Current Affairs The General Election

[NilSatisOptimum]

Court rejects LibDem court case to be involved in tv debate.

Lol.

Is that the ITV debate!

How a party such as the Liberals that supposedly supports free market etc, has the audacity to dictate what ITV can and can't do is ridiculous. Another case of do as we say not what we do.

Lib Dems and SNP lose high court bid over TV election debate

Parties argued it was illegal and unfair to restrict broadcast to Labour and Conservatives

www.theguardian.com

 

[davek]

Is that the ITV debate!

Yes.

 

[davek]

How a party such as the Liberals that supposedly supports free market etc, has the audacity to dictate what ITV can and can't do is ridiculous. Another case of do as we say not what we do.

Lib Dems and SNP lose high court bid over TV election debate

Parties argued it was illegal and unfair to restrict broadcast to Labour and Conservatives

www.theguardian.com

Ha Ha. Indeed.

Thank goodness we dont have to put up with austerity queen Swinson whining on.

 

[orchard]

I think they've just adjusted the methods haven't they? The Conservatives look very strong though, which I said a few days back.

The key things moving through the campaign are going to be;
1) How far can Labour squeeze the Lib Dem/Green vote further down. There's perhaps 2% points from Greens and potentially about 5-6 from Lib Dems. If that is done it starts the become a two horse race with a similar likelihood to the last election.

2) If that doesn't happen, to what extent are the Labour/Lib Dem votes split in a way that is beneficial to them or the Tories. While it's a simplistic analysis, if the Lib Dems are up in the South but down in North/London and the same in reverse of Labour the election remains relatively open.

3) To what extent do the headline voting figures reflect whats happening in key constituencies. Similar to the above, but if the big re-adjustment lead they've been given following methodological changes is essentially piling up bigger leads in safely held seats in the south while it looks impressive it will not be the most efficient way to spread the vote.

4) As a final aside, how far will Labour's superior ground operation help them perhaps compound some of the polls suggestions in the lead up to and on the day of the poll. From what I can see the Conservative approach is essentially based around digital. It's having decent success. Labour have to hope the marginals they are targeting with large numbers of people buck the national trend somewhat.

It's a fascinating debate. There's been a bump for the Cons this week (though LAB have continued to grow too) though thats to be expected with the decline of the BXP in headline terms (as polls are adjusted). The key is going to be, how far will the Labour growth continue?

The manifesto launch was a big advantage for Labour last time, as were the debates. I think Johnson will struggle at those relative to the advantage he has. It will be interesting if they played out.

That being said, the leads for cons are good, and if they keep rising next week, and Lab stall in progress some concern will be apparent.

There's an assumption that a far lower pc of <c50yo will vote than in 2017. Kantar (iirc) adjusted to make it the same proportion as that year and the Spivs have something like a 3pc lead.

 

[tsubaki]

How a party such as the Liberals that supposedly supports free market etc, has the audacity to dictate what ITV can and can't do is ridiculous. Another case of do as we say not what we do.

Lib Dems and SNP lose high court bid over TV election debate

Parties argued it was illegal and unfair to restrict broadcast to Labour and Conservatives

www.theguardian.com

They deserve to be boycotted for going around telling everyone they are the UK's biggest party of Remain.

 

[tsubaki]

from the Guardian's liveblog:

 

[catcherintherye]

Economics of Labour’s plan to nationalise broadband – £20 billion cost is unrealistic

A breakdown of the infrastructure and operating costs, as well as the market impact of giving free full-fibre broadband to the whole country.

theconversation.com

Thanks Bruce.

I'm not sure the head of BT is an impartial arbiter in this. The long and short of it is though, I can't see it being done if it costs 100 bn p/a.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

For people who constantly whinge about the 'media vendetta' against Corbyn, there isn't half some bitterness about the Lib Dems.

 

[Jebus_lives]

For people who constantly whinge about the 'media vendetta' against Corbyn, there isn't half some bitterness about the Lib Dems.

I think the mantra is 'throw mud at everyone that's not the Tories'

 

[Alan Whittle]

For people who constantly whinge about the 'media vendetta' against Corbyn, there isn't half some bitterness about the Lib Dems.

On here maybe. Not in the media though.

 

[catcherintherye]

There's an assumption that a far lower pc of <c50yo will vote than in 2017. Kantar (iirc) adjusted to make it the same proportion as that year and the Spivs have something like a 3pc lead.

Yes I saw that, there's a 6% just on the 2017 metrics. I think a lot of the others (such as Yougov in particular are far wider than 6% as well). It leads to a likelihood that 6-10% of the vote share would be adjusted with the same patterns as 2017. That puts the tories anywhere from about 8% ahead to bang level depending on the pollster.

You also have to add in (certainly with Survation's recent one) the adjustment to BXP and that has given the Tories a 3-4% advantage that may not play out as such when you calculate how they are doing in seats being defended by others.

The wider point in all of this is surely why on earth pollsters have paid absolutely no attention to what has happened in 2017? They have refused to adjust any models to take into account how wrong they were. The Tories may well win, but given the scale of young people registering (up on last time, substantially so) and the potential for cold /wet weather leaving older people potentially not voting I would say it's a reasonable bet to say some of the pollsters are out.

I would say at this stage take 6-10% off any given poll as a worthwhile starting point. The Tories are still ahead, but given there's very little squeeze left for the BXP, and plenty of soft votes kicking about for Greens/Lib Dems for Labour it's still very open.

 

[Blues Harp]

For people who constantly whinge about the 'media vendetta' against Corbyn, there isn't half some bitterness about the Lib Dems.

is this due to the possibility that the media barons are trying to ensure a tory vote in Con/Lib marginals? Or that they (the LDs) are trying to out-austerity the tories? Neo-Liberals seems an appropriate re branding idea at present.

 

[catcherintherye]

For people who constantly whinge about the 'media vendetta' against Corbyn, there isn't half some bitterness about the Lib Dems.

I can't really understand Swinson's point in all of it. They are going to have a multi-party debate which she will be involved in. However a party that won 12 seats at the last election (only 2 years ago) is hardly going to be treated to parties that won 20 times that number.

 

[Alan Whittle]

Ha Ha. Indeed.

Thank goodness we dont have to put up with austerity queen Swinson whining on.

It may have done the LD's a favour. Swinson does come across ( to me, at least) as a bit of a shouty know all.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Thanks Bruce.

I'm not sure the head of BT is an impartial arbiter in this. The long and short of it is though, I can't see it being done if it costs 100 bn p/a.

It's based on the figures from Ofcom - https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-tel...vice-for-consumers/broadband-uso-need-to-know - which place the costs about 5x what Labour believe it can be done for. BT dispute the Ofcom figure, suggesting even that might not be enough, especially in harder to reach areas. I'd say you have a point if Ofcom were broadly agreeing with Labour, but they're not, so it kinda begs the question where on earth Labour got their figures from if they're so wildly different to that of the regulator.