UK General Election

[MikeG]

Now this is a poll-free estimate for the next general election, using just local election results...........

As this is completely and utterly incorrect, everything which follows in your post isn't worth the trouble of reading.

Sloppy, Craig. Sloppy.

Here is the page which shows how they do their modelling and calcs.

 

[Craig B]

As this is completely and utterly incorrect, everything which follows in your post isn't worth the trouble of reading.

[qimg]http://i.imgur.com/1bjqT8U.jpg[/qimg]



Sloppy, Craig. Sloppy.

Here is the page which shows how they do their modelling and calcs.

That's a pity. I got it from your link to the Electorac Calculus site. It's here http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html in the section headed

Now this is a poll-free estimate for the next general election, using just local election results. If we plug it into the Electoral Calculus election predictor, then we get the following result:
Making sense of the locals
Notoriously, local elections are a poor guide to the subsequent general election. Even the dogs in the street know that. But is there any information we can get from them? (Table here. It incorrectly shows the SNP losing seats.)

At a qualitative level, local elections do give a bit of a clue in terms of overall direction. The most striking table, which is worth a thousand words of dull commentary, shows the ward changes ... (Another table here)

This is a Conservative majority of 118, and is somewhat closer to what the pollsters are saying, but based on local election results only. Maybe this is real. Maybe the dogs in the street don't know it all.​

But since among the various incivilities in your post is a statement that you won't read my reply, this explanation may be wasted on you.

 

[Aber]

If this is what actually happens it would be Labour's worst result since Clement Attlee won 154 seats in 1935. Far worse than the famous Michael Foot loss in 1983 ("longest suicide note in history") in which he won 209 seats. It would see some big Labour names without a seat, including Jon Cruddas, Clive Lewis, Geoffrey Robinson, Ben Bradshaw (hasn't he gone already?), Paul Flynn, and many more. Caroline Lucas of the Greens is predicted to lose her seat, and 11 SNP members would go too if this is converted into actuality.

There's a curious 25% predicted increase (2 points) in the Lib Dem vote share, and an associated 1 seat drop in results.

They also show quite a high UKIP vote in places. If that collapses or they fail to stand candidates it might be even worse.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

So the Tories can look to have a supermajority. If that map happens say goodbye to labour for a generation.

 

[MikeG]

That's a pity. I got it from your link to the Electorac Calculus site. It's here http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html in the section headed

Now this is a poll-free estimate for the next general election, using just local election results. If we plug it into the Electoral Calculus election predictor, then we get the following result:
Making sense of the locals
Notoriously, local elections are a poor guide to the subsequent general election. Even the dogs in the street know that. But is there any information we can get from them? (Table here. It incorrectly shows the SNP losing seats.).............

But since among the various incivilities in your post is a statement that you won't read my reply, this explanation may be wasted on you.​

There was no such statement. I said there was nothing worth reading in your (previous) post given that it was based on a complete inaccuracy. You thought that the table I linked to and showed a screenshot of was "poll-free". It wasn't. Below is the table that "poll free" referred to:

This is an entirely different table, generated as part of a long essay on the difference between opinion polls and local council results. The table you were responding to (in #815 and #821) didn't include anything from the council election results, and was entirely based on polls.​

 

[MikeG]

So the Tories can look to have a supermajority. If that map happens say goodbye to labour for a generation.

That's what you get if you take ideological purity and Marxism and chuck in a dithering over-promoted lightweight as leader. All that can be fixed quite quickly. How soon Labour fix all those issues determines how long they will be in the electoral wilderness.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

That's what you get if you take ideological purity and Marxism and chuck in a dithering over-promoted lightweight as leader. All that can be fixed quite quickly. How soon Labour fix all those issues determines how long they will be in the electoral wilderness.

The last time they had a charismatic centrist he lied to the public so he could have a war.

 

[MikeG]

The last time they had a charismatic centrist he lied to the public so he could have a war.

Indeed. But that doesn't mean that every charismatic left-of-centre leader is or would be a lying war-monger. And it doesn't mean that everything else Blair did should be treated with opprobrium.

 

[Garrison]

Indeed. But that doesn't mean that every charismatic left-of-centre leader is or would be a lying war-monger. And it doesn't mean that everything else Blair did should be treated with opprobrium.

Well that's been the MO of the Corbynites, act is if the Iraq War was the be all and end all of the Blair years. Just ignore the positive achievements. The irony is that they are playing into the hands of the Conservatives in doing so.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

Well that's been the MO of the Corbynites, act is if the Iraq War was the be all and end all of the Blair years. Just ignore the positive achievements. The irony is that they are playing into the hands of the Conservatives in doing so.

What positive achievements? NHS privatisation? Creeping Authoritarianism? Tuition Fees? Faith Schools? On balance, Blair did far more harm than good.

 

[MikeG]

What positive achievements?.....

I'd say peace in Northern Ireland was quite a good thing, wouldn't you?

 

[NWO Sentryman]

I'd say peace in Northern Ireland was quite a good thing, wouldn't you?

John Major deserves most of the credit for that.

 

[angrysoba]

If Labour want a far left leader then they should get one with a bit of charisma. George Galloway would be a brilliant choice!

 

[Giz]

If Labour want a far left leader then they should get one with a bit of charisma. George Galloway would be a brilliant choice!

Consistent principles too! *



* 100% Galloway all the way.

 

[MikeG]

Consistent principles too! *



* 100% Galloway all the way.

Yeah, that'd be quite funny. Having a leader who isn't even a member of your party would certainly be a bit of a talking point. How often would we have to sit through that excruciating video of him pretending to be a cat? Or of the glowing reverential speeches he made about Sadam Hussein?

 

[Mid]

So a draft of Labour's manifesto has been leaked:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39877439

The BBC says highlights include:

• Spend an extra £8bn on social care over the next Parliament Refuse to make "false promises" on immigration
• Stress that any leader should be "extremely cautious" about using Trident nuclear weapons, which leader Jeremy Corbyn opposes
• Strengthen trade union rights - including increased unionisation across the workforce and repealing last year's Trade Union Act
• Scrap the public sector pay cap and reintroduce national pay bargaining
• Ban so-called "zero hours" contracts
• Increase income tax for the highest-earning 5% to raise an extra £6bn for the NHS
• Build at least 100,000 council and housing association houses a year
• Reserve 4,000 homes for rough sleepers

There also seems to be stuff on publicly owned energy companies and nationalising the national grid.

I'm assuming the Tory manifesto won't be as detailed.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

So a draft of Labour's manifesto has been leaked:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39877439

The BBC says highlights include:



There also seems to be stuff on publicly owned energy companies and nationalising the national grid.

I'm assuming the Tory manifesto won't be as detailed.

Why is that idiot Corbyn prattling on about public services and the homeless when some of the country's most privileged people still can't ride round the countryside on horseback setting packs of dogs on wildlife?

The mans priorities are all wrong

 

[McHrozni]

So a draft of Labour's manifesto has been leaked:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39877439

The BBC says highlights include:

There also seems to be stuff on publicly owned energy companies and nationalising the national grid.

I'm assuming the Tory manifesto won't be as detailed.

I'm missing the cybernetic shape-shifting elephant in the room, what kind of a Brexit deal would Labour pursue?

I think this is more important for the future of UK than, say, refusing to make false promises on immigration. I would argue that issue also encompasses the issue of immigration to the maximum possible extent.

McHrozni

 

[Aber]

Why is that idiot Corbyn prattling on about public services and the homeless when some of the country's most privileged people still can't ride round the countryside on horseback setting packs of dogs on wildlife?

The mans priorities are all wrong

Just wait until you see the 40 pages of detail:

We will set up a National Review of Local Pubs to examine the causes for the large-scale demise of pubs, as well as the establishment of a joint taskforce that will consider future sustainability

Labour remains committed to an independent inquiry into Britain's military role in the 1984 raid on the Golden Temple in Amritsar

We will prohibit the third party sale of puppies,

 

[Mid]

Why is that idiot Corbyn prattling on about public services and the homeless when some of the country's most privileged people still can't ride round the countryside on horseback setting packs of dogs on wildlife?

The mans priorities are all wrong

Also no promise on blue passports or reversing decimalisation, it's like they're not going after the Mail and Telegraph's endorsement at all