ff1d1l
pfm Member
This is great - heads up and watch.
Winter election III
- Thread starter Nick_G
- Start date
- Status
jackbarron
Chelsea, London
It's likely I'll campaign in Putney during the next few days, trying to persuade Lib Dems to vote Labour.
The Tories could get 43% of the vote, Labour 40% and the Lib Dems 10%, according to a compilation of surveys, polls, past election results and student registration drives.
Swinson meanwhile slates Corbyn whenever she can and says she will not resign if the Lib Dems win even fewer seats.
Jack
Seanm
pfm Member
Ought not to be but these sites are spreading a lot of confusion. Safest to ignore.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
1. The tories were in government in 1996
2. Douglas Hurd thankfully isn't running for PM.
3. Maria Gatland - some story!
4 & 6. McGuinness had played an instrumental role in the peace process, and was by this time an elected MP and Deputy First Minister. The government decides who HMQ meets.
5. Whitelaw was acting on behalf of the government. Major William Whitelaw MC served as a Battalion CO in Normandy and NW Europe. I can't somehow visualise JC in command of a tube of toothpaste, let alone a battalion of Churchill tanks.
6. Margaret Thatcher is not running for PM.
SteveS1
I heard that, pardon?
Not if you want to unseat a Tory where Labour can’t win it isn’t. Best not to rely on a single site, but many of these seats are not a close fight between opposition - it’s pretty obvious which candidates are best placed to unseat the Tory.
Caledon1297
pfm Member
Caledon1297
pfm Member
FIFY.
Seanm
pfm Member
Yes and it’s often not the one recommended by sites being pushed by, e.g. The Guardian. All I’m saying is: ignore them. They are, at best, using outdated and unreliable data, at worst they are deliberately attempting to mislead the unwary.
Tony L
Administrator
So you are arguing that people vote Labour in Con/Lib marginals? That is just bloody crazy. Far better to use whatever stats are available and to actively target Johnson even if that means say both Jack and Drood voting LD. I would unquestionably vote Labour in a Tory/Lab marginal, and have done many times even though I am not a fan of the party. Every time. It is clear Corbyn has failed, all we can do at this stage is to vote against a Tory majority. I would advise people to do so.
gassor
There may be more posts after this.
"Marginals are usually defined as seats where a swing of up to 10 per cent will lead to a change, with the average swing between the Conservatives and Labour in the post-war period around three per cent. By this standard, around a quarter of seats that will be contested on Thursday across the UK can be classed as marginal." John Curtice.
Nothing is a foregone conclusion but Labour will not get a majority.
Nothing is a foregone conclusion but Labour will not get a majority.
Seanm
pfm Member
No, obviously not. I’m saying, don’t rely on these sites to tell you what is a lib/con marginal. The Guardian is telling people to vote for an ex-Tory in the constituency of f-ing Grenfell, which currently has a sitting Labour mp. It’s obvious what’s going on here. Ignore them, do your own research. In most cases that won’t require any more effort than Googling who came 2nd against Tories in 2017.
clifftaylor
Absolutely retired!
Which is what?
Seanm
pfm Member
Exaggerated faith in polls + failure to understand how tactical voting works + straightforward attempt to mislead, with a view to hobbling Labour.
Tl;dr stupidity and malice.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
Correct. And meeting with the IRA
Correct. And meeting with the IRA
Correct. And meeting close up and personal with the IRA
Correct. And met with lots of Tories
Correct. And befriended terrorists of the most sadistic kind
You are Sergeant Marc Francois and I claim my £5.00
Corbyn’s already made a pretty good job of that himself!
Seanm
pfm Member
All I’m asking is you use the brains God gave you. Do not trust these sites.
Tony L
Administrator
I’d trust them over Labour activists every single time as at least they are based on polling/trends etc rather than wishful thinking or pining for a long past 2017 peak. I would obviously like far more evidence than is currently in play, but I’ll always take ‘some’ over ‘none’ when that is the option.
eternumviti
Insufficient privileges to reply.
Oh dear...
russel
./_dazed_and_confused
video from the Financial Times data and statistics journalists says not to trust the sites.
https://www.ft.com/video/87c6a5c9-e741-4433-b35f-58642b7c517d
- Status