UK General Election, June 8th 2017

[jaichind]

Smart move by May.  She found a good excuse.  Gordon Brown should have done the same in 2007.

[jaichind]

Given that the Tories have pulled into a solid second place in the high 20's in Scotland.

What are the chances of the Tories winning seats of the SNP? How many?

This election might become a disaster for LAB in Scotland.  The might be pushed to a weak third place since all the anti-SNP tactical voting will most likely end up with CON which is for now the stronger of CON and LAB.

[jaichind]

This election seems like a good opportunity for LIB to make a comeback by pulling in the pro-EU vote.  Of course any LIB revival will make the situation for LAB even worse.

[jaichind]

I wonder if this would work toward "nationalizing" the May 4th local elections?  It would be interesting to see what the implied national vote share end up being from May 4th.

[jaichind]

Why is Labour supporting this?

I know whenever we have these over-confident snap elections in Canada, the governing party gets turfed. See Ontario 1990 and Alberta 2015.

Maybe because this is the only way to get rid of Corbyn

[jaichind]

Why is Labour supporting this?

I know whenever we have these over-confident snap elections in Canada, the governing party gets turfed. See Ontario 1990 and Alberta 2015.

Did not 1966 work out pretty well for LAB ?

[jaichind]

This election might become a disaster for LAB in Scotland.  The might be pushed to a weak third place since all the anti-SNP tactical voting will most likely end up with CON which is for now the stronger of CON and LAB.

We've fallen so far recently that comparatively it wouldn't really be a disaster. If Labour can hold Edinburgh South then it will be a great night for us. What we'll judge the year on is how well we do in the council elections in May.

Sure it terms of seats 2015 is near rock bottom for LAB. I was thinking for the humiliation of LAB of falling behind CON in terms of vote share by a significant margin which will be exaggerated by anti-SNP tactical voting. 

[jaichind]

If current polling holds then LAB might be looking at a result worse than 1983 both in terms of vote share(27.6%) and seats(209.)  Although I suspect the polls will tighten and LAB most likely will outperform their polling just like CON outperformed their polling in 2001.  Some of the leads CON have over LAB in polls look at lot like the 2001 LAB leads over CON.

[jaichind]

In theory this poll (ICM/The Guardian) was done after May made the announcement

https://www.icmunlimited.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/2017_guardian_campaign_poll1_april18.pdf

CON   46
LAB   25
LIB    11
UKIP   8
SNP    4
Green 4

Seems like 55% approve of May's decision to go for an election

[jaichind]

so they do polls with 1000 people from 650 constituencies? whats that like 1,5 person per constituency lol

Well, most polls done in the UK are around 1.5K-2K anyway

[jaichind]

It seems Tony Blair will campaign with LIB this time.

[jaichind]

Farron has rejected a pact with Labour. Which makes sense if Farron's goà is moderate remainets.

Well, if his angle is to have the LIB capture the pro-EU vote, forming an alliance with LAB would cloud that position given Corybn's ambiguous position on Brexit.

[jaichind]

Independent: Jeremy Corbyn 'likely to stay on' even if Labour suffers crushing election defeat

[jaichind]

lol corbyn

https://twitter.com/yougov/status/854975227960455168

Theresa May gains her highest ever "best Prime Minister" rating at 54% - Jeremy Corbyn on 15%, don't know 31%

That might be inflating the May advantage since it is the same as the Yougov poll that had massive lead of CON 48 LAB 24.  If that is the state of the race then LAB is doomed.  If that exaggerates the CON lead then most likely the May lead over Corybn is exaggerated as well.   In many ways this is very relevant. I recall that in 2015 LAB and CON traded leads but  Cameron was consistently ahead of Miliband on the leadership question the entire campaign which ended up being very predictive.

[jaichind]

I think  Corbyn logic for staying on  if LAB gets beaten badly is superficially that he has been in charge for two years and that is too short to judge leadership performance.

But I think at a deeper level I suspect he has a particular view of electoral history.  He mostly likely views election cycles as mostly fixed.  Meaning once an incumbent party has been in charge enough political debt, contradictions, and internal conflict  build up to the point that they will be beaten at the polls regardless of the opposition.  So in his mind Tony Blair or New Labor was not necessary to win in 1997.  A LAB party led by Corbyn or Foot for example would have won in 1997 as well, perhaps will a smaller majority. So in his mind, losing in 2017, perhaps badly, and losing in 2022 is par for the course.  As long as he or someone from the Far Left is in charge of LAB by 2027 when the CON government has been charge long enough then his agenda can be implemented under a Far Left LAB government.  In fact losing badly in 2017 would be a feature and not a bug.  Losing all marginal LAB seats would mean that PLP will lean even more Left making even easier for Corbyn's successor to be from the Far Left.

One can agree or disagree with Corbyn's view of electoral cycle history but I suspect this how he feels.  There are data to back up his view.  Trump's 2016 victory would be evidence of this view.  I very flawed candidate was able to win based on the anti-incumbency effect of a party being in power for 8 years and an open seat.

Only other alternative is that  Corbyn is actually a deep double agenda working for the CON party.

[jaichind]

Tories now trumpeting the 'Coalition of Chaos' line again. Either their private polling is showing a closer election than the public polling or they are worried about being hurt by low turnout.

Ftr, there was a report a few weeks ago of Tory private polling showing that about 25 seats could be lost to the Lib Dems.

Of course they would say that, regardless of weather it is true or not.  CON know how they won 2015 and is looking forward of playing the same card.  The main risk for the CON is their base does not turn out since it seems that CON are headed for a certain victory.  So it seems critical that CON have to say the CON "could lose." On the flip side I am certain the way the LIB are going to play this is to say the CON will win for sure and LAB will lose for sure.  That way pro-EU LAB voters can then vote LIB since the CON are going to win anyway.

As for LIB seats.  There seems to be 10 CON seats that LIB came within 10% in 2015, 3 LAB seats that LIB came within 10% in 2015 and 3 SNP seats that LIB came within 10% in 2015.  I can see LIB winning the 3 LAB seats.  For the 10 CON seats it seems CON will gain vote from LAB so LIB has to hope that there is a LAB collapse there for them to have a shot.  The 3 SNP seats I guess the main challenge there is the Unionist vote will consolidate behind CON so LIB has to  somehow find votes from SNP for have a shot there.  I sort of see LIB gaining around 3-5 seats to around 12 even as they will gain 3% or even a bit more in vote share.

[jaichind]

Good map on how limited LIB opportunities are to gain seats, especially via anti-CON voting.

[jaichind]

It seems that there are two parallel LAB campaigns.  Corbyn will tour districts the party needs to win to gain a majority in Parliament, while party’s headquarter,who control party funds and Corbyn as a liability, plan the defense of seats with majorities of 5K votes or more, conceding LAB seats with majorities of 5K or less as lost.

[jaichind]

ComRes

Con 50(+4) Lab 25(-) LD 11(-) UKIP 7(-2)

That would see a majority of 200 with Labour reduced to 140 seats

Well, back in 1997 and 2001 there were polls near the election with LAB leads nearly 30 points.  They won by 12.5 and 9 respectively.  All things equal even if the CON lead is that large all that would mean is CON turnout would be lower on election day and the scale of victory significantly lower than the 25 point lead the poll infer.

[jaichind]

IF CON gets above 45% of the vote AND turnout is reasonably high (close to 2015 turnout rates) then May might beat the 1992 Major's CON total record vote of 14.1 million.  It is interesting that before 1992 the record in terms of total vote by party was 1951 Attlee's LAB losing effort with a total vote of 13.95 million.

The fact the total vote record is so hard to beat speaks to the overall decline of turnout in UK elections as well as the fomentation of the vote share since the 1950s.

[jaichind]

Most polls seems to have CON+UKIP at 53-55 and LAB+LIB at 35-37.  There seems to significant variance between CON and UKIP on the one hand and between LAB and LIB on the other had.  But the each pair seem to poll around the same amount.

[jaichind]

Panelbase/Scotland
SNP - 44%
Con - 33%
Lab - 13%
Lib - 5%

This poll might be off but does fit into my thinking about all this talk about LIB revival in Scotland.  I always figured that the idea of LIB making gains in Scotland was most likely fiction.  If LIB were to go after the Remain vote it seems that vote should go SNP, if anything to stop CON.  If LIB were to go after the Unionist vote then that same vote most likely voted for Brexit and would go CON anyway.  I always figured that it will be a SNP vs CON battle this time in Scotland even if it will be an uneven battle.

[jaichind]

Tories getting close to 50% with ICM online CON 48 +2 LAB 26 +1 LD 10 -1 UKIP 8=

[jaichind]

ICM/Guardian poll (21-24 Apr)
Con 48 (+2)
Lab 27 (+2)
LD 10 (-1)
UKIP 7 (-1)
Greens 3 (-1)

CON+UKIP at 55 LAB+LIB at 37 which fits my view that almost all the polls have it CON+UKIP at 53-55 and LAB+LIB at 35-37.

[jaichind]

YouGov poll of Wales:

CON 40 (21 seats)
LAB 30 (15 seats)
PC 13 (3 seats)
LD 8 (1 seat)
UKIP 6
GRN 2

Shocking. First Tory majority since 1922

My impression is that CON did not get a majority in Wales either in 1922.  I do not think CON has ever been the largest party in Wales ever.