|
|
Post by jimjam on May 7, 2023 8:07:06 GMT
Trevor,
Slight quibble with ''Greens will vote best placed ABCON''
As suggested before I contend that recent Green switchers in some places are coming mainly from disillusioned Tories with an element of Nimbyism you and I posted about yesterday.
In essence the Greens have displaced the LDs as the protest party in certain places (such as Darlington).
They have been able to form a coalition of voters with 3 groups: Radical Greens, Labour malcontents and recently more 'local environment' Tories.
The idea that the latter would endorse leaving Nato and other left wing policies is questionable to say the least.
Sorry for repeat from a day or ago but worth restating imo, that simplistically adding GRN above 3/4% to Lab for the GE would be erroneous imo.
Best for Lab at the GE is that these 'Tory Greens' either stick with Green for the GE or abstain as despite the Greens being to the left of Lab on Economic and Social policy many of these voters would never consider voting Labour.
In much of the country Greens voters will be predominantly ABT at the GE, the big cities for example, but Lab will have to be careful how they use the 2 horse race messaging.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 8:12:06 GMT
If you do that it is game over. They would remain independent and never reunite - which was my comment on your original proposal, which becomes impractical.
Of course, as member states of the EU we could all reunite in that, but that is insufficient for you. So when hireton and I refer to that stance as being "British Nationalism" (ie wanting a British state, as opposed to English, Welsh and Scottish ones) it is an accurate representation.
I agree with you that the sensible restructuring of the UK (which I long supported) is impractical - but only because of the nationalist intransigence of "the Brits".This is where, as always, your nationalism blinds you to the fact there are people who reject nationalism as a political philosophy and are universalist as a principle. Four nations operating together is attractive to me not as an English empire but as an example of international cooperation and the rejection of narrow divisive nationalisms. I would in turn happily see that entity subsumed into a pan-European Federal union and I would be equally happy to see that disappear into a One World government, provided it was based on democracy. Your concentration on differences blinds you to that fact that the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish have far more in common than divides us, and indeed we are all just a sub-branch of a wider European identity. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 7, 2023 8:14:03 GMT
ON (and others) Re Lab in NI.
Labour Party members in GB are encouraged to join the SDLP if they move to NI and vice-versa, dual membership is endorsed/encouarged.
There are Labour members in NI who don't like this but they have no formal structures and Labour is not registered as a political party in NI.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 7, 2023 8:18:02 GMT
I haven't seen this mentioned yet: www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/06/this-election-bloodbath-was-bad-enough-for-the-tories-tactical-voting-labour-brexit-general-electionYet growing evidence of an electorate sufficiently angry at Tory incumbents to back whoever stands a chance of defeating them may presage tactical voting on a scale not seen since 1997. Such tactical voting would bring many extra seats into play for both Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Though the beneficiaries may vary, a strongly anti-incumbent mood is abroad. That is bad news for the government, and good news for all its opponents.
Robert Ford is professor of political science at Manchester University and co-author of The British General Election of 2019 I wonder if tactical voting is as effective in GEs as in LEs. Local Election voters are more likely to be politically aware (because the turnout is low). In a GE a lot more people vote - around 3 times as many - and I wonder how many of these will be aware of tactical voting opportunities in their constituency. Does anyone have any evidence of tactical voting making a difference in 2019 or any other time? Note - I'm not saying there aren't any examples but I suspect that there aren't many. We've gone over tactical voting sssooo many times on UKPR and UKPR2. It is very difficult to "prove" unless candidates step aside: - Bracknell Forest in these LEs showed one ABCON candidate worked in one area in this LE - The "Unite to Remain" pact in GE'19 (LDEM, Green, PC) worked for one by-election* (B+R) but was a disaster in GE'19 For what is usually called "paper candidates" then there is IMO plenty of "circumstantial" evidence of tactical voting. Notably the very "lumpy" LDEM vote in England and all 'Unionist' parties in Scotland. Can't be bothered going through all the previous examples yet again but in the North-Midlands then LDEM vote was hollowed out so very little left to 'squeeze' in most seats (with the notable exception of Tim Farron). In a lot of 'South' seats where LDEM are best placed ABCON then very little LAB vote to squeeze. What would be fair to say is that LDEM and Greens doing so well in the LEs MIGHT give LAB a higher % and #seats in a GE as in most seats LAB are the best places ABCON party. Although it is also possible that going from near 0% in many seats that LDEM and Greens split the ABCON vote and "undo" some historic tactical voting (especially in places where LDEM think they might be able to regain a headland (eg SW.Eng) or where they think a GE is the same as an LE (eg "Home County" seats)) Time will tell... * By-elections perhaps similar to your comment on LEs. A much smaller turnout is likely to be from people who are much more politically aware. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 7, 2023 8:25:33 GMT
Trevor, Slight quibble with ''Greens will vote best placed ABCON'' As suggested before I contend that recent Green switchers in some places are coming mainly from disillusioned Tories with an element of Nimbyism you and I posted about yesterday. In essence the Greens have displaced the LDs as the protest party in certain places (such as Darlington). They have been able to form a coalition of voters with 3 groups: Radical Greens, Labour malcontents and recently more 'local environment' Tories. The idea that the latter would endorse leaving Nato and other left wing policies is questionable to say the least. Sorry for repeat from a day or ago but worth restating imo, that simplistically adding GRN above 3/4% to Lab for the GE would be erroneous imo. Best for Lab at the GE is that these 'Tory Greens' either stick with Green for the GE or abstain as despite the Greens being to the left of Lab on Economic and Social policy many of these voters would never consider voting Labour. In much of the country Greens voters will be predominantly ABT at the GE, the big cities for example, but Lab will have to be careful how they use the 2 horse race messaging. Please use the "quote" function and quote what I actually said. I'll edit down my full post to show the MIGHT scenarios and as discussed before then I think it is unwise for people to assume Green LE vote will all be squeezed into LAB in a GE ... Of course people can ASSUME whatever they want for what will happen in a GE in 18mths time. We might well see very effective ABCON tactical voting. We might see Greens squeezed to vote LAB (or LDEM) as the best placed ABCON party in all but one seat in England. We might see RUK split the 'RoC' vote. We might also INSTEAD see the national polling gap narrow (although not until inflation starts to come down IMO), might see that a lot of the LE results were NIMBY "protest votes" against CON's local plans* (eg in my neck of the woods where people don't want new houses to be built) since it was LOCAL Elections and not a GE, etc. * ... Conservatives’ local plan, which he said would have “decimated” the green belt...
www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/may/07/anti-tory-coalition-leaves-party-reeling-and-ministers-at-risk-after-polls-disasterNB We'll see what NOC councils do about housing but LAB, LDEM, Green, RAs, etc won't be able to keep blaming a CON council for decimating the green belt now that CON have lost control of various councils. At HQ level then LAB+LDEM can't blame CON for decimation the green belt as CON recently ripped up housing targets. TBC what Starmer-LAB and Davey-LDEM say about housing in GE'24 manifestos but "bon chance" keeping NIMBY gains if they suggest building loads more houses. Changed a perhaps misleading word. INSTEAD showing it could go the other way (and it will very likely depend on local circumstances and events between now and GE'24). I'm not making a prediction - just saying people should be careful what they "assume" will happen. Full reply at: ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/82783/thread |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on May 7, 2023 8:26:26 GMT
Kuenssberg interviewing Lucy Frazer, culture secretary (never heard of her, but its a woman, guess someone thinks she might do better with the public). Asked about police arrests at the coronation, she essentially said the police had asked for extra powers so government had provided them, and whetever happened yesterday was the choice of the metropolitain police. Although she added she thought it was right that no dissent against the monarchy should be allowed to be shown on media likely to be seen internationally. (unless she meant internally as well).
Must say the shots of troops cheering the King in his back garden was an excellent trick. Hitler would have commended his PR advisor for such a successful rally. Again its intersting this was staged in the enclosed environment of the palace 40 acre garden, not a public park or parade ground. Not at all the first time troops on parade cheer their new monarch, but it was staged for televison this time. No embarassing protests. Cannot break the third wall by allowing the audience to interrupt.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 8:35:47 GMT
Trevor.
The lib dems won thirty new council seats in the North and over 100 more in the Midlands, together with holding 5 councils as the majority.
|
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on May 7, 2023 8:38:14 GMT
Trevor, Slight quibble with ''Greens will vote best placed ABCON'' As suggested before I contend that recent Green switchers in some places are coming mainly from disillusioned Tories with an element of Nimbyism you and I posted about yesterday. In essence the Greens have displaced the LDs as the protest party in certain places (such as Darlington). They have been able to form a coalition of voters with 3 groups: Radical Greens, Labour malcontents and recently more 'local environment' Tories. The idea that the latter would endorse leaving Nato and other left wing policies is questionable to say the least. Sorry for repeat from a day or ago but worth restating imo, that simplistically adding GRN above 3/4% to Lab for the GE would be erroneous imo. Best for Lab at the GE is that these 'Tory Greens' either stick with Green for the GE or abstain as despite the Greens being to the left of Lab on Economic and Social policy many of these voters would never consider voting Labour. In much of the country Greens voters will be predominantly ABT at the GE, the big cities for example, but Lab will have to be careful how they use the 2 horse race messaging. As a point of fact, the Green Party does not oppose membership NATO. That policy changed: greenworld.org.uk/article/spring-conference-2023-roundIn broad terms you are correct. There are serious incompatibilities between Labour and Green Party policy (such as electoral and constitutional reform) are a major barrier to Green voters tactically supporting Labour. These barriers have increased for sure with Starmer's leadership. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 7, 2023 8:58:28 GMT
... In broad terms you are correct. There are serious incompatibilities between Labour and Green Party policy (such as electoral and constitutional reform) are a major barrier to Green voters tactically supporting Labour. These barriers have increased for sure with Starmer's leadership. I can only speak for the Green-NIMBY voter side of things (ie the CON'19->Green'23 at LEs that will probably not be CON'19->Green in GE'24) However, I do keep an eye on some twitter accounts and they point out the "Starmer effect" that does suggest the 'squeeze' of Green->LAB into a GE might not occur under Starmer-LAB. Who knows. Perhaps Greens can do a UKIP? Arguably the most successful party of the last decade, WRT achieving their core aim, was UKIP. Only by becoming a serious threat to one of the two establishment* parties can a smaller party achieve change. * Starmer-LAB are now back to being an "establishment" party as they were under Blair. Taking money from whoever will give it to them and adopting Tory policies. Hence Starmer is not attacked by MSM in the way that Corbyn was. Folks notice that kind of thing! |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 9:03:54 GMT
oldnat More on that disgraceful and almost certainly unlawful detetention. "Councillor Aicha Less, cabinet member for communities(WCC) and public protection at Westminster City Council, said: “We are deeply concerned by reports of our Night Stars volunteers being arrested overnight. “This service has been a familiar and welcome sight in the West End for a long time and have extensive training so they can assist the most vulnerable on the streets late at night. “We are working with the Metropolitan Police to establish exactly what happened, and in the meantime, we are in touch with our volunteers to ensure they are receiving the support they need.” Night Stars is a part of the council’s night safety initiative" The three individuals detained were in their forties and fifties. I despair of my old employer.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 9:06:57 GMT
As a point of fact, the Green Party does not oppose membership NATO. That policy changed: greenworld.org.uk/article/spring-conference-2023-roundIn broad terms you are correct. There are serious incompatibilities between Labour and Green Party policy (such as electoral and constitutional reform) are a major barrier to Green voters tactically supporting Labour. These barriers have increased for sure with Starmer's leadership. That assumes that Green voters in local elections agree with or are even aware of Green national policies. The Green Party growth in Braintree started when Essex CC wanted to build a waste incineration plant in Silver End. The local Tory councillors were promptly removed by the electorate and replaced by Greens - in other words there was a strong NIMBY element to the vote. The Braintree Greens retain an anti-development stance, hence their ability to enter into a formal pact with the Independents. However, Green voters are obviously also anti-Tory or they would vote Conservative. In short, assuming that Green are all radical lefties who will be repulsed by Starmer - or even Sunak in the right circumstances - would be unwise. Or put more simply, voters of all parties likely don't 100% endorse that party's programme, but vote for diverse reasons of their own, including local circumstances, tactical considerations, dislike of other parties, etc. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 9:18:07 GMT
In all the excitement of the local elections I neglected to add the April update to my monthly 'opposition lead' chart over on the polling archive thread, which I have now done (https://ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/thread/11/polling-archive).
The lead was indeed down a little from 18.5% in March to 15.7% in April, but this still increased the figure for the parliament, which now stands at 13.2%, in second place only to the 1992-97 parliament. All the other 6 in the top 7 presaged a 'change of government' election. Just to repeat, this says nothing about sizes of majorities, just that history indicates their will be a new party leader occupying 10 Downing Street after the next GE.
|
|
|
|
Post by catmanjeff on May 7, 2023 9:30:49 GMT
As a point of fact, the Green Party does not oppose membership NATO. That policy changed: greenworld.org.uk/article/spring-conference-2023-roundIn broad terms you are correct. There are serious incompatibilities between Labour and Green Party policy (such as electoral and constitutional reform) are a major barrier to Green voters tactically supporting Labour. These barriers have increased for sure with Starmer's leadership. That assumes that Green voters in local elections agree with or are even aware of Green national policies. The Green Party growth in Braintree started when Essex CC wanted to build a waste incineration plant in Silver End. The local Tory councillors were promptly removed by the electorate and replaced by Greens - in other words there was a strong NIMBY element to the vote. The Braintree Greens retain an anti-development stance, hence their ability to enter into a formal pact with the Independents. However, Green voters are obviously also anti-Tory or they would vote Conservative. In short, assuming that Green are all radical lefties who will be repulsed by Starmer - or even Sunak in the right circumstances - would be unwise. Or put more simply, voters of all parties likely don't 100% endorse that party's programme, but vote for diverse reasons of their own, including local circumstances, tactical considerations, dislike of other parties, etc. I don't disagree. I do support the contention that assuming the green vote move wholesale to Labour, or indeed any other party in a GE is simplistic. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 9:50:54 GMT
Very interesting discussion between Prof Curtis and Peter Kellner on what to take from the local elections well worth watching. Their conclusion Starmer is going almost certainly to lead the next government and Labour don't even require to be the largest party to do so as apart from a half dozen dup flat earthers the Tories are billy no mates in parliament. For what it's worth they both thought Labour were highly likely to be the largest party possibly with a majority. My own thought on this is I think they are being a tad pessimistic from a Labour view as I suspect Labour will achieve a working possibly substantial majority. Of course I hope they don't get a majority at all as the around 40 lib dems I hope will be elected could then focus the minds of a minority Labour government on the obvious advantages of PR and moving back to the centre of European economics and community. Worth ten minutes to watch youtu.be/FiI8k32KDCk |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 10:01:17 GMT
Princess Anne preparing for her role as Nelson in the re run of the battle of Trafalgar.  |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 10:36:51 GMT
Princess Anne preparing for her role as Nelson in the re run of the battle of Trafalgar. View AttachmentShe is Gold Stick in Waiting apparently - because, of course, you never know when you might need a gold stick. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 10:38:55 GMT
Very interesting discussion between Prof Curtis and Peter Kellner on what to take from the local elections well worth watching. Their conclusion Starmer is going almost certainly to lead the next government and Labour don't even require to be the largest party to do so as apart from a half dozen dup flat earthers the Tories are billy no mates in parliament. For what it's worth they both thought Labour were highly likely to be the largest party possibly with a majority. My own thought on this is I think they are being a tad pessimistic from a Labour view as I suspect Labour will achieve a working possibly substantial majority. Of course I hope they don't get a majority at all as the around 40 lib dems I hope will be elected could then focus the minds of a minority Labour government on the obvious advantages of PR and moving back to the centre of European economics and community. Worth ten minutes to watch youtu.be/FiI8k32KDCkThat's you and Danny on the naughty step in the last couple of days - its Curtice not Curtis  But seriously, thanks for the link. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 10:46:46 GMT
pjw1961I thought I was on a roll as I got two L's in Kellner
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 7, 2023 10:49:01 GMT
Re NPS,
Sky have Lab/Con 36/29; BBC 35/26.
4 years ago BBC said 28/28 but I have not been able to find Sky's but not sure it matters much.
Not sure we can take anything from the movement from the May 2019 LE elections to the GE as Brexit and May-Johnson dynamic etc produce huge shifts in the autumn as protest votes moved back in greater numbers than ever before in such a short timescale.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on May 7, 2023 10:50:35 GMT
re: Sky news projection - Lab 36%, Con 29%, Lab 7 points ahead, Lab 298 seats, Con 238. That looks very much like what you get with a uniform national swing from the Tories 11% ahead to Lab 7 % ahead. A simple 9 point swing delivers 94 seats from Con to Lab. But this seems to overlook the very varied pattern in Thursday's Local Election results, with Lab and LibDems vastly outstipping UNS in seats where they are best placed against the Conservatives. Perhaps I should clarify my point here - especially in the light of Trevor's comments about "assumptions". I am not making assumptions here. What I am doing is commenting on how votes/swings can translate into seats. In the Local Elections, the BBC's NEV percentage show swings of just 4% from Con>Lab and 1.5% Con>LD when compared to the 2019LEs. The council seats changing hands would have been in the low hundreds if these movements had applied uniformly, so in these elections UNS totally fails as a forecasting tool. So when Sky news offer us a seats projection which is clearly based on UNS, I think we're entitled to query it. Recent General Elections results have diverged widely from UNS too, and I expect 2024 to be no different. And any calculation which anticipates the LDs doing as well in a General Election as in Local Elections is absurd - their LE performance is typically around 7-8 points above their GE polling - though this makes very little difference to the Lab seats total as there are so few Lab/LD contests. There are two further factors to bear in mind: regional differences in polling results, and (especially) tactical voting. Luckily, Electoral Calculus already reflects the regional pattern of current polling, and can be used to incorporate tactical voting. I've used it to show a 9% swing, using figures of Lab 42%, Con 35%, LD 12%, Green 5%, but with half of the Lab/LD/Green supporters being willing to switch tactically. EC produces figures of Lab 372, Con 204, LD 23 on these figures. Very different from the Lab 298, Con 238 produced by Sky news. Both reflect a 7% Lab lead, and a 9% Con>Lab swing from 2019, but I'd be very confident that EC will be closer to the actual seat totals if that actually happened at the GE. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 7, 2023 10:54:18 GMT
Re NPS, Sky have Lab/Con 36/29; BBC 35/26. 4 years ago BBC said 28/28 but I have not been able to find Sky's but not sure it matters much. Not sure we can take anything from the movement from the May 2019 LE elections to the GE as Brexit and May-Johnson dynamic etc produce huge shifts in the autumn as protest votes moved back in number than ever before in such a short timescale. The difference between the Conservative percentage is large enough to make a difference and doesn't fill me with much confidence in the methodology. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on May 7, 2023 10:54:21 GMT
Pensioner couple looking for the rest of the chess set.  |
|
patrickbrian
Member
These things seem small and undistinguishable, like far off mountains turned into clouds
Posts: 316
|
Post by patrickbrian on May 7, 2023 10:58:07 GMT
It must have been nice for top Tories to have a day at the coronation after the disaster of the LEs. I thought Sunak did a creditable job of reading the lesson - made it seem as if he meant it, and indeed had rehearsed it so well he almost knew it by heart. And Penny Mordaunt was superb! I didn't even recognise her until after. In contrast, Archbishop Welby was distinctly underwhelming, and Charles needed a script for the simplest of responses. I liked the music, but soldiers and silly hats generally leave me cold as spectacle. Still, each to his own.
If we ever go for an elected monarch, I'm for Penny!
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 7, 2023 11:27:10 GMT
re: Sky news projection - Lab 36%, Con 29%, Lab 7 points ahead, Lab 298 seats, Con 238. That looks very much like what you get with a uniform national swing from the Tories 11% ahead to Lab 7 % ahead. A simple 9 point swing delivers 94 seats from Con to Lab. But this seems to overlook the very varied pattern in Thursday's Local Election results, with Lab and LibDems vastly outstipping UNS in seats where they are best placed against the Conservatives. Perhaps I should clarify my point here - especially in the light of Trevor's comments about "assumptions". I am not making assumptions here. What I am doing is commenting on how votes/swings can translate into seats. In the Local Elections, the BBC's NEV percentage show swings of just 4% from Con>Lab and 1.5% Con>LD when compared to the 2019LEs. The council seats changing hands would have been in the low hundreds if these movements had applied uniformly, so in these elections UNS totally fails as a forecasting tool. So when Sky news offer us a seats projection which is clearly based on UNS, I think we're entitled to query it. Recent General Elections results have diverged widely from UNS too, and I expect 2024 to be no different. And any calculation which anticipates the LDs doing as well in a General Election as in Local Elections is absurd - their LE performance is typically around 7-8 points above their GE polling - though this makes very little difference to the Lab seats total as there are so few Lab/LD contests. There are two further factors to bear in mind: regional differences in polling results, and (especially) tactical voting. Luckily, Electoral Calculus already reflects the regional pattern of current polling, and can be used to incorporate tactical voting. I've used it to show a 9% swing, using figures of Lab 42%, Con 35%, LD 12%, Green 5%, but with half of the Lab/LD/Green supporters being willing to switch tactically. EC produces figures of Lab 372, Con 204, LD 23 on these figures. Very different from the Lab 298, Con 238 produced by Sky news. Both reflect a 7% Lab lead, and a 9% Con>Lab swing from 2019, but I'd be very confident that EC will be closer to the actual seat totals if that actually happened at the GE. Thank you for some numbers based on your assumptions - those numbers are certainly a possible outcome (aka as "plausible scenario"). Of course the biggest beneficiary of tactical voting is LAB. I'll repost numbers using your assumed %s without the assumption of tactical voting (change v 'tactical voting') LAB: 337 (-32) CON: 241 (+35) LIB: 14 (-9) Others*... Folks can check that using link below then editing for 'tactical voting' at 50% for LAB, LDEM and Green www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&tvcontrol=Y&CON=35&LAB=42&LIB=12&Reform=1&Green=5&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=0&TVLIB=0&TVReform=&TVGreen=0&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=17.7&SCOTLAB=30.3&SCOTLIB=8.3&SCOTReform=2&SCOTGreen=2.7&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=37.7&display=AllChanged®orseat=%28none%29&boundary=2019baseOf course EC's model makes lots of other assumptions as well. As always the biggest assumption of a "nowcast" (as some people correctly call it) is that polling won't change between now and a GE - which is clearly a false assumption. LDEM folks might be upset with EC's model as even with tactical voting they'll only get 23 seats using EC's model and either way then using the %s you've chosen LAB will form a majority govt and we know that Starmer has been "long opposed to PR" (although an 'O'-turn is possible from Mr.Flip Flop) LAB is back under NewLAB (Tory Plan B) management, so I don't mind Red Tories taking over and sticking with FPTP. If LDEM and Green folks want to tactically vote Starmer-LAB and keep getting screwed by FPTP system then fine by me  UKIP showed what can be done if you challenge one of the establishment parties. We can all make various assumptions to create any prediction that we want. I note EC's model doesn't allow for "-ve" tactical voting and hence assumes all the tactical voting we've seen in the past can only stay the same or increase - that is quite a big assumption IMO although, at the moment, then LDEM just seem to be an Orange Tory wing of the Red Tories happy to "Make Brexit Work" and maybe get a few red briefcases after GE'24 if the polls narrow between now and then. Rentoul covers various points in his piece: www.independent.co.uk/voices/keir-starmer-coalition-chaos-local-elections-b2333864.html* I assume you ignored Scotland and obviously tactical voting is different in Scotland but that explains why the changes don't sum to zero. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on May 7, 2023 11:34:05 GMT
Re NPS, Sky have Lab/Con 36/29; BBC 35/26. 4 years ago BBC said 28/28 but I have not been able to find Sky's but not sure it matters much. Not sure we can take anything from the movement from the May 2019 LE elections to the GE as Brexit and May-Johnson dynamic etc produce huge shifts in the autumn as protest votes moved back in number than ever before in such a short timescale. It is perhaps also worth restating how much Corbyn-LAB moved the polls leading into GE'17 I appreciate Starmer-LAB choose to ignore the "Corbyn Effect" of GE'17 but I pick that only to show that polls can move massively in just a few weeks. AW used to say that manifestos and campaigns didn't matter much, voters having already decided who to vote for months before a GE - but GE'17 busted that myth. Maybe Starmer is keeping his best policies secret until nearer the time (or starts doing 'O' turns back to his 10 pledge promises) and maybe Rishi fails on all of his "missions" (although inflation dropping is a near certainty). I don't have a time machine like some people seem to have, so I can't be certain of the future. IMO it is..
"All to play for"
"No Fate but what Rishi/Starmer makes for themselves" |
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 7, 2023 11:40:35 GMT
It must have been nice for top Tories to have a day at the coronation after the disaster of the LEs. I thought Sunak did a creditable job of reading the lesson - made it seem as if he meant it, and indeed had rehearsed it so well he almost knew it by heart. And Penny Mordaunt was superb! I didn't even recognise her until after. In contrast, Archbishop Welby was distinctly underwhelming, and Charles needed a script for the simplest of responses. I liked the music, but soldiers and silly hats generally leave me cold as spectacle. Still, each to his own. If we ever go for an elected monarch, I'm for Penny! A bit odd for a non-Christian to be asked to read a Lesson from the Bible. That would also be true of Starmer as a declared Atheist. |
|
patrickbrian
Member
These things seem small and undistinguishable, like far off mountains turned into clouds
Posts: 316
|
Post by patrickbrian on May 7, 2023 12:27:45 GMT
Graham
"A bit odd for a non-Christian to be asked to read a Lesson from the Bible. That would also be true of Starmer as a declared Atheist."
I wouldn't have any problem reading from the Upanishads, or the Koran, or the Sutras if the context required it. You don't have to be a Theist to see wisdom/ beauty in ancient texts. Hindu religion is very inclusive. But I thought Sunak did himself credit
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on May 7, 2023 12:33:12 GMT
Graham "A bit odd for a non-Christian to be asked to read a Lesson from the Bible. That would also be true of Starmer as a declared Atheist." I wouldn't have any problem reading from the Upanishads, or the Koran, or the Sutras if the context required it. You don't have to be a Theist to see wisdom/ beauty in ancient texts. Hindu religion is very inclusive. But I thought Sunak did himself credit But it does not convey sincerity to hear a religious script being read by a non-believer. He/she is obviously simply going through the motions. I am not blaming Sunak at all - he was obviously asked to do it and could hardly refuse. I am not aware that Churchill delivered a Reading at the 1953 Coronation . Ditto Baldwin in 1937. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on May 7, 2023 12:54:15 GMT
Graham "A bit odd for a non-Christian to be asked to read a Lesson from the Bible. That would also be true of Starmer as a declared Atheist." I wouldn't have any problem reading from the Upanishads, or the Koran, or the Sutras if the context required it. You don't have to be a Theist to see wisdom/ beauty in ancient texts. Hindu religion is very inclusive. But I thought Sunak did himself credit But it does not convey sincerity to hear a religious script being read by a non-believer. He/she is obviously simply going through the motions. We humans are so illogical aren't we? But don't worry, the AI bots will soon change all that . |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 7, 2023 13:00:57 GMT
In essence the Greens have displaced the LDs as the protest party in certain places (such as Darlington). They have been able to form a coalition of voters with 3 groups: Radical Greens, Labour malcontents and recently more 'local environment' Tories. The idea that the latter would endorse leaving Nato and other left wing policies is questionable to say the least. I completely agree with this...and say this as someone considering a Green vote at the next GE (although far, far, FAR from making my mind up)... The Greens have a similar, but, mirror image of future problems the tories will likely face. For the tories (and in the he she short term, it partially depends on which faction shouts loudest after their local election rout), they seem to be doubling down on the socially illiberal / "anti-woke" / trad-right path. It was a path that, in the short term, with brexit as a proxy, undoubtedly won them the 2019 election. But, there is a stark difference, based on age, which is bourne out by polling (and anecdotal evidence re-children of friends bears this out as well). The tories, if they keep to this path are slowly walking to political oblivion. The Greens have the opposite problem. Some of their recent support is coming from leafy outer suburbia. Those who, as I've said before are soft right types who see the Greens as "Liberals its ok to like". Such people would baulk at, what are left wing policies that Corbynites would be more than happy to get behind. These are potential future foot-soldiers, leaflet deliverers, the backbone of any ascendent party. The LibDems before them, while LOC on social issues, were centrist (or in the case of Orange Book LibDems, centre right) economically, and despite, in their heyday, being a little to the left of Blair's Labour, could, to an extent, look both ways. I dont think the Greens have that option on their current policy profile and if or when they become a largr force or a main/major recepticle for the go-to protest vote, could run into problems. |
|
