General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

prawnsambo

What this poll does, is give the opposition parties a good indication of where to direct their efforts. It also does that for the Tories obviously, but it's actually far enough in advance for them all to concentrate their efforts. The last time this poll was run was 9 days before the election.

Sam Coates reporting that figures such as Anna Soubry and Dominic Grieve and David Gauke set - assuming the poll is correct - to lose their seats.

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1199811361104158720

hotmail.com

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sam Coates reporting that figures such as Anna Soubry and Dominic Grieve set - assuming the poll is correct - to lose their seats.

https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1199811361104158720

Brexit now a certainty and the new cliff edge becomes December next year.

bren2001

Deleted User wrote: »

Be honest, would you really -- really -- be saying the same thing if Labour lead the Torys in the same poll?

Really!?



Very incisive post.

Very true.

Therefore, very likely to be dismissed by Labour voters.

Yes, yes I would be saying that because I understand the flaws associated with polling at present. It only needs about a 3% swing to remove the majority (Twitter saying 5, I have it at 3). There's still 3 weeks to go in the election.

The analysis is constructed in such a way the lower your voting age, the less your vote counts due to varying levels of turnout across the demographic. YouGov are unable to predict voter turnout in the 18-30 category, of which, Corbyn is the clear favourite. If the LP can excite that base, anything can happen. If the situation were flipped, there are other considerations to make that YouGov don't take into account.

I want to be clear, I'm in no way saying that Labour will win a majority in the election. The Tories will obviously win the most amount of seats. Will that be enough for a majority? That's still very unclear. Labour are not actually that far behind stopping an outright majority when you dig into the stats.

I also want to say, I'm not a Corbynite. I do align with the LP but Corbyn has been an utter shambles of a leader. It's embarrassing what has happened in the last few years.

According to what was released by Chris Curtis, who works as YouGov, he released the following "ranges" based on the poll results.

In any event, this is -- whatever way you salami slice it -- very good news for Prime Minister Johnson.

To think that Labour could be as low as 187 is shocking.

Shelga

Wonder what would happen on December 12th if Corbyn announced tomorrow morning that he was resigning as leader of the Labour Party with immediate effect, and Keir Starmer was taking over.

I see sheep

bilston wrote: »

Corbyn has to be the biggest liability a political party in the UK or pretty much anywhere else has had in a long time.

The Tories have been at war with themselves for the last 3 years (and for longer), the UK govt wasn't able to win important votes in the HoC. Their leader is regarded by most Britons as untrustworthy and worse by some, and yet they are on course for a 60 seat majority, the biggest Tory majority since 1987!

Incredible.

How can Corbynites and Labour not see this!!

If the Tories do win a majority it'll be purely down to people wanting Brexit done, if the Brexit referendum had never happened and the Tories had to fight on 10 years of crippling austerity, universal credit, nhs cuts, police cuts etc. they would be wiped out.

I talk to people who agree the Tories are terrible but are just so sick of Brexit they want it 'done'. (Which is of course a total lie from BJ and nonsense).

Plus the 24 media barrage of anti Corbyn propaganda in the media here wins over plenty of gullible voters.

prawnsambo

bren2001 wrote: »

The analysis is constructed in such a way the lower your voting age, the less your vote counts due to varying levels of turnout across the demographic. YouGov are unable to predict voter turnout in the 18-30 category, of which, Corbyn is the clear favourite. If the LP can excite that base, anything can happen. If the situation were flipped, there are other considerations to make that YouGov don't take into account.

That's the demographic that's been registering at a higher rate than any other in recent weeks. Something like three or four to one were registering from that group.

I see sheep

Shelga wrote: »

Wonder what would happen on December 12th if Corbyn announced tomorrow morning that he was resigning as leader of the Labour Party with immediate effect, and Keir Starmer was taking over.

Possibly what happened in 2015 when Milliband did much worse than Corbyn in 2017?

Shelga

Shelga wrote: »

Wonder what would happen on December 12th if Corbyn announced tomorrow morning that he was resigning as leader of the Labour Party with immediate effect, and Keir Starmer was taking over.

Conservative vote would rise.

At least Corbyn is semi-open about his politics.

Starmer is as bad as the worst Conservative when it comes to delivering the unpackaged truth.

Labour vote would drop - probably significantly. Corbyn has a following, Starmer is a version of semi-Blairism.

bren2001

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's the demographic that's been registering at a higher rate than any other in recent weeks. Something like three or four to one were registering from that group.

If young people turn up, they can stop Brexit. If they don't Boris and the older generations will get what they want.

It's all well and good registering, it's VERY hard to get them to actually vote.

TheJournal.ie now reporting that "Johnson on track to secure comfortable majority in UK general election"

The seat-by-seat analysis based on current polling by YouGov for The Times shows that if the election were held today the Conservative would win 359 seats (42 more than they took in 2017) and 43% of the vote.

These results would give Johnson a majority of 68.

In terms of seats won, this would be the Conservative’s best performance since 1987.

The poll predicts that Labour are set to lose 51 seats, falling from 262 seats in 2017 to 211 now – and taking 32% of the vote (a nine percentage point decrease).

In terms of seats won, this would be the party’s worst performance since 1983.

The polling results are entirely consistent with the results we've seen over the past couple of weeks.

Most importantly:

Tonight’s poll results will be closely analysed after the model accurately predicted back in 2017 that former Prime Minister Theresa May would lose her majority.

hotmail.com

[Deleted User] wrote: »

TheJournal.ie now reporting that "Johnson on track to secure comfortable majority in UK general election"



The polling results are entirely consistent with the results we've seen over the past couple of weeks.

Most importantly:

The Journal is reporting what is being reported in The London Times.

One Nation Conservatism gets a thorough and forensic bashing on here, as do I. And that's fine, people are entitled to their own political views.

But it is what the British electorate appear - based on these preliminary results - to want.

So, whilst we can condemn Conservatives and assume they are all beyond the pale, the UK electorate wish to see a Conservative Government for the forthcoming 5 years.

It's not over yet, though. As with any election, things can change - and, though unlikely, it is still within the bounds of possibility that some major event could deliver a minority Corbyn government.

From my perspective though, I'm ecstatic with these results and hope it continues apace in the weeks ahead.

briany

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Of course they can. They cannot abstain or vote against it and remain in the party is what you mean

Thing about that is that if every Conservative candidate signs a pledge to vote for the WA, and then votes against it, then that begs the question what they're saying on doorsteps. If they're running in their constituencies on the platform of voting for the WA, and they get a seat, then it wouldn't be just the parliamentary party they'd be in hot water with if they turned around and voted against or simply abstained. If they're running on a platform of voting against or abstaining, then that would surely get back to Conservative HQ and searching questions would be asked.

The deal is on the table. The Cons are running on the basis of passing it if a majority is achieved. I'm not really sure what wiggle room individual candidates have, here.

bilston

Deleted User wrote: »

Conservative vote would rise.

At least Corbyn is semi-open about his politics.

Starmer is as bad as the worst Conservative when it comes to delivering the unpackaged truth.

Labour vote would drop - probably significantly. Corbyn has a following, Starmer is a version of semi-Blairism.

It will be interesting to see what direction Labour goes in post election if the Conservatives do win a majority. Corbyn can't lose two elections and expect to remain as leader.

Keir Starmer seems a likely replacement but the party membership may think differently.

briany

briany wrote: »

Thing about that is that if every Conservative candidate signs a pledge to vote for the WA, and then votes against it, then that begs the question what they're saying on doorsteps. If they're running in their constituencies on the platform of voting for the WA, and they get a seat, then it wouldn't be just the parliamentary party they'd be in hot water with if they turned around and voted against or simply abstained. If they're running on a platform of voting against or abstaining, then that would surely get back to Conservative HQ and searching questions would be asked.

The deal is on the table. The Cons are running on the basis of passing it if a majority is achieved. I'm not really sure what wiggle room individual candidates have, here.

Completely true.

Moreover, if the Conservative Party do achieve a sizeable majority - say of 30+ people - those who vote against the WA are setting themselves up for a pretty astonishingly corrosive fall.

Strazdas

hotmail.com wrote: »

Brexit now a certainty and the new cliff edge becomes December next year.

Or mid summer in fact - No Deal would be evident long before December if it was heading that way.

hotmail.com

The younger voter thing is a bit of red herring. There are more older people (people over the age of 55) than there are in the age group of 18 to 30.

bilston

bilston wrote: »

It will be interesting to see what direction Labour goes in post election if the Conservatives do win a majority. Corbyn can't lose two elections and expect to remain as leader.

Keir Starmer seems a likely replacement but the party membership may think differently.

As a Conservative, I think one, often-overlooked, figure within the Labour Party is Hilary Benn.

He comes across as authentic. He's smart, and politically able; and he affirms his political views with a certain persuasive zeal.

That's just my view, but I can foresee a situation in which Benn is Prime Minister. He certainly has the capability.

I just don't see the same capability with the likes of Starmer, Abbott, or the shadow cabinet in general, to be honest.

I see sheep

Deleted User wrote: »

One Nation Conservatism gets a thorough and forensic bashing on here, as do I. And that's fine, people are entitled to their own political views.

But it is what the British electorate appear - based on these preliminary results - to want.

All the One Nation Conservatives have left the party.

It's all about Brexit, people have lost their minds over it.

awec

Deleted User wrote: »

As a Conservative, I think one, often-overlooked, figure within the Labour Party is Hilary Benn.

He comes across as authentic. He's smart, and politically able; and he affirms his political views with a certain persuasive zeal.

That's just my view, but I can foresee a situation in which Benn is Prime Minister. He certainly has the capability.

I just don't see the same capability with the likes of Starmer, Abbott, or the shadow cabinet in general, to be honest.

He's too old.

Capt'n Midnight

Deleted User wrote: »

So, what is your belief, that large-scale privatisation will take place?

Willing to put a % on it?

90%?

75%

10%?

Do you seriously, seriously believe that in 5-years' time, the NHS will not be free at the point of delivery but will, instead, become something akin to the US model?

In 5 short years, really?

At £13.75bn a year it's already over 10%.

And that doesn't include drug costs.

LeinsterDub

hotmail.com wrote: »

The younger voter thing is a bit of red herring. There are more older people (people over the age of 55) than there are in the age group of 18 to 30.

What an oddly specific stat. Sure you may as well say between 18 to 19 and over 80

hotmail.com

LeinsterDub wrote: »

What an oddly specific stat. Sure you may as well say between 18 to 19 and over 80

My point is that Labour is hanging onto the idea that they will win if they get the youth vote out .

I just don't believe there is enough younger people when compared with middle aged and older people.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

My point is that Labour is hanging onto the idea that they will win if they get the youth vote out .

I just don't believe there is enough younger people when compared with middle aged and older people.

Completely.

It assumes that young people are politically engaged at a high level. Almost all of us know that is never the case.

Even if those young people did agree, many are nihilistic enough to believe that their vote is "not worth it" or that some social event that day is instead worth their time or consideration.

The same cannot be true of tax-paying middle-aged people or politically-obsessed older people.

Given how contentious Brexit has been, the latter I've described are more likely to turn out - not the youth.

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

As a Conservative, I think one, often-overlooked, figure within the Labour Party is Hilary Benn.

He comes across as authentic. He's smart, and politically able; and he affirms his political views with a certain persuasive zeal.

That's just my view, but I can foresee a situation in which Benn is Prime Minister. He certainly has the capability.

I just don't see the same capability with the likes of Starmer, Abbott, or the shadow cabinet in general, to be honest.

Going from Corbyn to Benn would be a step in the wrong direction for Labour, imo. Labour would need an leader who the party can rally around. Someone with charisma and wide appeal. Benn comes across as serious and academic. His can be as authentic as he likes in his politics, but you need more than that in this day and age.

hotmail.com

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Completely.

It assumes that young people are politically engaged at a high level. Almost all of us know that is never the case.

Even if those young people did agree, some are nihilistic enough to believe that their vote is "not worth it" or that some social event that day is instead their time.

The same cannot be true of tax-paying middle-aged people or politically-obsessed older people.

Given how contentious Brexit has been, the latter I've described are more likely to turn out - not the youth.

That's true but my point is that even if all younger people voted, it's not enough for Labour to win.

So Labour pinning their hopes on the young vote is a bit hopeless at this stage.

They should have announced a promise to massively increase the old age pension.

Professor Moriarty

One would assume that the people registering to vote would have been included in tonight's poll results. If so, there is no comfort for Labour in the new registrations.

briany

briany wrote: »

Going from Corbyn to Benn would be a step in the wrong direction for Labour, imo. Labour would need an leader who the party can rally around. Someone with charisma and wide appeal. Benn comes across as serious and academic. His can be as authentic as he likes in his politics, but you need more than that in this day and age.

True, but Benn is a moderate Labour voice - not a fringe element on the far-left.

If we are honest, a far-left voice is unlikely to become Prime Minister of the UK.

So, whilst a Benn leadership may be uncomfortable for many in the membership, it may be better for a) the Labour Party and b) the country as a whole.

And national interest matters far more than some tribal loyalty to socialist ideals.

Hilary Benn, I think, could do an extraordinary job as Labour leader. But given the membership, who are now so devoted to some extremist that will almost never attain power, it's actually a shame that Benn and his equivalent may not rise to power. The UK needs an effective opposition.

The past 3 years have shown that a far-left opposition is -- and never will be -- the answer.

hotmail.com wrote: »

That's true but my point is that even if all younger people voted, it's not enough for Labour to win.

So Labour pinning their hopes on the young vote is a bit hopeless at this stage.

They should have announced a promise to massively increase to the old age pension.

Absolutely true.