ml1dch

"desensitized43's mate winning here! It's a two-horse race, villaglint's business partner cannot win!"

I guess the the EU side is quite happy with all its eggs being in the Johnson agreement and would rather not be open to accusations of playing both sides. I guess Labour don't want to have to put up with the cries of anguish from the "we'd have got a better deal if you hadn't been undermining poor Boris!!" morons. If it's true of course. Which it could very easily not be.

Without wanting to speak for Tony, I expect he's not "putting his trust" in a click poll on the Surrey Online website, merely sharing some anecdotal information. Does it tell us anything? Yes, it answers the valuable question of which party's voters are most likely to respond to an online poll if they happen to be looking at, or are directed to the Surrey Online website. Does that information have the same value as a sample group of 10,000 people across the country where you have tracked that group's voting intentions and record across all local, European and General Elections for the last five years and how that has changed over time? No. Think of it like a transfer rumour- what is the source, what is their methodology and what is their track record for accuracy. Then decide whether it's useful information or not.

Obviously drunk Prime Minister incoherently contradicts what the official Government documents say about his own DWA. It's impressive just how bad he is at all this.

*sigh*

But given it was a Lib Dem seat from 1997 - 2017, it's probably not one they are going to be keen to walk away from? I also expect that they would be focusing on where they have a strong activist base and local representation, and holding a seat for 20 years is going to do that.

Fine, but given he was there in 2017 that doesn't lend weight to the idea that there are loads of people who voted Labour in 2017 who will vote Conservative in 2019.

I think you're overcomplicating it. If someone wanted to think that Labour was going to deliver a leave result via their wishy-washy 2017 position, they can still convince themselves of that via their 2019 position. Why does it need to be more complicated than "for a lot of Labour voters, their Labour loyalty is stronger than their Brexit loyalty"

What was it that caused the likes of Mansfield, Walsall, Derby, Middlesbrough and Copeland to go from Labour to Conservative in 2017 if Labour voters weren't switching that way?

From a position of between 6-13% in the polls? They'll genuinely be doing well to win a single seat.

If Labour fancy making the first move in that tactical voting / candidates not trying as hard as they might have thing, here might be a nice place to join forces:

Good work Nigel. Keep it up.

Looks like he's been dropped as a candidate anyway. Chris Williamson and Stephen Hepburn as well.

First minister to resign during an election campaign since 1974.

Unless I'm missing something, he seems to have voted pretty solidly along official Labour Party lines. He wasn't one of the 19 who voted for Johnson's DWA.

Perhaps. But if your vote helps to return an MP who will vote for Conservative Brexit policy rather than Labour Brexit policy, how successful have your tactics been?

Here's a particularly egregious example: You wouldn't think he was running as an independent, due to having the whip removed because of his trial next year for multiple sexual assault charges...

I have nothing to link to, and it's third-hand anecdotal information, so should be treated with all the suspicion that entails - but I've been led to believe that there's no need to renegotiate anything, it's already been done. Starmer's numerous trips to Brussels to see Barnier weren't just beer and waffle tours. If there's a Labour administration then the broad agreement gets wheeled out pretty quickly.

What, everyone? In my Lib Dem-held constituency, which has spent most of it's life as a safe Conservative seat, where Labour barely get into double figures, I should vote Labour?

Yes to the first two. No to the third. If you feel that my suggestion on the question of the hypothetical scenario which could result in a Conservative majority isn't correct, and you feel that there are other, more likely methods that could result in that hypothetical scenario occurring then I'm more that happy to entertain them...

That was me - highest in a third of a century, since Thatcher in 1983.

Have I done / read an in depth analysis on a granular, seat-by-seat basis, taking into account local factors, popularity of the sitting MP and strength of local activism? No. If the broad trend is some Labour and Conservatives voters from 2017 moving to Lib Dem and NF Ltd, but greater numbers of Labour moving than Conservative, is my scenario above a likely consequence in some seats? Yes.

The risk is obviously how the drop in the Labour vote translates into seats. It's very easy to see dozens of seats that are say, 15,000 Labour, 12,000 Conservative and 3,000 Lib Dem suddenly becoming 9,000 Labour, 10,000 Conservative, 7,000 Lib Dem, 4,000 NF. Conservatives lose a sixth of their vote share and still gain. A lot of people are going to have to hold their nose, but there has never been a more important election to make sure that people are voting for whatever stops the Conservatives taking the seat. Hopefully the people actually voting are better at it than the people in charge are at organising it.

I'm in two minds. The "first owner" stuff strikes me as cynical even for this lot. In other words for the majority of players "you need to be opening packs to be able to do this".