Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swing voters haven’t stopped swinging – they’re just doing
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swing voters haven’t stopped swinging – they’re just doing it differently
Once upon a time, most people voted at general elections and nearly everyone that did voted Conservative or Labour. And thus the key swing vote was born: those persuadable voters in marginal constituencies. Win them and you win the election.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I also wonder if FPTP only really works in the more binary world of two dominant parties. It looks like 2015 is going to throw up an absolute stinker of an outcome. I'm guessing it will be close to 35/35/15/15 but Labour having a large majority.
They say Bedford is the place for it .... and plenty of "it" at that ....
What about replacing the current House of Lords with an elected Revising Chamber with its powers over Money Bills fully restored? The trick would be to restrict the vote for this Upper House to people in work - i.e. to exclude pensioners and other claimants (and also housewives, for that matter). The Commons could retain FPTP (or perhaps move to AV, retaining the constituency link that politicians are so sentimental about) whilst the ex-Lords could use a Party List system.
It would probably take a Grand Coalition of Tory and Labour to achieve this, but given what the next Government will need to do probably only a Grand Coalition can do it. We are certainly in the greatest national emergency since 1945.
I certainly agree we face an emergency. The emergency is that one of our leading political parties is economically incoherent and delightedly happy to push populist but ruinous policy. There are a lot of votes to be had from the gullible as you trash a country. How else can we explain Balls' outright denial that Brown ruined the national finances through incontinent spending?
Your proposal is great but for that very reason it will come to be over Labour's dead body.
Our only salvation ultimately will come through education and getting the British people to think and to understand the real world outcomes of economic policy decisions. That 40% of us will vote for socialism is a harsh indictment of our national capacity to understand economic realities.
And in the unlikely event the principle of fancy franchises were agreed, the details would never be. Take your own proposal of workers only: wait till the right realises this increases the proportion of trades union members! Or that it disenfranchises older voters who are most likely to put their crosses next to Tory candidates.
Still a very long way from winning a Westminster seat IMO. Their mix of nationalism and nostalgia is quite potent though.
In fact, not all the swing vote is with UKIP but a large proportion is. The rest is still fairly evenly divided between Con and Lab.
To illustrate that, return the 8% or so of the LD vote that's jumped to Labour and see how the Populus figures from yesterday look based on the LD's pre-government electoral coalition:
Con 33, Lab 28, LD 17, UKIP 15.
It's also misleading to lump together all non-Conservative votes as 'anti-Tory'. One reason the Conservative majorities were so big in 1983 and 1987 is because the anti-Labour vote was much bigger than the anti-Tory one. Unlike the closeness that later built up between Lib Dems and New Labour, the Alliance was genuinely equidistant and had as much against the unilateralist, Militant-infiltrated, properly red socialist Labour of Foot and early Kinnock as against Thatcher's Conservatives.
The 2015 position could be significantly different from 1951 or Feb 1974 because:
- The scale of the discrepancy will be much bigger. If Labour does emerge a little ahead on seats, it will be way behind in votes. It could just about win an overall majority without a plurality of votes. By contrast, the earlier elections were fairly close on both counts.
- Scotland. Assuming a No in the referendum, the West Lothian Question will again rear its head but much more so than before. Labour's majority would be based on Scottish MPs voting on English legislation, when the Conservative plurality in votes in England would be even greater than GB/UK overall. Add in Wales too where that Assembly has devolved powers.
I still think that one of the more fascinating aspects of politics since 2010 is that the protest vote against two of the three main parties has not translated into a large voting intention rise for the third, supposedly untainted party. People may be hacked off with the coalition from both perspectives but the "floating" voter has essentially had to relocate to a new party to express their discontent.
There is still a lot of anger out there towards Labour. They oversaw a massive increase in our population without being honest with the voters - a dishonesty that meant they could not make proper provision for extra health places, extra school places, extra welfare and pension needs that will seriously skew budget numbers for a generation or more. And they have a wretched Omega Male as their "leader".
Next time around, many voters - not just the late-lamented floater - are going to have a hell of a choice. Nick Clegg? Are you mad??? Nigel Farage - ask me when I'm pissed and I'll say yes, ask me when I'm sober and I'll say no. And people vote sober.
So the choice is down to re-electing a seriously disappointing and underwhelming Cameron or the utterly undeserving Miliband to lead the country. Quite a problem if you feel a social obligation to vote.
If there is soul-searching to be done, it should be on the right. Does the Conservative Party still aspire to being a national party in Britain rather than just England? Conservatives used to be able to count on two dozen MPs from Scotland. Even today, they have eight from Wales. Conservatives must be careful after a "perverse" defeat not to turn to what might be portrayed by their opponents as strident English nationalism.
I'm close to not voting next time, for the first time since I was a young man (a week on the pull in Spain with the lads was always going to trump Major and Kinnock).
I'm hoping for all the Armageddon ducks to line up-Scottish independence, a UKIP Euro triumph, Tories winning the popular vote but still losing out to Labour and a Lib Dem meltdown to complete the chaos-then we'll truly be living in interesting times!
I've just been reading a profile of Stephanie Flanders in The Times, and was struck by this comment she made when queried about her past relationships and friends (Balls, Cooper, Milliband, Katz, Osborne et al)
" These connections, she says, are merely a consequence of how Britain works: a tight-knit Oxbridge elite ends up in charge of everything."
That just about sums it up.
There is also the fact that so much policy is now set at EU level that the main parties do not have different offers.
UKIP are able to differentiate themselves because they start with not accepting EU policies as unchangeable.
Maybe we should have a go at founding one.
don't come back another day.
If I see your poster style,
I will run a country mile.
That seems the mantra this morning from the PB Lab/Lib/Cons this morning, from NickPalmer and JackW downwards, (upwards?).
It's the unbelief from them concerning UKIP, that makes me smile every day. And the more they wish it away, the more it grows. As Porky keeps saying: unspoofable
It's remarkable really, how few people from first class universities, like Bristol, Imperial College, Durham, Newcastle, Exeter, King's College, Leeds etc. reach the top in politics.
Although it clearly has an elite, the country that has an elite that is perhaps easiest to break into is the US. Just make a billion from a standing start and you are in, and if you want it the way will be made clear for you to be in Congress with a run at the White House. (Although it still helps to be called Kennedy, Clinton or Bush...)
http://stephentall.org/2014/02/07/fraser-nelsons-must-read-guide-to-utterly-and-completely-misunderstanding-the-lib-dems-coalition-strategy/?wt=3
That would be a start - then there could be a discussion on the factors that might mitigate or militate UKIP success.
Or is it a number you've just plucked out of the air?
When you move to a four-party system, and a party can win an overall majority, despite 70% of voters voting against them, and 35% not voting at all, then the system is broken.
I'd love to see UKIP win 25 seats, but it won't happen in 2015. We'd need to poll 20%+.
http://magicseaweed.com/World-Surf-Chart/64/
There is a black hole to the west of the UK! A bit choppy down towards Antarctica, otherwise nothing remotely to compare with what is hitting us.....
Yes, it's certainly possible for people to become MPs from less Enarquique backgrounds but how many of them reach cabinet level, never mind leadership level? The tendency has become worse if anything over the last 20 years with the rise of the SpAd and - consequently - the increasing importance of having connections in your early twenties, something that tends to come only with money, family, or university (hence the persisting and if anything increasing presence of Etonians, who can frequently tick all three boxes).
They'll be happy with one. Any one.
Last year's elections revealed 11 good prospects, hopefully this year's election results will suggest more.
http://survation.com/2013/05/ukip-won-in-8-westminster-constituencies-last-thursday/
What's a decent Scottish noble pie maker to do ?!?
Changing the subject, the discussion below about elites and the establishment encapsulates what is surely one of the main reasons why the Yes campaign is getting so much traction in Scotland. Whatever the economic and financial uncertainties, independence is a chance to start again. Why wouldn't you vote for that?
Tier 1
S Bas & E Thurrock
Thurrock
Bromsgrove
Halesown & Rowley Regis
Staffordshire Moorlands
Dudley North
Morley & Outwood
Newcastle Under Lyme**
Stoke on Trent South
Telford
Walsall North
Walsall South
West Bromwich West
Wolverhampton NE
Barking
Dag & Rain
Plymouth Moor View
Thanet North
Thanet South
Boston & Skegness
Tier 2
Broadland
Great Yarmouth
Peterborough
West Suffolk
Burton
Cannock Chase
Ludlow
Stourbridge
Bexhill & Battle
Dartford
Dover
Folkestone & Hythe
Hastings & Rye
Spelthorne
N Warks
Brirmingham Northfield
Stoke on Trent Central
Stoke on Trent North
West Brom East
Birmingham Yardley
Solihull
Hx & Upm
Erith & Thamesmead
Bournemouth East
Bridgewater & W Somerset
Christchurch
East Devon
Kingswood
Newton Abbot
Poole
SE Cornwall
Torridge & W Devon
Totnes
N Devon
If there is any threat of litigation from these four, the Conservatives would be well advised to negotiate a quick settlement. Judges have moved a long way from believing in testamentary freedom, and love to rule against charities and political parties.
Basically if the splits from the thread are to be believed on the make up of UKIPs current support , a UKIP score of 15 would represent
6.75 from 2010 Conservatives (45%)
3 of 2010 Kippers
2.1 from 2010 LDs (14%)
1.2 from 2010 Labs (8%)
4.95 from Others & DNV (32%)
This 32% includes the 2010 Kipper vote (3%) leaving 1.95 from others /DNV
the 1.95 equates to 13% of the score of 15
EDIT: This leads me to believe that the best chance of a UKIP success in by or Gen Elections is a seat where it was close between Lab & Con last time, with a combined BNP & UKIP vote of about 7-8% and a low turnout (that's where a lot of DNV s come into play)
I only know (vaguely) two of those constituencies - the West Bromwich ones - both of which I would have down as safely Labour. West has only once dropped below a 50% Labour vote share - 45% in 2010, and East is similarly solidly red on 46%. Don't know whether Adrian Bailey (69 @2015 GE) is standing again in East, but I would be surprised if Watson didn't stand again in West. You might push the Lib Dems into fourth place, but coming second would be a major achievement, let alone winning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bromwich_East_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bromwich_West_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10624966/Frugal-widow-becomes-one-of-biggest-donors-in-history-of-Conservative-Party.html
I do know a few, such as Hx and Upminster where I live, and the surrounding, Thurrock, Barking, Romford and Dagenham & Rainham, and would say they are all ripe kipper territory (H&U big Con maj at the mo, but Lab have won here recently, and the sitting MP is UKIP in all but name, possibly to the right actually)
Maybe its just the people I know (!) but my facebook news feed is full of anti immigration moans and anti this that the other stuff that I find a bit worryingly right wing to be honest. But this is the feeling in this neck of the woods.
To put it simply. Old days: one group, one message. Today: Many groups, many messages.
Like every form of modern communication personalisation is key. Having a team of activists selling your message and then a smart database that can then end out targeted mail in support is the way you win elections.
This is why Crosby and Dave are such a disaster for the Tories. They keep trying the air war route and instead end up splitting of their own vote with clumsy messaging.
Of course the press don't like this argument, as it kinda makes them a lot less relevant, so we end up in a never ending cycle of journalists focusing on things that really don't matter and missing what is really going on. Hence why Mike, his site, and his blogging from outside the Westminster bubble are all so important.
By one rather stupid leap of faith, assuming that other=DNV, you can then say this is much higher than Labour or the Tories.
However, anyone who voted UKIP in 2010 (3.1% of total electorate) would fall in to this category. 3.1% out of 12% is 25% of UKIP's support, so the real residual other/DNV figure is actually lower than the other parties. Given the rise in support, it's pretty tenuous to pretend they'll be retaining less than 80% of previous support on a worse case scenario. False recall is also probably boosting the number of people claiming 2010 Kipper status now as the cool vote to have.
1: I believe that the flooded South West has lost patience with this government and will not forget the lack of action, both before and during their ordeal. I believe that they will wreak havoc on the Tories and Lib/Dems come election time, and who are they going to turn to: UKIP, there is no one else. The flooded South East will also take a bite out of Coalition strongholds.
2. The major change in perception by a UKIP win in the Euros will also add to the general uncertainty.
3. Finally, a yes vote for Scottish independence will put finis to a Labour stronghold and its effect at Westminster.
Cameron flood warning revelation The Government was warned last summer of the danger of the Somerset Levels flooding but decided not to fund more dredging.
It has emerged that David Cameron was approached by in August by farmers' leader Edwin White with a plea for urgent action.
Number 10 passed the letter to a minister, Richard Benyon, who replied that he could not provide additional government funding for dredging in Somerset. Mr Cameron finally authorised the funding this week.
The Government has also been left embarrassed over a chart said to exaggerate the amount of future investment proposed in flood defences.
The Times reports that Sir Andrew Dilnot, head of the UK Statistics Authority, made a complaint about the chart in the National Infrastructure Plan, published with the Autumn Statement in December.
The watchdog took the unusual step of republishing the chart using a more conventional measuring scale.
The Daily Mail reports that ministers and the insurance industry have struck a deal which could see wealthy householders and those living in newer homes forced to pay a flood insurance levy, even though they won’t be covered by it.
have a glance at the "Cameron flood warning" below.
'Judges have moved a long way from believing in testamentary freedom, and love to rule against charities and political parties.'
My wife is currently acting as an executor and seeing at first hand that a Will, even when accompanied by a 'letter of wishes' is worthless if a judge decides it's unfair.
'2. The major change in perception by a UKIP win in the Euros will also add to the general uncertainty.'
The Euros are a joke election and no matter what the outcome diddly- squat is going to change and voters treat it accordingly.Whereas we are stuck for five years with the outcome of the GE in 2015 and a lot can change.
a) The transaction giving de-facto ownership of the assets to the heir was a statement of intent that's as near as dammit to a will.
b) At the point where the assets were transferred they weren't the deceased's to give because they were dead, so they have to be handed back to whoever the legal system thinks should get them based on reading the will.
c) The assets were transferred before the person died, sort-of, so let's just not count them as part of the estate.
Besides, if the government wants to turn people's homes into annual floodplains then they should a) buy their houses, and b) compensate landowners such as farmers, rather than do it by stealth.
And humans should always be the number one priority, not wildlife.
Nasty Labour, as ever.
Lord Ashcroft:
Voters readily distinguish between elections that matter and those that matter less. In our research people compared European elections to the Eurovision Song Contest; some cheerfully said that voting UKIP in these elections was just a way to “give Europe a slap”. A strong UKIP performance in [the 2014 Euros] even if they were to win more seats than any other party – need not mean electoral doom for the Tories the following year.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2012/12/the-ukip-threat-is-not-about-europe/