|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 12, 2022 17:53:38 GMT
Ah I did a J.G.Harston - should have expanded the map. That answers my question about MRP/UNS. I agree with others that it was a poor selection of constituencies and UNS isn't really appropriate when you have seats like Esher where Labour's vote was squeezed massively last time alongside the likes of Reading West. Graham is going to be even more unbearable now. Not only Wimbledon but also Sutton, Sutton & Cheam a ) what do you mean "now" ? I mean " even more now"
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Oct 12, 2022 18:00:28 GMT
Ah I did a J.G.Harston - should have expanded the map. That answers my question about MRP/UNS. I agree with others that it was a poor selection of constituencies and UNS isn't really appropriate when you have seats like Esher where Labour's vote was squeezed massively last time alongside the likes of Reading West. Graham is going to be even more unbearable now. Not only Wimbledon but also Sutton, Sutton & Cheam a ) what do you mean "now" ?  b ) although some of the extrapolations seem ridiculous, they are not at all dissimilar to extrapolating recent national polls to those constituencies. For example, Redfield & Wilton's latest national poll, as well as that of several other companies, actually does suggest Lab gain Totnes, Sutton & Cheam, and Wantage - although Labour is in 3rd in all those seats, the swing from LD to Lab is enough to take them past the LDs as well as the Tories. Perhaps in some ways Wantage is the least ludicrous of those, Labour wasn't that many votes behind in 1997 & has historically had strong votes in Didcot but also some support (in the more distant past) in Wantage itself and also some relatively industrial other villages Wantage is a seat where Labour and LibDems pretty much swapped places from 2017 to 2019 and could well be a seat where there isn't an obvious challenger. It would be hard to say this was the case for either Totnes or Sutton & Cheam where it's clear that the LibDems are in second place
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,369
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 12, 2022 18:12:54 GMT
We haven't had a General Election with anything like 25pt popular vote lead since 1931: landslides are usually produced by leads between 10 and 15pts, with none higher than the latter figure. If we really were to see a Labour lead of the sort polls presently show in a General Election, then the result would be a near-total wipeout. As we saw with both the LibDems and Scottish Labour in 2015, places wouldn't hold out just because.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,077
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Oct 12, 2022 18:41:06 GMT
We haven't had a General Election with anything like 25pt popular vote lead since 1931: landslides are usually produced by leads between 10 and 15pts, with none higher than the latter figure. If we really were to see a Labour lead of the sort polls presently show in a General Election, then the result would be a near-total wipeout. As we saw with both the LibDems and Scottish Labour in 2015, places wouldn't hold out just because. Something calamitous would have had to have happened for that sort of a giant lead
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Oct 12, 2022 18:51:56 GMT
a ) what do you mean "now" ? b ) although some of the extrapolations seem ridiculous, they are not at all dissimilar to extrapolating recent national polls to those constituencies. For example, Redfield & Wilton's latest national poll, as well as that of several other companies, actually does suggest Lab gain Totnes, Sutton & Cheam, and Wantage - although Labour is in 3rd in all those seats, the swing from LD to Lab is enough to take them past the LDs as well as the Tories. Perhaps in some ways Wantage is the least ludicrous of those, Labour wasn't that many votes behind in 1997 & has historically had strong votes in Didcot but also some support (in the more distant past) in Wantage itself and also some relatively industrial other villages Wantage is a seat where Labour and LibDems pretty much swapped places from 2017 to 2019 and could well be a seat where there isn't an obvious challenger. It would be hard to say this was the case for either Totnes or Sutton & Cheam where it's clear that the LibDems are in second place The Lib Dems do control the local council, so have a decent amount of local presence - which will help in a seat like this. Labour have only finished second there in 1997 and 2001 during the Labour landslides and in 2015 and 2017 during the trough for the Lib Dems. I'd expect Labour wouldn't put much effort into gaining the seat in a general election, whereas the Lib Dems will put a lot in.
|
|
|
Post by london(ex)tory on Oct 12, 2022 19:00:39 GMT
We haven't had a General Election with anything like 25pt popular vote lead since 1931: landslides are usually produced by leads between 10 and 15pts, with none higher than the latter figure. If we really were to see a Labour lead of the sort polls presently show in a General Election, then the result would be a near-total wipeout. As we saw with both the LibDems and Scottish Labour in 2015, places wouldn't hold out just because. Something calamitous would have had to have happened for that sort of a giant lead Something even more calamitous than Liz Truss becoming PM...?
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 12, 2022 19:03:46 GMT
Something calamitous would have had to have happened for that sort of a giant lead Something even more calamitous than Liz Truss becoming PM...? Two Liz Trusses becoming Prime Minister?
|
|
r34t
Non-Aligned
Posts: 874
|
Post by r34t on Oct 12, 2022 19:09:31 GMT
We haven't had a General Election with anything like 25pt popular vote lead since 1931: landslides are usually produced by leads between 10 and 15pts, with none higher than the latter figure. If we really were to see a Labour lead of the sort polls presently show in a General Election, then the result would be a near-total wipeout. As we saw with both the LibDems and Scottish Labour in 2015, places wouldn't hold out just because. Something calamitous would have had to have happened for that sort of a giant lead The calamity has already happened, but what the Tories need is some competence & stability to recover some of their traditional supporters who are currently pissed off with them & are telling pollsters they are pissed off with them. So who is going to take the role of Major & who is going to be Clarke ??
|
|
r34t
Non-Aligned
Posts: 874
|
Post by r34t on Oct 12, 2022 19:10:31 GMT
Something even more calamitous than Liz Truss becoming PM...? Two Liz Trusses becoming Prime Minister? Truss brings Bojo back as Chancellor ?
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,324
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Oct 12, 2022 20:32:31 GMT
What is the definition of "Blue Wall" here - any seat that the Tories have held in the past two elections, or recently, or the unknowledgeable consider to have always been Tory?
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,666
|
Post by European Lefty on Oct 12, 2022 20:41:03 GMT
What is the definition of "Blue Wall" here - any seat that the Tories have held in the past two elections, or recently, or the unknowledgeable consider to have always been Tory? Apparently it's any seat "Situated in the South of England (Eastern England, London, South East or South West) Voted Conservative in 2015, 2017, & 2019 >25% of adults have a degree Conservative majority <15k over Lib Dems OR <10k over Labour 2016 Remain vote >42.5%"
|
|
|
Post by batman on Oct 12, 2022 20:44:24 GMT
a ) what do you mean "now" ? b ) although some of the extrapolations seem ridiculous, they are not at all dissimilar to extrapolating recent national polls to those constituencies. For example, Redfield & Wilton's latest national poll, as well as that of several other companies, actually does suggest Lab gain Totnes, Sutton & Cheam, and Wantage - although Labour is in 3rd in all those seats, the swing from LD to Lab is enough to take them past the LDs as well as the Tories. Perhaps in some ways Wantage is the least ludicrous of those, Labour wasn't that many votes behind in 1997 & has historically had strong votes in Didcot but also some support (in the more distant past) in Wantage itself and also some relatively industrial other villages Wantage is a seat where Labour and LibDems pretty much swapped places from 2017 to 2019 and could well be a seat where there isn't an obvious challenger. It would be hard to say this was the case for either Totnes or Sutton & Cheam where it's clear that the LibDems are in second place yes that's absolutely true. I don't recall Labour being in second place in either constituency in my time. Logically both seats should be regarded as absurd prospects for Labour gains, but that's what some of the polls say, and we have seen before that very strange things can happen in constituencies when a party has strong momentum. Not just for Labour in 1997 and the Tories in 2019, but also for the SNP in 2015. In all of those instances, the parties won seats that appeared impossible. Does that mean Labour can win Totnes? Almost certainly not, of course, but other pretty weird seats are certainly at genuine risk.
|
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Oct 12, 2022 21:49:10 GMT
Wantage is a seat where Labour and LibDems pretty much swapped places from 2017 to 2019 and could well be a seat where there isn't an obvious challenger. It would be hard to say this was the case for either Totnes or Sutton & Cheam where it's clear that the LibDems are in second place yes that's absolutely true. I don't recall Labour being in second place in either constituency in my time. Logically both seats should be regarded as absurd prospects for Labour gains, but that's what some of the polls say, and we have seen before that very strange things can happen in constituencies when a party has strong momentum. Not just for Labour in 1997 and the Tories in 2019, but also for the SNP in 2015. In all of those instances, the parties won seats that appeared impossible. Does that mean Labour can win Totnes? Almost certainly not, of course, but other pretty weird seats are certainly at genuine risk. Labour were regularly second in Totnes until overtaken in February 1974, and were second again in 2017.
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Oct 12, 2022 22:12:35 GMT
Wantage is a seat where Labour and LibDems pretty much swapped places from 2017 to 2019 and could well be a seat where there isn't an obvious challenger. It would be hard to say this was the case for either Totnes or Sutton & Cheam where it's clear that the LibDems are in second place yes that's absolutely true. I don't recall Labour being in second place in either constituency in my time. Logically both seats should be regarded as absurd prospects for Labour gains, but that's what some of the polls say, and we have seen before that very strange things can happen in constituencies when a party has strong momentum. Not just for Labour in 1997 and the Tories in 2019, but also for the SNP in 2015. In all of those instances, the parties won seats that appeared impossible. Does that mean Labour can win Totnes? Almost certainly not, of course, but other pretty weird seats are certainly at genuine risk. This current Labour lead is more of a reaction to the economic mismanagement of the current government than any innate support for Labour policies - so they'll be picking up anti-Conservative votes in areas they wouldn't usually get them (albeit they would be soft voters). In the seats where both of Labour and the Lib Dems could win, which ever party has the manifesto or campaign which aligns best with the seat could be the ones who benefit from the Conservative collapse come an election; the Lib Dems are the one with the greatest leeway to adapt their message to these sort of seats - Labour probably would win a majority without having to target (or win) a lot of these seats due to their strength elsewhere. Of course, landslides can cause strange results. Labour are the most trusted party in each of the fourteen issues asked (Economy, Covid, Education, Immigration, Environment, Housing, Health, Defence, Foreign Affairs, Crime, Pensions, Welfare, Taxation, Levelling Up), while the Lib Dems are second except when it comes to Covid, Defence and Foreign Affairs and almost level with Labour on the economy. I imagine there's an element of people not completely knowing the Lib Dem policy which will almost certainly lower trust (along with any lingering views about the coalition). Only on Health do more than half of voters give a net positive trust rating to any party on any issue (specifically Labour). On a similar note, 65% of voters in these seats either have no opinion on Ed Davey's performance as Lib Dem leader or don't know - that could be a double-edged sword as Jo Swinson found out. Compared to 43% for Keir Starmer and 31% for Liz Truss. One concern for the Conservatives is both Labour and Lib Dem voters are willing to vote tactically - which probably isn't much of a surprise, but does further the likelihood of a 1997 style result (especially for the Lib Dems).
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Oct 12, 2022 22:22:09 GMT
yes that's absolutely true. I don't recall Labour being in second place in either constituency in my time. Logically both seats should be regarded as absurd prospects for Labour gains, but that's what some of the polls say, and we have seen before that very strange things can happen in constituencies when a party has strong momentum. Not just for Labour in 1997 and the Tories in 2019, but also for the SNP in 2015. In all of those instances, the parties won seats that appeared impossible. Does that mean Labour can win Totnes? Almost certainly not, of course, but other pretty weird seats are certainly at genuine risk. This current Labour lead is more of a reaction to the economic mismanagement of the current government than any innate support for Labour policies - so they'll be picking up anti-Conservative votes in areas they wouldn't usually get them (albeit they would be soft voters). In the seats where both of Labour and the Lib Dems could win, which ever party has the manifesto or campaign which aligns best with the seat could be the ones who benefit from the Conservative collapse come an election; the Lib Dems are the one with the greatest leeway to adapt their message to these sort of seats - Labour probably would win a majority without having to target (or win) a lot of these seats due to their strength elsewhere. Of course, landslides can cause strange results. Labour are the most trusted party in each of the fourteen issues asked (Economy, Covid, Education, Immigration, Environment, Housing, Health, Defence, Foreign Affairs, Crime, Pensions, Welfare, Taxation, Levelling Up), while the Lib Dems are second except when it comes to Covid, Defence and Foreign Affairs and almost level with Labour on the economy. I imagine there's an element of people not completely knowing the Lib Dem policy which will almost certainly lower trust (along with any lingering views about the coalition). Only on Health do more than half of voters give a net positive trust rating to any party on any issue (specifically Labour). On a similar note, 65% of voters in these seats either have no opinion on Ed Davey's performance as Lib Dem leader or don't know - that could be a double-edged sword as Jo Swinson found out. Compared to 43% for Keir Starmer and 31% for Liz Truss. One concern for the Conservatives is both Labour and Lib Dem voters are willing to vote tactically - which probably isn't much of a surprise, but does further the likelihood of a 1997 style result (especially for the Lib Dems). I think the tactical vote question is weird one. If you're a Tory in a Tory seat with a 15k maj why would you tactically vote. Given how high those numbers are for labour it is a concern for the Tories but at the same time we want to avoid being lumped in with this amorphous coalition merely known as the progressive alliance. There's a distinctive brand that is labour, otherwise we're just the convenient anti Tory option until there's an alternative
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Oct 12, 2022 22:26:45 GMT
This current Labour lead is more of a reaction to the economic mismanagement of the current government than any innate support for Labour policies - so they'll be picking up anti-Conservative votes in areas they wouldn't usually get them (albeit they would be soft voters). In the seats where both of Labour and the Lib Dems could win, which ever party has the manifesto or campaign which aligns best with the seat could be the ones who benefit from the Conservative collapse come an election; the Lib Dems are the one with the greatest leeway to adapt their message to these sort of seats - Labour probably would win a majority without having to target (or win) a lot of these seats due to their strength elsewhere. Of course, landslides can cause strange results. Labour are the most trusted party in each of the fourteen issues asked (Economy, Covid, Education, Immigration, Environment, Housing, Health, Defence, Foreign Affairs, Crime, Pensions, Welfare, Taxation, Levelling Up), while the Lib Dems are second except when it comes to Covid, Defence and Foreign Affairs and almost level with Labour on the economy. I imagine there's an element of people not completely knowing the Lib Dem policy which will almost certainly lower trust (along with any lingering views about the coalition). Only on Health do more than half of voters give a net positive trust rating to any party on any issue (specifically Labour). On a similar note, 65% of voters in these seats either have no opinion on Ed Davey's performance as Lib Dem leader or don't know - that could be a double-edged sword as Jo Swinson found out. Compared to 43% for Keir Starmer and 31% for Liz Truss. One concern for the Conservatives is both Labour and Lib Dem voters are willing to vote tactically - which probably isn't much of a surprise, but does further the likelihood of a 1997 style result (especially for the Lib Dems). I think the tactical vote question is weird one. If you're a Tory in a Tory seat with a 15k maj why would you tactically vote. Given how high those numbers are for labour it is a concern for the Tories but at the same time we want to avoid being lumped in with this amorphous coalition merely known as the progressive alliance. There's a distinctive brand that is labour, otherwise we're just the convenient anti Tory option until there's an alternative It probably would've been better to ask whether the respondent would vote tactically for the Conservatives, Labour or Lib Dems (or a more general 'would you consider voting for <party>?') as opposed to the more vague question we've ended up with. There's no data for current VI in the tables, so it's possible a lot of that Conservative tactical vote share are people who are not planning on voting Conservative now.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 13, 2022 8:40:31 GMT
yes that's absolutely true. I don't recall Labour being in second place in either constituency in my time. Logically both seats should be regarded as absurd prospects for Labour gains, but that's what some of the polls say, and we have seen before that very strange things can happen in constituencies when a party has strong momentum. Not just for Labour in 1997 and the Tories in 2019, but also for the SNP in 2015. In all of those instances, the parties won seats that appeared impossible. Does that mean Labour can win Totnes? Almost certainly not, of course, but other pretty weird seats are certainly at genuine risk. Labour were regularly second in Totnes until overtaken in February 1974, and were second again in 2017. There was even a Communist candidate in 1950!
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 13, 2022 10:51:20 GMT
Labour were regularly second in Totnes until overtaken in February 1974, and were second again in 2017. There was even a Communist candidate in 1950! And a Communist MP elected in 1955..
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 13, 2022 13:46:49 GMT
There was even a Communist candidate in 1950! And a Communist MP elected in 1955.. Indeed. Although masquerading as a Conservative.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,823
|
Post by iain on Oct 13, 2022 16:48:28 GMT
|
|