You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
So who would form a government? I really don’t know… but if there’s a majority against the Tories forming a government, but no majority for Labour forming a government… what happens? More quick elections? How many?
A two horse race. The lib dems only need a 45% swing to win.
https://twitter.com/angelasmithmp/status/1192364732357005312?s=20
So who would form a government?
Dunno but I hear Call-me-Dave is out campaigning. Is he confused, stuck in a time warp or is it signs of Stranger Things to come from the Tories?
If Snp and labour had a majority between them but couldn't agree even an S&C deal? Hypotheticals so only my best guess
largest party attempts to form a government first. If they get a queens speech past then its them ( assume that the tories) if not then the second largest party tries ( labour) SNP abstain, queens speech goes thru - its labour. the SNP would be very unlikely to vote down a labour government. If labour cannot get a QS thru even with SNP abstaining its back to the polls
Those facebook ad spending figures are interesting when you look at the government spend just before the election kicked off.
Again Dazh, a huge swing needed if looking at 2017… but that’s ignoring the 2019 votes. I’m inclined to use 2017 to look at what is most likely to happen… but anyone running a campaign for a LibDem candidate will be trying to use 2019 votes to convince people to go with them… to do otherwise would be bonkers. 2015&2017 has LibDems all but dead… 2019 votes have them beating Labour and the Conservatives all over the country (I can’t see that being repeated, but can see why LibDem activists need to cling to that and use it in their campaigning).
Today was the day the wanna-be chancellors clashed (if only in the media, rather than face to face) - and it has to be said - it’s Labour completely dominating the agenda now. The Conservatives are just offering a less joined up, less green, less clearly costed and funded version of what Labour are proposing. Anyone see it differently…?
a huge swing needed if looking at 2017
Comparisons with 2017 are the only ones that are valid as it's the last time the seat, possibly with the same candidates was contested. It's just stupid, dishonest and deliberately misleading to do otherwise. Anyway I'm convinced it will back fire. Voters don't like being taken for fools, and that seems to be the Lib Dem primary strategy in this election. I've been amazed at the tory campaign so far for it's chaos but at least they are just being disorganised, the lib dems seem to have deliberately chosen this approach. Swinson will be gone in a few weeks, either as a result of this terrible campaign, or losing her seat, or even both.
Comparisons with 2017 are the only ones that are valid
It’s the best measure in many seats, in my opinion, but it completely ignores the way support for the parties have changed since 2017… why would the LibDems use 2017 as their starting point for campaigning, when they have had a big upturn in support recently?
Why are the “ignore 2019” shouts so loud from some people, I wonder…
https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/
dazh - superb job with the bus poster - I like that!
But I think you're in danger in becoming a bit obsessive about Swinson!!! I cannot abide magic grandpa but I dislike Boris more so I'm going down the route of voting labour to stop the tories (admittedly helped by fact we have a good local labour mp).
If you were in a Lib Dem/Tory marginal would you seriously not vote Lib Dem?
but it completely ignores the way support for the parties have changed since 2017
You know as well as I, and along with the vast majority of voters that what happens in a euro election (with a tiny turnout) is pretty much irrelevant to a general election, and this has been proven many times over. Jo Swinson's Liberal Democrats (as I think I'll call them from now on cos I still find it funny) are even going one step further, using arbitrary council ward elections which had 500 voters and scaling those up to constituency level. It's complete bullshit, and everyone knows it is, which is why it's going to backfire.
dazh – superb job with the bus poster – I like that!
I should say I did't produce it, it was a random find on twitter...
https://twitter.com/greenthelesbian/status/1192177423879565313?s=20
And what about the polls Dazh? LibDem support in 2019 is not where it was in 2017, is it? So their campaigns are not going to be based on their 2017 results, are they? It would make no sense for them whatsoever. Labour might be happy to think they are going to repeat 2017 (and I hope they do, or better still do even better) but the truth is that there are lots of seats where LibDems can get support from previously Tory voters and could go from third to first if others also support them… with the alternative being another Tory hold… and I hope they work their arses off trying to do so and take a fair few seats off of Johnson.
But I think you’re in danger in becoming a bit obsessive about Swinson!!!
In danger of becoming obsessed? I think I'm past that point! 🙂
Honestly though, it's a result of her being perhaps the most disingenuous, inauthentic, narcissistic and plain dishonest politician I think I've ever seen. It's like she's competing with Johnson to be the most reviled politician in the country. The difference is that I think Swinson actually believes in her bullshit whereas for Johnson it's just a means to an end.
And yes, I would vote lib dem in a tory/lib dem marginal without even thinking about it. Fortunately I don't have to though.
And what about the polls Dazh?
Which ones? The ones the lib dems are making up and putting false attributions on? Or the ones that show them consistently losing support over recent weeks/months?
A reminder that Cameron only got his majority by taking seats off the LibDems, after a campaign where Labour seemed obsessive about condemning the LibDems, rather than focussing on the Tories.
Oh, that and the Tories scaring people about the SNP having the whip hand over a minority Labour government. I expect this one to come back again in a few weeks time, depressingly… not sure it’ll work as well this time though.
Anyone heard the clip of Javid saying "and...we...will...borrow...more...money" ? Very strange tone/timing reminds me of TM and her low serious voice.
Lib dem support in the polls is not that far from 2017 is it? a lot closer than the euro elections.
I agree it will backfire badly the misleading information. while it might fool a few it will turn off a lot.
Briliant Scotroutes
Liberal Democrats have made good gains in council by-elections.
Yes we know that's different to a GE or electing MEPs, but it's hard, nieve even to ignore that.
Like it or not this GE is all about Brexit, as were recent by-elections.
Like it or not this GE is all about Brexit, as were recent by-elections.
This. Being the only revoke party is a terrific USP in this election and you only need to look at this thread for the evidence of how spooked the other parties are.
That really is not how I see it. I see the lib dems blundering about and alienating support by Swinsons attitude. the fake polling will put a lot of folk off. the folk that the lib dems need are those who think about politics and to them the fake poll charts are very offputting
As I said earlier - my parents are lib dem activists in Swinsons constituency who have always campaigned for her in the past but they are so disgusted with where she is taking the party they no longer are going to do so.
Heres a bet ( think up a comedy forfeit) if you want. the lib dems will end up with no more than 30 seats. I'll be happy if the get a lot more because that likely means no tory majority unless Swinson jumps into bed with them again but given how badly her election campaign is going and how poorly the lib dems are poling 30 seats is a stretch.
That really is not how I see it.
You're starting to sound a bit like a zealot dude.
You’re starting to sound a bit like a zealot dude.
What the hell is zealous about saying you disagree with someone? And even if it is, what would be wrong with that? There's nothing wrong with having strong firmly held opinions and defending them. I think you're confusing having firmly held beliefs with extremism.
And just to agree with TJ, I think this election could be disastrous for the lib dems, possibly even approaching 2015. It'll be tragic if that's the case, because until Clegg sold his soul they were always the sensible alternative option to the mudslinging instincts of the two big parties, and they were doing fairly well at recovering that position under Cable. I have no idea why Swinson has chosen to jump on the fake news/alternative facts Trumpian bandwagon along with Johnson, but it's a huge mistake.
On top of the detail , he is not
But at least he's actually speaking to some people, it's just been photo ops and bussed in crowds in empty warehouses so far- was looking like Mays 2017 GE campaign
Like it or not this GE is all about Brexit, as were recent by-elections
It's not clear that it is. If it were, you'd expect to see much clearer division. Given that the referendum was basically 50-50 and there's been a bit of movement back and forth since, why aren't the hard leave/remain parties neck and neck with the mushy middle trailing behind?
The polls seem to show that people's #1 concern is Brexit. While also simultaneously being the NHS, the economy, immigration, ending the drag of austerity, etc.
I don't think voters have coalesced around an issue yet, which may be why the main parties are flailing around trying to find something that voters will latch onto. If and when they do, I think you'll see the numbers change and firm up.
It's not onto policy yet
At the moment we're at the stage where it's a battle over who's prospective candidates have the dodgiest social media history
In the red corner we have the anti Israel brigade in the blue corner it's team rape apologists
Re the video of drunk uncle Bozo up there^^^ I bet Cummings has his aides on strict orders now to stop him drinking & the efforts to keep him away from the public will increase too
What the hell is zealous about saying you disagree with someone? And even if it is, what would be wrong with that?
The feverish mud slinging at the lib dems whilst conveniently ignoring labour's refusal to have a stance for remain or leave or work with the remain alliance.
Every party should be focused on keeping the tories out. Everything else is a secondary priority.
kimbers
It’s not onto policy yet
At the moment we’re at the stage where it’s a battle over who’s prospective candidates have the dodgiest social media history
In the red corner we have the anti Israel brigade in the blue corner it’s team rape apologists
Re the video of drunk uncle Bozo up there^^^ I bet Cummings has his aides on strict orders now to stop him drinking & the efforts to keep him away from the public will increase too
It's basically as I said either on this thread or the other ... a war on banned subjects.
It's not called anti-Isreal it's labelled anti-semetic... quite possibly the most misleading term ever given the both genetic evidence and religious beliefs of both sides on Abraham, Sarah and Haggar!
Pick your terrorist and pick your freedom fighter according to which way the wind is blowing...
That said I'd love a honest answer from Rees-Mogg on if he thinks the type of people caught in the fire should be allowed to breed...
Clearly they should, like rabbits, it makes staffing the workhouse easier when there's competition for the gruel.
whilst conveniently ignoring labour’s refusal to have a stance for remain or leave
Still don't see why this is a problem. 2nd ref stance is equally as plausible as those two, and much more sensible IMO given the political situation.
So Johnson telling Northern Ireland how good his deal is for them because they get free movement and access to the single market!
Still don’t see why this is a problem. 2nd ref stance is equally as plausible as those two, and much more sensible IMO given the political situation.
Yes, however though, they'd need to win majority which is unlikely. I can't see why they won't work with the remain aliance to further weaken the tories, the alliance wouldn't dilute the labour vote in key tory labour marginals in return and vice verssa, it's a complete no brainer, sureley?
sobreity
Clearly they should, like rabbits, it makes staffing the workhouse easier when there’s competition for the gruel.
I quite honestly would love to know.....
My feeling is he thinks of the rest of us more like farm animals that should be selectively bred when required and sold or disguarded when not.
it’s a complete no brainer, sureley?
Dunno it's complex. With an alliance you're effectively saying 'our best attribute is that we're not them' which isn't exactly positive campaigning.
Every party should be focused on keeping the tories out.
Labour are 100% focused on beating the tories in the hundreds of seats where they are the clear challenger. The lib dems so far have spent all their time pretending that they are the challengers despite being 10s of thousands of votes behind labour in many of these constituencies. If you're looking for parties who aren't pulling their weight in the effort to beat the tories, it's pretty obvious who they are.
So Johnson telling Northern Ireland how good his deal is for them
It does appear on the face of it, that he doesn't understand his own negotiated deal... Can't say I'm massively surprised by the speech though, this is just Johnson telling the people around him what they want to hear. Standard Boris.
The lib dems so far have spent all their time pretending that they are the challengers despite being 10s of thousands of votes behind
To be fair to the Lib Dems dazh, this is how elections work...You try to persuade people to vote for you.
Dunno it’s complex. With an alliance you’re effectively saying ‘our best attribute is that we’re not them’ which isn’t exactly positive campaigning.
This plus a load of other reasons which is why Labour rules prohibit it. Tories won't do a deal with the BP and Labour won't deal either & personally I think they've both got it right.
For the smaller parties it's a good tactic though AFAIC, mind you if you won a seat because other parties stood down that leaves a really dodgy looking mandate.
To be fair to the Lib Dems Dazh, this is how elections work…You try to persuade people to vote for you.
This.
If you’re looking for parties who aren’t pulling their weight in the effort to beat the tories, it’s pretty obvious who they are.
Bollocks, without SNP and the LibDems there wouldn't even be an election. If Labour had their way the Torys would be in Government indefinitely, or rather until after Brexit happened.
Nicola Sturgeon:
“If there is a hung Parliament after this election... SNP MPs would seek to form a progressive alliance to lock the Tories out of government.”
this is how elections work…
By pubishing misleading data and outright lies in an effort to con the electorate? You're right yes, skullduggery has always been a feature of election campaigns, and it's certainly nothing new for the lib dems. But seen in the context of Matty's comment that every party should be doing their best to keep the tories out, that's clearly not what the lib dems are doing.
I'm all for politicians persuading people to vote for them. I've said more times than I can remember that parties should be judged on their policies, past records and their honesty. The lib dems are failing miserably on all 3 of these aspects in this campaign.
Looking in from afar both the cons and labour look like they are imploding....
MP quit because of anti semitic remarks.
Tory candidate quits because of rape comments.
Deputy of Labour gone...
If these people can't seemingly run a party how are they to be trusted to run the country....
I need to register to vote as I'm out of the UK. Where does my vote go/get counted? The last place I was registered in the UK?
a complete no brainer
Except it would be against a lot of the key labour areas who had the clearest leave vote in the Ref
See previous pages ad nauseum for details
every party should be doing their best to keep the tories out
In fairness, that’s what the tories are doing and it’s working out very well for them
“If there is a hung Parliament after this election… SNP MPs would seek to form a progressive alliance to lock the Tories out of government.”
Given the Tories' profligate spending commitments are nearly as mental as Labour's I'd welcome a coalition government lead by the SNP with a revoke policy dictated by the LibDems. (Fantasy, I know.)
Weird though, I thought the 'threat' of an SNP/Labour coalition was a vote loser for both.
Tories profligate spending commitments
Pennies compared to the barmy Green policies!
By pubishing misleading data and outright lies in an effort to con the electorate?
Have you cast a critical eye over McDonald's spending "plans" by any chance? I wouldn't be making sweeping statements about misleading data and lies this early in the campaign. It's not any other parties (including the one we both support) aren't shy of telling the odd porky themselves...
In amongst all the Labour PPCs having to excuse themselves from the process, there's this gem from LibDemLand;
https://twitter.com/BeatriceLibDem/status/1185852774505996288?s=19
Won't somebody think of the tartiflette?
It’s not any other parties (including the one we both support) aren’t shy of telling the odd porky themselves…
Not claiming labour are squeaky clean, they can and do play dirty to when required. There's a big difference though between fabricating and misrepresenting poll data and overly optimistic economic forecasts.
By pubishing misleading data and outright lies in an effort to con the electorate?
Like labour you mean?
https://twitter.com/twlldun/status/1192697947156353025
Labour have the gall to complain about LibDem bar charts.
Deliberately misleading to treat all borrowing as current currency values (a 2010 GBP is worth £1.27 in 2019 GBP; a 1997 GBP is £1.80 in 2019 GBP).
In the last 33 years there have only been 13 years of Labour government.
"All Labour governments in the past 33 years" is not the same as "33 years of Labour government"
It's actually a way of saying "The Blair/Brown government".
Which was only 13 years.
Not claiming labour are squeaky clean, they can and do play dirty to when required. There’s a big difference though between fabricating and misrepresenting poll data and overly optimistic economic forecasts.
Umm.... yeah but I don't think in the manner in which you mean.
Who gives a toss over poll. data that is already deliberately biased according to who pays....vs fabricating economic forcasts and models... ?
"will the UK be better economically under a deal than in the EU?"
answer (sic)
"um, I'm just a shadow chancellor... we will have to ask the people"
libuster
.....I need to register to vote as I’m out of the UK. Where does my vote go/get counted? The last place I was registered in the UK?
provided in time frame allowed yes....5 mins on line if have passport handy unless you lived in NI and that is by post only. Then have to register with the council for either post or proxy vote using an email link when app' to vote confirmed...I currently have a postal vote but seen suggestions need to swop to proxy as local authorities havn't got much time to post out ballot papers and probably won't get in time to return
Who gives a toss over poll. data that is already deliberately biased according to who pays
Bit of an allegation that - got any evidence?
Molgrips,
If you write the questions, you can skew the results. Using phrases like "Thinking of X, do you agree that Y... " can steer people into agreeing with the question.
http://www.charneyresearch.com/resources/the-top-10-ways-to-get-misleading-poll-results/
https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/5-common-survey-mistakes-ruin-your-data/
Thos are just the top 2 i found.
double digit falls for Labour everywhere
it doesnt matter how clueless drunken uncle Bozo rambles on about the NI border he doesnt understand
https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/1192815365136568320
If you write the questions, you can skew the results. Using phrases like “Thinking of X, do you agree that Y… ” can steer people into agreeing with the question.
Of course, this is clear. But you're saying that they deliberately choose leading questions depending on who's paying for the poll. That's the big claim you've made, where's the evidence for that?
A good pollster would carefully choose questions that avoid this issue. You're saying they're all basically bent.
Pretty consistetnt picture there. However, how it plays out on a constituency by constituency basis will give very different answers and also there is plenty of time for peopel to change their mind. I image at this stage people are mor elikely to say who they would like to vote for, but by the end tactical voting will com into play and they mmay vore elsewhere
How come they add up to 100%, without a column for "all others"?
For example my local MP was Labour and is now an independent, I'll likely vote for him as I believe the two and a half party system has basically broken the design of our form of democracy, and that there should be far more independent MPs than there are, although I'll need to look at the detailed projections in a few weeks to make sure that I'm not enabling the Tories by voting for him.
If that's the case then I'll hold my nose and vote for whoever isn't a Tory who has the best chance of winning, just the thought of which is making me feel dirty inside.
EDIT: Pointless comment given the analysis below.
analysis here
Thanks Kimbers, "polling, carried out between 17 October and 4 November". Really doesn't tell us much.
They're all You-Gov.
You need the aggregate poll to really make sense of things.
It's a comparison between regions back in 2017 and currently. Not last week and this week OOB. And no it's I don't think it correlates to spending - that after all would be a good thing.
Though it's still interesting.
spending - after all would be a good thing.
Interest on debt is our 6th biggest public spending item at 39bn. Where do you think voters would like to see it? 1st? 3rd?
For a party that doesn't like wealthy bankers it's seems a bit odd to give them even more than the current 39bn a year - 9bn a year MORE than we spend on social services.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt
Of course, this is clear. But you’re saying that they deliberately choose leading questions depending on who’s paying for the poll. That’s the big claim you’ve made, where’s the evidence for that?
A good pollster would carefully choose questions that avoid this issue. You’re saying they’re all basically bent.
That was my post .... but I agree with willard's reply....
Is it bent to get the answer you're being paid for?
Dunno.... I feel its 'more bent' to pay for an answer than provide the answer you're paid to deliver???
Interest on debt is our 6th biggest public spending item at 39bn. Where do you think voters would like to see it? 1st? 3rd?
For a party that doesn’t like wealthy bankers it’s seems a bit odd to give them even more than the current 39bn a year – 9bn a year MORE than we spend on social services.
but if we spend more it increases our GDP ....surely we just need to spend more and more?
Is it bent to get the answer you’re being paid for?
Yes, when you're claiming to be polling actual voting intention. I do not think they are paid to produce campaign advertising material, tbh. If so, the answers would be rather different I'd imagine, or Labour would be asking for their money back.
So, I'm on http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/swingometer/uk-parliament, and putting the latest YouGov figures (from the Guardian) into it gives a Tory majority of 30, still no Brexit party seats and only 12 LD seats.
Many of us tried to say that Labour coming off the fence for remain would damage their polling - looks like that is happening even with the 2nd ref promise.
From that YouGov poll (so, boo) and might be out of date (boo again) but a good sample size (so, yay)
Brilliant isn't it? Tory share of votes down, Tory seats up.
Hands up who voted against voting reform?
Hands up who voted against voting reform
At least 100 Labour MPs
but if we spend more it increases our GDP ….surely we just need to spend more and more?
Of course, I'd forgotten that fact, thanks for the reminder. ....and that explains why every single country in the world has now become phenomenally wealthy simply by borrowing more and more in an endless virtuous cycle of debt leading to growth.
Oh, hang on...
If those polls above are right then all but a tiny few of us are f*****! And we'll deserve it. Lets hope they're wrong. Although I watched the labour rally in Manchester last night and came to the strong conclusion that Angela Rayner will be the next labour leader. That might be the only silver lining.
I need to register to vote as I’m out of the UK. Where does my vote go/get counted? The last place I was registered in the UK?
Exactly. You'll need to confirm when you left the UK and how you want to vote (postal or proxy mainly)
Question for the various experts here - how should I vote? I don't want people to debate my views (they're not perfect, but they're mine) - just advice on which way to vote and why.
If I had to rank my personal priorities they would be:
- Stop Brexit/ at least keep the UK in the common market.
- Kick out the Tories, and associated racist populists.
- Prevent mass nationalisation and appropriation of listed companies, private schools etc
- Avoid electing anti-semitic and/or racist populists to power, it'll only encourage them.
Logic would probably suggest Lib Dems - they're not openly in favour of mass nationalisation, and they're not the Tories. But they won't win a majority, and there's a real risk of splitting the anti-racist populist vote.
The other option is Labour, but if they get a majority to start pushing through their more radical plans, the whole country's going to hell in a handcart, with large companies fleeing, government debt rocketing (energy companies don't come cheap), etc.
So, what do you suggest and why?