Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB’s leadership rules will limit the number of nominees and c

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited December 2019 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB’s leadership rules will limit the number of nominees and could well ensure it’s an all-female battle

Irrespective of what happens on Thursday, there will be some form of Labour leadership election soon. Tom Watson standing down as Deputy Leader (and MP) alone ensures that. If Corbyn does well enough to retain the leadership then the contest to be his deputy becomes a contest to be heir-apparent; if not, we get the full-blown leadership contest more-or-less straight away.

Read the full story here


«1345678

Comments

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited December 2019
    First (yay!)
  • I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.



  • Third! Unlike Rebecca Wrong-Daily (unfortunately...)
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Dawn Butler looks like she really ought to be a lot shorter priced than 50/1 should there be a vacancy soon. A black woman, ex-GMB officer, former minister, one of Corbyn's original backers, unambiguously of the left and not too old. True, she has a history of gaffes but these are inconsequential relative to Corbyn's historical baggage.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.

    A reasonable statement quite obviously, but do we really think that Labour post-Corbyn isn't at least likely to elect a woman of the Left? Firstly there's the issue of their sensitivity over having had an endless succession of straight, white, middle-aged or elderly male leaders over all else; secondly, there's the overwhelming bias of the mass membership, who will decide the eventual winner, towards the Corbynite perspective. Corbyn was, of course, elected in large part as a consequence of frustration with, and the perceived failures of, the centre-Left, and much of the already outnumbered moderate wing of the party membership has thrown in the towel and abandoned Labour since he became leader. Some of them post regularly on here.

    There is no reason to suppose that the trauma of another defeat won't result in anger amongst the Labour membership at rejection by the electorate, followed by a doubling down on Left principles and a further lurch towards socialism. They're hardly going to say to themselves "Oh, we were obviously wrong, let's tack towards the muddy middle ground again and try to win over some Tory voters." That's how a pragmatic political movement might choose to operate, but today's Labour Party ain't pragmatic.

    The argument @david_herdson advances therefore appears sound. As to whether it is premature to be discussing the subject, it might be argued thus - but the site needs content and there's only so much that can be said about this election campaign! Unless and until the polling evidence tells us something new, it looks distinctly as if the electorate made up its mind about a fortnight ago and nothing much has changed since.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Third! Unlike Rebecca Wrong-Daily (unfortunately...)

    That’s the best adaptation I’ve seen so far
  • OT thing on Buttigieg's work history.

    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/pete-buttigieg-mckinsey-timeline

    For a presidential nominee not to be able to talk about your record because they're under NDA seems kind of bad, doesn't it? Trump can just make up what he likes and Mayor Pete is contractually forbidden from defending himself...
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.
  • Interesting that SKYNEWS reporting the leaked documents brandished by Cornyn are said by Reddit to have come from a Russian source.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 13,755
    edited December 2019

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    The Conservative manifesto includes:
    a) repeal of the FTPA
    b) updated and equal constituencies
    c) requiring ID to vote
    d) stopping postal vote harvesting
    e) unspecified measures to prevent foreign interference
    f) making it easier for expats to vote
    g) ending the 15-year-limit on expats' voting rights

    Distinguishing between measures aimed at suppressing Labour votes and those to boost Tory votes is left as an exercise for the reader. The odd one out is that granny-farming is usually thought to favour Conservatives.
  • Interesting that SKYNEWS reporting the leaked documents brandished by Cornyn are said by Reddit to have come from a Russian source.

    Is that why Boris suppressed the report on Russian interference?
  • I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.



    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
  • OT thing on Buttigieg's work history.

    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/pete-buttigieg-mckinsey-timeline

    For a presidential nominee not to be able to talk about your record because they're under NDA seems kind of bad, doesn't it? Trump can just make up what he likes and Mayor Pete is contractually forbidden from defending himself...

    I think the first part would happen anyway.
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    The problem is that Cameron and Osborne's attempted gerrymandering was just a bit too clever for its own good, depending on reducing the number of constituencies to 600. Increasing to 700 would have had the same effect without arousing opposition from the Conservative Party in the country and on the backbenches whose seats were to be abolished.
  • Those nice folk at Ladbrokes (Shadsy et al) gave me a free £1 bet this morning to add to my £5 punt on Angela Rayner, effectively increasing my odds from 12/1 to 14.4/1 ... tasty.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 6,266
    edited December 2019

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.



    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290

    Interesting that SKYNEWS reporting the leaked documents brandished by Cornyn are said by Reddit to have come from a Russian source.

    Is that why Boris suppressed the report on Russian interference?
    Enough of an issue to ensure the report is reworked to include assessments of interference in this election too.
  • I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.

    A reasonable statement quite obviously, but do we really think that Labour post-Corbyn isn't at least likely to elect a woman of the Left? Firstly there's the issue of their sensitivity over having had an endless succession of straight, white, middle-aged or elderly male leaders over all else; secondly, there's the overwhelming bias of the mass membership, who will decide the eventual winner, towards the Corbynite perspective. Corbyn was, of course, elected in large part as a consequence of frustration with, and the perceived failures of, the centre-Left, and much of the already outnumbered moderate wing of the party membership has thrown in the towel and abandoned Labour since he became leader.
    There is no reason to suppose that the trauma of another defeat won't result in anger amongst the Labour membership at rejection by the electorate, followed by a doubling down on Left principles and a further lurch towards socialism. They're hardly going to say to themselves "Oh, we were obviously wrong, let's tack towards the muddy middle ground again and try to win over some Tory voters." That's how a pragmatic political movement might choose to operate, but today's Labour Party ain't pragmatic.

    The argument @david_herdson advances therefore appears sound. As to whether it is premature to be discussing the subject, it might be argued thus - but the site needs content and there's only so much that can be said about this election campaign! Unless and until the polling evidence tells us something new, it looks distinctly as if the electorate made up its mind about a fortnight ago and nothing much has changed since.
    I guess I'm making the tedious point that it will be "about policy, not personality".

    This truism always makes me yawn, so I feel bad in using it but what I'm getting at is that, were they to lose, I think "Brexit is now a fact" will be a big, new factor

    Labour's reponse to this (embrace it, embrace it and apologise for having messed about on it, double down and go for Rejoin, declare the referendum/2017/2019 votes invalid & press for armed insurrection etc?) will probably matter more, initially, than the chromosome set of the next leader.
  • OT thing on Buttigieg's work history.

    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/pete-buttigieg-mckinsey-timeline

    For a presidential nominee not to be able to talk about your record because they're under NDA seems kind of bad, doesn't it? Trump can just make up what he likes and Mayor Pete is contractually forbidden from defending himself...

    I think the first part would happen anyway.
    Sure, that's what I mean. He'll make up a load of stuff, mixing in slight elements of truth, and going to quite extreme lengths to make something that needs a response, as he tried to with Biden and Ukraine. But unlike Biden and Ukraine, Mayor Pete won't be able to respond. This seems like a sub-optimal situation for fighting an election campaign, to put it mildly...
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271

    Interesting that SKYNEWS reporting the leaked documents brandished by Cornyn are said by Reddit to have come from a Russian source.

    If only there was a report awaiting release into Russian interference in our politics that could bring these issues into the open...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    No mention of WASPI last night by Corbyn, he stuck admirably to answering each question instead of shoehorning in his most eye catching giveaways at every moment
  • I think David is wrong about Starmer and CLPs. I think he is actually very popular among members because he is seen as being so clearly pro-Remain. It’s notable that he has been doing a lot of campaigning around the country, even if the leadership has kept him off the TV and away from the press. I also think there are significant differences in the unions. Unite is very definitely in bed with Momentum, the GMB and Unison very clearly aren’t. If Starmer wants to run I expect he’ll get the nominations to do so. I also think that given CLP nomination requirements the far left may only get one candidate. If Labour has 200 MPs after the next election you’d need 60 to be nominating a combination of Long Bailey, Rayner and Butler for them all to get through. That looks very unlikely to me.

    My guess is that we’ll see a Starmer v Long Bailey contest - and that it will be pretty close. However, given Labour members always make the worst choice available Long Bailey is likely to win.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 13,755
    edited December 2019

    OT thing on Buttigieg's work history.

    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/henrygomez/pete-buttigieg-mckinsey-timeline

    For a presidential nominee not to be able to talk about your record because they're under NDA seems kind of bad, doesn't it? Trump can just make up what he likes and Mayor Pete is contractually forbidden from defending himself...

    I think the first part would happen anyway.
    Sure, that's what I mean. He'll make up a load of stuff, mixing in slight elements of truth, and going to quite extreme lengths to make something that needs a response, as he tried to with Biden and Ukraine. But unlike Biden and Ukraine, Mayor Pete won't be able to respond. This seems like a sub-optimal situation for fighting an election campaign, to put it mildly...
    On the subject of politicians barred from commenting on their own employment history, did you see HIGNFY last week? Rory, apart from the fact that you went to Eton and Oxford, your father was deputy head of MI6, you've worked in the Middle East on multiple occasions and you can speak 11 languages. Why do people keep saying you're a spy?

    Rory claimed the story had been planted in the Telegraph by our own fantasist-in-chief.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I guess I'm making the tedious point that it will be "about policy, not personality".

    This truism always makes me yawn, so I feel bad in using it but what I'm getting at is that, were they to lose, I think "Brexit is now a fact" will be a big, new factor

    Labour's reponse to this (embrace it, embrace it and apologise for having messed about on it, double down and go for Rejoin, declare the referendum/2017/2019 votes invalid & press for armed insurrection etc?) will probably matter more, initially, than the chromosome set of the next leader.

    My own instinct is that, if Brexit goes ahead, it becomes settled reality and that Labour as well as the Tories won't be interested in re-opening old wounds. Apart from anything else, Leave has arguably been Johnson's most effective weapon - there's no value to Labour in perpetuating that argument.

    It's certainly a different story for the secessionist Celtic nationalist parties, and possibly for the Lib Dems if they really do elect to double down and adopt Rejoin as policy, but the big two (trade talks notwithstanding) will move on to other things.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290
    The graphic seems to be the only part of The Economist article outside the pay wall. But it shows the vast number of seats that Labour has at risk from a slightly better performance by the Conservatives. It's why a modest majority for Boris looks likeliest, but a massive break through into Labour seats is tantalisingly within reach.....

    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/12/07/voting-lib-dem-could-hurt-the-tories-as-much-as-labour
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890
    To answer any Labour contest you need to understand union politics in particular the difficult relationship between GMB and Unite. Look at who sponsors which MP and you’ll better understand the potential candidates.
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261
    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015
    TimT said:

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.



    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
    He posits three factors, of which the third and the first are the same. So we are left with Labour’s poll surge and the rise in youth turnout. The first isn’t really happening, and time is running out. The second is a possibility - those large numbers of young people recently added to the register are probably hard for pollsters to reach in the first place, and surely polling is assuming a lower turnout of the young (though I would have expected them to have adjusted for the 2017 recovery in youth voting - which negates his point somewhat).

    I would expect the turnout of the young to rise, relatively (I.e. as a proportion of the overall turnout) this time, which will help both opposition parties. But I am not feeling the surge of enthusiasm that would suggest a youth quake is on the horizon.

    The only surge that can really stop the Tories now is a big rise in Lab/LD tactical voting, in the right direction in the right places.

    Meanwhile the Russians are doing their best to drop Labour in it?
  • TimT said:

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.




    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
    I think this last para in the article: "If the Conservatives win an overall majority on 12 December, they will become the first government to increase their seat total when seeking a fourth term in office since the 19th century. Such a phenomenal task would require them to expand their support beyond the overwhelmingly pro-leave voters that enabled the Conservatives to win 42% of the vote in 2017. There are no signs, so far, that they have done so."....rather suggests that the wish is the father to the thought

  • MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Oh look it's another obituary for Jeremy Corbyn.

    How many is that now?!

    Hmmm. A week from now we might be talking about the tory leadership. I just wonder ...
  • I think David is wrong about Starmer and CLPs. I think he is actually very popular among members because he is seen as being so clearly pro-Remain. It’s notable that he has been doing a lot of campaigning around the country, even if the leadership has kept him off the TV and away from the press. I also think there are significant differences in the unions. Unite is very definitely in bed with Momentum, the GMB and Unison very clearly aren’t. If Starmer wants to run I expect he’ll get the nominations to do so. I also think that given CLP nomination requirements the far left may only get one candidate. If Labour has 200 MPs after the next election you’d need 60 to be nominating a combination of Long Bailey, Rayner and Butler for them all to get through. That looks very unlikely to me.

    My guess is that we’ll see a Starmer v Long Bailey contest - and that it will be pretty close. However, given Labour members always make the worst choice available Long Bailey is likely to win.

    To clarify, I think the make up of the PLP will make it impossible for Long Bailey, Rayner and Butler to all be nominated.

  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    TimT said:

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    I think that is where we will get to...probably a substantial majority for the blue team (maybe 60+ or so). But who knows?

    If this happens though, I suspect the losing teams will have to go through a rethink before (or during) their leadership elections. Brexit will suddenly be a fact, not an opinion, for example. Adaptation to a "new normal" will be highly traumatic for Labour and, especially, the LibDems, but maybe cathartic too in ways that are hard to predict.



    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
    It's not complete fantasy but it does look suspiciously like straw clutching. The Lib Dems have not completely collapsed as in 2017 (and there is no sign of them so doing); and, more fundamentally, the existence of a 2017 "Youthquake" is disputed. The British Election Study debunks the youthquake theory here:

    https://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-impact/youthquake-a-reply-to-our-critics/#.XetNJej7RPY

    Nor is there any reason to suppose that the Conservatives need to increase their vote share relative to 2017 in order to win outright. All that may be necessary is for Labour's to go backwards, which is what the headline VI numbers (which have now been reasonably stable across all pollsters for nearly a fortnight) would suggest. And that's without taking into account the possibility that the Tory vote could be becoming more efficient - shipping some Remain voters in Southern safe seats, whilst holding steady or gaining in the Labour Leave constituencies and in their Scottish defences.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015
    edited December 2019

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    All those new Tory MPs with small majorities are not going to move their seat boundaries around and put fifty of them to the chop, for sure. The commission will be asked to start again with 650 seats and criteria put back toward the traditional ones. This will mean relatively modest changes, particularly given that the rising ethnic populations in urban areas and the registration drive for younger voters have unwound much of the advantage the Tories had from the review in the first place.

    Especially if they end up representing a new batch of depopulating northern towns!
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890

    Oh look it's another obituary for Jeremy Corbyn.

    How many is that now?!

    Hmmm. A week from now we might be talking about the tory leadership. I just wonder ...

    Technically this isn’t an obituary. There will be a Labour leadership regardless. That said I remember raising the prospect of a Tory leadership contest at about this stage in 2017. How they laughed.
  • Jonathan said:

    To answer any Labour contest you need to understand union politics in particular the difficult relationship between GMB and Unite. Look at who sponsors which MP and you’ll better understand the potential candidates.

    Indeed. I think Starmer would very comfortably get the CLP nominations he’d need. I think he’d get dozens, if not hundreds - and that one of the anti-Unite unions would back him.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015
    Pulpstar said:

    No mention of WASPI last night by Corbyn, he stuck admirably to answering each question instead of shoehorning in his most eye catching giveaways at every moment


    It was easier for Bozo, as he only had one policy to remember in the first place.
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890
    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,129
    Jonathan said:

    To answer any Labour contest you need to understand union politics in particular the difficult relationship between GMB and Unite. Look at who sponsors which MP and you’ll better understand the potential candidates.

    O/t, I know, but reflecting on the Leaders debates, and last night's efforts I would say that I really do not understand why Ms Sturgeon is such a hate figure among the Tories, apart of course from the fact that she took a lot of Scottish Tory seats. Both she and the Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price, seem sensible, grounded people. Swinson, I thought, is suffering from being promoted too soon. If she survives, she may do a lot better next time round. Corbyn is beginning to look, and sound old and Johnson has confirmed my (and my wife's) opinion of him as a blustering liar and has added cowardice to his other vices.
  • felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    You've not read the Conservative manifesto on limiting access to, and reducing the power of, the courts?

    You may also have missed @Cyclefree's header, Protecting our Democracy
    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    No, extending the vote to Brits abroad is a different form of manipulation. Why should someone who emigrated decades before have a vote here? I am thinking more of the need for photo ID as a form of vote suppression, though ironically that would probably most disenfranchised the poorer CDE voters that the Tories are supposedly picking up at the moment.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,129

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    If we used a sensible voting system such as STV it wouldn't matter so much.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Absolutely. And, whilst this was widely assumed to favour the Tories when the last boundary review was being attempted, it's an opportunity to make the boundaries fairer for everyone. Some of the urban constituencies (Stephen Timms' East Ham seat, to offer an obvious example,) are significantly over-sized, as well as many rural and suburban ones. The over-representation of Wales post-devolution is a total anachronism as well.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290

    TimT said:

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.

    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
    I think this last para in the article: "If the Conservatives win an overall majority on 12 December, they will become the first government to increase their seat total when seeking a fourth term in office since the 19th century. Such a phenomenal task would require them to expand their support beyond the overwhelmingly pro-leave voters that enabled the Conservatives to win 42% of the vote in 2017. There are no signs, so far, that they have done so."....rather suggests that the wish is the father to the thought
    That stat about Boris being the first Govt. to increase seats seeking a fourth term is partly a measure of how awful May was. But it is also the defining metric of Crap Corbyn. Basically, Jeremy has reversed the direction of travel of the Political Pendulum of Inevitability. He will have killed Buggins' Turn. He is deemed so dangerous, he has overcome the innate fairness of the electorate to "let the other side have a go now".
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    Last time I looked, Cameron and Osborne did have a political affiliation, as indeed does Boris.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    The 80% chance was probably correct given what we knew at the time
  • So it’s Tears for Keir’s fans.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 6,534
    edited December 2019
    Once again the polls are showing the undecideds breaking for Corbyn after yesterday's debate.

    Very interesting indeed, I would say.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    You've not read the Conservative manifesto on limiting access to, and reducing the power of, the courts?

    You may also have missed @Cyclefree's header, Protecting our Democracy
    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/
    I was referring to the proposals on voting rights. Your point is different. The role of the courts in the constitution is not connected to my point. I support the sovereignty of Parliament in making the law. It has the virtue of being elected by the people. In this country judges are not elected.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    Nevertheless the government of the day sets the timetable and the rules.

    The whole system is broken in any event; some foibles with the boundaries are the least of its problems.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    edited December 2019

    TimT said:

    I'm a bit surprised that the overall narrative (including this well written header) is now accepting the certainty of a Tory win and we seem to be moving on to the discussion of the consequences.




    Surely, David's piece contains sufficient caveats and what-ifs to allow adequate provision for a GE result other than that now widely forecast. As the harbinger of bad news for the Tories last time, he is the very last person on PB to assume the result is a foregone conclusion.
    Indeed. Just read this piece in the Grauniad by the Stats for Lefties guy:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/06/tories-victory-stats-tell-different-story-labour-youthquake

    What do people think of this analysis?

    To me, he is over-egging the comparisons with 2017, but that could just be wishful thinking on my part. And he does seem to assume that the 2019 polling data is directly comparable to the 2017 polling data, i.e. that the polling companies have made no adjustments to their models to correct for their failings in 2017, so - in his view - they are just as likely to be wrong in the same direction and to the same degree as in 2017.
    I think this last para in the article: "If the Conservatives win an overall majority on 12 December, they will become the first government to increase their seat total when seeking a fourth term in office since the 19th century. Such a phenomenal task would require them to expand their support beyond the overwhelmingly pro-leave voters that enabled the Conservatives to win 42% of the vote in 2017. There are no signs, so far, that they have done so."....rather suggests that the wish is the father to the thought

    Such a phenomenal task is probably only possible when you have Corbyn as LOTO
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290
    Just an observation on Rebecca Long-Bailey as successor. Labour would be well advised to look at how the public not only didn't take to Jo Swinson this election -they actively took against her. Long-Bailey has that ability in spades. he more you see of her, the more annoying she becomes. And the more unconvincing she sounds on having answers to today's problems.
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.

    The Boundary Commission is independent, but follows the brief given to it by the government of the day. Equalised constituencies based on registered voters, not adult population, and less of them were a government call, not a Boundary Commission one.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890
    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    The 80% chance was probably correct given what we knew at the time
    Funny you should say that...


    Pulpstar said:
    Labour ahead in Canterbury ?

    I have NEVER heard so much tripe in all my life.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    The most recent review exempted the Western and Northern Isles on the grounds of geographical isolation and distinctiveness, and the Isle of Wight so that part of the island wouldn't have to share an MP with the mainland. In each case electors would therefore find themselves living in under rather than over sized seats (as the Isle of Wight was to be divided into two equal halves.) These were the only exceptions to equalisation, and they seem entirely reasonable given the circumstances.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    No, extending the vote to Brits abroad is a different form of manipulation. Why should someone who emigrated decades before have a vote here? I am thinking more of the need for photo ID as a form of vote suppression, though ironically that would probably most disenfranchised the poorer CDE voters that the Tories are supposedly picking up at the moment.
    Citizens living abroad have the right to vote as they generally cannot vote in their country of residence. I emigrated 10 years ago and have paid taxes to the UK continously. Your last point about photo ID is ridiculous.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    edited December 2019
    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 6,534
    edited December 2019
    Jonathan said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    The 80% chance was probably correct given what we knew at the time
    Funny you should say that...


    Pulpstar said:
    Labour ahead in Canterbury ?

    I have NEVER heard so much tripe in all my life.
    This site is often a centre-right echo chamber, in the way the Guardian's is of the centre-left.

    The Tory high command will not be particularly pleased with yesterday's debate, because of some of the very similar data that's emerging as last time.
  • Foxy said:


    No, extending the vote to Brits abroad is a different form of manipulation. Why should someone who emigrated decades before have a vote here?

    Because due to a combination of legacy systems and brain worms, the nations of the world are run based on nationality, and the British think this is correct, and don't let people of other nationalities vote there even if they live there, except in a few weird former-empire-related cases.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    No, extending the vote to Brits abroad is a different form of manipulation. Why should someone who emigrated decades before have a vote here? I am thinking more of the need for photo ID as a form of vote suppression, though ironically that would probably most disenfranchised the poorer CDE voters that the Tories are supposedly picking up at the moment.
    Citizens living abroad have the right to vote as they generally cannot vote in their country of residence. I emigrated 10 years ago and have paid taxes to the UK continously. Your last point about photo ID is ridiculous.
    I do think that voters abroad should need some ongoing connection to the country, but overall the numbers are not large, and I do think that the numbers retiring to the Costas will be sharply down post Brexit.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,694
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
  • Foxy said:


    I do think that voters abroad should need some ongoing connection to the country, but overall the numbers are not large, and I do think that the numbers retiring to the Costas will be sharply down post Brexit.

    Obviously the people in question have some kind of ongoing connection to the country, otherwise they wouldn't be interested in voting in it.

    If you're really bothered about people having too many rights or something then have them promise that they're not registered to vote anywhere else, it wouldn't be totally enforceable but it would be as water-proof of the rest of the system.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
  • I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Absolutely. And, whilst this was widely assumed to favour the Tories when the last boundary review was being attempted, it's an opportunity to make the boundaries fairer for everyone. Some of the urban constituencies (Stephen Timms' East Ham seat, to offer an obvious example,) are significantly over-sized, as well as many rural and suburban ones. The over-representation of Wales post-devolution is a total anachronism as well.
    This originally mattered to the Conservatives when Wales was a Labour stronghold with no Conservative MPs: none. Since then, Conservatives have regained their Welsh mojo, despite the weird creole (as Boris put it) and won 3, 8, 11 and 8 seats at the last four elections. A recent poll had Labour and Conservatives level-pegging in Wales, iirc.
  • BromBrom Posts: 3,760
    One thing worth considering is if the Tories have a great night Rayner could lose her seat. Long Bailey definitely won’t.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    The 80% chance was probably correct given what we knew at the time
    Yes a 4/1 on a Con majority in 2017 was perhaps even an underestimate. In such a situation then the alternative will happen 20% of the time, and it did.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,694
    edited December 2019

    Foxy said:


    I do think that voters abroad should need some ongoing connection to the country, but overall the numbers are not large, and I do think that the numbers retiring to the Costas will be sharply down post Brexit.

    Obviously the people in question have some kind of ongoing connection to the country, otherwise they wouldn't be interested in voting in it.

    If you're really bothered about people having too many rights or something then have them promise that they're not registered to vote anywhere else, it wouldn't be totally enforceable but it would be as water-proof of the rest of the system.
    One thing that is being overlooked is the very strong implication of this 'voter ID required' is the implication that the Tories intend to introduce compulsory photo ID.

    Now that's something for which there are good arguments. For example, if we had a chip card to access benefits, to register for tax, to act as a driving licence, to use NHS services or to register when visiting government buildings, that could work, as long as we also had the right to inspect the government database and see who had been looking at our information.

    But there is a fundamental flaw in this logic, and that is the British hate ID cards (leaving aside the fact such safeguards as I outline would be utterly alien to our secretive and suspicious government). So this is actually a policy any sensible Labour MP should start emphasising.

    Of course, that would lead to the awkward point that Corbyn's policies more or less require them as well...
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 17,890
    With 10 mins to go before polls closed last time some people posted Labour 150-199 seats and the Tories pushing 400.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271

    Foxy said:


    I do think that voters abroad should need some ongoing connection to the country, but overall the numbers are not large, and I do think that the numbers retiring to the Costas will be sharply down post Brexit.

    Obviously the people in question have some kind of ongoing connection to the country, otherwise they wouldn't be interested in voting in it.

    If you're really bothered about people having too many rights or something then have them promise that they're not registered to vote anywhere else, it wouldn't be totally enforceable but it would be as water-proof of the rest of the system.
    I do accept that turnout is low in the 10 million Brits abroad, so the influence is small on any GE.

    I am not expecting to migrate abroad myself. Even if Brexit is a shitshow, my job and pension are some of the safest in existence, not least now that I can take early retirement if either are threatened.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015

    Jonathan said:

    To answer any Labour contest you need to understand union politics in particular the difficult relationship between GMB and Unite. Look at who sponsors which MP and you’ll better understand the potential candidates.

    O/t, I know, but reflecting on the Leaders debates, and last night's efforts I would say that I really do not understand why Ms Sturgeon is such a hate figure among the Tories, apart of course from the fact that she took a lot of Scottish Tory seats. Both she and the Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price, seem sensible, grounded people. Swinson, I thought, is suffering from being promoted too soon. If she survives, she may do a lot better next time round. Corbyn is beginning to look, and sound old and Johnson has confirmed my (and my wife's) opinion of him as a blustering liar and has added cowardice to his other vices.

    Only 10/1 with Ladbrokes that Swinson will become PM during her leadership...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 22,341
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
    Yes, people got wildly over excited by early declarations in safe Labour seats that showed swing to the Tories and declared it would be a landslide and Curtice was wrong.

    But as result after result matched the YouGov MRP people should have wised up faster.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    I'm going to leave Starmer in the green I think, laying Johnson was advised by Herdson last time round...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,694
    Alistair said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
    Yes, people got wildly over excited by early declarations in safe Labour seats that showed swing to the Tories and declared it would be a landslide and Curtice was wrong.

    But as result after result matched the YouGov MRP people should have wised up faster.
    Incidentally you have to fee a bit sorry for poor Sunil. Four days on tenterhooks for the update...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    The most recent review exempted the Western and Northern Isles on the grounds of geographical isolation and distinctiveness, and the Isle of Wight so that part of the island wouldn't have to share an MP with the mainland. In each case electors would therefore find themselves living in under rather than over sized seats (as the Isle of Wight was to be divided into two equal halves.) These were the only exceptions to equalisation, and they seem entirely reasonable given the circumstances.
    A classical PB pedant point is that the IOW is simply required to be divided (under the previous criterion) - they didn’t make any stipulation that the division had to be “equal”
  • felix said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    You've not read the Conservative manifesto on limiting access to, and reducing the power of, the courts?

    You may also have missed @Cyclefree's header, Protecting our Democracy
    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2019/12/05/protecting-our-democracy/
    I was referring to the proposals on voting rights. Your point is different. The role of the courts in the constitution is not connected to my point. I support the sovereignty of Parliament in making the law. It has the virtue of being elected by the people. In this country judges are not elected.
    The post on which you commented did also refer to the manifesto's proposals on limiting the role of the courts and indeed parliament against the Executive.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    Jonathan said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    The 80% chance was probably correct given what we knew at the time
    Funny you should say that...


    Pulpstar said:
    Labour ahead in Canterbury ?

    I have NEVER heard so much tripe in all my life.
    :smile: can't get everything right ;)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    It is an interesting header from @david_herdson. I hadn't appreciated how much the CLP and Affiliate numbers would restrict the field of candidates.

    It is perhaps also noteworthy that it is very difficult to have a quick election on such rules.
  • Interesting take from the Editor of the FT:

    https://twitter.com/lionelbarber/status/1203219177370198016?s=20
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,326

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    While I'm completely on board with equalising constituency sizes (although I'd probably go for +/- 7.5% rather than 2.5%), I'm not convinced of the rationale behind 600 seats.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
    It could be equally difficult this time, at least at the margins, with leavy northern towns coming in early and leafy remainer shires very much later.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Absolutely. And, whilst this was widely assumed to favour the Tories when the last boundary review was being attempted, it's an opportunity to make the boundaries fairer for everyone. Some of the urban constituencies (Stephen Timms' East Ham seat, to offer an obvious example,) are significantly over-sized, as well as many rural and suburban ones. The over-representation of Wales post-devolution is a total anachronism as well.
    This originally mattered to the Conservatives when Wales was a Labour stronghold with no Conservative MPs: none. Since then, Conservatives have regained their Welsh mojo, despite the weird creole (as Boris put it) and won 3, 8, 11 and 8 seats at the last four elections. A recent poll had Labour and Conservatives level-pegging in Wales, iirc.
    True, but two points: 1. the most recent Welsh survey put Labour back in the driving seat; and 2. the Labour vote is really piled up in the Valleys where most of the seats are. So the small constituencies do still offer an inbuilt advantage to Labour, even if the country as a whole obviously isn't so hostile for the Tories as it was during their 1997/2001 nadir.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290
    IanB2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    To answer any Labour contest you need to understand union politics in particular the difficult relationship between GMB and Unite. Look at who sponsors which MP and you’ll better understand the potential candidates.

    O/t, I know, but reflecting on the Leaders debates, and last night's efforts I would say that I really do not understand why Ms Sturgeon is such a hate figure among the Tories, apart of course from the fact that she took a lot of Scottish Tory seats. Both she and the Plaid Cymru leader, Adam Price, seem sensible, grounded people. Swinson, I thought, is suffering from being promoted too soon. If she survives, she may do a lot better next time round. Corbyn is beginning to look, and sound old and Johnson has confirmed my (and my wife's) opinion of him as a blustering liar and has added cowardice to his other vices.

    Only 10/1 with Ladbrokes that Swinson will become PM during her leadership...
    Revoke will no longer be the albatross around her neck.

    But by then, Rejoin might be. Oh, and what is that sound of knife-grinding I hear in the background? The longevity of her leadership might require a prayer that Chuka loses....
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106


    The Conservative manifesto includes:
    a) repeal of the FTPA
    b) updated and equal constituencies
    c) requiring ID to vote
    d) stopping postal vote harvesting
    e) unspecified measures to prevent foreign interference
    f) making it easier for expats to vote
    g) ending the 15-year-limit on expats' voting rights

    Distinguishing between measures aimed at suppressing Labour votes and those to boost Tory votes is left as an exercise for the reader. The odd one out is that granny-farming is usually thought to favour Conservatives.

    These proposals all seem reasonable and prudent to me.

    Which ones in particular do you object to?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 39,497
    Don't know if this has already been commented on, as I’ve been scarce for a day or so, but just a warning not to assume that Musk’s libel defence would necessarily work out quite the same in the UK:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-50695593

    Though you could put forward similar arguments, the US typically grants more latitude for ‘free speech’.


  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    IanB2 said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.

    The Cameron/Osborne changes were designed to help the Tories as they were in the early 2010s. The Tories in 2019 will have a very different voting demographic based much more around the low turnout northern and midland seats that were targeted for substantial change and abolition last time around. There will have to be very careful thought put into the next guidelines for redrawing if the Tories are to benefit long-term.

    Last time I looked the boundary commission members had no political affiliation. Indeed in Scotland the members usually include a judge and a surveyor. Clearly Labour is happy for the Western Isles to return an MP on an electorate of roughly 20,000 and the Isle of Wight on 140,000. In 21st century with vastly improved transport and communications, tiny island seats should be scrapped. I would amalgamate Western Isles with Ross and Cromarty and Orkney and Shetland with Caithness and Sutherland.
    The most recent review exempted the Western and Northern Isles on the grounds of geographical isolation and distinctiveness, and the Isle of Wight so that part of the island wouldn't have to share an MP with the mainland. In each case electors would therefore find themselves living in under rather than over sized seats (as the Isle of Wight was to be divided into two equal halves.) These were the only exceptions to equalisation, and they seem entirely reasonable given the circumstances.
    A classical PB pedant point is that the IOW is simply required to be divided (under the previous criterion) - they didn’t make any stipulation that the division had to be “equal”
    I think that the problem for the IOW was not just partition, but also that part of the IOW would have to be combined with a chunk of the mainland in order to reach equal sizes. East and West Wight at 70 000 each would have been too small.
  • rcs1000 said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    While I'm completely on board with equalising constituency sizes (although I'd probably go for +/- 7.5% rather than 2.5%), I'm not convinced of the rationale behind 600 seats.
    The “600 seats” has been dropped, hasn’t it?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 45,326

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    The Conservative manifesto includes:
    a) repeal of the FTPA
    b) updated and equal constituencies
    c) requiring ID to vote
    d) stopping postal vote harvesting
    e) unspecified measures to prevent foreign interference
    f) making it easier for expats to vote
    g) ending the 15-year-limit on expats' voting rights

    Distinguishing between measures aimed at suppressing Labour votes and those to boost Tory votes is left as an exercise for the reader. The odd one out is that granny-farming is usually thought to favour Conservatives.
    I would not have (c) as until I moved to the US and was forced to drive, I've never carried ID. There are other ways to secure elections that do not deliberately depress turnout of the young and the urban.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,783
    The ghosts of 2017 continue to make me a coward but the stability of polling over the last 10 days does seem to point to a comfortable Tory majority of about 50, that is about 350 seats. This is consistent with the spread betting as well.

    That comfortable majority means that there will be somewhat fewer Labour MPs and quite possibly a different mix too. There will be 1 Scot who is so far from being a Corbynite that they had a real go at unseating him. There will be quite a number of casualties in northern England and the Midlands leaving a PLP that is even more dominated by London and other Inner City types. I think that the PLP will prove to be more Corbynite after his departure than it has been throughout his reign.

    I agree with David that this is not likely to make Starmer's job any easier. A majority along the lines I am suggesting would also mean that any successor will have quite a period in which to learn the job as we are much more likely to have an extended Parliament of at least 4 years notwithstanding the repeal of the FTPA. This makes the relative inexperience of some of the candidates less of an issue.

    Labour should be in a very strong position by 2024. But to win they need to present credible economic policies, sort out the anti-Semitism mess and actually have a position on the important issues of the day. It's going to be a long haul and I see nothing like the Blair/Brown combo to achieve it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 48,694
    rcs1000 said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    The Conservative manifesto includes:
    a) repeal of the FTPA
    b) updated and equal constituencies
    c) requiring ID to vote
    d) stopping postal vote harvesting
    e) unspecified measures to prevent foreign interference
    f) making it easier for expats to vote
    g) ending the 15-year-limit on expats' voting rights

    Distinguishing between measures aimed at suppressing Labour votes and those to boost Tory votes is left as an exercise for the reader. The odd one out is that granny-farming is usually thought to favour Conservatives.
    I would not have (c) as until I moved to the US and was forced to drive, I've never carried ID. There are other ways to secure elections that do not deliberately depress turnout of the young and the urban.
    Surely you had a passport? (Although that is of course not true of everyone especially low income groups.)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 70,195
    Alistair said:

    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
    Yes, people got wildly over excited by early declarations in safe Labour seats that showed swing to the Tories and declared it would be a landslide and Curtice was wrong.

    But as result after result matched the YouGov MRP people should have wised up faster.
    Yougov MRP was very good. If it gets it right this time round, that will be useful info. It seems to match up broadly with the Bents Green Labour and Killamarsh Tory vibe I've got from my local patch.
    Maybe they can build a statue to Corbyn in Canterbury after all
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 40,015
    I note that Bozo continues to troll Mrs May by sending Nicky Morgan onto the airwaves just as she is pouring her cornflakes each morning

    The Tories’ surprise giveaway for the final weekend is a World Cup bid.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    Something similar could be made about the Tories i'm sure but this is fascinating all the same...

    https://twitter.com/SunPolitics/status/1203209274391814144
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,261
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    Surely, implementing the boundary changes must be an absolute priority if only to demonstrate that Parliament takes our democracy seriously. Such changes are now approximately EIGHT YEARS overdue which is an absolute disgrace. Going forward, legislation should be introduced to ensure that such boundary changes take place automatically, within a prescribed time frame.
    Boundaries should automatically be updated after every GE, but there is more than a slight whiff of voter suppression to the Tory plans. Particularly so when one considers the removal of parliamentary and judicial restraints on the executive that are also planned. We do not have the balanced powers of a written Constitutional, and we have already seen the contempt that Johnson and Cummings have for our unwritten constitution.
    So extending voting rights to Brits abroad suppresses voting rights along with equalising constituencies as those fascist Chartist campaigned for on the 19th century! It's a view.
    No, extending the vote to Brits abroad is a different form of manipulation. Why should someone who emigrated decades before have a vote here? I am thinking more of the need for photo ID as a form of vote suppression, though ironically that would probably most disenfranchised the poorer CDE voters that the Tories are supposedly picking up at the moment.
    Citizens living abroad have the right to vote as they generally cannot vote in their country of residence. I emigrated 10 years ago and have paid taxes to the UK continously. Your last point about photo ID is ridiculous.
    I do think that voters abroad should need some ongoing connection to the country, but overall the numbers are not large, and I do think that the numbers retiring to the Costas will be sharply down post Brexit.
    Not much evidence of that last point so far and irrelevant anyway.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 42,783
    rcs1000 said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    While I'm completely on board with equalising constituency sizes (although I'd probably go for +/- 7.5% rather than 2.5%), I'm not convinced of the rationale behind 600 seats.
    I agree, it was always a slightly bizarre gesture by Cameron. Yes MPs are greedy, thieving people of doubtful parentage so I will sort this by having 50 fewer of them. If we are to go back to 650, however, the EC needs to get straight on it. No more messing about. This really has to be the last election on the current boundaries.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Jonathan said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    I've given up making predictions. The data is confusing and in any case the plausible conclusions are too depressing. Whichever side wins there will be a racist with a track record of supporting violence who thinks the truth is for losers as PM.

    But if I had to point to a figure, I would say Tory majority of around 30. Could easily be wildly wrong either way though. If Labour are 15 points behind in Wrexham while 4 points ahead in Wales something very weird and unpredictable is happening - or the polls are total bs again.
    Last time people couldn’t predict the result after the polls had closed and the exit poll was published.
    True, we're all guessing at the moment - but another effect of the 2017 debacle is that both the MRP and the exit poll have gained credibility. If the update on Tuesday points one way and the exit poll concurs then the probability is that they'll be right. So if that's the case and everyone's prediction at 10:01 is therefore "what the exit poll just said" then we're all liable to be pretty much spot on :smile:
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 44,290
    Foxy said:

    Jonathan said:

    PB posts are a goldmine

    June 2 2017. Con Majority an 80% chance

    June 5 2017 HYUFD was predicting a 50-100 seat Tory majority

    A PB prediction contest at this point is a useful reference point when judging future posts.

    I have been too busy with work and church commitments these last few weeks to form a distinctive view, but broadly think the polling will be accurate this time with the Tories on 360 or so seats.

    I am still predicting a low turnout though. There is little enthusiasm out there.
    The great surprise of 2019 might yet be asymmetric turn-out - Brexiteers determined to vote come hell or high water, Remainers finally conceding they've lost and not prepared to give their vote to parties who buggered up their chance to overturn the referendum.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 32,271
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I have to say, while David has written an excellent thread as usual, what a depressing prospect for the country. A shower of complete non-entities with the exception of Angela Rayner who has an impressive back story. Hopefully if Boris secures a 69+ majority and completes the boundary changes and seat reductions, Labour Will find a 2023 election beyond them. I am assuming the FTPA will be repealed.

    The Conservative manifesto includes:
    a) repeal of the FTPA
    b) updated and equal constituencies
    c) requiring ID to vote
    d) stopping postal vote harvesting
    e) unspecified measures to prevent foreign interference
    f) making it easier for expats to vote
    g) ending the 15-year-limit on expats' voting rights

    Distinguishing between measures aimed at suppressing Labour votes and those to boost Tory votes is left as an exercise for the reader. The odd one out is that granny-farming is usually thought to favour Conservatives.
    I would not have (c) as until I moved to the US and was forced to drive, I've never carried ID. There are other ways to secure elections that do not deliberately depress turnout of the young and the urban.
    Surely you had a passport? (Although that is of course not true of everyone especially low income groups.)
    I think older CDE voters are particularly unlikely to have photo ID.

    Considering the negligible rate of impersonation in person at polling stations, it does seem to be a solution in search of a problem, unless the problem is considered to be people voting for the opposition.

    The other big challenge to an opposition overturning the anticipated Tory majority is the loss of 59 seats due to Scottish Independence and 18 to Irish reunification. It is not impossible that both occur before the next GE, particularly if Brexit goes badly wrong.
This discussion has been closed.