I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
Ed West sounds like the candidate, not the constituency
The LDs did very well in the Scottish locals there last month, doubling their number of councillors in Edinburgh, and doing particularly well in the Almond ward which makes up the bulk of the Edinburgh West constituency.
Also Michelle Thomson, the suspended former MP comprehensively queered the pitch for the SNP.
It is for a similar reason why Glasgow East might, just might, see an huge upset Labour win. The previous SNP MP, Natalie McGarry has been charged with fraud in relation to local party funds and the Women for Independence organisation. Considering that Labour got over 60% in 2010 it is not impossible that there will be a greater swing back to them there than in the other Glasgow seats.
It's possible. We're seeing the first drift back from SNP to Labour since Indyref.
Another Labour longshot is Midlothian. They did well in the locals and there is a significant Conservative support to squeeze. Midlothian is commuter land for Edinburgh these days and takes on some of its politics.
Which is fake news My wife became quite worryingly ill on a Saturday. This only became apparent when the gp surgery which is open on saturday had closed. She was able to go to the local out of hours service virtually immediately. Indeed so soon was the appointment that I was worried I would nor be able to drive her there in time. She was diagnosed and treated and recovered inside 3 - 4 days. My 90 year old mother in law was talen to the surgery, I took her, when taken ill and seen even though the official session was over. She has had all kinds of treatments for illnesses including a cancer and no where near has had to wait 3 weeks.
You know what, just shut the wotsit up with your propaganda peddling.
It's from the Daily Telegraph front page. That famous Corbynite propaganda sheet.
Online booking is convenient (and EMIS are the best NHS software providers. Their products work!) but does not create space. making room for urgents reduces space for routines.
What has the fact that it's the telegraph got to do with anything. The telegraphs a modern day joke. It's still fake news... maybe its all generated by a 'bot'.... My experiences are true stories. Given that it is free and we have choice taken out of our hands is it so bad that 'routine' is viewed as just that. Kent Rising makes good points. Lefties just use the nhs as a political football. They stink.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
As with the Tories and their view of May, this view will change once Labour do actually lose the election. Personally I am of the 'a plague on both your houses' view but will vote Tory to ensure Brexit is not derailed.
So, if you're Labour what do you do? Some people are about to think for the first time 'maybe'. How do they handle that? In the past, Labour has not handled that moment well. How would you play it?
1. Hope. You want better for you and yours than you have now? As the 6th richest economy we don't have to cut everything and everything. We can't afford NOT to invest in our children 2. Decency. This is Britain. My grandfather didn't fight to secure our freedom in order to have veteran soldiers starved to death, the disabled left to lie in their own filth and children going to school hungry because their working parents can't afford food. We are better than this. What the Tories are doing to people is wrong at a very basic moral level, your neighbour is your friend not your enemy if we all pull together
Having spoken to so may people in this campaign my gut feel as to the mad swing is this. The Tory manifesto broke the TINA narrative. People have said "that isn't right" and are willing to vote accordingly. Because whatever your views on the economy these are human beings and our friends family and neighbours being treated by the Tories like scum. And the Tories excuses for working people reliant on foodbanks just doesn't wash any more.
People voted Brexit because they want a better future. Only one party offering details about what that means to them.
Tories are scum. Tories are morally wrong. Tories aren't decent.
Nothing changes from the Labour hymnsheet, does it?
I burst out laughing at the idea that a supporter of a party putting forward Corbyn and McDonnell as its two most senior people could with a straight face cite 'Decency' as a reason to vote for them.
Have to agree with this. There's no way in hell McDonnell could be called decent.
Even if thousands of young people who normally don't vote do vote for Corbyn, they probably wont vote tactically. They'll just vote Labour. The Tories therefore might hold seats they might not have done otherwise?
Just a theory. Dont know how many seats this might apply to.
That could be right, but also there's the problem for Labour that most of the places with an unusually large proportion of young people are already safe Labour seats. Obviously not all of them, but the point is most marginal seats don't have a heavy proportion of young people.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
No labour supporter can't say immigration will come down under labour because it won't,just look at the people who surround corbyn - all pro mass immigration.
The real fear for me and my poor city is labours asylum policy.I can see record levels heading our way under a corbyn government.
I don't get the Trump-May hand-holding thing. He was just being a gentleman and holding her hand while she took a step down, potentially precarious in her heels. I bet many if not most people see it that way. No? Okay, just me then.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
Ya still gonna fucking LOSE ya miserable commie bastard. HAH.
There is something else we may not be taking account of in the Conservative figures.
I always felt whilst they were 46-47% style figures that there was a reducing gain after a point, that some of that froth on top just wouldn't result in proportionate gains.
The reverse, however, also stands. 43% which I think they'll hit on election day could also be a point of maximum gain potential.
Yes I suspect the young will turn out more, but even at mid 30s for Labour, its simply wont get them near striking distance of denying the Conservatives an improved working majority when the Conservatives are north of 42% .
I don't get the Trump-May hand-holding thing. He was just being a gentleman and holding her hand while she took a step down, potentially precarious in her heels. I bet many if not most people see it that way. No? Okay, just me then.
It's just the way it can be used to illustrate the idea TMay will march in lockstep with him, literally hand in hand. In itself nothing at all.
The interesting constituency in Edinburgh is South West. It's the one the SNP are putting the most effort into. I think they reckon it is at severe risk of being lost - to the Conservatives.
Labour have picked a candidate here hardly anyone knows as opposed to the popular local councillor who stood in 2015, and I've seen and heard very little of their campaign. They are throwing every resource they have into holding Ed South. It seem for at least three Edinburgh seats, only one Unionist candidate will get the high profile support and virtually a clear run at being the anti-SNP choice.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
As with the Tories and their view of May, this view will change once Labour do actually lose the election. Personally I am of the 'a plague on both your houses' view but will vote Tory to ensure Brexit is not derailed.
I do find it utterly bizarre that people are presenting a Labour loss as some kind of mandate for Corbyn.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.
I don't get the Trump-May hand-holding thing. He was just being a gentleman and holding her hand while she took a step down, potentially precarious in her heels. I bet many if not most people see it that way. No? Okay, just me then.
It's just the way it can be used to illustrate the idea TMay will march in lockstep with him, literally hand in hand. In itself nothing at all.
So you polling junkies brace yourself for cold turkey as your next fixes will come on Saturday.
The final weekend before polling day should bring around 5-7 polls in the Sunday papers?
#MegaPollingSaturday
I'm hoping for more.
Peak poll.
haven't we got lord ashcroft tomorrow?
An update to his model, yeah. Should be in the late afternoon if last week was anything to go by.
New bedsheets on standby - I severely doubt his model will increase its forecast of Tory seats.
What I find really interesting is that his forecast using 2015 turnout and self-reported turnout are the same. Using the EU referendum turnout results in a significantly smaller majority.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
An interesting stat would be how many of those were for those already on the register.
The interesting constituency in Edinburgh is South West. It's the one the SNP are putting the most effort into. I think they reckon it is at severe risk of being lost - to the Conservatives.
Also I would say that the MP there is more high profile than the other Edinburgh SNP MPs. If it is clear who is best positioned to be the Nats, Labour or Con then Ms Cherry is probably going to lose. However since the 2 parties were split 27/20 in Labour's favour in 2015 but the Tories did much better in the last Holyrood election in the slightly smaller Pentlands seat getting within 2500 votes of the SNP it might not totally obvious to the electorate. I think that it will be very close but she will just lose to the Tories since the drop in the SNP vote will take her below 40% which was pretty fatal in 2015 (Only 1 seat in Scotland was won with less than 39% of the vote, BRS) It is also telling that the SNP are concentrating there rather than Edin South or West. (I do think that there is clear evidence that the folk in Edinburgh have a much better understanding of Anti-SNP tactical voting and more willing to do it than in the rest of the country but it will spread to other parts over the next few years probably starting next week)
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
As with the Tories and their view of May, this view will change once Labour do actually lose the election. Personally I am of the 'a plague on both your houses' view but will vote Tory to ensure Brexit is not derailed.
I do find it utterly bizarre that people are presenting a Labour loss as some kind of mandate for Corbyn.
I don't think its a mandate for him if they lose seats. BUT if it is not too many seats and the vote share increases, I do think that his opponents won't have the guts or the support to oust him.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many of them don't. Puzzling.
There is, of course, the matter of simple mathematics involved in the polls.
Given they've got to add up to 100%, if we assume the Conservatives are floating around 43%, and then assume that the other minor and nationalist parties are likewise going nowhere or even falling back (certainly not impossible) and say 2% Green, 4% UKIP, 7% Lib Dem and 4% Nationalist - this is only 60%. Assuming this is a GB wide poll, who is getting the other 40%? Well, it has to be Labour.
It may seem mad, but its simple maths. The percentages have to add to 100% (or 99% if they shout 'rounding') but it's that simple. Maybe the Labour 'surge' isn't there at all. It's simple the minor parties being drowned out as two party politics assets itself across GB and voters from the minor parties jumping one way or the other (but in this case - mostly Labour, except for some UKIP to Con switchers).
It could easily be 2% Green, 7% UKIP, 10% LD leaving Labour with 34%.
In terms of the GB (not UK) vote, the Conservatives probably won't do worse than 44% - very little of the 38% who backed Cameron over Miliband are going to desert May for Corbyn, May should mop up about half of the Ukip vote, and any leakage of hardcore Europhiles to the Lib Dems now looks likely to be so modest that, in terms of crude national vote share, it should be entirely compensated for by the gain in Tory share in Scotland. So that leaves 56% of the vote.
Realistically, SNP + Plaid + Speaker + independents + minor parties (Cornish Nationalists, Socialist Labour, etc, etc) won't add up to anything less than 5%; in fact it'l probably be a little more than that, but let's not split hairs. 56-5 = 51% of the vote remaining.
Now, in order for Labour to make 40% we would have to assume the following:
1. The Lib Dem + Ukip + Green = 11% only, e.g. LD 7%, Ukip 3%, Green 1% 2. That any net loss of vote share from the Lib Dems, and from Ukip over and above a defection rate of 50% as previously mentioned, would have to move entirely to Labour 3. That there is no net movement from Lab to Con at all
And if the Tories creep up to 45, 46, 47%, things become even more difficult for Labour.
In point of fact, as previously discussed, Labour seems to be dependent for its more generous polling figures on record turnout amongst very young and other previous non-voters. The pollsters who are less generous to Labour are still giving the Tories enough of a lead for anything between a comfortable working majority and a landslide.
I may not be giving Labour enough credit, and it may turn out that I'm wrong and they do well enough to erase the Conservative majority, but right now I still can't see that as being at all likely.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many don't. Puzzling.
Well, it's a legal requirement, so people feel it's something they need to get round to. But what I meant was that this specific slice of 4% of the electorate (and a larger share of the young electorate) almost certainly will vote, since they have just made a special effort to register in the last few weeks. So to some extent it adds credence to the theory that the young will vote in larger numbers than usual.
Good-humoured concession by veteran Corbyn critic on Labour List:
"Can't believe what is going on. Even with a huge margin of error it looks like Diane Abbot was right about her at the time 'ridiculous' forecasts.
The Tories are crumbling and .... dare I say it .... Corbyn is making a monkey out of all us who bashed him. Including me of course.
All the best. Great campaign so far. Can't fault it.
OK, OK, I was wrong. I admit it. I now believe."
As I've said, a lot of the opposition to Corbyn was simply that they thought he'd lose big time. If he doesn't, the probability of a successful challenge becomes very small. Is there anyone who still feels we'd be doing better if we'd elected Owen Smith?
As with the Tories and their view of May, this view will change once Labour do actually lose the election. Personally I am of the 'a plague on both your houses' view but will vote Tory to ensure Brexit is not derailed.
I do find it utterly bizarre that people are presenting a Labour loss as some kind of mandate for Corbyn.
I don't think its a mandate for him if they lose seats. BUT if it is not too many seats and the vote share increases, I do think that his opponents won't have the guts or the support to oust him.
The outcome of this election will almost certainly produce 2 leaders of the major parties who are impregnable, but viewed as utterly inept generally by the majority of their own MPs.
I spoke to a particularly well known UK politician the other day, and he said that the problem with this election is that the leaders are fucking useless....
At the last election we all knew Ed Miliband was crap....now we have Jezza, Tessa, and Tim who all are worse than Ed....and that is really saying something.....
So they are spending £0.1bn on reversing benefits cuts, yet spending a hundred times that on a bung for middle class students. Very progressive.
I'd prefer that money was spent on reversing cuts to disability benefits rather than abolishing tuition fees and renationalising the railways - but neither major party is offering that option.
Benefit cuts won't be totally reversed whoever gets in. But if it's a choice of no benefit increases and go for a hard brexit versus reverse the very worst benefit cuts and go for a soft brexit I'll vote for the latter.
I am reminded on election night 2015 that Paddy Ashdown was relying on the YouGov poll giving the LibDems 31 seats over the exit poll that gave them 10, when he said he would eat his hat if the exit poll was right.....
I don't get the Trump-May hand-holding thing. He was just being a gentleman and holding her hand while she took a step down, potentially precarious in her heels. I bet many if not most people see it that way. No? Okay, just me then.
From what I have seen of the video it looked very awkward. Not at all natural or comfortable.
I don't know what to make of it, but I couldn't see anything normal in it at all.
I am reminded on election night 2015 that Paddy Ashdown was relying on the YouGov poll giving the LibDems 31 seats over the exit poll that gave them 10, when he said he would eat his hat if the exit poll was right.....
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
No it is not safe to assume that. There was a 14% increase in young people registering last time but turnout amonst them fell 1%.
I'd also had Ed West switching with far greater confidence that Dunbartonshire East
Ed West sounds like the candidate, not the constituency
The LDs did very well in the Scottish locals there last month, doubling their number of councillors in Edinburgh, and doing particularly well in the Almond ward which makes up the bulk of the Edinburgh West constituency.
Also Michelle Thomson, the suspended former MP comprehensively queered the pitch for the SNP.
It is for a similar reason why Glasgow East might, just might, see an huge upset Labour win. The previous SNP MP, Natalie McGarry has been charged with fraud in relation to local party funds and the Women for Independence organisation. Considering that Labour got over 60% in 2010 it is not impossible that there will be a greater swing back to them there than in the other Glasgow seats.
It's possible. We're seeing the first drift back from SNP to Labour since Indyref.
Another Labour longshot is Midlothian. They did well in the locals and there is a significant Conservative support to squeeze. Midlothian is commuter land for Edinburgh these days and takes on some of its politics.
As with a lot of seats in Scotland it depends if all the new voters that the Nats attracted in 2015 turnout again this time. Midlothian saw 9000 more voters in 2015 than 2010 and the SNP majority is 10000. If half of them don't turn up this time then there are enough Con and LD votes to get the Labour candidate over the line.
Anecdote alert. Greens are actively helping in campaign down here.Not likely to make the difference, but we are starting to pick up Plaid,Lib and UKIP switchers to Labour.Things have def moved last few days in Preseli.
I suppose in a way she could flip flop back to her pre referendum position in opposition, although she wouldn't be leader anyway so it wouldn't particularly matter
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour's policy is essentially to restrict immigration for people who don't have job offers, but allow it when they do - the classic example is bringing East Europeans to Eas tAnglia for the crops. Corbyn personally likes a diverse Britain but the party accepts that public concern has reached a point where we can't just ignore it.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
I am reminded on election night 2015 that Paddy Ashdown was relying on the YouGov poll giving the LibDems 31 seats over the exit poll that gave them 10, when he said he would eat his hat if the exit poll was right.....
To be fair to Paddy...that election night prediction seemed a real shocker.....
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
No it is not safe to assume that. There was a 14% increase in young people registering last time but turnout amonst them fell 1%.
Among the young in general or those 14% in particular?
It'll be interesting to see if Labour can win back East Lothian from the SNP. There seems to be a consensus that it's their best chance of a gain in Scotland, perhaps based on local election results.
Which is fake news My wife became quite worryingly ill on a Saturday. This only became apparent when the gp surgery which is open on saturday had closed. She was able to go to the local out of hours service virtually immediately. Indeed so soon was the appointment that I was worried I would nor be able to drive her there in time. She was diagnosed and treated and recovered inside 3 - 4 days. My 90 year old mother in law was talen to the surgery, I took her, when taken ill and seen even though the official session was over. She has had all kinds of treatments for illnesses including a cancer and no where near has had to wait 3 weeks.
You know what, just shut the wotsit up with your propaganda peddling.
It's from the Daily Telegraph front page. That famous Corbynite propaganda sheet.
Online booking is convenient (and EMIS are the best NHS software providers. Their products work!) but does not create space. making room for urgents reduces space for routines.
What has the fact that it's the telegraph got to do with anything. The telegraphs a modern day joke. It's still fake news... maybe its all generated by a 'bot'.... My experiences are true stories. Given that it is free and we have choice taken out of our hands is it so bad that 'routine' is viewed as just that. Kent Rising makes good points. Lefties just use the nhs as a political football. They stink.
As are my parents'. Your point seems to be my GP is OK, so everyone else is wilfully mis representing.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many of them don't. Puzzling.
We heard all this during EuRef, 2 million more registered to vote. Result: Much young remoaning.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
No it is not safe to assume that. There was a 14% increase in young people registering last time but turnout amonst them fell 1%.
Interestingly there has been a big campaign in schools to make children over 16 aware that they can and should register to vote even if they can't actually vote until they are 18. It is part of civic lessons (and a jolly good thing too). I wonder how much effect that is having on these new registrations as I have not heard of it before.
Anyone seen the BBC's 'Know your constituency' thing, which quizzes on basic stats about each constituency? Average house prices, average age, that sort of thing. I did pretty well, around 62, so know my basic stats to some extent.
I don't get the Trump-May hand-holding thing. He was just being a gentleman and holding her hand while she took a step down, potentially precarious in her heels. I bet many if not most people see it that way. No? Okay, just me then.
From what I have seen of the video it looked very awkward. Not at all natural or comfortable.
I don't know what to make of it, but I couldn't see anything normal in it at all.
When you look at Donald Trump with Theresa May normal isn 't a word that springs to mind...
May has started to make my hairs crawl slightly when I see her.,....
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many of them don't. Puzzling.
We heard all this during EuRef, 2 million more registered to vote. Result: Much young remoaning.
I know someone who registered for a postal vote because they are on holiday on 8th June. Only problem is the postal vote didn't arrive until they had gone on holiday so they cannot vote! So it happens.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many of them don't. Puzzling.
We heard all this during EuRef, 2 million more registered to vote. Result: Much young remoaning.
Yes indeed. Anecdotally I'm aware of a few youngsters who have learned their lesson from then and insist they will vote this time, but I still wouldn't expect to see an enormous rise, but still a rise.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
No it is not safe to assume that. There was a 14% increase in young people registering last time but turnout amonst them fell 1%.
I also seem to recall, from the graph of turnout by age group from the FT that was posted on here the other day, that turnout in all of the 35+ age groups had, by the time of the 2015 election and the 2016 EU vote, more or less recovered to where it was in the period before the big dip in 2001. However, turnout amongst the 25-34s was still struggling to come back up, and that amongst the 18-24s remained appalling - a modest upturn for the 2015 election, but then down again (to an unprecedented low?) for the EU vote.
The notion that Labour might be catapulted upwards into Hung Parliament territory by a huge upswing in support from the young is, therefore, predicated upon a sudden and very significant change in quite long-term historical voting patterns.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many don't. Puzzling.
Well, it's a legal requirement, so people feel it's something they need to get round to. But what I meant was that this specific slice of 4% of the electorate (and a larger share of the young electorate) almost certainly will vote, since they have just made a special effort to register in the last few weeks. So to some extent it adds credence to the theory that the young will vote in larger numbers than usual.
A chunk will already be registered at home. Another chunk will register but on 8th June will not be where they have registered - and won't have got a postal. Another chunk will be Tories for whom it would be social death to admit how they vote....
What did the Asian bloke in QT say at the end of his speech about limiting migrants from asia without literacy and numreracy? The audience seemed to jeer him at the end.
I am reminded on election night 2015 that Paddy Ashdown was relying on the YouGov poll giving the LibDems 31 seats over the exit poll that gave them 10, when he said he would eat his hat if the exit poll was right.....
To be fair to Paddy...that election night prediction seemed a real shocker.....
Brent North has had just two MPs since it was created in 1974, Sir Rhodes Boyson and Barry Gardiner. Interesting characters both of them, although it would be difficult to think of two more different politicians.
Thinking back to my first voting opportunity in 2005, I was 18 and voted LD, I really cannot recall any level of discussion among my local age group about politics. I assume, living in a Tory shire, that some will have voted Tory, but I don't recall many if any Labour fans, or die hard LDs either, I think we were an apathetic bunch compared to these screeching fanatics you see sometimes.
Another chunk will be Tories for whom it would be social death to admit how they vote....
This is always a point worth remembering. I wonder how much of the immense Labour lead amongst the youngest voters in the polls is down to the Shy Tory Problem?
David Davis should have been Tory PM leader rather than Cameron in 2008.... and everything else would have been avoided
*sigh*
I'm not sure why he's so derided on here and other places. He seems on top of his brief.
david davis is a class act..he's likeable, charismatic, an effective communicator, a good back story, handsome, well dressed, self deprecating, comfortable in his own skin.....I don't like his politics, but I cannot think of many better suited for this kind of living.....
Thinking back to my first voting opportunity in 2005, I was 18 and voted LD, I really cannot recall any level of discussion among my local age group about politics. I assume, living in a Tory shire, that some will have voted Tory, but I don't recall many if any Labour fans, or die hard LDs either, I think we were an apathetic bunch compared to these screeching fanatics you see sometimes.
Anyone seen the BBC's 'Know your constituency' thing, which quizzes on basic stats about each constituency? Average house prices, average age, that sort of thing. I did pretty well, around 62, so know my basic stats to some extent.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour's policy is essentially to restrict immigration for people who don't have job offers, but allow it when they do - the classic example is bringing East Europeans to Eas tAnglia for the crops. Corbyn personally likes a diverse Britain but the party accepts that public concern has reached a point where we can't just ignore it.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
Many thanks. I aim at unfailing courtesy, and although my remark was somewhat tongue-in-cheek I really didn't intend to tread on anyone's sensitivities.
David Davis should have been Tory PM leader rather than Cameron in 2008.... and everything else would have been avoided
*sigh*
Certainly a Conservative or Conservative-led government would have been avoided.
He's turning out to be much better than I expected in his current role, though. We'll have to see how he actually fares in the negotiations (assuming he still has the role!)
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many don't. Puzzling.
Well, it's a legal requirement, so people feel it's something they need to get round to. But what I meant was that this specific slice of 4% of the electorate (and a larger share of the young electorate) almost certainly will vote, since they have just made a special effort to register in the last few weeks. So to some extent it adds credence to the theory that the young will vote in larger numbers than usual.
But some of the young people rushing to register to vote are already registered elsewhere but have suddenly realised that they are not going to be at their place of study come the 8th of June. Might it actually see a reduction in the % of turnout even if there is an increase in the total votes because of this? Also how is registering to vote a legal requirement, I know of several people who can't vote because they don't register to.
Brent North has had just two MPs since it was created in 1974, Sir Rhodes Boyson and Barry Gardiner. Interesting characters both of them, although it would be difficult to think of two more different politicians.
Never made that link! Rhodes Boyson, there was a character. Although, he had at least had a proper job, unlike many MPs these days. Taught in, and led, some tough schools.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
I don't understand why anyone who makes an effort to register to vote doesn't then vote at the subsequent election(s). But when only 65% take part, it must be the case that many of them don't. Puzzling.
We heard all this during EuRef, 2 million more registered to vote. Result: Much young remoaning.
Yes indeed. Anecdotally I'm aware of a few youngsters who have learned their lesson from then and insist they will vote this time, but I still wouldn't expect to see an enormous rise, but still a rise.
I fully expect youth turnout will be higher then the 43% in 2015 maybe up to a significant increase to 50-57% based on the Cleggmania of 2010 which had turnout of 50%. What people don't know is Cleggmania did happen but only with the 18-24 year olds who increaded their turnout by a massive 14%.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour's policy is essentially to restrict immigration for people who don't have job offers, but allow it when they do - the classic example is bringing East Europeans to Eas tAnglia for the crops. Corbyn personally likes a diverse Britain but the party accepts that public concern has reached a point where we can't just ignore it.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
I was referring to the fact that this poster was repeating what had been said by TM this morning. C4 described the Tory politicians lie about Lab wanting open borders as BRINGING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE.
Someone asked a couple of days ago if there was concrete data on what sort of people have recently gone onto the register, and how many. I've come across the figures:
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.</p>
No it is not safe to assume that. There was a 14% increase in young people registering last time but turnout amonst them fell 1%.
I wondered if there was a population-increase effect to take account of, but no;
There may be better stats out there, but it looks to me like - all else being equal - we should expect a small decline in young first-time registration this time around, then it'll level off in 2022 and go up bigly in 2027.
Any absolute increase, (relative to 2015) is against the population trend.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour's policy is essentially to restrict immigration for people who don't have job offers, but allow it when they do - the classic example is bringing East Europeans to Eas tAnglia for the crops. Corbyn personally likes a diverse Britain but the party accepts that public concern has reached a point where we can't just ignore it.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
I was referring to the fact that this poster was repeating what had been said by TM this morning. C4 described the Tory politicians lie about Lab wanting open borders as BRINGING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE.
In terms of the GB (not UK) vote, the Conservatives probably won't do worse than 44% - very little of the 38% who backed Cameron over Miliband are going to desert May for Corbyn, May should mop up about half of the Ukip vote, and any leakage of hardcore Europhiles to the Lib Dems now looks likely to be so modest that, in terms of crude national vote share, it should be entirely compensated for by the gain in Tory share in Scotland. So that leaves 56% of the vote.
Realistically, SNP + Plaid + Speaker + independents + minor parties (Cornish Nationalists, Socialist Labour, etc, etc) won't add up to anything less than 5%; in fact it'l probably be a little more than that, but let's not split hairs. 56-5 = 51% of the vote remaining.
Now, in order for Labour to make 40% we would have to assume the following:
1. The Lib Dem + Ukip + Green = 11% only, e.g. LD 7%, Ukip 3%, Green 1% 2. That any net loss of vote share from the Lib Dems, and from Ukip over and above a defection rate of 50% as previously mentioned, would have to move entirely to Labour 3. That there is no net movement from Lab to Con at all
And if the Tories creep up to 45, 46, 47%, things become even more difficult for Labour.
In point of fact, as previously discussed, Labour seems to be dependent for its more generous polling figures on record turnout amongst very young and other previous non-voters. The pollsters who are less generous to Labour are still giving the Tories enough of a lead for anything between a comfortable working majority and a landslide.
I may not be giving Labour enough credit, and it may turn out that I'm wrong and they do well enough to erase the Conservative majority, but right now I still can't see that as being at all likely.
A very solid analysis.
I'm not sure that 44% is certain - but it is the current polling position, and hence should be quite likely to be achieved next week if nothing significant changes.
I hope @Casino_Royale reads this before bed and sleeps better.
David Davis should have been Tory PM leader rather than Cameron in 2008.... and everything else would have been avoided
*sigh*
Certainly a Conservative or Conservative-led government would have been avoided.
He's turning out to be much better than I expected in his current role, though. We'll have to see how he actually fares in the negotiations (assuming he still has the role!)
Remember when he resigned his seat in 2008 to force a by-election, to raise awareness regarding the erosion of civil liberties? I donated to his re-election campaign. Okay, it was a tenner, but I respected his move.
Never mind - Labour have an open doors policy that will soon give us all more time to recover first.
YOU BRING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE
No wonder Liar Liar is number1
Something of an over-reaction, sir. Why should any remark of mine (however cynical) bring politics into disrepute, however ill-advised? I am not standing as a candidate and don't belong to any political party.
Am I misrepresenting the Labour party's manifesto on immigration? My apologies if so - I have heard Mr Corbyn say that he wants to see immigration increase, but that was before the GE was called.
Labour's policy is essentially to restrict immigration for people who don't have job offers, but allow it when they do - the classic example is bringing East Europeans to Eas tAnglia for the crops. Corbyn personally likes a diverse Britain but the party accepts that public concern has reached a point where we can't just ignore it.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
I was referring to the fact that this poster was repeating what had been said by TM this morning. C4 described the Tory politicians lie about Lab wanting open borders as BRINGING POLITICS INTO DISREPUTE.
I am afraid Corbyn long ago brought his particular brand of politics into disrepute. Sad that you should seek to emulate him.
Comments
Another Labour longshot is Midlothian. They did well in the locals and there is a significant Conservative support to squeeze. Midlothian is commuter land for Edinburgh these days and takes on some of its politics.
My experiences are true stories. Given that it is free and we have choice taken out of our hands is it so bad that 'routine' is viewed as just that. Kent Rising makes good points.
Lefties just use the nhs as a political football. They stink.
Think all the panelists are doing well so far.
The real fear for me and my poor city is labours asylum policy.I can see record levels heading our way under a corbyn government.
Edited. That was Britain elects, not Electoral calculus.
I always felt whilst they were 46-47% style figures that there was a reducing gain after a point, that some of that froth on top just wouldn't result in proportionate gains.
The reverse, however, also stands. 43% which I think they'll hit on election day could also be a point of maximum gain potential.
Yes I suspect the young will turn out more, but even at mid 30s for Labour, its simply wont get them near striking distance of denying the Conservatives an improved working majority when the Conservatives are north of 42% .
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
https://www.indy100.com/article/general-election-electoral-register-vote-theresa-may-june-8-2017-conservative-labour-latest-7742376
This does appear to show a specific surge among young voters (<35). To put it in perspective, it's about 4% of the 25 million-odd who voted in 2015, so enough to be noticeable but not enough to be amazing. But it's probably safe to assume that someone who rushed to register will in fact vote.
However since the 2 parties were split 27/20 in Labour's favour in 2015 but the Tories did much better in the last Holyrood election in the slightly smaller Pentlands seat getting within 2500 votes of the SNP it might not totally obvious to the electorate.
I think that it will be very close but she will just lose to the Tories since the drop in the SNP vote will take her below 40% which was pretty fatal in 2015 (Only 1 seat in Scotland was won with less than 39% of the vote, BRS) It is also telling that the SNP are concentrating there rather than Edin South or West.
(I do think that there is clear evidence that the folk in Edinburgh have a much better understanding of Anti-SNP tactical voting and more willing to do it than in the rest of the country but it will spread to other parts over the next few years probably starting next week)
Realistically, SNP + Plaid + Speaker + independents + minor parties (Cornish Nationalists, Socialist Labour, etc, etc) won't add up to anything less than 5%; in fact it'l probably be a little more than that, but let's not split hairs. 56-5 = 51% of the vote remaining.
Now, in order for Labour to make 40% we would have to assume the following:
1. The Lib Dem + Ukip + Green = 11% only, e.g. LD 7%, Ukip 3%, Green 1%
2. That any net loss of vote share from the Lib Dems, and from Ukip over and above a defection rate of 50% as previously mentioned, would have to move entirely to Labour
3. That there is no net movement from Lab to Con at all
And if the Tories creep up to 45, 46, 47%, things become even more difficult for Labour.
In point of fact, as previously discussed, Labour seems to be dependent for its more generous polling figures on record turnout amongst very young and other previous non-voters. The pollsters who are less generous to Labour are still giving the Tories enough of a lead for anything between a comfortable working majority and a landslide.
I may not be giving Labour enough credit, and it may turn out that I'm wrong and they do well enough to erase the Conservative majority, but right now I still can't see that as being at all likely.
I spoke to a particularly well known UK politician the other day, and he said that the problem with this election is that the leaders are fucking useless....
At the last election we all knew Ed Miliband was crap....now we have Jezza, Tessa, and Tim who all are worse than Ed....and that is really saying something.....
Benefit cuts won't be totally reversed whoever gets in. But if it's a choice of no benefit increases and go for a hard brexit versus reverse the very worst benefit cuts and go for a soft brexit I'll vote for the latter.
I don't know what to make of it, but I couldn't see anything normal in it at all.
I haven't seen your original comment but I agree that you shouldn't be held responsible for the state of politics!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39952365
May has started to make my hairs crawl slightly when I see her.,....
The notion that Labour might be catapulted upwards into Hung Parliament territory by a huge upswing in support from the young is, therefore, predicated upon a sudden and very significant change in quite long-term historical voting patterns.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-40118865
They should renamed and shamed.
I'll get my coat.....
We need another Welsh poll!!
Davies is the acceptable face of Toryism but he is less popular than Angus Robertson of the SNP!!!!
The appalling UKIP woman got booed when she proposed grabbing money off Scotland!!1
Perhaps a London/Scotland alliance could still save this country!
He's turning out to be much better than I expected in his current role, though. We'll have to see how he actually fares in the negotiations (assuming he still has the role!)
Also how is registering to vote a legal requirement, I know of several people who can't vote because they don't register to.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/pop-estimate/population-estimates-for-uk--england-and-wales--scotland-and-northern-ireland/mid-2011-and-mid-2012/sty---uk-population-estimates.html
There may be better stats out there, but it looks to me like - all else being equal - we should expect a small decline in young first-time registration this time around, then it'll level off in 2022 and go up bigly in 2027.
Any absolute increase, (relative to 2015) is against the population trend.
I'm not sure that 44% is certain - but it is the current polling position, and hence should be quite likely to be achieved next week if nothing significant changes.
I hope @Casino_Royale reads this before bed and sleeps better.