-
Yet no matter where you look:
- http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/05/10/labour-could-lose-blyth-valley-what-the-local-elections-are
- http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/seatdetails.py?seat=Cambridge
- https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/10/cambridge-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-voters-lib-dem-labour-limbo
One sees story after story, data on top of data, showing that for Cambridge there is a Lab > Lib swing, that it's the #1 target and will receive massive focus by Lib, and worse...
... look at the Electoral Calculus link above. Look at the chart on likelihood of winning. Lib first by a huge margin... but Lab are not 2nd. Most data driven efforts are drawing the same conclusion, if it isn't Lib then Con actually stand a chance.
Under-estimating the slaughter that is coming means that there are no safe seats. Only the strongest will survive, and Lib have that strength and for it to survive against the Tories they will need, in Cambridge, every vote that they can get.
Splitting the vote is a sure fire way to take a previously safe seat or close call (but not Tory) and to deliver it to the Tories.
As RuPaul says...
- http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/05/10/labour-could-lose-blyth-valley-what-the-local-elections-are
You are reading a single comment by @Velocio and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Velocio
Hefty
The Tories are a massively distant third in Cambridge. It'll be either the yellows or the reds.
Julian Huppert voted against tuition fees and is one of the nice Lib Dems, but Daniel Zeichner, the labour dude, is equally principled and pro cycling. So I don't mind which one gets it and because there's no risk of a Tory here I felt able to vote Green last time.
Cambridge is one of those rare seats where you don't have to vote tactically.