The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 28, 2023 10:49:56 GMT
I think this seat (out of the four) is the most likely Tory hold. Yes the polls have widened again in Labour's favour, but not too dissimilar from the time of the local elections.
Their performance in the locals - even with some strong gains - did not indicate a knock out performance, with a lot of experts highlighting the likelihood of a hung parliament. To overturn a 20,000 majority is a mammoth task, when you're the official opposition (not the third party); and the concrete results recently don't necessarily point to that level of success. And is a twenty-five year old Oxbridge-educated candidate, with understandably more limited life experience, going to cut it with the electorate ?? Whilst agreeing with the consensus that this *is* a tough ask for us and we will be doing very well if we win it, the bolded part really needs correcting. Labour are now doing significantly better in the polls than in the run up to the local elections, and the lazy initial take of "these are disappointing Labour results that would mean a hung parliament" was corrected once the number crunchers actually looked at them properly. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 28, 2023 11:55:57 GMT
I think this seat (out of the four) is the most likely Tory hold. Yes the polls have widened again in Labour's favour, but not too dissimilar from the time of the local elections.
Their performance in the locals - even with some strong gains - did not indicate a knock out performance, with a lot of experts highlighting the likelihood of a hung parliament. To overturn a 20,000 majority is a mammoth task, when you're the official opposition (not the third party); and the concrete results recently don't necessarily point to that level of success. And is a twenty-five year old Oxbridge-educated candidate, with understandably more limited life experience, going to cut it with the electorate ?? Whilst agreeing with the consensus this is a tough ask for Labour and they will be doing very well if they win it, the bolded part really needs correcting. Labour are now doing significantly better in the polls than in the run up to the local elections, and the lazy initial take of "these are disappointing Labour results that would mean a hung parliament" was corrected once the number crunchers actually looked at them properly. corrected to suggest it wouldn't be a hung parliament? I haven't seen that |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 28, 2023 11:59:17 GMT
I understand that Labour's candidate had been visiting Selby to campaign on the regular for 6 months which is why the locals opted for him.
He gives the impression of someone who is going to give it a good go, get a decent result and if not win this time maybe will be looked on favourably for better prospects
|
|
|
|
Post by jakegb on Jun 28, 2023 18:10:12 GMT
I think this seat (out of the four) is the most likely Tory hold. Yes the polls have widened again in Labour's favour, but not too dissimilar from the time of the local elections.
Their performance in the locals - even with some strong gains - did not indicate a knock out performance, with a lot of experts highlighting the likelihood of a hung parliament. To overturn a 20,000 majority is a mammoth task, when you're the official opposition (not the third party); and the concrete results recently don't necessarily point to that level of success. And is a twenty-five year old Oxbridge-educated candidate, with understandably more limited life experience, going to cut it with the electorate ?? Whilst agreeing with the consensus this is a tough ask for Labour and they will be doing very well if they win it, the bolded part really needs correcting. Labour are now doing significantly better in the polls than in the run up to the local elections, and the lazy initial take of "these are disappointing Labour results that would mean a hung parliament" was corrected once the number crunchers actually looked at them properly. The line 'not a knock out performance' does not directly correspond with 'disappointing Labour results'. I never described their results as 'disappointing'. In my view, Labour performed well in the locals. But to win a majority government, they do more than 'well', they need a 'knock out performance', from such a low starting point in 2019. This viewpoint was made clearly by the likes of Sir John Curtice and other analysts. |
|
|
|
Post by jakegb on Jun 28, 2023 18:11:51 GMT
Whilst agreeing with the consensus this is a tough ask for Labour and they will be doing very well if they win it, the bolded part really needs correcting. Labour are now doing significantly better in the polls than in the run up to the local elections, and the lazy initial take of "these are disappointing Labour results that would mean a hung parliament" was corrected once the number crunchers actually looked at them properly. corrected to suggest it wouldn't be a hung parliament? I haven't seen that Nor have I ... |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,730
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 28, 2023 19:35:17 GMT
Whilst agreeing with the consensus this is a tough ask for Labour and they will be doing very well if they win it, the bolded part really needs correcting. Labour are now doing significantly better in the polls than in the run up to the local elections, and the lazy initial take of "these are disappointing Labour results that would mean a hung parliament" was corrected once the number crunchers actually looked at them properly. The line 'not a knock out performance' does not directly correspond with 'disappointing Labour results'. I never described their results as 'disappointing'. In my view, Labour performed well in the locals. But to win a majority government, they do more than 'well', they need a 'knock out performance', from such a low starting point in 2019. This viewpoint was made clearly by the likes of Sir John Curtice and other analysts. I am pretty sure that John Curtice made a contrary point that Labour actually did very well once all the votes had come in. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 28, 2023 19:43:24 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might
|
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,345
|
Post by graham on Jun 28, 2023 19:53:33 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might Hemel Hempstead was Labour-held 1997 - 2005 and October 1974 - 1979. Admittedly significant boundary changes have taken place. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 28, 2023 19:59:53 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might Hemel Hempstead was Labour-held 1997 - 2005 and October 1974 - 1979. Admittedly significant boundary changes have taken place. yes and labour had a majority on Dacorum at the time. They hold 6 seats now |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,730
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 28, 2023 20:13:38 GMT
Hemel Hempstead was Labour-held 1997 - 2005 and October 1974 - 1979. Admittedly significant boundary changes have taken place. yes and labour had a majority on Dacorum at the time. They hold 6 seats now I thought they only held 3 seats. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 28, 2023 21:50:54 GMT
yes and labour had a majority on Dacorum at the time. They hold 6 seats now I thought they only held 3 seats. my apologies |
|
|
|
Post by Delighted Of Tunbridge Wells on Jun 29, 2023 3:16:55 GMT
It looks like the Climate Party (the one led by Buckinghamshire councillor Ed Gemmell) are trying to stand here. Also someone called Andrew Gray is apparently "the AI-powered candidate". pol.is/home Interesting AI he's got there. Seems like a genuine man, but I'm not sure data mining is the best option for his campaigning. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 29, 2023 10:40:16 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might East Herts? New Labour made no great impact there, but it was as irrelevant to their route to a majority as it is to Labour today. It's undoubtedly true that Rawlings and Thrasher suggested the local elections results indicated a hung parliament, but all that really tells us is that Rawlings and Thrasher shouldn't be taken seriously as analysts of today's electoral geography. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 29, 2023 10:49:57 GMT
The line 'not a knock out performance' does not directly correspond with 'disappointing Labour results'. I never described their results as 'disappointing'. In my view, Labour performed well in the locals. But to win a majority government, they do more than 'well', they need a 'knock out performance', from such a low starting point in 2019. This viewpoint was made clearly by the likes of Sir John Curtice and other analysts. I am pretty sure that John Curtice made a contrary point that Labour actually did very well once all the votes had come in. He did indeed, and generally his performance was much better than last year (when he had a definite bee in his bonnet about Labour "under performing") |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 29, 2023 11:57:48 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might East Herts? New Labour made no great impact there, but it was as irrelevant to their route to a majority as it is to Labour today. It's undoubtedly true that Rawlings and Thrasher suggested the local elections results indicated a hung parliament, but all that really tells us is that Rawlings and Thrasher shouldn't be taken seriously as analysts of today's electoral geography. Labour had 8 seats in 1990s which was 8 more than they had from 2001 til 2019. A small bit of Stevenage is part of East Herts and Labour have previously held Hertford. Different boundaries. But given the polls labour must really fancy their chances in Hertford |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jun 29, 2023 12:24:33 GMT
No Hertford constituency has ever been Labour-held. Labour did of course hold Hertford & Stevenage between 1974 & 1979.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,455
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 29, 2023 12:40:33 GMT
The problem is that the Lib Dems and Greens did very well in places New Labour historically did well. East Herts and Dacorum are two that initially occur to me as local to my home town. So it's hard to measure. Lib Dems clearly in a good place in Harpenden and Berko but Labour haven't really demonstrated they can win Hemel. However, the Tories could certainly lose it, so will Lib Dems locally vote Labour in Hemel to shaft the Tories? They just might East Herts? New Labour made no great impact there, but it was as irrelevant to their route to a majority as it is to Labour today. It's undoubtedly true that Rawlings and Thrasher suggested the local elections results indicated a hung parliament, but all that really tells us is that Rawlings and Thrasher shouldn't be taken seriously as analysts of today's electoral geography.ouch! |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,455
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 29, 2023 12:41:21 GMT
I am pretty sure that John Curtice made a contrary point that Labour actually did very well once all the votes had come in. He did indeed, and generally his performance was much better than last year (when he had a definite bee in his bonnet about Labour "under performing") I wrote to him about something and got nothing so i shrug my shoulders when i see him on tv now |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jun 29, 2023 12:55:28 GMT
East Herts? New Labour made no great impact there, but it was as irrelevant to their route to a majority as it is to Labour today. It's undoubtedly true that Rawlings and Thrasher suggested the local elections results indicated a hung parliament, but all that really tells us is that Rawlings and Thrasher shouldn't be taken seriously as analysts of today's electoral geography. Labour had 8 seats in 1990s which was 8 more than they had from 2001 til 2019. A small bit of Stevenage is part of East Herts and Labour have previously held Hertford. Different boundaries. But given the polls labour must really fancy their chances in Hertford If we fancy our chances in Hertford, then we're on course for a massive majority, so I think you're contradicting yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jun 29, 2023 13:41:27 GMT
Labour had 8 seats in 1990s which was 8 more than they had from 2001 til 2019. A small bit of Stevenage is part of East Herts and Labour have previously held Hertford. Different boundaries. But given the polls labour must really fancy their chances in Hertford If we fancy our chances in Hertford, then we're on course for a massive majority, so I think you're contradicting yourself. my point was that the local elections were not a perfect indication as to what might happen as where labour might do well in some places the greens and lib Dems have done well. We know though much of the time the Lib Dems specifically switch to labour in a general election. This new found confidence in the greens is harder to gage though. I think it's perfectly sensible to say despite Greens gains in East Herts Labour might win Hertford. Possibly go further, Green gains in East Herts makes it more likely. The pause for thought, is we just don't know for sure. It's a new world. Don't you agree? |
|
