Snap General Election?

[Einion Yrth]

turbobloke said:

edh said:

techiedave said:

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

Perhaps they think that this will encourage Labour to put up the Shadow Home Sec? Abbott needs to be hidden away for the next 2 weeks IMO.

It's too late, she's done enough damage already.

I hope so, because the damage she could wreak as Home Secretary does not bear thinking about.

[turbobloke]

Einion Yrth said:

turbobloke said:

edh said:

techiedave said:

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

Perhaps they think that this will encourage Labour to put up the Shadow Home Sec? Abbott needs to be hidden away for the next 2 weeks IMO.

It's too late, she's done enough damage already.

I hope so, because the damage she could wreak as Home Secretary does not bear thinking about.

Can't disagree with that, but approx 30% of the voting population think it'd be OK.

Corbyn is OK, McDonnell is OK, Abbott is OK, they're all so nice, they want to hand out free stuff to their rump and the rest because it's somebody else's fault. Then they'll take the country down (again, for what would be the third time in living memory).

Frightening.

[Vaud]

turbobloke said:

Can't disagree with that, but approx 30% of the voting population think it'd be OK.

Corbyn is OK, McDonnell is OK, Abbott is OK, they're all so nice, they want to hand out free stuff to their rump and the rest because it's somebody else's fault. Then they'll take the country down (again, for what would be the third time in living memory).

Frightening.

Roughly this. While the people who could attract a centrist vote are kept away from the front.

[MarshPhantom]

turbobloke said:

Einion Yrth said:

turbobloke said:

edh said:

techiedave said:

I read somewhere that Amber Rudd will represent the Tories in an upcoming leaders debate. I'm not sure that she comes across that well on TV myself.
But to be blunt I am unlikely to bother. I am sick of hearing that truly awful welsh woman who is probably doing as much to endear her part of the UK to others as the burn the holiday homes brigade did in the 70s. The same goes to the green woman or is it the bloke who will represent them. And as Mr Nuttall will be there I can imagine the total farce it will be

Perhaps they think that this will encourage Labour to put up the Shadow Home Sec? Abbott needs to be hidden away for the next 2 weeks IMO.

It's too late, she's done enough damage already.

I hope so, because the damage she could wreak as Home Secretary does not bear thinking about.

Can't disagree with that, but approx 30% of the voting population think it'd be OK.

Corbyn is OK, McDonnell is OK, Abbott is OK, they're all so nice, they want to hand out free stuff to their rump and the rest because it's somebody else's fault. Then they'll take the country down (again, for what would be the third time in living memory).

Frightening.

Because the Torres have done such a great job of running the country for the last seven years? We also had three major recessions, high interest rates, high unemployment etc, the last time your lot were in. Happy to take my chances with anyone but them.

Currently down in Dorset for the week, the dearth of Vote Tory signs anywhere here or on the way is quite an eye opener.

[Gargamel]

MarshPhantom said:

Because the Torres have done such a great job of running the country for the last seven years? We also had three major recessions, high interest rates, high unemployment etc, the last time your lot were in. Happy to take my chances with anyone but them.

Currently down in Dorset for the week, the dearth of Vote Tory signs anywhere here or on the way is quite an eye opener.

What do you mean high unemployment ? Where ?

Unemployment has been at its lowest level for nearly 40 years.
Interest Rates and historic lows
Growth the highest in the G7
Which recessions ? Three of them are you absolutely sure, I don't recall them.

What on earth are you talking about.

[Stickyfinger]

MarshPhantom said:

Currently down in Dorset for the week, the dearth of Vote Tory signs anywhere here or on the way is quite an eye opener.

LOL......sure mate

(I frigging live in the SWest...Labour support is MASSIVE.......... hahahaha)

[turbobloke]

Stickyfinger said:

MarshPhantom said:

Currently down in Dorset for the week, the dearth of Vote Tory signs anywhere here or on the way is quite an eye opener.

LOL......sure mate

(I frigging live in the SWest...Labour support is MASSIVE.......... hahahaha)

Liberal Democrats Winning Here posters have been dusted off in the SW but they still reflect single figures % if the polls schmolls are anywhere near accurate and I'd put a shilling on the SW not turning yellow as before.

[turbobloke]

A summary of polls appearing over the weekend, from UK polling report.

Opinium
CON 45%
LAB 35%
LDEM 7%
UKIP 5%

ComRes
CON 46%
LAB 34%
LDEM 8%
UKIP 5%

ORB
CON 44%
LAB 38%
LDEM 7%
UKIP 5%

YouGov
CON 43%
LAB 36%
LDEM 9%
UKIP 4%

ICM
CON 46%
LAB 32%
LDEM 8%
UKIP 5%

Overall a CON lead of around 10 points by means of a simple average (mean).

Fieldwork was generally undertaken last week through to Friday.

What does it mean? Who knows!

[Burwood]

Thanks Turbo- i very much think the margin is well into double figures. We will see. At this stage i'll take +30 working majority.

[turbobloke]

Burwood said:

Thanks Turbo- i very much think the margin is well into double figures. We will see. At this stage i'll take +30 working majority.

Possibly a tad pessimistic...the polling co's which look at a) telephone suirveys and b) look at demographics and turnout (ICM and ComRes more than others) in their models are the ones that give the Tories a bigger lead, this may prove to be more real world. Then there's the UKIP decision to stand aside in key marginals. We may yet see the Conservatives with more seats and a bigger majorirty (as opposed to % vote overall).

It's still a case of 'who knows' not least as people are still capable of lying to pollsters, or changing their minds, nor actually voting when they said they would (another fib but maybe for genuine reasons) and/or the pollsters' models remain out of kilter etc.

[Burwood]

i'll take it but hoping for 380 plus seats which translates to WM of 117+

[Burwood]

the percentage figures don't matter as much as marginal seats. A won seat is just that regardless of the %age vote. Look at UKIP, I recall they got 15% of the vote but won, what, 1 seat. A lot of people will swing back to Blue on June the 8th.

[FN2TypeR]

Burwood said:

the percentage figures don't matter as much as marginal seats. A won seat is just that regardless of the %age vote. Look at UKIP, I recall they got 15% of the vote but won, what, 1 seat. A lot of people will swing back to Blue on June the 8th.

They got 12.7% of the vote, some 3,881,099 votes and one seat

Proportional representation would have given them 83 seats

[FiF]

turbobloke said:

Burwood said:

Thanks Turbo- i very much think the margin is well into double figures. We will see. At this stage i'll take +30 working majority.

Possibly a tad pessimistic...the polling co's which look at a) telephone suirveys and b) look at demographics and turnout (ICM and ComRes more than others) in their models are the ones that give the Tories a bigger lead, this may prove to be more real world. Then there's the UKIP decision to stand aside in key marginals. We may yet see the Conservatives with more seats and a bigger majorirty (as opposed to % vote overall).

It's still a case of 'who knows' not least as people are still capable of lying to pollsters, or changing their minds, nor actually voting when they said they would (another fib but maybe for genuine reasons) and/or the pollsters' models remain out of kilter etc.

Donald Rumsfeld mode.

Known unknowns.
Effect of policy u-turn. Some folks see it as a complete u-turn, others see it as a clarification which could gave been handled better. Does it indicate lack of professionalism? Pass.
Will the Labour vote turn out? Will there be a new tranche of the Labour vote ie younger end voting for first time. Not known for actually getting off their backsides to vote, but maybe more motivated. Pass.

Known knowns.
UKippers going towards Cons. Not all of them obviously, but significant numbers, and where UKIP standing down, looking at the majorities and the likely number of Ukippers changing their vote Labour in trouble.
Highest Cons vote in local elections since '08.
Copeland by election, historic in several ways, first gain in a by election by a governing party since 1982, Labour had held the seat since the constituency created in 1982, indeed Labour had held its predecessor Whitehaven since 1935. Ok this was in February and the by elections were at beginning of May, week is a long time bla bla bla.
Despite national figures there is still a 7% swing to Cons in England.

[Helicopter123]

turbobloke said:

A summary of polls appearing over the weekend, from UK polling report.

Opinium
CON 45%
LAB 35%
LDEM 7%
UKIP 5%

ComRes
CON 46%
LAB 34%
LDEM 8%
UKIP 5%

ORB
CON 44%
LAB 38%
LDEM 7%
UKIP 5%

YouGov
CON 43%
LAB 36%
LDEM 9%
UKIP 4%

ICM
CON 46%
LAB 32%
LDEM 8%
UKIP 5%

Overall a CON lead of around 10 points by means of a simple average (mean).

Fieldwork was generally undertaken last week through to Friday.

What does it mean? Who knows!

What it means is that the Tories, despite a truly awful campaign to date, are still out of sight.

Labour, despite Corbyn, are set to attract a higher % of votes than under 'red' Ed.

UKIP are now irrelevant.

[Burwood]

FiF said:

turbobloke said:

Burwood said:

Thanks Turbo- i very much think the margin is well into double figures. We will see. At this stage i'll take +30 working majority.

Possibly a tad pessimistic...the polling co's which look at a) telephone suirveys and b) look at demographics and turnout (ICM and ComRes more than others) in their models are the ones that give the Tories a bigger lead, this may prove to be more real world. Then there's the UKIP decision to stand aside in key marginals. We may yet see the Conservatives with more seats and a bigger majorirty (as opposed to % vote overall).

It's still a case of 'who knows' not least as people are still capable of lying to pollsters, or changing their minds, nor actually voting when they said they would (another fib but maybe for genuine reasons) and/or the pollsters' models remain out of kilter etc.

Donald Rumsfeld mode.

Known unknowns.
Effect of policy u-turn. Some folks see it as a complete u-turn, others see it as a clarification which could gave been handled better. Does it indicate lack of professionalism? Pass.
Will the Labour vote turn out? Will there be a new tranche of the Labour vote ie younger end voting for first time. Not known for actually getting off their backsides to vote, but maybe more motivated. Pass.

Known knowns.
UKippers going towards Cons. Not all of them obviously, but significant numbers, and where UKIP standing down, looking at the majorities and the likely number of Ukippers changing their vote Labour in trouble.
Highest Cons vote in local elections since '08.
Copeland by election, historic in several ways, first gain in a by election by a governing party since 1982, Labour had held the seat since the constituency created in 1982, indeed Labour had held its predecessor Whitehaven since 1935. Ok this was in February and the by elections were at beginning of May, week is a long time bla bla bla.
Despite national figures there is still a 7% swing to Cons in England.

Given Thursday is a typical 'get pissed' day for students, I'm afraid their new young voters will stay at the Union rather than go voting

[Moonhawk]

Burwood said:

the percentage figures don't matter as much as marginal seats. A won seat is just that regardless of the %age vote. Look at UKIP, I recall they got 15% of the vote but won, what, 1 seat. A lot of people will swing back to Blue on June the 8th.

This is true.

The Tories got a higher percentage of the popular vote in 2010, than Labour did in 2005 (36.1% vs 35.2%) - but Labour got 355 seats whereas the Tories only got 306. This meant that Labour could form a majority government despite getting fewer votes overall, whereas the Tories has to form a coalition with the LDs.

[speedy_thrills]

Gargamel said:

Growth the highest in the G7

I think the answer is Germany but why G7? Find a better benchmark, OECD at least.

As for unemployment data the UK is broadly similar to other developed countries, that is they are now back at full employment really.

If I could be politically bias for a moment here however if I was a voter in the UK my questions would actually be about how the Conservatives can improve median per capita inflation adjusted (often called "real") income. This has been an area the UK has performed particularly poorly in for over a decade now, here is a link to ONS data. The majority of the UK population is employed (74.1%) and unemployment isn't a worry but questions about if the standard of living is still a Conservative priority and what they'll be doing differently to the previous Conservative government. Here is a chart of the UK compared to international peers. Why would voters in the UK expect quality of living to now improve under a Conservative government when the UK has been a has been a consistent under performer for so long?

[Burwood]

Moonhawk said:

Burwood said:

the percentage figures don't matter as much as marginal seats. A won seat is just that regardless of the %age vote. Look at UKIP, I recall they got 15% of the vote but won, what, 1 seat. A lot of people will swing back to Blue on June the 8th.

This is true.

The Tories got a higher percentage of the popular vote in 2010, than Labour did in 2005 (36.1% vs 35.2%) - but Labour got 355 seats whereas the Tories only got 306. This meant that Labour could form a majority government despite getting fewer votes overall, whereas the Tories has to form a coalition with the LDs.

Not with the polls at their worst. And i suspect Abbotts latest anti Britain comments will swing it back the other way-widening the gap further.

[motco]

Just a reminder of an earlier Labour 'success'..

Moneyweek

A tea party compared with the economy downstream of Red McDonnell