British Election may be much closer than expected


[Editor’s note: It is a rule of thumb in politics that when the polls don’t agree it means that the outcome is likely to be pretty close; add to that the fact that some of the polls are showing a very small and decreasing gap then I think it is a fairly safe assumption that this election is likely to be a pretty close one and it is unlikely we will see a Conservative majority.

This means a hung parliament where no-one has a majority which brings up the possibility of a coalition government being formed. The two groups that are likely to possess a significant but small number of seats are the Ulster Unionists and the Scottish National Party, two groups that are bitterly opposed to Brexit and no fans of Theresa May or her Conservative party. 

Should this situation arise, it would seem far more likely that Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party would be the ones able to form a coalition; Corbyn, himself opposed to Brexit, would simply have to offer to hold a second Brexit referendum and the SNP and perhaps the Ulster Unionists too, would likely take that deal and enter into a Corbyn-lead coalition. It may take the offer of a second referendum on Scottish independence to persuade the SNP, another intriguing factor in this most unusual and unpredictable of election campaigns.

Then things would get really interesting as Corbyn is very much the worst nightmare for the British Establishment and would be the first true socialist leader we have had in a very long time, almost 40 years in fact. Ian]

Merco Press
UK June 8 election opinion polls marred in controversy

Prime Minister Theresa May could lose control of parliament in Britain’s June 8 election, according to a projection by polling company YouGov, raising the prospect of political turmoil just as formal Brexit talks begin.

The YouGov model suggested May would lose 20 seats and her 17-seat working majority in the 650-seat British parliament, though other models show May winning a big majority of as much as 142 seats and a Kantar poll showed her lead widening.

If the YouGov model turns out to be accurate, May would be well short of the 326 seats needed to form a government tasked with the complicated talks, due to start shortly after the election, on Britain’s divorce from the European Union.

A later poll, a separate regular survey carried out by YouGov for Thursday’s Times newspaper, showed May’s Conservative Party just three percentage points ahead of the Labour opposition, which has been eating into her lead since the start of the campaign.

The Conservatives were on 42%, down a point from last week, with Labour up three points, the YouGov survey said.

A total of eight polls carried out since the May 22 Manchester suicide attack have shown May’s lead over the Labour Party narrowing, with some suggesting she might not win the landslide predicted just a month ago.

When asked by a reporter if she would resign if she lost seats, May dodged the question on Wednesday, saying that the only poll that mattered was the election on June 8. Recent opinion polls have shown May’s lead has contracted to a range of 5 to 14 percentage points. YouGov’s election model was based on voting intention figures which gave May a lead of just 3 percentage points, YouGov said.

YouGov, using a technique called “Multilevel Regression and Post-stratification”, uses a range of factors including demographics, past elections and voter profiles to build a model which can come up with an estimate of how the vote will be split in individual constituencies.

Michael Ashcroft, a former Conservative Party donor who funds polling, uses the same types of modeling as YouGov but came up with a very different estimate of the election: May winning 396 seats and Corbyn winning 180 seats.

Other projections suggested May would win soundly. The Electoral Calculus website, which predicts the results based on polls and electoral geography, said May would win 371 seats and Labour 205 seats. Betting markets give a more than 80% probability of May winning an overall majority, though they were wrong ahead of the unexpected Brexit result in the June 23 referendum last year.

YouGov acknowledged that its predictions were controversial and allowed for a wide margin of error, adding that the samples in each constituency were small.

Jim Messina, a polling and data adviser for the Conservative Party who worked on Barack Obama’s campaign, said the YouGov numbers were stupid and that he had spent the day laughing at them. YouGov allowed for big variations in the outcome of the election, ranging from as high as 345 seats for the Conservatives, 15 more than their current number, to as low as 274, the pollster’s chief executive, Stephan Shakespeare, said.

Merco Press
Sterling drops on fears Tories could fail to win an outright majority

The value of the pound dropped after a projection suggested the Conservatives could fail to win an outright majority in the election on 8 June. Previous opinion polls suggested Prime Minister Theresa May’s party would increase its majority, which is currently 17 seats.

But the projection, published in The Times and based on YouGov research, suggests a possible hung parliament.

Sterling fell by more than half of one per cent, but recovered some losses. By early Wednesday morning, it was trading 0.44% lower against the dollar at $1.28020 and 0.29% lower against the euro at 1.14600 Euros.

The Times said the YouGov data suggested that the Tories could lose up to 20 of the 330 seats they held in the last parliament, with Labour gaining nearly 30 seats he Conservatives would still be the biggest party, but would not have an overall majority.

The model is based on 50,000 interviews over a week, with voters from a panel brought together by YouGov. It uses a new “constituency-by-constituency” model for polling, which the paper says allows for big variations.

According to The Times, “the estimates were met with skepticism by Tory and Labour figures.”

YouGov’s chief executive, Stephan Shakespeare said the model had been tested during the EU referendum campaign, when it consistently put the winning Leave side ahead. But he added: “It would take only a slight fall in Labor’s share and a slight increase in the Conservatives’ to result in Mrs. May returning to No 10 with a healthy majority.”



All content herein is owned by author exclusively.  Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, technicians or Veterans Today Network (VT).  Some content may be satirical in nature. 
All images within are full responsibility of author and NOT VT.
About VT - Read Full Policy Notice - Comment Policy


  1. The fabric of any society is seldom to blame for national blunders. However, if one has a philosophy of personal responsibility, then others are viewed as the groups they define themselves as. If I say Britain, I am speaking of the entity Britain and all of it’s parts. We all need a financial revolution. My main point , is to call out Britain as friend of the US to stop being so polite. My own view of being personally responsible, keeps me actively working to improve my own community. I expect nothing less from anyone else. Identifying criminals and working to bring justice, does not affect my personal responsibility.
    If my friend is being an idiot, they will be notified immediately. If Britain is to be sovereign, then let her admonish the US with the Iraq war report, otherwise it all seems a ruse. Revolutions or great change is only made possible by people who accept personal responsibility for themselves and their people. If we want to beat the banks, then we adopt their rules and employ them, rather than be subjugated by them. If we want to beat Trump, then use the very tactics that appear to have leaders fainting and fearing handshakes. Old school bully fighters should know, run towards the bully and do not flinch. The past starts today.

  2. Had for example the IRA claimed responsibility for Manchester Ariana Grande concert attack, there would be national alarm already, tanks would drive through Ireland, Orange Order marches organized in Belfast and half of London Irish even remotely connected to it arrested and incarcerated. But not today in Londonistan. All colonialists support secessions only not in their courtyard. Scotland, Catalunya we are all a family but who cares about Sudan or Kurdistan or Palestine. I sincerely wish to the UK that half of its beligerents secede and then they can preach to the rest about same colonial boots on their faces as well.

    • Nonsense, the IRA carried out many bombings that were worse than what happened in Manchester and no British government since 1922 ever sent tanks to ireland or carried out anything close to what you’re suggesting. They did setup internment camps for republicans in the 1970s but they turned out to be an utter disaster, prisoners like Bobby Sands became heroes after protesting their internment via hunger strike and all internment did was prolong and deepened the violence, it also increased recruitment to the IRA. Therefore what you propose would be utter stupidity and make the situation far worse than it already is.

  3. I have a festering disdain for Britain. My family came here to get away from bloodline occupiers. All generations of my family to serve US military since the revolution, only to constantly see princes and princesses on the front of my papers without purpose. Britain has become the unwanted meddling mother-in-law and May personifies it. She wore a CHAIN around her neck the day she took over, and the question is, who is holding the leash to it ? None of that matters, as long as the princesses skirt blows in the wind for the peasants. If Britain wants to be a true friend, they should pressure us to accept their report on the Iraq war instead of selling upskirt shots of the “princess”. Our inheritance from Britain is uncontrolled colonization urges, exceptionalism, and untreated greed and domination fantasies. Ball four, take your base.

    • It’s not the fault of the British, we have been occupied and enslaved by a largely Jewish banking elite since William of Orange and the British people are victims of this elite as much as everyone else.

    • Ever since oil has been discovered the British elites wish that they had ethnically cleansed tiny places like Azerbaijan or Qatar instead of vast plains of Australia and North America. But they are still at it nevertheless. The islander conquerers have never changed one bit. If any country in history of this world deserves to be Balkanized then it is the UK, number one champion of ethnopolitical disasters worldwide. God knows what they have in hand for us for the 21st century. I share mr Greenhalgh’s optimism about Corbyn but I don’t believe than he can step up against these notorious elements among the lordship, I hope I am wrong.

    • What you have to understand is that Britain had been wracked by half a century of civil wars by the time William of Orange invaded, we had been worn down by all the fighting and the huge number of deaths – more Britons died in the civil wars than any other war before or since and this was at a time when the population was far smaller, so the proportion that died was large and crippling. This is similar to Syria today only it went on far longer. Only the Irish were able to oppose William which lead to the Battle of the Boyne, Drogheda and a divide in Ireland that is still an open, festering wound today. Cromwell and the New Model Army he created was very similar to ISIS today – a bunch of religious fanatics (they were Puritans) on a mission from God who were lavishly financed by the Jewish bankers in Amsterdam. Cromwell and his army were used to get rid of the British king (Charles I) and later to get rid of parliament too, turning us into a military dictatorship. However, Cromwell died and it fell apart, the monarchy and parliament returned and the Jewish plans went awry. So they then picked out William Stadtholder, a Dutch army officer with some royal blood and financed the creation of a large army with which he invaded and seized Britain. This was the end of British rule in Britain because we were enslaved, the City of London and the Bank of England were established, the Jews (who had been thrown out in 1290 by Edward I) were allowed to return and the rest is history. The British Empire was then built, all financed and directed by the Jewish bankers now ensconced in London. Therefore I don’t think the British people themselves bear the blame for what Britain the nation did as it was not us that was in control, we still aren’t in control today and we never will be unless we overthrow the London banking elite and their usurious financial system.

    • You just don’t understand history. At the same time the British elite, the so-called ‘nobility’ was mistreating people around the world, how do you think they were treating the British people? No better, they just used as as cannon fodder. Few of the men in the Royal Navy or British Army were there because they wanted to be, they were either press ganged or had no other choice as they were escaping brutal poverty. If you’re going to blame someone, at least learn about who is really to blame.

Comments are closed.