SR,

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/12/forget-52-rise-re-leavers-mean-pro-brexit-electora/

So who's stupid now. This is why I called it the new delusion.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Yes I've seen that graphic and many others which why I expressly said;

“If you think the Brexit crowd have any kind of allegiance to the Tories then you are just plain stupid.”

Your side of politics has been counting on the Brexit voters as cementing a win for the Tories. This is idiocy. People didn't suddenly change their values and become rusted on conservative voters. They may well have supported leaving the EU but it only takes a quick look at the Tories most popular policies to show how hard May is trying to cater to the disaffection that got Brexit over the line.

Her most popular is increasing NHS funding by 8 billion pounds. Also in the top 3 is increasing the living wage to 60% of the median wage.

Plus she is flagging means testing the universal winter fuel payments for pensioners.

This is her version of Turnbull's Labour Light.

You seem to wallow in the delusion that disaffection equals conservative votes. May and Turnbull are smart enough to realise their grip on these voters is very tenuous. Why aren't you?

Hi Steele,

Yes,sorry, I got my wires crossed, brain's not fully engaged: opinion polls and the actual election. I was trying to tease out why opinion polling may have less relevance in Britain than here, since elections there - the 'real' poll - are not won on the same basis as here; and they certainly aren't run in the same way that opinion polls are, on some sort of proportional basis, but on a first-past-the-post, winner-take-all, basis. A candidate who gets the most (first-preference) votes, wins. End.

Opinion polls can't measure that, it seems. A 54-46 % split would mean little, if it was(hypothetically) translated into every electorate: in such a hypothetical situation, a 54-46 % split would mean 100 % victory for first-past-the-post Tories, with (hypothetically) 54 % of every electorate vote. So opinion polls are not much of a guide.

Perhaps if they were carried out electorate by electorate, then we would see a much more realistic summary across the country, seat by seat, and what sort of majority the Tories might have after the election. That would make more sense.

For all that, the gap seems to be much wider now than at the last election, which Cameron won strongly enough to tell the LibDems to piss off. But other issues might stand out: Labour may win NO seats in Scotland, and lose many in Wales and Nthn Ireland, not to mention in England's North.

I still think Labour's loss might be around 20-30 seats. What's your best guess ?

Joe

SR,

Given that it is clear that the support for Brexit has increased, and those supporting it are largely changing their vote to Conservative, probably due to Corbyn's wishy washy approach. Allegiances may be fickle, but it looks like they will support May at least until the general election.

It's also funny how all people do better under a conservative government, (the income of the lowest 25% of workers increased more under Howard that in any comparative time in Aus history). looking after the economy helps everyone. However, but I fail to see how a 6.7% increase in funding to the NHS over 5 years is labor light.

Shadow, what a crack up! Another 'Egg of Face' award coming your way, Add this one to your "Turnballs will win in a landslide" claim. How do you manage to get so many predictions so wrong! You jumped out of the blocks to claim an easy Tory victory in Britain, Labour to lose 50 seats you said. All based on the fact Labour were running with a silly old fuddy duddy up front, unfortunately you didn't allow for the fact The Tories had an even bigger silly old fuddy duddy leading them!

Wow, did I get that wrong ? The Tories will still form government, they'll have the Nthn Irish and maybe the Scottish Nats, but they'll have to make all sorts of deals to empower the peripheries, perhaps even the welsh, I hope.

The poor bloody Labour Party is now stuck with Corbyn for maybe another five years, prattling his idiotic 120-150-year-old agenda, as if there is still a huge proletariat and no immigration, which brings us to .....

..... who got the Muslim vote ? Labour ? No ! I don believe it. Really ? I wonder how that squares with the 19th century-socialist message ? Surely, as conservatives, the imams were instructing their flocks to vote tory ? No ? labour ? Gosh, maybe Islamists are progressive ? Maybe Shari'a is a harbinger of true socialism ?

It certainly is a strange new world.

Joe