impossible for Unionists to know who to vote for in East Lothian. On paper, SLab are strongest, but all recent data points to the SCons being a stronger challenger to the SNP.
Naturally, this lack of clarity heavily favours the SNP. Best prices:
SNP 8/11 SLab 3/1 SCon 16/5 SLD 125/1
I enjoy your posts - they focus on the betting. How many total SNP seats do you reckon?
Low 40s.
If pushed for an exact figure: 41.
(If I’m miles out, in my defence, there are a hell of a lot of marginals.)
I reckon trying to pick the Scottish seats is the trickiest aspect of this election by miles. Tories could be anywhere from 3 to 16.
Scottish Labour are currently FAV in just 2 of the country’s 59 seats (3.4%):
Edinburgh South 3/10 Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath 8/11
In the other 5 current SLab seats the SNP are FAV. Here are the SLab prices:
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill 2/1 East Lothian 3/1 Glasgow North East 7/2 Midlothian 7/2 Rutherglen and Hamilton West 7/2
East Lothian stands out as a great price, due to the huge residual /SLD vote (18,278 at GE17) in that area. Surely a few thousand will hold their noses and cast a vote for their Better Together pals?
I'm pretty sure East Lothian is Labour's second-best prospect rather than Kilmarnock.
East Lothian is one of only three constituencies that Labour holds in the Scottish Parliament (Iain Gray) so I agree that it must be one of their better chances for a hold. Just wonder whether SCon voters would be able to bear voting for Corbyn. Will be an interesting one - as SCon had a v good result in a fairly recent council by-election in this seat, going from third to first.
Almost impossible for Unionists to know who to vote for in East Lothian. On paper, SLab are strongest, but all recent data points to the SCons being a stronger challenger to the SNP.
Naturally, this lack of clarity heavily favours the SNP. Best prices:
SNP 8/11 SLab 3/1 SCon 16/5 SLD 125/1
I enjoy your posts - they focus on the betting. How many total SNP seats do you reckon?
Low 40s.
If pushed for an exact figure: 41.
(If I’m miles out, in my defence, there are a hell of a lot of marginals.)
5 gains from SLab, 2 from SCon and lose Fife NE?
You`ve all gone well under 45.5 - a figure Under which Betfair Sports have at 5/6
An stupid blunder by Corbyn which normally would have been a matter for slight hilarity but which is now being blown up into something major because we are all bored waiting for the next polls.
And I DETEST Corbyn and would sell my own children* if it meant he wouldn't end up as PM. But even I think it is all a but silly.
*If my children are reading this don't worry, I would only sell one of you, picked at random by shortest straw.
Thanks, caught up now.
If we weren't in the middle of an election, he would just have said "I'm a life-long republican - what do you think?"
As it is, he's just managed to out-cringe Gordon "Arctic Monkeys" Brown.....
Trump throwing a strop is really the big news....I bet CCHQ was like that scene out of the Thick of It when the defence overspend gets bumped on the nightly news by piss lady.
From last thread: Reply to Casino Royale on veganism:
It is not often I am in agreement with you CR, but I am on this. Veganism is the equivalent of evangelical fundamentalist religion. It's advocates give the impression of believing themselves to be morally superior to the rest of the human race, and some are highly militant, objectionable and sometimes violent.
It is also highly questionable as to whether veganism is "sustainable" from an environmental perspective. A wholesale move to the production of vegan produce would have to destroy many ecosystems that depend on grazing, and would make genuine organic production largely unviable. It would also almost certainly lead to mass starvation if it were possible to immediately implement. Veganism is a fad for self righteous eccentrics.
Every statement you've typed here after your first sentence is rubbish. Do you believe that abstention from cannibalism is morally superior to cannibalism? Or would that be too moralistic a view, sometimes enforced by violence, and smacking of self-righteousness? How about slavery? Medical experiments on slaves?
Oh dear. You have precisely the views I was referring to. Your post probably takes the prize for the most stupid I have read on here.
Along with most reasonable sane people, I don't make equivalence between animals that are bred to be eaten, or even pets, and human beings.
I very much love my dogs, but if I had to make a choice between saving my own dog from a fire and a child from a family I do not know I would chose the child every time, obviously. Maybe you would chose the dog, or perhaps a cockroach - I mean, in your rather weird vegan world we must not be "speciesist" must we? Is there any species hierarchy in your world? No? What about when you grow your lentils, surely you must be careful not to kill any flies when harvesting? The whole philosophy of extreme vegetarianism and veganism is morally and intellectually vacuous.
There is no moral equivalence between eating meat and cannibalism, slavery or medical experimentation, unless you are a psychopath. I feel sorry for you.
C'mon Nigel, make your mind up - am I stupid, insane, or amoral? In any case, you were foaming against vegans for supposedly believing they are "morally superior" and now you are denouncing a "philosophy" as "morally vacuous". It sounds as though you believe you're morally superior for choosing [*] to support factory farming. And yes there is a moral equivalence between eating meat, slavery, and vivisection - they all involve avoidably treating other sentient, feeling beings as objects.
Well that's what really matters in this election - not Brexit, not the NHS, not Pensions, NATO, not anything like that. It's The Queen's Speech!
But it's not really about the Queens Speech per se is it? Its about the fact that even on something as trivial as what he watches on Christmas Day Jezza appears evasive and untrustworthy...
This is the sort of thing that will cut through with voters (much more so than the ins and outs of Brexit etc)
If only Boris could be caught on fibbing in a similar way.
Unfortunately Boris gets away with being a bit of a fibber. Jezza doesn't.
That's the way the cookie crumbles sometimes and lets face it Labur had a good run with Teflon Tony and his "pretty straight kinda guy" shtick.
Boris gets away with it, because he never claims to be whiter than whiter. Everybody knows at the very least Boris is a cad that you wouldn't leave your wife alone with and that he loves to tell a tale that is wouldn't even pass the CCHQ fact check service.
The problem Jezza has is he loves to preach about his morals, and his cult talk up his absolute purity. That's why when he lies over finding a train seat it become a story.
They're both thoroughly dishonest in their very different ways. Johnson gets a much easier ride though.
Been out - what's the Queen's Speech thing please?
An stupid blunder by Corbyn which normally would have been a matter for slight hilarity but which is now being blown up into something major because we are all bored waiting for the next polls.
And I DETEST Corbyn and would sell my own children* if it meant he wouldn't end up as PM. But even I think it is all a but silly.
*If my children are reading this don't worry, I would only sell one of you, picked at random by shortest straw.
Very well said. This is not a story and won't swing votes but its symptomatic of it being a slow news day and we have little else to talk about.
And that in itself matters. Because we are 8 days from polling day with the polls as they are and today is the big NATO summit that some on the left were pinning their hopes on for a gaffe. Instead we are talking about this.
I disagree - it shows that Corbyn is not that bright, shifty and rattled. All are relevant at this stage of the GE.
this is why Labour are going to lose so badly - Boris does a video to let you know he has a cheeky flapjack (almost winking at the female viewers as he does it) and says 16 hour work days are nothing to boast about because lots of people have long workdays (yes I understand you Mr shift worker) - Corbo lies about the Queen's speech, does EXERCISE on xmas day and wierds everyone out by droning on about his good works evangelising on the wonders of a socialist revolution to poor people who can't walk away, or they'll miss their christmas dinner and a decent bed.
Boris is a mendacious sod, he's a liar but he clearly isn't a weirdo - he's basically what he says he is - a gee-er-upper, a positive vibes machine, a can'do-otron, a flapjack-powered ball of chirpy optimism - forget the crazed and ever more desperate Labour promises - they could have walked this election and Blair would have done - Corbyn is an odd odd man and I think a lot of everyday people have realised that since 2017.
That is a fantastic summary of the appeal of Boris. He has flaws but ones like a lot of people.
I hold nothing against Corbyn and his hobbies, but drain cover and train spotting are not exactly popular, a dedication to Arsenal divisive. Jam making, allotments, teetotalism and Veganism not exactly breaking the model of a far left politician.
I thought Corbyn was vegetarian not vegan. Trump too is teetotal. Johnson could hardly walk in a straight line at the remembrance ceremony at the Cenotaph.
Boris is pretty good at the PM press conference lark.
Cleared a date for Andrew Neill yet?
If I was Boris, I'd avoid one too. Zero upside from doing it.
Sure, and it's ok for Brave Sir Boris to run away, but if anybody else did it.....
I don't think so.
Pretty sure many a politician has avoided Neil at election times. In fact I can't recall any election ever where the PM was interviewed by Neil and went on to win a majority.
Unless I am mistaken I don't recall Cameron ever being interviewed by Neil at election time and I don't recall you or others making a big deal about that.
The daft thing was team Corbyn agreeing to it without a written in stone published schedule for Johnson doing it too (the kind of thing that would have hurt Johnson had he subsequently wriggled out of it). Johnson's not obliged to do it and it looks to be smart to dodge it.
Swinson/others signing up is not necessarily stupid - we'll see whether or not in a few hours! - they have potentially more upside and need publicity.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Candidates (or usually someone they nominate) can attend the opening of postal votes. I did it myself one year, but I can’t remember exactly what you see.
They aren’t allowed to tell anyone what they have seen though. Of course many (Ok, most) do pass the information on to others involved in their campaign.
I follow mainly lefties on twitter so I can try and understand where the opposition is coming from.
I have definitely had the sense over the last day or two that the fight is starting to go out of many of them and there is a fatalistic acceptance creeping in.
Don't worry Jezza. Three weeks today you will be in Downing Street. The Queens Speech will have been abolished. Diane Abbott will be giving a multi faith fraternal address from Hackney to the nation. In the morning.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
I don't know, but I think it probably is illegal for an electoral registration office to release that kind of information before polling stations close. But it's not illegal for someone else to say a lot of people have been telling them they've postally voted for one party or another, surely?
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
I don't know, but I think it probably is illegal for an electoral registration office to release that kind of information before polling stations close. But it's not illegal for someone else to say a lot of people have been telling them they've postally voted for one party or another, surely?
I would have been gob smacked if the postal votes didn’t look good for him otherwise he would be in the shit he is also unlikely to say ‘oh dear they are a bit patchy’ so the comment is worthless as an indicator.
Status quo of UK - US trade is WTO terms. What dire scenario are you imagining that a UK PM and majority of Parliament are prepared to end their careers by yielding on this point in order to get a trade deal in place?
This is puerile playground stuff.
The scenario would be where we genuinely need the deal because its successful implementation is expected to bring great benefits. In which case a PM with the national interest at heart - and with the next election perhaps years away - might not allow the sacred cow status of the NHS to get in the away. Course if we don't need the deal, that is wholly different.
Question 1) Does Canada have a free trade agreement with the US?
Question 2) What is the relative price of pharmaceuticals in Canada versus the US?
If you get both these answers right, your prize is the wisdom to ignore the bullshit coming out of Labour and vote for someone else.
If you think they will get a deal without including drugs or anything else at an advantageous rate to US companies then you have been drinking too much Moonshine
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Candidates (or usually someone they nominate) can attend the opening of postal votes. I did it myself one year, but I can’t remember exactly what you see.
They aren’t allowed to tell anyone what they have seen though. Of course many (Ok, most) do pass the information on to others involved in their campaign.
I really dont understand the need to open the votes before polling day, let anyone give candidates access. What possible benefit is there to organising a fair election?
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Must be illegal that they are already opened and being passed on to Tories
Scottish Labour are currently FAV in just 2 of the country’s 59 seats (3.4%):
Edinburgh South 3/10 Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath 8/11
In the other 5 current SLab seats the SNP are FAV. Here are the SLab prices:
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill 2/1 East Lothian 3/1 Glasgow North East 7/2 Midlothian 7/2 Rutherglen and Hamilton West 7/2
East Lothian stands out as a great price, due to the huge residual /SLD vote (18,278 at GE17) in that area. Surely a few thousand will hold their noses and cast a vote for their Better Together pals?
I'm pretty sure East Lothian is Labour's second-best prospect rather than Kilmarnock.
East Lothian is one of only three constituencies that Labour holds in the Scottish Parliament (Iain Gray) so I agree that it must be one of their better chances for a hold. Just wonder whether SCon voters would be able to bear voting for Corbyn. Will be an interesting one - as SCon had a v good result in a fairly recent council by-election in this seat, going from third to first.
Almost impossible for Unionists to know who to vote for in East Lothian. On paper, SLab are strongest, but all recent data points to the SCons being a stronger challenger to the SNP.
Naturally, this lack of clarity heavily favours the SNP. Best prices:
SNP 8/11 SLab 3/1 SCon 16/5 SLD 125/1
I enjoy your posts - they focus on the betting. How many total SNP seats do you reckon?
Low 40s.
If pushed for an exact figure: 41.
(If I’m miles out, in my defence, there are a hell of a lot of marginals.)
I reckon trying to pick the Scottish seats is the trickiest aspect of this election by miles. Tories could be anywhere from 3 to 16.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Candidates (or usually someone they nominate) can attend the opening of postal votes. I did it myself one year, but I can’t remember exactly what you see.
They aren’t allowed to tell anyone what they have seen though. Of course many (Ok, most) do pass the information on to others involved in their campaign.
I really dont understand the need to open the votes before polling day, let anyone give candidates access. What possible benefit is there to organising a fair election?
If you are attending - I guess you see the initial envelope (B) being opened and the signature and age (based on validation Date of Birth) of the person voting.
Down south that may confirm that a lot of older people have voted and you suspect they are Tory voters.
As posted yesterday it's bonkers that we had numerous articles with everyone getting excited re how many applied to register on Day X and Day Y - all figures which don't tell full story as most are already registered.
Now when we should have the figure that actually matters and really tells us the true position everybody has forgotten about it.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Must be illegal that they are already opened and being passed on to Tories
What happens is that the postal vote envelopes are opened and verified in front of representatives of all parties, this happens daily in each constituency until Election Day. The ballot paper itself is kept face down by the staff, but the party representatives will try and work out the vote in each one by looking carefully at pencil marks and shadows as the papers are moved around.
No actual counting of papers takes place until election night.
The verification process takes time, so It wouldn’t be practical to open all the postal ballots on the night of the election itself.
It’s illegal to reports facts or estimated numbers from this process, as Kerry McCarthy found out in 2010.
Raab’s answer today to Crick was brilliant, in that he knew Crick couldn’t possibly report on what he was being asked to look at. Crick knows this, which is why he was so annoyed by the answer.
Have we discussed the Mori figs? Surprised that lab only have a 1% lead over the tories in improving public services. More worryingly for then, people don't believe they can pay for improvements.
I thought Corbyn was vegetarian not vegan. Trump too is teetotal. Johnson could hardly walk in a straight line at the remembrance ceremony at the Cenotaph.
Scottish Labour are currently FAV in just 2 of the country’s 59 seats (3.4%):
Edinburgh South 3/10 Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath 8/11
In the other 5 current SLab seats the SNP are FAV. Here are the SLab prices:
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill 2/1 East Lothian 3/1 Glasgow North East 7/2 Midlothian 7/2 Rutherglen and Hamilton West 7/2
East Lothian stands out as a great price, due to the huge residual /SLD vote (18,278 at GE17) in that area. Surely a few thousand will hold their noses and cast a vote for their Better Together pals?
I'm pretty sure East Lothian is Labour's second-best prospect rather than Kilmarnock.
East Lothian is one of only three constituencies that Labour holds in the Scottish Parliament (Iain Gray) so I agree that it must be one of their better chances for a hold. Just wonder whether SCon voters would be able to bear voting for Corbyn. Will be an interesting one - as SCon had a v good result in a fairly recent council by-election in this seat, going from third to first.
Almost impossible for Unionists to know who to vote for in East Lothian. On paper, SLab are strongest, but all recent data points to the SCons being a stronger challenger to the SNP.
Naturally, this lack of clarity heavily favours the SNP. Best prices:
SNP 8/11 SLab 3/1 SCon 16/5 SLD 125/1
I enjoy your posts - they focus on the betting. How many total SNP seats do you reckon?
Low 40s.
If pushed for an exact figure: 41.
(If I’m miles out, in my defence, there are a hell of a lot of marginals.)
I reckon trying to pick the Scottish seats is the trickiest aspect of this election by miles. Tories could be anywhere from 3 to 16.
Tories could be anywhere from 4 to 20.
Would you like a wager they are nowhere near 20
Tricky one but I do think Tories will suffer a Boris drag so Malc probably right to be sceptical about 20. I'm sure SCon would be delighted to retain their 13. But who knows anymore in Scotland?
Why is Dim Dom telling us to "take a look at the postal votes"?
We are not allowed to do that. If only.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
I follow mainly lefties on twitter so I can try and understand where the opposition is coming from.
I have definitely had the sense over the last day or two that the fight is starting to go out of many of them and there is a fatalistic acceptance creeping in.
True of this one. For me this election was never winnable. The timing and the framing of it were perfect for the Cons. If we keep the majority below 50 it will be a triumph.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Must be illegal that they are already opened and being passed on to Tories
What happens is that the postal vote envelopes are opened and verified in front of representatives of all parties, this happens daily in each constituency until Election Day. The ballot paper itself is kept face down by the staff, but the party representatives will try and work out the vote in each one by looking carefully at pencil marks and shadows as the papers are moved around.
No actual counting of papers takes place until election night.
The verification process takes time, so It wouldn’t be practical to open all the postal ballots on the night of the election itself.
It’s illegal to reports facts or estimated numbers from this process, as Kerry McCarthy found out in 2010.
Raab’s answer today to Crick was brilliant, in that he knew Crick couldn’t possibly report on what he was being asked to look at. Crick knows this, which is why he was so annoyed by the answer.
Thanks for the detailed answer, am amazed this is allowed. If they have to be done in advance it does not need to be daily and could be started a couple of days before the election date.
One of my favourite pieces of televised sport was the last innings of the Headingley test in 1981. Bob Willis was just utterly compelling. It wasn't so much the ease with which he carved through the Australian batting, it was the utter focus and fury with which he did it. All around him were celebrations of an improbable win, while Bob just seethed.
He hasn't actually provided any results though, has he?
Anybody that does follow his advice and look at the postal votes is the one in the shit! lol!
I suspect he means look at the level of returns. Is it illegal to say how many postals have been returned?
How would he know either how many votes have been returned or who has voted which way?
It is remarkable if that is normal practice that the candidates get to see such data during the election. Do the independent candidates get offered the same? Might be worth standing in a marginal to use the data for betting!
Must be illegal that they are already opened and being passed on to Tories
What happens is that the postal vote envelopes are opened and verified in front of representatives of all parties, this happens daily in each constituency until Election Day. The ballot paper itself is kept face down by the staff, but the party representatives will try and work out the vote in each one by looking carefully at pencil marks and shadows as the papers are moved around.
No actual counting of papers takes place until election night.
The verification process takes time, so It wouldn’t be practical to open all the postal ballots on the night of the election itself.
It’s illegal to reports facts or estimated numbers from this process, as Kerry McCarthy found out in 2010.
Raab’s answer today to Crick was brilliant, in that he knew Crick couldn’t possibly report on what he was being asked to look at. Crick knows this, which is why he was so annoyed by the answer.
Thanks for the detailed answer, am amazed this is allowed. If they have to be done in advance it does not need to be daily and could be started a couple of days before the election date.
Daily was certainly the case when I was last involved in 2010. The volumes can be 1000/day, and in some places probably closer to 2000/day next week, now that postal voting is so widespread.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
The "Patel smirk". She can't help it but it's unfortunate. One imagines it in place as she kicks open the trap door.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
The "Patel smirk". She can't help it but it's unfortunate. One imagines it in place as she kicks open the trap door.
That is not at all pleasant and to be fair, not like you
Have we discussed the Mori figs? Surprised that lab only have a 1% lead over the tories in improving public services. More worryingly for then, people don't believe they can pay for improvements.
I can't see any voting intention numbers for Ipsos Mori.
However, the favourability ratings are 33/47% for Johnson, 22/60% for Corbyn. That's consistent with Labour making no further progress in polling.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
The "Patel smirk". She can't help it but it's unfortunate. One imagines it in place as she kicks open the trap door.
Hopefully with Corbyn and his cabal of terrorist sympathisers on the end of it.
One of my favourite pieces of televised sport was the last innings of the Headingley test in 1981. Bob Willis was just utterly compelling. It wasn't so much the ease with which he carved through the Australian batting, it was the utter focus and fury with which he did it. All around him were celebrations of an improbable win, while Bob just seethed.
I agree with this, it is called the Botham test, but if it were not for Willis.
I think there's still some value selling Tory seats on those spreads.
Don't get me wrong... Tory Maj 30 (ie c340 seats) is well within the realms of possibility, even likely. But my gut feeling is around a further limited tightening of the polls putting that at the upper end of expectations.
Apart from that, the unknowns feel to me more unknown than usual: turnout on a potentially snowy day; marginals in Scotland and N/Mid England which may not follow established expectations; the ability of both main leaders not to royally screw something up in the last week; the whim of the electorate which seems hell bent on delivering tied contests at every opportunity in some some of weird collective murmuration.
But (shrugs) maybe it's like that every time and we kid ourselves this time it's different
That is not at all pleasant and to be fair, not like you
Come on, give me a break, it's not that nasty. Reference to her notorious support for capital punishment. That's what she's known for, hanging and the smirk. I just combined.
I follow mainly lefties on twitter so I can try and understand where the opposition is coming from.
I have definitely had the sense over the last day or two that the fight is starting to go out of many of them and there is a fatalistic acceptance creeping in.
It was at exactly this point in 2017 Corbyn supporters were starting the expectation management and "under 200 seats shouldn't mean he has to resign" chat.
That is not at all pleasant and to be fair, not like you
Come on, give me a break, it's not that nasty. Reference to her notorious support for capital punishment. That's what she's known for, hanging and the smirk. I just combined.
I think the connection is not necessary and her smirk has been debunked as anything sinister
One of my favourite pieces of televised sport was the last innings of the Headingley test in 1981. Bob Willis was just utterly compelling. It wasn't so much the ease with which he carved through the Australian batting, it was the utter focus and fury with which he did it. All around him were celebrations of an improbable win, while Bob just seethed.
I agree with this, it is called the Botham test, but if it were not for Willis.
Fortunately they're not going to win the election, so they can say what they like. The more unhinged the better.
I'm not interested in stupid shit like this, they just need to detail how and where they intend to get some bloody housing built. A publicity stunt doesn't help the families that are in need. Student union level politics.
I think there's still some value selling Tory seats on those spreads.
Don't get me wrong... Tory Maj 30 (ie c340 seats) is well within the realms of possibility, even likely. But my gut feeling is around a further limited tightening of the polls putting that at the upper end of expectations.
Apart from that, the unknowns feel to me more unknown than usual: turnout on a potentially snowy day; marginals in Scotland and N/Mid England which may not follow established expectations; the ability of both main leaders not to royally screw something up in the last week; the whim of the electorate which seems hell bent on delivering tied contests at every opportunity in some some of weird collective murmuration.
But (shrugs) maybe it's like that every time and we kid ourselves this time it's different
So many unknowns to factor in this time round. How many remainers will vote against Tories in London and South Marginals. How many Lab voters will hold their noses to vote Tory. Could be the difference of 50 seats changing hands there alone. In Scotland, Will SNP win all SNP/CON marginals or will Tories hold all of their seats, maybe even pick up another couple.
Hopeless task for pollsters to pick up a lot of these shy voters correctly.
Might be a pleasant and inspiring gesture. After all, the only thing of significance to come out of Chequers in recent times was one of Theresa's doomed Brexit plans, which friend Boris was totally in favour of until he was totally against it.
That is not at all pleasant and to be fair, not like you
Come on, give me a break, it's not that nasty. Reference to her notorious support for capital punishment. That's what she's known for, hanging and the smirk. I just combined.
I enjoy your posts - they focus on the betting. How many total SNP seats do you reckon?
Low 40s.
If pushed for an exact figure: 41.
(If I’m miles out, in my defence, there are a hell of a lot of marginals.)
I reckon trying to pick the Scottish seats is the trickiest aspect of this election by miles. Tories could be anywhere from 3 to 16.
Tories could be anywhere from 4 to 20.
Would you like a wager they are nowhere near 20
I don’t think they’ll be anywhere near 20. It would mean them winning seats like Argyll and Bute, Central Ayrshire, East Lothian, Edinburgh North and Leith, Edinburgh South West, Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey, Lanark and Hamilton East, Linlithgow and East Falkirk, Midlothian, North Ayrshire and Arran or Paisley and North Renfrewshire.
Those are all profoundly unlikely. But just imagine if:
- SNP supporters fail to turn out - the SLD vote utterly collapses and goes straight to SCon - SLab vote halves, with most going straight to SCon - The SCons have wonderful differential turnout - Yes voters vote Green where there is a Green PPC
Any of those things are feasible. In a nightmare scenario, all could happen.
20 is their absolute dream upper limit. I’m not saying that that is what I expect to happen.
I really dont understand the need to open the votes before polling day, let anyone give candidates access. What possible benefit is there to organising a fair election?
It takes a very long time to open the envelopes and check the signature of each individual elector. There are probably thousands of them. And candidates and their reps are allowed to be there precisely to make sure that everything is done properly.
I really dont understand the need to open the votes before polling day, let anyone give candidates access. What possible benefit is there to organising a fair election?
They don't count them - they do the tedious verification process to save time on the night, and sharp-eyed observers think they can detect trends by looking through the face-down votes as they come out of the envelope. It's so widely-reported that I assume it's true, but personally I could never make out anything useful.
Why is Dim Dom telling us to "take a look at the postal votes"?
We are not allowed to do that. If only.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
Get used to the faces. One of them will likely be next leader of the Tory Party.
Imagine attacking somebody for wanting to help people
Everyone wants to help people. Some people have good methods to do so, others don't.
There are better ways to help people than handing over a single property that has had many millions spent on it for security, then having to spend even more money to make wherever they are to be secure.
Might be a pleasant and inspiring gesture. After all, the only thing of significance to come out of Chequers in recent times was one of Theresa's doomed Brexit plans, which friend Boris was totally in favour of until he was totally against it.
Well in fairness he wanted a lift home. May’s government had a lot of low points but that was up there.
Why is Dim Dom telling us to "take a look at the postal votes"?
We are not allowed to do that. If only.
Raab is like Patel. He has a terrible resting face, which manifests itself at the start and end of media appearances. They're the only two egregious resting faces that i have noticed.
Get used to the faces. One of them will likely be next leader of the Tory Party.
Not likely to be a vacancy for many years. Plenty of time for someone else to come through the ranks.
Comments
The problem Jezza has is he loves to preach about his morals, and his cult talk up his absolute purity. That's why when he lies over finding a train seat it become a story.
It isn't the not watching that smells bad, it's the obvious porky telling...I mean, who the hell doesn't know it's on in the afternoon?
And that in itself matters. Because we are 8 days from polling day with the polls as they are and today is the big NATO summit that some on the left were pinning their hopes on for a gaffe. Instead we are talking about this.
If we weren't in the middle of an election, he would just have said "I'm a life-long republican - what do you think?"
As it is, he's just managed to out-cringe Gordon "Arctic Monkeys" Brown.....
Pillock.
(*) Note the spelling.
Trump too is teetotal.
Johnson could hardly walk in a straight line at the remembrance ceremony at the Cenotaph.
Swinson/others signing up is not necessarily stupid - we'll see whether or not in a few hours! - they have potentially more upside and need publicity.
They aren’t allowed to tell anyone what they have seen though. Of course many (Ok, most) do pass the information on to others involved in their campaign.
I have definitely had the sense over the last day or two that the fight is starting to go out of many of them and there is a fatalistic acceptance creeping in.
Con Maj 1.44
https://twitter.com/DavidHerdson/status/1201824600130240512
EDIT: Ah, sorry. I see what you mean. I can't see yours either.
We are not allowed to do that. If only.
If you are attending - I guess you see the initial envelope (B) being opened and the signature and age (based on validation Date of Birth) of the person voting.
Down south that may confirm that a lot of older people have voted and you suspect they are Tory voters.
As posted yesterday it's bonkers that we had numerous articles with everyone getting excited re how many applied to register on Day X and Day Y - all figures which don't tell full story as most are already registered.
Now when we should have the figure that actually matters and really tells us the true position everybody has forgotten about it.
Sad news
No actual counting of papers takes place until election night.
The verification process takes time, so It wouldn’t be practical to open all the postal ballots on the night of the election itself.
It’s illegal to reports facts or estimated numbers from this process, as Kerry McCarthy found out in 2010.
Raab’s answer today to Crick was brilliant, in that he knew Crick couldn’t possibly report on what he was being asked to look at. Crick knows this, which is why he was so annoyed by the answer.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1202243465368756224?s=20
1.44 also now gone but now a gap:
1.43 back, 1.45 lay
However, the favourability ratings are 33/47% for Johnson, 22/60% for Corbyn. That's consistent with Labour making no further progress in polling.
He is going to hand over Chequers to the homeless
McDonnell to do the same with no 11
They are becoming more deranged by the minute
Don't get me wrong... Tory Maj 30 (ie c340 seats) is well within the realms of possibility, even likely. But my gut feeling is around a further limited tightening of the polls putting that at the upper end of expectations.
Apart from that, the unknowns feel to me more unknown than usual: turnout on a potentially snowy day; marginals in Scotland and N/Mid England which may not follow established expectations; the ability of both main leaders not to royally screw something up in the last week; the whim of the electorate which seems hell bent on delivering tied contests at every opportunity in some some of weird collective murmuration.
But (shrugs) maybe it's like that every time and we kid ourselves this time it's different
Mind you I am not a fan of hers at all
That is not a big move.
How many remainers will vote against Tories in London and South Marginals.
How many Lab voters will hold their noses to vote Tory. Could be the difference of 50 seats changing hands there alone.
In Scotland, Will SNP win all SNP/CON marginals or will Tories hold all of their seats, maybe even pick up another couple.
Hopeless task for pollsters to pick up a lot of these shy voters correctly.
Movement about 30 mins ago was so sudden it looked like a leak.
Maybe MORI? Posts above suggest new MORI but no voting intention figures?
I think only other poll due would be ComRes.
Those are all profoundly unlikely. But just imagine if:
- SNP supporters fail to turn out
- the SLD vote utterly collapses and goes straight to SCon
- SLab vote halves, with most going straight to SCon
- The SCons have wonderful differential turnout
- Yes voters vote Green where there is a Green PPC
Any of those things are feasible. In a nightmare scenario, all could happen.
20 is their absolute dream upper limit. I’m not saying that that is what I expect to happen.
There are better ways to help people than handing over a single property that has had many millions spent on it for security, then having to spend even more money to make wherever they are to be secure.