Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting opens on Beaconsfield which almost certainly will be o

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited October 7 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting opens on Beaconsfield which almost certainly will be one of the top constituency markets at the general election

The news at the weekend that the Liberal Democrats have decided to stand aside in the Beaconsfield constituency at the general election in order to give the incumbent MP, Dominic Grieve, a clear run has inevitably set off a betting market which looks likely to be a big one.

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 11,773
    First like the Tories.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,995
    Second like the Tories
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,090
    Third like Labour.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,995
    edited October 7
    My money is on Grieve. Edit/ or will be, when I get back to the Uk
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,814
    Scottish court dismisses case.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888
    edited October 7
    In the European Parliament elections the Brexit Party won South Bucks (containing Beaconsfield) on 7310 to 5340 votes for the LDs so would not count on Grieve holding on. The Tories were also third on 3169 votes

    https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/17668055.eu-elections-2019-vote-breakdown-wycombe-chiltern-and-south-bucks/
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,935
    Looking at the full court opinion I think the ruling is fair .

    The judge has taken account of the undertakings given by the government . The judge thought the order was premature .

    I suppose the judge is hoping the undertakings are in good faith and given Bozos behaviour one might question that .

    However as he has given assurances if he doesn’t honour them then he will be in trouble with the courts .
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,030
    I'd be backing the Tories at these prices. 51/49 (an estimate at that) is near as makes no difference, and 36.5k is a huge vote for the party.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    Scottish Court backs the UK government after UK Supreme Court ruled against the UK Government then
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661
    edited October 7
    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 20,995
    edited October 7
    HYUFD said:

    In the European Parliament elections the Brexit Party won South Bucks (containing Beaconsfield) on 7310 to 5340 votes for the LDs so would not count on Grieve holding on. The Tories were also third on 3169 votes

    https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/17668055.eu-elections-2019-vote-breakdown-wycombe-chiltern-and-south-bucks/

    So Grieve just needs the LibDem voters, half of those Tories who were unwilling to defect to Farage in the EU elections (and are therefore likely to be a mix of remainers and soft Brexiters) and a little bit of tactical help from those who backed the Greens, Change Uk and Labour in the Euros.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 30,958
    HYUFD said:

    In the European Parliament elections the Brexit Party won South Bucks (containing Beaconsfield) on 7310 to 5340 votes for the LDs so would not count on Grieve holding on. The Tories were also third on 3169 votes

    https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/17668055.eu-elections-2019-vote-breakdown-wycombe-chiltern-and-south-bucks/

    Do you think the Brexit Party will stand aside for the Tory?
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    I don't expect the Inner House to overturn it.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307
    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    Noo said:

    Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes?

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307
    Meanwhile, in the "month of next election" market, December 2019 was last matched at 1.98. How low is it going to go?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894

    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,702
    If the LibDems are ever going to be a major force in U.K. politics they have to start thinking and acting like a big party, not like a little party apologetically asking if it can join in with the big boys.

    It is entirely counter productive to the image of a major party to stand aside in circumstances such as this, just as promoting tactical voting is. It is a great big shouty message of "WE CAN'T WIN" which isn't a good look.
  • DruttDrutt Posts: 815

    I'd be backing the Tories at these prices. 51/49 (an estimate at that) is near as makes no difference, and 36.5k is a huge vote for the party.

    "This makes the case for independence"~ malc, Sturgeon et al ad nauseam.
  • JonCisBackJonCisBack Posts: 818
    Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 472
    edited October 7
    Regardless of who wins, Beaconsfield will be returning a solid Tory on all matters other than Brexit.

    A rather odd decision by the LD's.
  • ArtistArtist Posts: 1,617
    I'd go for the Tories. Most Labour voters will stick hoping for a split vote and wouldn't vote for a former Tory anyway, non political types won't know who Grieve is and the constituency may be pro remain but that doesn't mean they're fully behind a remain at all costs MP.
  • TGOHF2TGOHF2 Posts: 584
    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    Personal Vote doesn’t help Those that rat on manifesto commitments.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894
    The Lib Dem vote in 2010 was ~20%. I expect Grieve will come a very distant second. Labour will get around 10% I think, maybe a bit less
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 2,935
    Noo said:

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    I don't expect the Inner House to overturn it.
    I agree , the case though has forced the government to give undertakings and importantly not to frustrate the Benn Act .

    This is key . If Bozo doesn’t honour what the government QC has provided in terms of written undertakings then he’s in serious trouble with the courts .
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful

    Hahaha, that's the maddest comment of the day.
    Democracy means you have to stand now? Utterly barking.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 62,888

    HYUFD said:

    In the European Parliament elections the Brexit Party won South Bucks (containing Beaconsfield) on 7310 to 5340 votes for the LDs so would not count on Grieve holding on. The Tories were also third on 3169 votes

    https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/17668055.eu-elections-2019-vote-breakdown-wycombe-chiltern-and-south-bucks/

    Do you think the Brexit Party will stand aside for the Tory?
    I think most of the Brexit Party vote will go Tory v Grieve regardless, the Labour vote will not go Grieve
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894

    Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful

    The Greens have announced a candidate, I think they could potentially hold their deposit here this time round with no Lib Dem standing. There will be some Lib Dem -> Green switchers here.
    Grieve will be far too right wing for plenty of Lib Dem types.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 1,137
    Abstracting from the special circumstances of the seat would make the Tories the clear winner ahead of the Lib Dems in second place, according to my model. If one assumes that Grieve would get 80% of the predicted Lib Dem vote and 20% of the predicted Conservative and Labour votes with the Conservatives on 80% of their prediction from the baseline, then that would make the Conservative candidate the very narrow victor. So the pricing looks about right to me.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,492
    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,080
    philiph said:

    If the LibDems are ever going to be a major force in U.K. politics they have to start thinking and acting like a big party, not like a little party apologetically asking if it can join in with the big boys.

    It is entirely counter productive to the image of a major party to stand aside in circumstances such as this, just as promoting tactical voting is. It is a great big shouty message of "WE CAN'T WIN" which isn't a good look.

    Not sure about that. It is certainly saying "We have principles and we have objectives. If hitherto Conservatives wish to, we can work together for the greater good. Traditional Conservatives can safely vote Lib Dem - or in this case Independent - to get rid of the thuggish tendency that has taken over the Conservative Party."

    A similar message to liberal-minded voters in the Labour Party, of course.

    I am not sure how many voters would wish to be sold out to the American freebooters by Cummings and Johnson.

    My money would tend to go on Grieve.
  • isamisam Posts: 28,277

    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    Looks like you and Aaron should cut out the middle man and lay each other EVS
  • BrexitStewart

    I mean.... what a bell end. Lucky he'd never show his face round here...

  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 568
    I really don't like what the Lib Dems have done here. This is a General Election, and though we on PB are already putting a mask on this hypothetical GE as being a 'Brexit poll by proxy', this isn't what it is. Its a government for the next five years.

    Lets say a voter rocks up, staunch LD supporter, and staunch believer in REMAIN. However, like many, doesn't really follow local politics and is unaware of what has happened.
    Gets to the ballot paper and can't find LD on it. Only sees Con, Labour, Green and 'Independent'. How does he vote?

    Another voter - staunch REMAINER, likes the LDs and hates the 'Tories'. Is aware of what's happened locally and rocks up. Looks at the ballot paper, and then thinks "This is for five years, NOT five weeks." and votes Labour, disgusted with himself and the LD for forcing the choice. He ain't voting Tory, or pseudo-Tory in his life.

    (As an aside, this is surely a problem coming up. If, and its a huge IF, the LDs win because they are the party of Remain, I do wonder how many Tory Remainers, and Labour Remainers will be happy when Swinson says, "Right, thanks for your lent vote, that's Revoke sorted.... now about that PR we promised, and all the other manifesto commitments which you hate for the next five years)

  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 1,121
    HYUFD said:

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    Scottish Court backs the UK government after UK Supreme Court ruled against the UK Government then
    Good Lord. No. The UKSC backed the Scottish Court against the U.K. Govt in an entirely separate case to this one. This one could also go to the SC, where the SC may uphold the U.K. Govt’s position. Do you think purely in soundbites?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894
    isam said:

    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    Looks like you and Aaron should cut out the middle man and lay each other EVS
    4-5 Tories, 5-4 Grieve is the 'true' implied price with no over or underround right now.
    I don't think Labour or the Greens can win here even if the election was held ten thousand times in the current circs.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 15,476
    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
  • Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful

    Yup. Wanna discuss a change to the voting system? I'm sure somebody will write a thread for you.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661
    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    Scottish Court backs the UK government after UK Supreme Court ruled against the UK Government then
    Good Lord. No. The UKSC backed the Scottish Court against the U.K. Govt in an entirely separate case to this one. This one could also go to the SC, where the SC may uphold the U.K. Govt’s position. Do you think purely in soundbites?
    Will your rhetorical question get an answer?
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,702
    Dominic Grieve - rather sums up this article:

    https://capx.co/the-big-crisis-in-british-politics-is-not-brexit-but-a-collapse-in-trust/

    The section below is an excerpt from the article.

    The solution does not lie in resolving Brexit alone, even if Johnson were to find the perfect solution. Nor will it be solved by a managerial approach or by going back to 1997 with a reheat of Blairism. Appealing to ‘centrism’, the ‘free market’, or ‘socialism’ won’t cut it either. It needs a new solution, a new way of doing politics which isn’t really ‘doing politics’ at all, where politicians are not shielded by their advisors and follow the ‘playbook’, but are instead authentic, themselves, and answer the question even if it means admitting they do not know.

    In my opinion it will also revolve around the weakening of 'The Party', acceptance of individual views and minimising the manifesto to the core National Interest issues (and therefore dumping a load of whipping). MPs should be allowed to act in the interest of Nation, Constituents and the personal manifesto they put forward, rather than party ideology and thus create trust and show authenticity.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,607
    edited October 7
    An interesting point in reference to Beaconsfield is CCHQ's attitude to it. For instance given the Grieve insurgency, will CCHQ spend time and money campaigning in one of the safest Tory seats within the UK? If CCHQ do intervene, then it means less activity elsewhere. You can only spend money once and one person can only be in one location at any given time! If more whipless Tory MPs fight as independents this could create a strategic problem for the Tories!
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 568

    Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful

    I think you've just said (far better than I) what I've likewise posted.
  • Hmm. In the absence of polling I'd want longer odds than that on Grieve given just how Tory the seat is. It voted Tory in the 1997 Blair landslide. It's also a very high infomation proposition to get across to the electorate in a short time. " Don't vote Tory. Vote for the ex Tory who is still actually a Tory but Brexit " and it's a very marginal tactical message to Greens/Labour voters. " Vote for the marginally less evil Tory ".

    On the other hand he'll raise uddles of cash and not be short of ground troops - though imported activists can irritate locals - and will have an actual campaign. It won't be a twitter thing only.

    If we are to block a Tory majority this is exactly the kind of mature thing we need to pull off against the odds. I'd vote for him without hesitation. But I'm not normal.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
    Here's some data against you:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/23/remainer-or-leaver-the-emergence-of-the-brexit-identity-prism/
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,030
    isam said:

    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    Looks like you and Aaron should cut out the middle man and lay each other EVS
    I'm happy to accommodate both Alastair and @IanB2 at evens
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,492
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
    The election won't all be about Brexit, but there was analysis after the 2017GE that did show it had an effect. I don't think Labour would have won Canterbury, or the Tories Mansfield had it not been for Brexit.
  • JonWCJonWC Posts: 163
    It's a pity there is no market on Betfair yet. There is endless research demonstrating that voters go for the party not the candidate. Grieve-who will poll embarrassingly badly.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 13,120
    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,561
    Cyclefree said:

    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.

    I would be delighted to join but I simply don't have the time or energy to organise anything.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 568

    An interesting point in reference to Beaconsfield is CCHQ's attitude to it. For instance given the Grieve insurgency, will CCHQ spend time and money campaigning in one of the safest Tory seats within the UK? If CCHQ do intervene, then it means less activity elsewhere. You can only spend money once and one person can only be in one location at any given time! If more whipless Tory MPs fight as independents this could create a strategic problem for the Tories!

    Yes, the 21 rebels (well, its much lower than 21 now as some have jumped anyway - Gyimah - and quite a few aren't standing again - Clarke, Stewart... who else?) but having to pour resources into defending your safest seats in the country isn't in the playbook.

    The Conservatives might have to give up their chance of winning Bootle.
  • eekeek Posts: 5,791
    edited October 7

    Hmm. In the absence of polling I'd want longer odds than that on Grieve given just how Tory the seat is. It voted Tory in the 1997 Blair landslide. It's also a very high infomation proposition to get across to the electorate in a short time. " Don't vote Tory. Vote for the ex Tory who is still actually a Tory but Brexit " and it's a very marginal tactical message to Greens/Labour voters. " Vote for the marginally less evil Tory ".

    On the other hand he'll raise uddles of cash and not be short of ground troops - though imported activists can irritate locals - and will have an actual campaign. It won't be a twitter thing only.

    If we are to block a Tory majority this is exactly the kind of mature thing we need to pull off against the odds. I'd vote for him without hesitation. But I'm not normal.

    They didn't vote for Blair in 1982 either..
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 16,330
    Solid Con hold and Grieve OUT is my prediction here.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
    Here's some data against you:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/23/remainer-or-leaver-the-emergence-of-the-brexit-identity-prism/
    Where's the data on how the Remain/Leave sentiment maps onto party voting? All that article is is talking about is about people adopting Remain or Leave identities (plus a broken link to something, I don't know what). I'm asking how much that vote -- or the identity that flows from it -- influences a general election or byelection vote.
  • isamisam Posts: 28,277
    If we are looking at previous elections, we might want to consider this


  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    there was analysis after the 2017GE that did show it had an effect.

    ok, any idea how much?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894


    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model.

    People say they want that, but they're all lying. I reckon at least 25,000 voters in Beaconsfield want someone with a blue rosette on representing them in parliament come helll or high water.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,511
    Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?

    I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307

    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
    I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.

    I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.

    NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 15,476
    Completely off topic, this weekend I realised that I have 152 houseplants. Most of them are succulents and cacti and similar. But still.

    I am going to have stop collecting more because apart from the time spent watering etc- which is remarkably soothing and calming - I will soon end up living in a mini-Kew Gardens hothouse.

    I also erected a new potting bench outside which was done without the usual "sweary fun" in the words of my youngest.

    Cyclefree said:

    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.

    I would be delighted to join but I simply don't have the time or energy to organise anything.
    I may regret this. In fact I probably will. But happy to help organise - if someone else wants to help - but bear in mind that being a girly swot I know even less about London pubs than Rory Stewart.

    Maybe we should get him along and we can quiz him. It could be a select PB focus group!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 23,734
    On topic: Dominic Grieve is, to quote a leading politician, "a good man and a true Conservative". I'd love him to keep his seat, but it's very hard indeed to assess his chances; a huge amount would depend on when and under what circumstances any election was held. So no bet for me.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,446
    HYUFD said:

    Scottish court dismisses case.

    Scottish Court backs the UK government after UK Supreme Court ruled against the UK Government then
    Different topics
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307
    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
    Here's some data against you:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/23/remainer-or-leaver-the-emergence-of-the-brexit-identity-prism/
    Where's the data on how the Remain/Leave sentiment maps onto party voting? All that article is is talking about is about people adopting Remain or Leave identities (plus a broken link to something, I don't know what). I'm asking how much that vote -- or the identity that flows from it -- influences a general election or byelection vote.
    I don't have that - but what it does suggest is that Brexit trumps party loyalties, for now at least.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,200
    tpfkar said:

    Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?

    I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.

    Was that a Lib Dem voter who was outraged by the idea of their not standing ?

    It was a fairly silly argument, but if they were of another party, then even sillier.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 20,384

    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
    I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.

    I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.

    NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
    LOL presumably looking forward to a quiet family Christmas!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,446

    Cyclefree said:

    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.

    I would be delighted to join but I simply don't have the time or energy to organise anything.
    I am in the frozen north so awkward location wise.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 15,200

    Cyclefree said:

    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.

    I would be delighted to join but I simply don't have the time or energy to organise anything.
    Too busy considering a late entry into the Democratic primary ? :smile:
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 23,734
    tpfkar said:

    Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?

    I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.

    You haven't understood. It is clearly a democratic outrage that the LibDems are evading their sacred duty of splitting the anti-crash-out vote.
  • There is nothing " undemocratic " about the Lib Dems endorsing Grieve here, They aren't a charity or publicly funded universal service. They exist to further political goals and if they feel doing this furthers those goals that's upto them. Nor is this new. They don't contest Northern Irish seats or the Speakers. They've stood aside for Independents in Tatton and Wyre Forest previously and in 2017 for the Greens in Brighton Pavillion.

    Nor is any voter obliged to follow their advice. In the last election I was going to vote Green but they stood down as part of a ' progressive alliance ' and endorsed the Labour candidate. So I voted Lib Dem instead.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 24,446
    Drutt said:

    I'd be backing the Tories at these prices. 51/49 (an estimate at that) is near as makes no difference, and 36.5k is a huge vote for the party.

    "This makes the case for independence"~ malc, Sturgeon et al ad nauseam.
    I don't even need to say it.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 54,894
    I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    Noo said:

    It's time to seriously ask what influence we think the Remain/Leave percentage has on the result of an election. The OP writes "Given that Beaconsfield voted Remain", and I rolled my eyes. Then I thought twice about it. Do we have any evidence for how much difference that makes? My hunch is that it's greatly exaggerated in the minds of commentators, and that reaching for it is lazy. But I am happy to be disabused of that notion if it's been looked into in detail somewhere.

    51/49 is near enough a tie. I wouldn't consider a constituency as having a Remain or Leave identity unless it was at least 55/45, and possibly 60/40 either way.
    I'm with you on that. But even if it were 60/40, I'm not convinced Brexit is weighted as much in the eyes of voters as it is for us on here. It's the same reason why I think the Conservative strategy is flawed in the north England, why the Conservatives will still be in trouble in the South West despite the Leave votes, why the SNP cannot rely on the Brexit to recapture those Aberdeenshire seats, and why Labour will still leach votes to the Lib Dems despite their move towards a more remainy stance. Simply, there's a lot of stuff going on in the minds of voters, and their Brexit vote 3 years ago is just one of them.
    But we all know the narratives and counternarratives. Where's the data to poke holes in the stories?
    Here's some data against you:

    https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2018/10/23/remainer-or-leaver-the-emergence-of-the-brexit-identity-prism/
    Where's the data on how the Remain/Leave sentiment maps onto party voting? All that article is is talking about is about people adopting Remain or Leave identities (plus a broken link to something, I don't know what). I'm asking how much that vote -- or the identity that flows from it -- influences a general election or byelection vote.
    I don't have that - but what it does suggest is that Brexit trumps party loyalties, for now at least.
    Yes, I'm familiar with the story. I wonder if there's anything in that narrative that explains what happened at the 2017 election, because in my view that result was quite damaging to the idea that Brexit trumps all. Perhaps people feel that this polarisation is accumulating, but I'm not sure that is the case. What would be fascinating would be those figures you linked to -- reported in Oct 2018 -- over time. Perhaps if it shows the identity aspect growing, it would reinforce the idea I'm trying to criticise.
  • isamisam Posts: 28,277
    edited October 7

    There is nothing " undemocratic " about the Lib Dems endorsing Grieve here, They aren't a charity or publicly funded universal service. They exist to further political goals and if they feel doing this furthers those goals that's upto them. Nor is this new. They don't contest Northern Irish seats or the Speakers. They've stood aside for Independents in Tatton and Wyre Forest previously and in 2017 for the Greens in Brighton Pavillion.

    Nor is any voter obliged to follow their advice. In the last election I was going to vote Green but they stood down as part of a ' progressive alliance ' and endorsed the Labour candidate. So I voted Lib Dem instead.

    Agreed. UKIP didn't challenge Leave politicians in 2017, and TBP are open to doing the same if I understand correctly. Why would anyone criticise the Lib Dems for standing aside? Who is?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 15,476
    malcolmg said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Hey @Peter_the_Punter and @kinabalu and @malcolmg (fpt):

    I'd be up for a mini-PB meet. Or we can have a proper one and invite OGH and anyone else who would like to join in.

    I would be delighted to join but I simply don't have the time or energy to organise anything.
    I am in the frozen north so awkward location wise.
    A shame. Might you be tempted to visit us southern jessies one day?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,492
    My thinking is that, assuming he is still leader of the Conservatives, the next election will reduce down to the question of: for Boris, or against him?

    This maps strongly onto the Brexit vote, but it's about more than Brexit.

    I think Grieve picks up lots of tactical votes on an anti-Boris ticket, but it won't be enough.
  • isamisam Posts: 28,277

    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
    I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.

    I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.

    NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
    My mum is a lifelong Labour voter, and a Remainer, who says she will never vote again after the debacle of the last three years
  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,878

    There is nothing " undemocratic " about the Lib Dems endorsing Grieve here, They aren't a charity or publicly funded universal service. They exist to further political goals and if they feel doing this furthers those goals that's upto them. Nor is this new. They don't contest Northern Irish seats or the Speakers. They've stood aside for Independents in Tatton and Wyre Forest previously and in 2017 for the Greens in Brighton Pavillion.

    Nor is any voter obliged to follow their advice. In the last election I was going to vote Green but they stood down as part of a ' progressive alliance ' and endorsed the Labour candidate. So I voted Lib Dem instead.

    It's not undemocratic, but it is wrong. Beaconsfield has been gifted to the Tories. Grieve is likely to support a Tory PM on almost every matter, possibly even including Brexit if Boris is replaced with someone more to his taste.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661
    Cyclefree said:

    Completely off topic, this weekend I realised that I have 152 houseplants.
    I know even less about London pubs than Rory Stewart.

    You could organise a meetup at a garden centre instead..
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 27,307
    Pulpstar said:

    I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.

    A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 4,638

    Add this to the list of Lib Dems doing things which are profoundly undemocratic. If you want to vote Lib Dem but you live in Beaconsfield, they won't let you. You are supposed to vote for who they tell you to vote for.

    Also they will no doubt pressure the Greens to do the same, disenfranchising Green supporters.

    Ugh, just awful

    You clearly want the Tory to win. The LibDems and those who vote for Grieve don't.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,702
    isam said:

    There is nothing " undemocratic " about the Lib Dems endorsing Grieve here, They aren't a charity or publicly funded universal service. They exist to further political goals and if they feel doing this furthers those goals that's upto them. Nor is this new. They don't contest Northern Irish seats or the Speakers. They've stood aside for Independents in Tatton and Wyre Forest previously and in 2017 for the Greens in Brighton Pavillion.

    Nor is any voter obliged to follow their advice. In the last election I was going to vote Green but they stood down as part of a ' progressive alliance ' and endorsed the Labour candidate. So I voted Lib Dem instead.

    Agreed. UKIP didn't challenge Leave politicians in 2017, and TBP are open to doing the same if I understand correctly. Why would anyone criticise the Lib Dems for standing aside? Who is?
    I am as I think it harms their chances of being viewed as a Big UK Party and getting into a position to challenge Labour / Conservatives on equal terms.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,253
    edited October 7
    Con hold. Grieve will get under 30%.
    Then he can be an outraged constitutional commentator when the new government passes acts to prevent backbenchers seizing control of the order paper in future and the commons is put in a strait jacket
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 15,476
    Noo said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Completely off topic, this weekend I realised that I have 152 houseplants.
    I know even less about London pubs than Rory Stewart.

    You could organise a meetup at a garden centre instead..
    That is not going to help me stop collecting even more plants!!!

    Plus any PB'ers turning up will find themselves conscripted into general fetching/carrying and other labouring duties. Which will be lovely for me. But perhaps not for anyone else.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,090
    Smart bit of research by Stephen Bush, using spending announcements to figure out the Conservatives' likely targets (and key defences) at the next GE:



    I think he's a bit off on the defences vs the Lib Dems (B&R would have been a plausible target regardless of the by-election) but generally in the right direction.
  • philiphphiliph Posts: 3,702

    My thinking is that, assuming he is still leader of the Conservatives, the next election will reduce down to the question of: for Boris, or against him?

    This maps strongly onto the Brexit vote, but it's about more than Brexit.

    I think Grieve picks up lots of tactical votes on an anti-Boris ticket, but it won't be enough.

    Wouldn't that become for BJ or JC?
    A straight choice.
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,511

    tpfkar said:

    Those saying this is a democratic outrage might consider how many Council seats in May weren't contested by the Tories (3%) Labour (23%) or Lib Dems (47%). The idea of voters getting outraged in the polling booths by their party not standing - well it happens in its thousands every time. Where's the outrage about that?

    I will cheer Dominic Grieve on all the way; but this is a heck of a hard path for him.

    You haven't understood. It is clearly a democratic outrage that the LibDems are evading their sacred duty of splitting the anti-crash-out vote.
    Ah right - all clear now. Although I fear that Grieve and the Labour party might not need any help from the Lib Dems to do that in Beaconsfield.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,492
    Noo said:

    there was analysis after the 2017GE that did show it had an effect.

    ok, any idea how much?
    Try here.
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661
    Cyclefree said:

    Noo said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Completely off topic, this weekend I realised that I have 152 houseplants.
    I know even less about London pubs than Rory Stewart.

    You could organise a meetup at a garden centre instead..
    That is not going to help me stop collecting even more plants!!!

    Plus any PB'ers turning up will find themselves conscripted into general fetching/carrying and other labouring duties. Which will be lovely for me. But perhaps not for anyone else.
    I'll be honest, I'd rather lug bags of compost than go for a pint in a Wetherspoons. But since I would not come either way, I'll leave my frivolous suggestion to quietly die. Best of luck with your next round of watering.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 2,090

    Pulpstar said:

    I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.

    A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
    But the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow it, and the experience of 2010-2015 suggests the Lib Dems shouldn't be too strongly associated with any "Conservative" branding anyway. So we'd need two things: better branding for the Conservative escapees, and an equivalent counterweight on the Labour side.

    The Grievesters could become the National Centre-Right. The equivalent party on the centre-left, in the absence of using the "Labour" brand, could become the National Socia...

    Oh, wait.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,253

    Smart bit of research by Stephen Bush, using spending announcements to figure out the Conservatives' likely targets (and key defences) at the next GE:



    I think he's a bit off on the defences vs the Lib Dems (B&R would have been a plausible target regardless of the by-election) but generally in the right direction.

    I think Halton is hmmm optimistic. Just the 26% swing needed
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 20,384
    edited October 7

    Smart bit of research by Stephen Bush, using spending announcements to figure out the Conservatives' likely targets (and key defences) at the next GE:



    I think he's a bit off on the defences vs the Lib Dems (B&R would have been a plausible target regardless of the by-election) but generally in the right direction.

    There was an interesting bloke on Week in Westminster saying that there are 26 "northern Labour leave seats" (the ones @HYUFD keeps on banging on about) of which 13 will stay Labour come what may. So that is 13 that might turn blue on Brexit. This is the number of seats that the Cons look set to lose in Scotland for the same reason.

    So the whole hoover up Labour leave seats thing looks to be, when you factor in North of the border, a wash (no pun intended).
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,253
    edited October 7

    Pulpstar said:

    I think Grieve would have more of a chance here running as an official Lib Dem fwiw actually.

    A solution that might suit both sides is if the whipless 21 organised themselves as National Conservatives, in coalition with but separate from the Lib Dems (just as the old National Liberals used to do with the Conservatives). This would allow the Lib Dems to maintain a bit of distance from some fairly old-style Conservatives, allowing them to continue to hitch their skirts at disaffected Labour supporters, while allowing the National Conservatives to continue to maintain a sense of ideological continuity.
    But the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow it, and the experience of 2010-2015 suggests the Lib Dems shouldn't be too strongly associated with any "Conservative" branding anyway. So we'd need two things: better branding for the Conservative escapees, and an equivalent counterweight on the Labour side.

    The Grievesters could become the National Centre-Right. The equivalent party on the centre-left, in the absence of using the "Labour" brand, could become the National Socia...

    Oh, wait.
    I fancy half of the 21 will be back shortly, 5 or 6 will step down leaving Grieve Greening, possibly Gauke as the core of any new movement with maybe 4 or 5 others
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 568

    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
    I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.

    I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.

    NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
    On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.

    They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.

    [1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,126

    Pulpstar said:


    On topic, in a seat that voted for Remain and where the local MP will undoubtedly have some personal vote, you'd have thought Dominic Grieve stands a very good chance. Some value in the 5/6 on him, I think.

    I don't think it's nearly enough. He'd have a chance in a by-election but I'm on the Tories here at 5-6 now 4-6.
    A lot depends on whether the election turns out to be all about Brexit or not - a curious feature of the debate is that nearly everyone feels strongly about the principle (In or Out) but few care about the details. I doubt if the media will run with 35 consecutive days of In or Out stories, so the subject will change.

    Grieve's trump card might be that everyone claims to want independent-minded, principled MPs, and whatever one thinks of his views, he fits that model. Do most voters really prefer that to the party they usually vote for, though? Party allegiances are fading fast, but habits are hard to break. I know a local voter who always supports the Tories but hates Brexit, despises Boris and doesn't think much of the MP (Jeremy Hunt). I asked her if she was thinking of voting LibDem in view of that. It was a new thought for her - "I suppose I even might". I wasn't totally convinced that she actually will.
    I had a very similar conversation with my mum (a lifelong Conservative) over the weekend. My elder sister is apparently going to vote Lib Dem, much to my mum's bemusement. I misheard and thought she was saying that she was going to vote Lib Dem herself. I was soon corrected.

    I think my mum is going to abstain next time round. She did in the Euros and the Conservatives don't seem to be an option for her at the moment.

    NB having been a firm Leaver at the time of the referendum, she would now definitely vote Remain if there is a fresh referendum.
    On the subject of party loyalties, my family on my wife's side are staunch REMAINERS. Absolutely staunch. But they are also Labour (being in Bootle). My wife is more fence sitting and usually votes Labour but not always. She's determined to vote LD at any upcoming election to stop Brexit. She spoke to her own mum and dad about it, both of whom hate Brexit too, and tried to convince them they really had to think again about Labour.

    They told her that the name on the ballot paper could be 'Adolf Hitler - Labour Party Candidate'[1] and they would still vote Labour. Nothing, absolutely NOTHING will convince them to vote anything other than Labour.

    [1] With apologies to Godwin's law.... and Ken Livingstone.
    Ah, splitters. :)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 8,492
    Cyclefree said:

    Noo said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Completely off topic, this weekend I realised that I have 152 houseplants.
    I know even less about London pubs than Rory Stewart.

    You could organise a meetup at a garden centre instead..
    That is not going to help me stop collecting even more plants!!!

    Plus any PB'ers turning up will find themselves conscripted into general fetching/carrying and other labouring duties. Which will be lovely for me. But perhaps not for anyone else.
    If the tea and scones are good I could be persuaded.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 27,418
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    In the European Parliament elections the Brexit Party won South Bucks (containing Beaconsfield) on 7310 to 5340 votes for the LDs so would not count on Grieve holding on. The Tories were also third on 3169 votes

    https://www.bucksfreepress.co.uk/news/17668055.eu-elections-2019-vote-breakdown-wycombe-chiltern-and-south-bucks/

    So Grieve just needs the LibDem voters, half of those Tories who were unwilling to defect to Farage in the EU elections (and are therefore likely to be a mix of remainers and soft Brexiters) and a little bit of tactical help from those who backed the Greens, Change Uk and Labour in the Euros.
    So he's screwed then.....
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 23,734
    Number 2 on Stephen Bush list: Newcastle-under-Lyme. Are we going to see another PB-stalwart MP?
  • NooNoo Posts: 1,661

    Noo said:

    there was analysis after the 2017GE that did show it had an effect.

    ok, any idea how much?
    Try here.
    Yeah, well, I'm happy to do my own research when I have a hunch there's good evidence out there, but I don't. So it's natural to reach out to those who are so confident in their opinions to signpost it. You know, the trailblazers who have obviously gotten their research in before me.
    The bonus is, on the off chance that they are merely just lazy shysters talking rubbish, everyone else gets to see that their confident assertions are actually hollow.
This discussion has been closed.