#GE2017 - Fighting for the MPs that represented cyclists

needs more Charlie Sheen

Labour are going to be ousted from a lot of seats they hold, it's going to be a slaughter.

I think it's best to take what fight still exists to form opposition and focus it into the strongest one possible.

Which is Labour.

No single party can be that opposition. SNP and Labour have both in their own ways guaranteed that. Opposition will have to be an alliance in any case. The right are united (see UKIP standing aside everywhere to boost the Tory vote), and the centre and left are still having arguments about how best to form a numerically effective opposition.

Again the numerically effective opposition is Labour. The only party, other than the Conservatives, that can form a government.

I note that you haven't argued against the data, or against the Remain vote, or against the fact that LAB have declared Brexit a done deal, or against the strong support that LIB candidate does have... you've only argued for LAB, blind to the risk it poses. LAB are 3rd in the list of likely winners for Cambridge... behind CON, yet you would have people vote LAB and against their own EU preference too?

What is the data? Is it local polling, or are you extrapolating from national polls?

yet you would have people vote LAB and against their own EU preference too?

The latest national opinion poll has the Lib Dems on 8%, so it seems as if the vast majority of Remain voters are content to go into the polling booth and disregard Tim Farron's boys and girls.

I do wonder if National Polling is missing the smaller picture in some places. Much like in the US polling put Hillary ahead, and was (US wide) pretty much correct for the vote share, it missed that she would lose in key states, and thus lose overall.

I'm not suggesting that the overall polling is wrong, more that the specific polling in tighter local races isn't being done (or I've not seen it, please point if you have it), and doesn't reflect the feeling on the ground. I'd look to places like Cambridge, Bristol and Bath for this sort of result. Places that (AFAIK) have seen pro-EU protests since the referendum.

What is the data? Is it local polling, or are you extrapolating from national polls?

Ah, I see what you're getting at, and no, and let me make a couple of things clear.

The data that http://www.tactical2017.com is using are election results primarily, but if it's not as clear-cut then we'll resort to other data, i.e. did an area vote strongly Remain or Leave? is an area traditionally one party and only recently has become close?

What facts exist to support a recommendation where necessary, not what speculation could support a recommendation.

We're really not using polling information at all, and nor are we over-emphasising national trends. Recommendations are focused on: Who is the most likely non-Conservative to win in a given area? That question may not deliver you an answer you're pleased with if you're more in favour of one non-Tory party over another, but the one who can get the most votes in an area so that local opposition is strongest is the focus of the http://www.tactical2017.com team.

But this... this thread is not even that.

This thread is about the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group.

It is about two candidates who have both made an impact in their capacity as part of the APPCG that will hopefully deliver improvements for cycling, for the people on this forum.

It is about two candidates, one of whom is at risk, one of whom was beaten in a protest and is likely to win again... we could end up with neither, one, or both.

Those candidates, if we can support them and they win, are the very people we are looking to when we rant on LFGSS about drivers not being prosecuted when they kill cyclists, or when we rant about poor junction planning these are the people who need to produce the reports to force all councils to achieve a minimum standard.

This thread, if you read the first post... is about support 2 candidates who have already made a difference to cycling in the UK, and if we can help them they will make more of a difference.

This thread says, in the title, that we'll fight for the MPs that in the past have represented cyclists.

The support of a LIB candidate for Cambridge is in support of cycling. But, the support is also consistent with the progressive alliance and other groups who have also analysed the data in their own way and believe that locally, in Cambridge, the LIBs are best placed to produce a win even though Labour won it only a couple of years ago.

The LAB seat most at risk of the two, is the Brentford one. Which will likely go to the Tories. When it does so, we'll lose another voice for cycling. If you want to throw pro-LAB effort in any direction... Ruth Cadbury could really do with your help.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/10/cambridge-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-voters-lib-dem-labour-limbo

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.

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...

Id be happy to wager you USD50 that the blue colour party will be third in Cambridge.

If I hadn't over-committed my month's budget by donating to a load of candidates I'd still decline... I don't do betting :)

Edit: That's a fib, I entered a Eurovision sweep stake once.

Did you win?

No, I had Yugoslavia or something, it was a long time ago as you may tell.

Lie. No such country.

Or it really was long ago.

I live in Brentford. I am voting for Ruth Cadbury - the APPCC stuff is a bonus in my mind. Other than her standing against some of the plans the developers have for Brentford at the moment. I am voting for her because she is the Labour candidate, and I want to see Corbyn as our next leader.

I think Labour and the SNP will make a deal since it is the only sensible thing to do. A part from the Lib Dems who have made the u-turning of Brexit a main campaign piece. I would love to sit the Lib Dems down and ask them how they plan to do this when all the other EU states have now said that Britain has no way back.

Labour has actually done the right thing by not making any promises on that front. The reason why you don't get Corbyn saying whether he is for or against Brexit is simple. He doesn't think it is as important an issue, in relation to the actual problems we have.

Student Fees - By scraping student fees we deal with the reality that the labour market is stagnant whilst the supply of graduates is going up. At least those graduates that don't get jobs won't have £30000+ of debt on their heads. - How can anyone be against that!

End of Zero Hour Contract + £10 minimum wage - Again this helps those students that don't end up doing what they wanted coming out of uni.

NHS - if the Tory get back in the NHS is finished, nothing else to be said on this point.

Income Tax - higher rates for £80k and £123k bands. Again this is a good thing.

Hire 10000 key workers - nurses, fireman and policeman. Perhaps some of those students will find there way in these services.

Pension lock - helps all those 55+ year olds that voted for Brexit keep their pensions. All the pension funds for the people retiring in the next ten years are woeful, mainly due to the problems from 2007 on wards. Eventually helps everyone so not a bad thing.

Renegotiate with the large corporate tax dodgers. A new government voids any deals a previous government made.

Those are just some of the key points please look at all of the party manifestos. Here is the BBC summary for the Labour one. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39933116

Brexit is and was a big diversion around the actual issues that plague us as a society. Don't get me wrong I was a 'remain' voter. But the reality is we have bigger problems. The list of priorities for any government should be - Employment, Housing, Healthcare and Education - everything else is just fluff.

^ electoral reform please .....

Electoral reform - again another thing which is never going to happen under Tories. People have already forgotten the steps the Tories took to re-draw the constituencies in London 2010. So they could gain more seats at the last election. My example being Hammersmith and Fulham, Kensington and Chelsea - 2 boroughs - got split into 3 seats. Hammersmith - Labour, Kensington - Conservative. Then Fulham and Chelsea - which then fell to the Conservatives. There are other examples.

@diable - you live in Hammersmith, which is a Labour safe seat.

British Cycling – General Election 2017: How the parties compare on cycling

Just out of curiosity @velocio does the tactical2017 website show lots of people visiting from marginal constituencies or is it mainly safe seats or a blend of the two? (Or do you not know)

Vote Labour, don't split the vote in Cambridge

Just out of curiosity @velocio does the tactical2017 website show lots of people visiting from marginal constituencies or is it mainly safe seats or a blend of the two? (Or do you not know)

I know everything :)

The most visited seats are Brighton seats and Bristol seats with about 30k unique visitors. The least visited seats are Northern Ireland seats with about 1.6k unique visitors.

The average though, is around 16k unique visitors per seat, across all marginal and safe seats.

Vote Labour, don't split the vote in Cambridge

100% of tactical and progressive groups have Lib Dem down for Cambridge. The recommendation is based on more than just the 2015 GE and the marginal win for Labour then.

The recommendations for Witney certainty don't fit with my impressions. Both Tactical2017 and the guardian equivalent advocate voting Labour, with the guardian adding that:

But don't get your hopes up. The combined vote of Labour, Lib Dem and the Greens would not have been enough in 2015 to beat the Conservatives.

However this does not account for the Witney 2016 By election and the moderate inclination towards Bremain in the EU referendum (537% remain). Betting odds also suggest LibDems are far stronger than Labour in Witney.

*EDIT: I wrote too soon... I just double checked and Tactical2017 have updated their page since I last checked to advocate for a Lib Dem vote.

537% remain?

That's a strong outcome.

Sounds a bit on the low side.

On the forum it was 531% if I recall correctly.