How will this map and table change tonight and tomorrow? – politicalbetting.com

Richard_Nabavi said:

nico679 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

nico679 said:

Dialup said:

I am hearing that Guildford is going very badly for the Tories, from somebody who lives there, albeit it's just one source ofc

The Tories are in big trouble in Eastbourne and Lewes. Similar type blue wall seats .

Not really blue wall at all - the Yellow Peril have long been strong in both, in both local and general elections.

A bit further north is proper blue wall at the GE level, of course, but there are smatterings of Greens and indies, and it's not that long since the LibDems did really well there at the local level.

Yes I know these have been long-standing Tory Lib Dem marginals . Labour and the Lib Dems need to work together for the greater good .

I said as much today to the two tellers , one Labour and one Lib Dem . They need to come to some agreement . Number one priority is to rid the country of the Tories .

Both Eastbourne and Lewes are LibDem/Tory contests, with Labour nowhere. Are you perhaps thinking of Hastings, where Labour are strong?

A confounding factor, in the locals at least, is likely to be the Greens, who have been making progress in this area for some time.

They could help the Tories by splitting the votes . I do understand though that the local elections does give them the best chance for representation.

At a GE though it’s unforgivable IMO to facilitate the Tories . A progressive alliance is needed , I understand parties want to avoid looking like making deals but simply put up paper candidates . Tactical voting needs to be front and centre aswell.

If Tories won't stay at home protest in these elections when the heck would they?

So what do the parties need tonight?

Labour should be looking to gain at least 500 councillors. 1000 gains is landslide territory. Any lead under 5% would be very poor. A lead of 10% and they would be well on the way to a healthy majority at the GE.

Cons need to be gaining hundreds of Councillors if they are on course to retain power. Recall that 2015 was fought on the day the Cons won a small majority and they lost over 1300 Councillors four years later. It cost PM May her job. Any further losses would be an awful performance and indicative of looming and almost inevitable GE defeat. They should aim to be within 10% of Lab and if they can get within 5% they would have a GE chance. Maybe not a good one but at least a chance.

The LDs and Greens are defending good results last time (record ones in the case of the Greens). So holding their own would be OK. However, they really need to make gains to maintain their momentum. At the GE they are likely to be squeezed - especially if the Con position has notably recovered.

I would note that local BEs have shown the Cons over-performing any polling. It will be interesting to see if that holds true tonight and tomorrow. Note the headline figures and the percentage vote but also take note of any regional patterns. Will the Con vote hold up in the West Midlands and Tees Valley? Could they pull off a surprise in Leicester? Will the LDs continue their progress in Surrey, Herts and Oxfordshire? Can the Greens win a council in Brighton or Suffolk? Can Lab continue their gains on the South coast and in places like Swindon as well as reclaiming traditional Northern and East Midlands strongholds. Can Reform UK show any evidence of their polling performance? Can the Socialists win a Councillor?

FWIW I doubt the voter ID nonsense will have much impact on the results. Those that vote in LEs are far more likely to be engaged enough to know what they need and act accordingly.

NB. This far out from a GE only once under Con Govts since 1979 have Lab won this LE by more than 3%. That once was of course in the run-up to 1997. We are not headed for another 1997 but tonight may give us a better idea of what will happen.

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Way Off Topic - Scotland you are NOT alone

Seattle Times ($) - Culprit revealed in Bainbridge Island ferry grounding

Contaminated fuel is the culprit behind last month’s dramatic grounding of the ferry Walla Walla on Bainbridge Island.

The source of the bad fuel, and whether it came from an outside vendor or was dirtied onboard, is still under investigation, said Ian Sterling, spokesperson for the Washington State Ferries. No other ships were affected.

The fuel seems to have clogged the filters leading into the boat’s generators, answering the question of why the redundancies built into the ferry’s systems didn’t prevent the crash. According to Sterling, when one generator went down, a second also failed almost immediately. A third generator takes more time to fire up, which the crew instead used to ready for impact.

The Walla Walla returned to service in Bremerton on Wednesday, just two weeks after its failure. Engineers removed all fuel onboard and cleaned out the tanks, said Sterling. They also attached remote monitors to the generators so that crews might notice a failure more quickly in the future.

The hull was scratched but not damaged. The propeller needed to be bent back into place, which workers underwater were able to do without lifting the boat onto dry dock.

The generators that failed power the onboard lights as well as the controls, which is why the engine still worked but crews lost steering. They stalled just as the ship was entering Rich Passage from Bremerton, on its way to Seattle, when it should have made a nearly 90-degree right turn. The result was a slow drift into the south end of Bainbridge Island, where the vessel and its passengers sat for more than five hours.

“It happened at the worst possible second,” Sterling said.

No injuries were reported. Passengers, after trying to make the best of their time aboard with photo shoots and food from the galley, were eventually offloaded onto Kitsap Transit fast ferries.

The grounding came just as lawmakers in Olympia were considering a budget for ferry maintenance and preservation. Nearly half of the 21-boat fleet is over 40 years old, and three boats are due for retirement in short order.

Legislators also passed a bill making it easier for the state to solicit out-of-state bids for new ferry construction, a stark change from the in-state work currently conducted. Despite concerns from local builders and unions, lawmakers said it’s a necessary change if the state hopes to bring new boats online in a timely and affordable manner.

Nah, they are miles ahead of Scotland. Their ferries are actually in the water.

Dialup said:

I am hearing that Guildford is going very badly for the Tories, from somebody who lives there, albeit it's just one source ofc

Where I used to live. Woking, Guildford, are going majorly yellow. I tipped Woking to go LibDem last time out and it did.

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

noneoftheabove said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

noneoftheabove said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Driver said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

FPT - In Washington State, "curing" ballots submitted via mail or drop boxes, to make them eligible to count, takes place before and during Election Day, up until one day prior to official certification of the election.

Note that lion's share of returned ballots that are "challenged" by election workers, get flagged for one of two reasons:
> missing signature = failure to sign the required voter oath on outside of return ballot envelope.
> mismatched signature = sig provided does NOT match one on file with voters registration record.

Don't have exact figures, but county-by-county typical challenge rate is about 1% - 2%. And of ballots challenged, more than half are typically cured by voters submitting required sigs or other info.

For some info, including real-time statistics from April 2023 special election in King County, check out this link

https://kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/results/ballot-return-statistics/2023/202302.aspx

This is true, but in (at least some states of) the US they think it's ok to "certify" the election weeks after polling day. We expect declared results within 24 hours of polls closing, so this wouldn't work.

Wouldn't work because you haven't tried it.

Note that in about 99% of election races, the final winners & losers are known on Election Night, because the margin is too sizeable to be overturned. And in most of the rest, the end result is clear within a few days.

Only the very closest races still hanging fire. Which by definition deserve careful canvassing NOT a hurry-hurry-tell-us-NOW approach.

Lots of American things I am happy for us to import - tech, burgers, box sets, spaceships, good service in restaurants. Voting processes is not one of them, thank you very much for the offer!

No doubt "Punch" was sulfurous in its comments re: the Yankee outrage called "hamburgers" back in the day . . . because publishers, editors & dear readers had never actually TRIED a burger?

Just because we are not allowed to vote, many of us UK pb-ers have sat through American elections and taken plenty of interest in how it all works as we can bet profitably on it and have been freely able to do so for many years.

Reading media reports, whether from next door or a world away, is NOT the equivalent of actually observing the election process, that is how the votes are actually cast and counted.

Via personal face time. Which few journos, politicos, bloggers or PBers ever do.

And quite often those most involved and invested in a process are not the best placed to judge its merits versus alternatives as they tend to prefer what they are used to. Still no interest in importing US electoral processes thank you very much. Lots of other countries I would look at if we wanted international comparison.

felix said:

As usual there is massive expectation management on all sides but the feeling seems to be if +100 Tories lose 100 + very bad 6-700 losses meh, under 500 a good result. LDs seem unlikely to gaij mofre than 200 so anyhting better would be very good for them.

Im hoping for the meh resuklt at best but would not be surprised if it's much worse for the blues. What it means for the GE who knows.

The Coronation will swiftly kick any news into the long grass apoart from places like this but we should perhaps remind ourselves more frequently how niche we are.

The LibDems had a fantastic 2019, gaining over 700 councillors and being only 9% behind Labour and Conservatives in the popular vote, so it would be surprising if they were to have a big night. I would say that 25-75 gains is a par score for them, and it's entirely possible that they go backwards.

Labour should be the party that has the best night: they are defending half the number the Conservatives are (and barely more than the LibDems), and are at least ten points higher in the polls. A par score for them is +500, any less and it will have been a poor performance.

MoonRabbit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

I don't know @MikeSmithson but it should be interesting.

I guess there's no equivalent of an exit poll or any kind of indication at 10 pm?

Also wondering if the BBC are still going to do their local to national equivalence voting poll?

In 24 hours time we all get to discover whether the reckoning you promised has come or not.

It won’t be any worse at the GE, as you wisely said earlier. Moment of truth in next 19hrs for Heathener. 10 point Labour PNE lead, or bust.

Lol.

I tend to the view that the Conservatives will fare MUCH worse at the General Election than the local elections.

The next GE will be a Labour landslide but I'm afraid you're going to have to wait rather more than 19 hours to celebrate if I'm wrong.

cf @Casino_Royale

kle4 said:

Driver said:

rcs1000 said:

Driver said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

FPT - In Washington State, "curing" ballots submitted via mail or drop boxes, to make them eligible to count, takes place before and during Election Day, up until one day prior to official certification of the election.

Note that lion's share of returned ballots that are "challenged" by election workers, get flagged for one of two reasons:
> missing signature = failure to sign the required voter oath on outside of return ballot envelope.
> mismatched signature = sig provided does NOT match one on file with voters registration record.

Don't have exact figures, but county-by-county typical challenge rate is about 1% - 2%. And of ballots challenged, more than half are typically cured by voters submitting required sigs or other info.

For some info, including real-time statistics from April 2023 special election in King County, check out this link

https://kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/results/ballot-return-statistics/2023/202302.aspx

This is true, but in (at least some states of) the US they think it's ok to "certify" the election weeks after polling day. We expect declared results within 24 hours of polls closing, so this wouldn't work.

Is it more important to make sure every valid vote is counted, or to get the absolutely final number by 7am?

The two goals needn't be mutually exclusive.

Yes. There's no need to take weeks, but counting fast doesn't mean it is rushed or inadequate either. I don't really think it is essential we know by 7am, though I'd prefer it, and there are also good reasons why it takes longer than a day or so in america without weeks being reasonable. It's a fallacy when 'got to get it right' is used as an excuse for being that long, when many many places can get it right, but faster.

One interesting choice is allowing votes which arrive after election day to be counted if postmarked on that day, which will add a couple of days on to finalisation even if you count the rest quickly of course.

"interesting" is certainly one word for it.

I don't think we need to know by 7am. But with voting on a Thursday, there is no reason why we shouldn't have the results in time for the new MPs to start work on Monday morning.

nico679 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

nico679 said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

nico679 said:

Dialup said:

I am hearing that Guildford is going very badly for the Tories, from somebody who lives there, albeit it's just one source ofc

The Tories are in big trouble in Eastbourne and Lewes. Similar type blue wall seats .

Not really blue wall at all - the Yellow Peril have long been strong in both, in both local and general elections.

A bit further north is proper blue wall at the GE level, of course, but there are smatterings of Greens and indies, and it's not that long since the LibDems did really well there at the local level.

Yes I know these have been long-standing Tory Lib Dem marginals . Labour and the Lib Dems need to work together for the greater good .

I said as much today to the two tellers , one Labour and one Lib Dem . They need to come to some agreement . Number one priority is to rid the country of the Tories .

Both Eastbourne and Lewes are LibDem/Tory contests, with Labour nowhere. Are you perhaps thinking of Hastings, where Labour are strong?

A confounding factor, in the locals at least, is likely to be the Greens, who have been making progress in this area for some time.

They could help the Tories by splitting the votes . I do understand though that the local elections does give them the best chance for representation.

At a GE though it’s unforgivable IMO to facilitate the Tories . A progressive alliance is needed , I understand parties want to avoid looking like making deals but simply put up paper candidates . Tactical voting needs to be front and centre aswell.

Why have tactical voting then? Be honest and have a full-on coupon election. Give everyone exactly one of a Labour candidate or a Lib Dem or a Green.

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

viewcode said:

Be honest. We are all going to be talking bollocks until the real results start come in...

A propot, where is Leon?

DavidL said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Way Off Topic - Scotland you are NOT alone

Seattle Times ($) - Culprit revealed in Bainbridge Island ferry grounding

Contaminated fuel is the culprit behind last month’s dramatic grounding of the ferry Walla Walla on Bainbridge Island.

The source of the bad fuel, and whether it came from an outside vendor or was dirtied onboard, is still under investigation, said Ian Sterling, spokesperson for the Washington State Ferries. No other ships were affected.

The fuel seems to have clogged the filters leading into the boat’s generators, answering the question of why the redundancies built into the ferry’s systems didn’t prevent the crash. According to Sterling, when one generator went down, a second also failed almost immediately. A third generator takes more time to fire up, which the crew instead used to ready for impact.

The Walla Walla returned to service in Bremerton on Wednesday, just two weeks after its failure. Engineers removed all fuel onboard and cleaned out the tanks, said Sterling. They also attached remote monitors to the generators so that crews might notice a failure more quickly in the future.

The hull was scratched but not damaged. The propeller needed to be bent back into place, which workers underwater were able to do without lifting the boat onto dry dock.

The generators that failed power the onboard lights as well as the controls, which is why the engine still worked but crews lost steering. They stalled just as the ship was entering Rich Passage from Bremerton, on its way to Seattle, when it should have made a nearly 90-degree right turn. The result was a slow drift into the south end of Bainbridge Island, where the vessel and its passengers sat for more than five hours.

“It happened at the worst possible second,” Sterling said.

No injuries were reported. Passengers, after trying to make the best of their time aboard with photo shoots and food from the galley, were eventually offloaded onto Kitsap Transit fast ferries.

The grounding came just as lawmakers in Olympia were considering a budget for ferry maintenance and preservation. Nearly half of the 21-boat fleet is over 40 years old, and three boats are due for retirement in short order.

Legislators also passed a bill making it easier for the state to solicit out-of-state bids for new ferry construction, a stark change from the in-state work currently conducted. Despite concerns from local builders and unions, lawmakers said it’s a necessary change if the state hopes to bring new boats online in a timely and affordable manner.

Nah, they are miles ahead of Scotland. Their ferries are actually in the water.

Not all of 'em. For example, saw a Washington State Ferry propped up in drydock at Anacortes WA last Friday:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Chetzemoka

Heathener said:

MoonRabbit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

I don't know @MikeSmithson but it should be interesting.

I guess there's no equivalent of an exit poll or any kind of indication at 10 pm?

Also wondering if the BBC are still going to do their local to national equivalence voting poll?

In 24 hours time we all get to discover whether the reckoning you promised has come or not.

It won’t be any worse at the GE, as you wisely said earlier. Moment of truth in next 19hrs for Heathener. 10 point Labour PNE lead, or bust.

Lol.

I tend to the view that the Conservatives will fare MUCH worse at the General Election than the local elections.

The next GE will be a Labour landslide but I'm afraid you're going to have to wait rather more than 19 hours to celebrate if I'm wrong.

cf @Casino_Royale

Blithering nonsense from you. Facts are against you. More Tories will sit out this one than voters for opposition parties. Many Tories sitting today out will definitely be back for the GE. So how exactly do the Tories end up with a worse result at that one?

In comparison with this election, The Tory line of pebbles will grow next year more than the opposition line of pebbles. Don’t get me wrong, even with this fact it can still be torrid general election result for Tories. But it can’t be worse than this one.

How late do we have to stay up to know how well the Tories are emulating a stepmom on TSE's favourite website?

MoonRabbit said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

kinabalu said:

I'm more than usually excited about these Locals because they're so close to the General. Also because there's genuine uncertainty about how well Labour are doing. Polls are one thing, real votes in real ballot boxes (from those able to present ID in one of the prescribed forms) are quite another. Soon we'll know how big the Labour lead really is. I desperately hope it's double digits. The difference between 12 and 7 is massive. Not so much numerically (5) but emotionally for the next 18 months. I'd much prefer to spend this time being smug and complacent rather than in a constant state of high anxiety. So c'mon you Labour! ✊️

I don't know if this has already been noted, but this substack post is really good on how the notional votes shares in these locals might point to what is likely to happen in the GE:

https://beyondthetopline.substack.com/p/forget-the-party-spin-what-does-history

Tl:dr (and it is quite a long article): Labour need a lead in the national equivalent vote of around 10% to be on track for a small majority at the GE, 12% to 14% for a comfortable majority, or 15%+ to be in landslide territory.

Where I would disagree is just as CR said, Tories could suffer from stay at home today, but so many of them will be back for the GE. Tories will get a PV in the thirties at the next election, even if only 30 or 32. So a 39-24 15 point win for Labour here definitely does not guarantee landslide next year. It doesn’t even suggest it.

Today is likely to be peak Labour electoral win for many years, if not a couple of decades if they go into government next year - that’s the correct way to measure this result, that next year cannot be as big or bigger vote lead over the Tories. So for me, my psephology, It’s not the gap between Lab Con that matters from this, ignore psephologists selling you that - it’s the Lab % from this election. If it’s not up to around 40% tomorrow, the GE will be hard work for a majority.

May 2024 could be pretty cheery for the red team as well. I think we're all expecting Rishi to hold on until the autumn for the GE, in case something turns up.

But the baseline will be the elections that should have happened in May 2020 but got postponed to 2021 and Peak Boris. It's hard to see the Conservatives holding on to everything they won then.

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

MoonRabbit said:

Heathener said:

MoonRabbit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

I don't know @MikeSmithson but it should be interesting.

I guess there's no equivalent of an exit poll or any kind of indication at 10 pm?

Also wondering if the BBC are still going to do their local to national equivalence voting poll?

In 24 hours time we all get to discover whether the reckoning you promised has come or not.

It won’t be any worse at the GE, as you wisely said earlier. Moment of truth in next 19hrs for Heathener. 10 point Labour PNE lead, or bust.

Lol.

I tend to the view that the Conservatives will fare MUCH worse at the General Election than the local elections.

The next GE will be a Labour landslide but I'm afraid you're going to have to wait rather more than 19 hours to celebrate if I'm wrong.

cf @Casino_Royale

Blithering nonsense from you. Facts are against you. More Tories will sit out this one than voters for opposition parties. Many Tories sitting today out will definitely be back for the GE. So how exactly do the Tories end up with a worse result at that one?

In comparison with this election, The Tory line of pebbles will grow next year more than the opposition line of pebbles. Don’t get me wrong, even with this fact it can still be torrid general election result for Tories. But it can’t be worse than this one.

I don't agree. Turnout at LEs is, I'd guess, only around half of what it is at a GE. Who's the half who won't vote today but will at the GE? Yes, some of them will be Tory hand-sitters. But others will be those who can't be arsed to turn out for local elections because they're not interested, or may not even know they're happening. Take the young, for example. Much more likely to vote at a GE than a LE. And much less likely to vote Tory.

NOT the best way for WA Attorney General Bob Ferguson to being his campaign for Governor, which he announced earlier this week following Gov. Inslee's decision NOT to seek re-election:

Seattle Times ($) - WA judge fines AG’s office, DSHS in ‘cavalier’ withholding of lawsuit evidence

The state attorney general’s office and Department of Social and Health Services have been fined $200,000 — and face the prospect of forking over hundreds of thousands of dollars more in legal fees — for what a judge called “egregious” and “cavalier” withholding of evidence in an ongoing lawsuit.

King County Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan, in a March 21 ruling, ordered the fine as a “severe sanction” for the state failing to turn over nearly 11,000 pages of records to attorneys suing over the alleged neglect of a developmentally disabled woman at an adult family home in Kent.

“The discovery violations in this case are egregious, severe, without excuse and the result of willful disregard of discovery obligations by both DSHS” and the attorney general’s office, Ryan wrote in his scathing 12-page order.

The $200,000 penalty is just the start of the state’s legal woes — and cost to taxpayers — in the lawsuit.

The attorney general’s office admitted it recently discovered an additional 100,000 pages of records that had been wrongfully withheld, according to court filings.

Ryan’s ruling put the state on the hook to pay the legal fees for the plaintiff’s attorneys.

Attorneys with the Seattle law firm Hagens Berman, in a motion Friday, calculated the state should pay the firm $214,000. A hearing on the fees is set for next week.

The price could grow, as it does not count the time Hagens Berman attorneys will spend reviewing the recently turned over 100,000 pages.

In addition, Ryan on April 11 appointed Seattle attorney Russell Aoki as a “discovery master” in the case, charging him with investigating the discovery violations and determining whether the state has hidden any more documents.

Aoki will be paid $500 an hour, billed to the state. He is authorized to interview employees of the attorney general’s office and DSHS and to hire a forensic computer expert — also at state expense — and will draft a detailed report on his findings.

The increasingly costly legal blunders have come to light as Attorney General Bob Ferguson launches his long-anticipated run for governor, in which the three-term Democrat is touting his experience leading the AG’s office since 2013. The penalties and withholding of documents in the case were first reported by McClatchy. . . .

SSI - Note that similar (albeit way more costly) error by her office when she was WA Attorney General, was an important factor Christine Gregoire's razor-thin election for Governor in 2004.

My immediate guess, is that this will NOT be as negative for Ferguson in 2024. But NOT helpful!

Mexicanpete said:

MoonRabbit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

I don't know @MikeSmithson but it should be interesting.

I guess there's no equivalent of an exit poll or any kind of indication at 10 pm?

Also wondering if the BBC are still going to do their local to national equivalence voting poll?

In 24 hours time we all get to discover whether the reckoning you promised has come or not.

It won’t be any worse at the GE, as you wisely said earlier. Moment of truth in next 19hrs for Heathener. 10 point Labour PNE lead, or bust.

Labour's expectation management has been dreadful. The Conservatives on the other hand have been pretty good in explaining they will do badly, so when they do OK, Labour will appear they have come up ridiculously short.

You are right, Mex, It’s true the expectation management here, where it’s come to this evening, helps the Tories. If they don’t lose 1000 seats or if Labour don’t get 40% and a 10 point win, this election is a Tory win. Suggests the expectation.

Richard_Nabavi said:

kinabalu said:

I'm more than usually excited about these Locals because they're so close to the General. Also because there's genuine uncertainty about how well Labour are doing. Polls are one thing, real votes in real ballot boxes (from those able to present ID in one of the prescribed forms) are quite another. Soon we'll know how big the Labour lead really is. I desperately hope it's double digits. The difference between 12 and 7 is massive. Not so much numerically (5) but emotionally for the next 18 months. I'd much prefer to spend this time being smug and complacent rather than in a constant state of high anxiety. So c'mon you Labour! ✊️

I don't know if this has already been noted, but this substack post is really good on how the notional votes shares in these locals might point to what is likely to happen in the GE:

https://beyondthetopline.substack.com/p/forget-the-party-spin-what-does-history

Tl:dr (and it is quite a long article): Labour need a lead in the national equivalent vote of around 10% to be on track for a small majority at the GE, 12% to 14% for a comfortable majority, or 15%+ to be in landslide territory.

I read it thanks, most informative. The precise benchmark is "Labour win by 9-11 points: Labour probably still on course for a General Election victory, but a landslide looks unlikely".
So 9% up in the NEV is taken to be what's needed for a Labour majority without a landslide.

I don't wholly buy the conclusion. It chooses rather too easily to ignore local elections in the Blair/Brown years when Labour were in government, notably in 2004 when the Conservatives were 8% up on the NEV yet Labour won in 2005. By taking as the point of reference only local election results prior to GEs when the Conservatives were in government, by definition it is restricting the sample to just one local election (1996) which was followed by Labour ousting the Conservatives in a landslide, and drawing conclusions almost entirely from local elections under Conservative governments before GEs which Labour lost.

On the calculation of the NEV itself there are also grounds for scepticism. Today's local elections in parts only of England are being extrapolated as far as countries where there are different political parties and used to draw lessons for a general election where you are voting for more than your local councillor. It would stretch credulity a bit less if the methodology used to derive the NEV were transparent, but I've tried and failed to find any proper explanation of the methodology. We just have to wait for Moses to arrive with tablets of stone and have to take what's on them as read.

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Should it be, for postal votes?

One way of improving reliability of postal voting, if that's needed, as various PBers have suggested.

TimS said:

MoonRabbit said:

Heathener said:

MoonRabbit said:

Casino_Royale said:

Heathener said:

I don't know @MikeSmithson but it should be interesting.

I guess there's no equivalent of an exit poll or any kind of indication at 10 pm?

Also wondering if the BBC are still going to do their local to national equivalence voting poll?

In 24 hours time we all get to discover whether the reckoning you promised has come or not.

It won’t be any worse at the GE, as you wisely said earlier. Moment of truth in next 19hrs for Heathener. 10 point Labour PNE lead, or bust.

Lol.

I tend to the view that the Conservatives will fare MUCH worse at the General Election than the local elections.

The next GE will be a Labour landslide but I'm afraid you're going to have to wait rather more than 19 hours to celebrate if I'm wrong.

cf @Casino_Royale

Blithering nonsense from you. Facts are against you. More Tories will sit out this one than voters for opposition parties. Many Tories sitting today out will definitely be back for the GE. So how exactly do the Tories end up with a worse result at that one?

In comparison with this election, The Tory line of pebbles will grow next year more than the opposition line of pebbles. Don’t get me wrong, even with this fact it can still be torrid general election result for Tories. But it can’t be worse than this one.

One counterpoint to this: council elections have low turnout and those who do turnout may well be disproportionately old.

With the Tories so far ahead with the old, and so far behind with the young and middle aged, any age distortion could be much greater than in the past. Add to that a small impact from the voter suppression rules and they could surprise on the upside. As indeed they’ve done in recent council by-elections.

Check out page 6 (age breakdown of returned ballots) on this link for current special election:

https://kingcounty.gov/depts/elections/results/ballot-return-statistics/2023/202302.aspx

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

? Anti- aircraft defence for the big day, or part of the show?

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Should it be, for postal votes?

One way of improving reliability of postal voting, if that's needed, as various PBers have suggested.

No, because we don't really sign for anything (in a way that requires signature verification).

My "signature" is used once every 5 years or so and looks completely different each time. For most people under 35 years old, it will be the same.

Foxy said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

? Anti- aircraft defence for the big day, or part of the show?

Well she is an Air Defence Destroyer (apparently froma quick Google) so I suspect the former.

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Wife and I been to vote in South Kesteven. In my ward a choice of

Two Independents
Two Tory
One Green
One Labour

For 2 seats

2 votes from me for Independents.

What flavor of independence? And how deep IS it today, in The Deepings?

Freedom for South Kesteven, throw off our Colonial oppressors!

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Should it be, for postal votes?

One way of improving reliability of postal voting, if that's needed, as various PBers have suggested.

No, because we don't really sign for anything (in a way that requires signature verification).

My "signature" is used once every 5 years or so and looks completely different each time. For most people under 35 years old, it will be the same.

System I describe requires a voter signature on file, in my state obtained at time of registration OR updated by voter subsequently.

And situation you describe is commonplace here, resolved by allowing voter to submit updated signatures (under oath) IF their ballot sig doesn't match file sig.

From tenor of push back by PBers, amazing that the Ballot Act was ever enacted in UK, seeing has how ballot hadn't been used before AND was very different from old system?

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Is it not, Mr Gallowgate? I wonder what the returning officer and team have been doing all these years when I have gone to the count.

I always used to get super-paranoid that the sample I had given was out of date and my ballot would not stand because my signature had gained a flourish since I did it or I was trying to be too neat on the sample.

Foxy said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Wife and I been to vote in South Kesteven. In my ward a choice of

Two Independents
Two Tory
One Green
One Labour

For 2 seats

2 votes from me for Independents.

What flavor of independence? And how deep IS it today, in The Deepings?

Freedom for South Kesteven, throw off our Colonial oppressors!

What about Front for Liberation of South South Kestevan? Bent on overturning tyranny of North South Kesteven!

TimS said:

Seem to be some anecdotal tweets coming in now reporting quite happy Lib Dem and Labour canvassers in various places. Not so sure about Green.

I would never rely on what a canvasser told me or even my canvass returns as I said before.

There are various formulae (the one I used was called the "Richmond Formula") for trying to extrapolate the result from your canvass returns. Accurate? To a point and perhaps more so outside London - when I worked Polling Days in Cornwall, the Agent seemed to have a pretty good idea of what was happening.

One early indicator I believe some Agents use is to look at one polling district and see if the turnout and those coming out to vote were looking promising.

I remember elections where one Ward was basically abandoned two hours before the close of poll because it was "in the bag" and everyone rushed to another Ward to do last minute knocking up - again, you can do that in urban areas more easily.

biggles said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Is it not, Mr Gallowgate? I wonder what the returning officer and team have been doing all these years when I have gone to the count.

I always used to get super-paranoid that the sample I had given was out of date and my ballot would not stand because my signature had gained a flourish since I did it or I was trying to be too neat on the sample.

In my own humble bailiwick, election workers checking returned ballot signatures, look for 3 points of agreement. They also make some allowance for fact that signatures change over time due to aging.

In my case, am pretty careful when returning my ballot, and so far my sig has always passed muster compared to decades-old file signature.

However, IF in future my sig is "challenged" have no problem returning the paperwork they will send me in that case, in order to "cure" my ballot BEFORE final deadline.

Benpointer said:

First, like Labour tonight.

Was something going on today?

Andy_JS said:

Well bloody hell.

Just heard that my mum almost got turned away from the polling station today because all her official documents are in her original family name and the electoral register is in her married name. Eventually they allowed her to vote, after a phone call from the polling station staff to some kind of "supervisor".

Sorry your mom had this (not untypical problem for women) and glad she got it resolved.

One advantage to having a canvassing period, is that it gives more time for election workers to investigate such issues.

Another approach is via provisional ballots, where in questionable cases, a prospective voter is allowed to vote, but their ballot is kept aside until their eligibility is established. Counted if it is, not if not.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

What? Republicans think we should abolish the armed forces too?

Interesting.

Jonathan said:

Andy_JS said:

Well bloody hell.

Just heard that my mum almost got turned away from the polling station today because all her official documents are in her original family name and the electoral register is in her married name. Eventually they allowed her to vote, after a phone call from the polling station staff to some kind of "supervisor".

Down here a policeman was turned away because his id badge wasn’t on the official list.

FFS

Gallowgate said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Is it not, Mr Gallowgate? I wonder what the returning officer and team have been doing all these years when I have gone to the count.

You tell me? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Verification of postal votes. Which apparently IS a thing in the UK?

Presumably the PB Tory quarterwits who have been going out to bat for in-person voter ID will now deliver fulsome apologies.

Casino_Royale said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

What? Republicans think we should abolish the armed forces too?

Interesting.

Where did I say that??

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Richard_Tyndall said:

Wife and I been to vote in South Kesteven. In my ward a choice of

Two Independents
Two Tory
One Green
One Labour

For 2 seats

2 votes from me for Independents.

What flavor of independence? And how deep IS it today, in The Deepings?

If it’s Lincs they’ll be right-wing anti-EU headcases. Which probably suits our RT

Sean_F said:

We also have all-out elections in Northern Ireland.

And it looks like the face-eating leopards are in for a very good night.

Sinn Fein should win 28-30%, up from 24% in 2019. The DUP and TUV should win 28-32%, up from 27%.

It looks like SDLP will do terribly, down from 13% to 7-8%.

How is this all likely to affect seat counts?

GarethoftheVale2 said:

Went to vote in our ward in Bracknell Forest a few hours ago. Seemed really quiet, especially as there is one polling place for the whole ward.

My best guess is that Lab will make inroads in Bracknell Town, while Cons hold up better in the rest of the borough (with LDs best shot in Sandhurst)

Sandhurst?!?! Are the cadets getting ready to mutiny?

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Gallowgate said:

ClippP said:

Gallowgate said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

IanB2 said:

Carnyx said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

El_Capitano said:

Meanwhile in Stockport...

https://manchestermill.co.uk/p/a-scandal-on-polling-day-have-stockport

Someone had leaked us an email sent by the chair of Stockport’s Constituency Labour Party, in which he was rallying activists to go and campaign in Edgeley, where Labour faces a tough fight against a new independent party. “We are concerned at the strong showing of the Edgeley Community Association in the postal votes,” the email reads.

But hang on, how did he know about their strong showing? Or as Andy, one of our members, asked in the comments: “How do Stockport Labour know what’s in the postal votes in Edgeley? I didn’t think they were meant to be opened/counted until the count begins.”

Good question. We’ve been trying to work out what happened here, and it seems like the Labour official in Stockport may well have broken electoral law.

Cough.

Verification process.

Cough.

That's only the signatures. Shouldn't reveal the actual vote. And in any case the disclosure is illegal. Though at least one noted ScoTory got off scot (so to speak) free after a similar incident in recent years.

And our TSE misses the key point that postal vote verification is (supposed to be) done with the ballot papers face down at all times

In WA State, verification of signatures on returned ballot envelopes takes place BEFORE the envelope is opened.

Realize that's a Yankee innovation and thus HIGHLY suspect. But seems to make sense nonetheless.

Comparing signatures for verification purposes isn’t really a thing in the UK.

Is it not, Mr Gallowgate? I wonder what the returning officer and team have been doing all these years when I have gone to the count.

You tell me? I have no idea what you're talking about.

Verification of postal votes. Which apparently IS a thing in the UK?

Sure is. Object being to ensure that the signature on the form accompanying the ballot paper matches the signature on the application for the PV in the first place, to verify that the vote has been cast by the correct person. Because the voter ID is all face up, the actual ballot must be kept face down to avoid the landowner discovering that the voter hasn’t in fact voted for the person they were bribed or threatened to do so, and consequently evicting them from their cottage after the election, leaving them destitute and wandering the lanes living off turnip tops until eventually destined to end up in some poorhouse.

Westie said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

What? Republicans think we should abolish the armed forces too?

Interesting.

Where did I say that??

I almost forgot falling real incomes, widespread expectations of further falls, and foodbanks and stuff, when I saw those luscious photographs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs

Not as elegant as its predecessors, the Daring class of the 1950s, though.

Edith: should have said, British and Australian, of course. There remains one in Sydney, at the maritime museum.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205163139

Carnyx said:

Westie said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Casino_Royale said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

As a teeny bit of a peace offering to my monarchist chums: HMS Diamond spotted today in the Thames at Greenwich!

What? Republicans think we should abolish the armed forces too?

Interesting.

Where did I say that??

I almost forgot falling real incomes, widespread expectations of further falls, and foodbanks and stuff, when I saw those luscious photographs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmInkxbvlCs

Not as elegant as its predecessors, the Daring class of the 1950s, though.

Edith: should have said, British and Australian, of course. There remains one in Sydney, at the maritime museum.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205163139

Edit No 2: AND they had a Coronation Review back in 1952, with at least one of those. But then the Navy had 10x as many warships.