Proper Tidy
Arsed
God I hope notShouldn't Corbyn be seeking to develop a remain alliance with the Lib Dems/Greens etc?
God I hope notShouldn't Corbyn be seeking to develop a remain alliance with the Lib Dems/Greens etc?
Would you be up for having no deal on the ballot paper?
Two stages like French presidential elections. Three or more options with two biggest votes going to a final vote. Would be the fairest way and wouldnt guarantee remain at all.It would guarantee a win for remain if it was a three-way poll.
Two stages like French presidential elections. Three or more options with two biggest votes going to a final vote. Would be the fairest way and wouldnt guarantee remain at all.
Shouldn't Corbyn be seeking to develop a remain alliance with the Lib Dems/Greens etc?
Couldn’t give two hoots what his exact net worth is tbh - but I’m glad we can both agree that he is worth a decent amount for a socialist.
I think it’s fair to say that old crusty Corbyn is the very definition of the phrase ‘champagne socialist’ or the American version ‘limousine liberal’.
What happened to the Bollinger Bolsheviks?
Yep. It's their only hope of appealing beyond Brexit, which has still got to be Labour's main goal, imo.Labour should make hay out of them being only party standing on own feet and putting themselves to the polls on their own terms and manifesto tbh
What's unfair about it?That doesn't sound fair at all.
there's some figures in this article -You don’t think the fact that in the previous election you refer to Labour stood on a platform of respecting and enacting the referendum result?
What's unfair about it?
Sounds fair to me, if there were, say, some specified deal that's been worked out and can be applied, no deal, and remain. My problem with it is that I don't think a political class can or should present an option to a referendum that it itself considers to be dangerous - dangerous to peace in NI, for starters. It would bear responsibility for any shit that happened if that option won and was enacted, but would seek to shift that responsibility to 'the voters'.That doesn't sound fair at all.
That's pretty much what happens in French elections - Macron or Le Pen? Well, neither. But you get to choose your less-hated option.If remainers lose round one they get to pick between two things they don't want. .
Most elections are just two or three identical blokes in different hats tbf. I can't think of a fairer way of doing it anyway.Imagine a presidential election with three candidates but two of them are the same bloke in two different hats.
Yes. I think the Tories win, but if there is to be anything other than a tory working majority, this is the key issue. Same time, the libs need to also still do well in a few tory/lib marginals.I'll be expecting libdem polling to sink now, with a brexit pact they are going to find it hard to stop voters swinging behind labour in all but a few seats
there's some figures in this article -
Our most recent data was collected right after the European Parliament elections in June when the Brexit party was briefly leading the polls. Taken together, the Brexit party drew 72% of its support from 2017 Conservatives and 17% from 2017 Labour voters. In Labour-held seats, this gap narrows slightly to 64% Conservatives and 24% Labour voters.
Opinium have a rising number of Labour/Leave voters returning to Labour (66% in their last poll) - I don't think you can assume this will hurt them.
1. It has, but the labour party have still held on to more than half of their 2017 leave supporters, which is currently on an upwards trend (we'll see if the latest from Farage changes this)There are, I think, 3 issues with this:
1. Labour’s Brexit position has changed since June.
2. One in four 2017 voters is significant - given Labour’s shift can we see much of the 24% switching back?
3. Labour’s target seats are predominantly leave seats
I don't think it's necessary for him to have been offered anything: the polling was pretty clear and the BP vote was getting squeezed to fuck, and he's been under significant internal pressure to stand down in many seats over the last week or so to give the tories a clear run. This could as easily be a face saving exercise as anything else.Aside from the political analysis, there's the ever present question of 'what does farage himself get out of this?' He'd happily abandon the BP in a heartbeat if this led to a cabinet post. There's also the possibility of him becoming ambassador to Washington, though there's probably too much admin and real work involved in a job like that.
Yep, and this announcement is a symptom of that. As killer b says, the BP was already getting hammered in the polls. This is an action carried out from a position of increasing weakness. It's hard to judge, but I'm inclined to welcome it, tbh.The Brexit Party will get fuck all votes. This is a nationwide general election, people have other priorities than Brexit, as we saw 2 years ago.
I'm just clarifying what he's reported to have said today, obviously things could change over the coming weeks.Yes. Thats what he said. But Farage said they were standing in 600 seats last week.
If you take a seat like Walsall at the moment you’d expect Labour to win the seat even though the majority of the vote will probably go to two leave candidates. It makes sense therefore for either the BP or Tories only to stand in these seats. Or at least decide which of them will ‘go for it’ with the other agreeing not to campaign.
If, as Farage suggests, there is now a ‘Leave Alliance’ this would be the only logical position to adopt
Activist pressure too - there's overwhelming support in the BP grassroots for something like this, and loads of candidates pulling out and endorsing the local tory.Anyway I'd say the main factor for brexit party decision to stand down will have been its own polling
Have to see how this plays out in terms of what will probably be unpredictable splits and shifts, but on the face of it it's a disaster for Labour. I suspect Farage will get a bit of stick for this and there will be a tiny boost for ukip, but the bigger picture is messy but good for the tories. It's up to Labour to present this as a capitulation by johnson, a hard right alliance etc.
'Unlikely to be a game-changing moment' - YouGov on significance of Farage's decision
YouGov, the polling company, has sent out an analysis of the Nigel Farage decision saying it is unlikely to be a “game-changing moment” for the election. This is from its political research manager, Chris Curtis.
Farage’s decision to stand aside in current Conservative-held seats and not in Labour-held seats that the Tories will be looking to gain will likely make very little difference. There are three caveats to this. Firstly, whilst there has been a swing towards the Tories in their battle against Labour, the increase in Lib Dem and SNP vote share means that there is likely to be a swing against them in seats where they are battling against those parties. However, there are not as many of these seats as there are Labour/Conservative marginals, and most of them will be the kind of places where the Brexit party wouldn’t have won many votes anyway, such as in Scotland or more remain-leaning seats in the south.
Secondly, it does help mitigate against the effects of a surge in support for Labour during this campaign. If the Labour vote share does start to recover, in the same way it did in 2017, this will make it more difficult for the party to start gaining seats from the Tories. However, on current polling it will take quite a turnaround of Jeremy Corbyn’s fortunes in order to reach this point. Finally, whilst the practical effect might be quite small, we don’t know what effect Farage’s message might have on the broader perceptions of the parties. It could be that even in seats where the Brexit party are standing, voters that might otherwise have supported the party now feel more comfortable voting Conservative after Farage’s comments.
General election: Farage's plan to stand aside in Tory seats amounts to 'Trump alliance', says Corbyn - live news