Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swingback is happening – how far will it go?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Swingback is happening – how far will it go?
The Omnishambles Budget of 2012 was perhaps Ed Miliband’s high point of the parliament. In that response, he set the political narrative for at least a Summer and put the government, and George Osborne in particular, right on the back foot. He introduced a readily reusable slogan and one which penetrated well into public consciousness.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The reason you've not done this, as we talked, was the diffifculty of getting the data for UKIP which wasn't being separately recorded and you'd have to have gone back to the dataset of every single poll.
I'm not sure Jan 2012 would have been a better start - that'd have been misleading the other way - as I believe that apart from the Dec 12 / Jan 13 period, there was a fairly steady trend to Labour in the style of a classic parliamentary term, from election to mid-term. In that broader context, the veto bounce was essentially an extended blip and one which was already wearing off before the Omnishambles budget, though that just accelerated the decline back to (and briefly beyond) the broad trend.
Either way, what I hope is that as each month progresses from here in, we'll be able to track the progress of the four parties in a way that takes out a lot of the very short term effects of both events and sampling variability. It'll be an interesting contrast with the weekly YouGov and Populus combi-polls, which should be short-term enough to pick up the effects of 'events', even when these aren't particularly long-lasting.
YES 35% .. NO 57%
Last YG poll 37/52
Caveat - Presently sequence of questions and inclusion of Devo Max may have influenced result. Await full published data.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/new-poll-a-holyrood-with-more-power-but-within-uk-is-peoples-settled-will.23950673
Does the COE's new attack on offshore assets and income mean that this is a precursor to a wealth tax = a tax on assets wherever held - if so there will need to be a lot more double-taxation agreements.
The news, presently unsubstantiated, from Bedford is that OGH was last seen being poured out of one of the towns notorious fleshpots in the early hours .... The paparazzi had apparently seen Mike Smithson entering "Swinging Here" cocktail bar and nightclub close to midnight on the arm of a bejeweled beauty only known locally as "Jacky S"
By breakfast Mr Smithson was unavailable for comment at his luxury home "Sandal Heights" in the leafy suburbs of the county town.
It shows a UKIP surge 12 months ago, Labour being pretty static ever since and the Tories making a very small recovery at the expense of UKIP.
Not exactly swing back.
Just wondering whether on Saturday 20th September as the English waken to contemplate the fixtures for Man U, Man C, Liverpool, Arsenal and Chelsea, the Scots will waken and ask, have we really just voted to separate?
May 22nd assumes a greater importance because it is Labour who is defending the high ground and in some of the key GE2015 battlegrounds.
Meanwhile has the Independent and its sister paper the "I" taken over as lead Labour cheerleader from the Guardian? Trying to create a story about taxpayer funded Tory gay sex orgies. Sounds more like something penned by one or two leading (current or ex) UKIP figures trying to explain why there is heavy rain.
http://news.opinium.co.uk/survey-results/political-polling-25th-march-2014
I like this because they are one of the more pro-UKIP pollsters, and I always wonder how true the Conservatives number is in an average as it might be skewed underestimating UKIP support.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7744
Personally ICM will remain the King until they are dethroned at a major election and I look forward to what they are saying early next week. (I have of course taken rather a shine to Populus recently as well funnily enough but ICM remain the gold standard).
That said, a big unknown for 2015 is what will happen to the UKIP vote in the election campaign. We generally assume it'll drop because they'll get squeezed, which would be my best guess too, but if it behaves the way the LibDem vote has tended to then it'll actually go up, all the more so if Farage gets into the debates.
Polling in Scotland with 4 parties has generally been less reliable and accurate than for the UK. I think we are seeing some of that too.
- There simply aren't enough by-elections these days. In the '50s, '60s and 70s, there's be dozens of by-elections in a parliament, representing a meaningful statistical sample. So far, there've been just 17, of which only one has been in a Conservative-held seat. By contrast, the 1959-64 parliament produced 62 such elections This produces two particular problems:
- The sample can easily be regionally biased to an area of the country that behaves differently to the UK as a whole. This happened in 2005-10 when four of the 14 by-elections were held in Scotland, which subsequently swung slightly to Labour when England and Wales went more strongly to the Tories.
- Temporal bias. Only four of this parliament's 17 elections have been since Jan 2013; there's a marked bias to the first half of the term - data which is likely to be least relevant to the prevailing political climate come the GE.
- The model cannot capture the effects of any change during the campaign itself (debates or a 'well, alright!' moment), and doesn't particularly capture well a Falklands-type event which transforms the landscape late on, especially if it's beneficent to the government which then calls an election off the back of it. Fixed-term parliaments should take out the latter risk but cannot remove the former one.
That's not to diss it entirely. It's useful as part of a suite of information but I wouldn't trust much to it on its own.
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/9260767/gene-haas-has-revealed-the-fia-have-granted-his-team-a-licence-to-join-f1-in-2015
On-topic: I still think Labour will win, sadly. It's not a certainty by a long shot, though.
Probably reading the graph completely wrong, but it looks to me as though the Labour/UKip figures inversely mimic each other far more so than the other parties; the Mar 13 peak and trough for L/Ukip being a particularly noticeable.
Is there any reason for this? as it just strikes me as counter intuitive.
Presumably it's the white working class (WWC) shifting from one to the other?
I hope you will now think better and apologise for your recent remarks about Nigel Evans being charged.
Labour 23
Conservative 22
Lib Dem 3
UKIP 3 ( 1 elected as Con 1 elected as Ind )
Green 2
SNP 1 ( standing again but as an Ind )
Ind 3
Ind Soc 1
The lead has dropped from a steady 9-11% between May 2012 and March 2013, from where it's dropped to below 4% in the most March 2014. A six-month rolling average would show a peak for the parliament of exactly 10%, again in March 2013, from where there's a drop almost every month since (the only exception is that Oct and Nov 2013 are the same). The latest rolling average is 5.3%, so even if we think that March is a low outlier, there's been a swingback of close to half the gap. Given that rolling averages themselves have a lag relative to the current position, the 3.9% for last month feels about right. Local by-elections, while not wholly reliable, tend to the same conclusion.
As for the chart, it *does* show a swingback for Con: the monthly figures dropped from 32.9% at the start of the period to a low of 28.9%, from where they've now almost recovered that ground. You're right though in saying that UKIP affected Labour at least as much, which is in itself interesting.
Labour's peak came in May to Nov 2012. For the next six months, UKIP pulled roughly equally from both main parties and in spring 2013 took their final surge almost entirely from Labour. While that surge might mask some underlying churn (i.e. some Con to UKIP was offset by some Lab to Con), it would still be significant either way.
Since then, yes, Labour's tracked fairly consistently at 37% while the Tories have recovered a little more ground at UKIP's expense. Even so, the net effect is that Labour's not won back the 5% that defected in the winter of 2012/3 and while 37% is enough for Labour to win a majority, it doesn't leave much margin for error.
The question is, how 'core' is that 37%? What it probably represents is the 8% who were 2010 LDs plus just 29% representing pre-2010 Lab voters (which is frankly pretty dire). That might be a tougher group for Con to eat into. However, even if the swingback has been indirect so far, swingback it has still been and with UKIP at around 12-13% for most of the last year, there's still scope for Con to pick up support without it coming directly from Lab.
The other unanswered question is whether the Lib Dems can start to recover from the 10% they've been stuck on for most of the parliament? Their March score was their best in a year though that may just be statistical / event-driven noise (all the last 12 months and 17 of the last 18 have seen them on 10% ± 0.7%). If they can, where will it come from?
Interesting Herald poll on independence and clearly a signpost for where the No side needs to start focusing. The problem, though, is that you can't just give Devomax to Scotland, as it will require a complete reworking of the whole UK constitutional settlement; and that's something that will have to be agreed UK-wide. However, the Yes side has shown that it's possible to get away with prevarication, obfuscation and blandishment, so it should not be beyond the wit of the No side to do the same.
That was why I wanted to devise an average that (1) took in several firms which do use different methodologies, (2) was not hugely biased to one based on an overwhelming output of polls, but (3), which did recognise that sheer numbers will mitigate any outliers produced.
As such, taking an average each of the five firms to have consistently produced monthly polls' own average for each month, weighted to account for their accuracy in 2010 and the frequency of publication (for example, Mori and ICM are down-weighted by 25% as they only publish one a month), seemed the best way of achieving that outcome I could come up with.
For reference, the pollsters are YouGov, Mori, Opinium, ICM and ComRes.
I've excluded any pollster who didn't publish in at least 80% of months, or which had at least two consecutive non-publishing months, in order to maintain consistency. This does mean that Populus' heavy polling since July 2013 is unfortunately excluded but that's the price of maintaining consistency within the series.
Thankfully, Conservative MPs handled the (admittedly more serious) accusations against Evans in a clearer manner.
As I've said many times passim, the political parties should be showing best practice in this area. If they expect private and public organisations to treat their employees well, then they should be doing the same themselves.
isam said:
» show previous quotes
A prize what?
I believe the correct word you might be looking for is hypocrisy. Hardly a surprise on here by now though no less hilarious too see it proved so blatantly time after time after time.
Yes I agree. Really does seem like one rule for one and one for another on here.
Cameron said he had to get UKIP down to 5% to win. If he did that, he'd win an overall majority. I don't he think he will, but if he can get the UKIP vote down to c.8%, he's got a fighting chance of the Conservatives being the largest party.
PS Difference is people trust the SNP as to date they have pretty much done what they said they would do , but everybody knows the Westminster parties always speak with forked tongue and will not be easily fooled with false promises of baubles. Offering Devomax or even a small amount of extra powers is not in their remit.
If the polls swing back to a ten point Labour lead, Ed will be PM with a majority. If we get crossover. It'll be Dave in coalition or leading a minority administration.
Lib Dems should outperform their polling and retain 30-40 seats, UKIP might get a couple if they poll in double figures.
Then. We have Scotland. Could Ed lose the chance of majority on the back of Yes and a huge swing to the SNP North of the border?
For the first time since 1992, it's pretty much game on all ways around.
Roughly, the polls show that a little over a third of the voters are prepared to go for Labour, just under a third of them want Conservative, and the rest either don't know or go for the minor parties. So, pretty much, on any given day, two thirds of people polled don't want Labour involved, and two thirds don't want the Tories involved.
Fair play to the two main parties, though, as they will crow, come May 2015, when real votes have been cast, that "The People have Spoken", and they've got the mandate (probably with the Lib Dems as kingmakers) to save the country from the last lot.
Truth is none of the parties are very appetising, and with luck, the Press war on MPs Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll lifestyles might take a few of them down.
So completely different. Scotsman has already been forced to print a grovelling apology after questioning Panelbase reputation.
I do expect that the LDs will end up around 15% but where that extra 5-6% will come from I am not sure.
As EdM does not have the confidence of 40% of Labour's VI as the person to be 'best PM' and as a good leader, Labour's VI could be fragile.
However, the Coalition/Cons have not been able to solve five of GB's legacies.
(a) The 2000/2007 false house price bubble - the effects of which have had a great impact on families and renters,
(b) The overgenerous benefit and tax credit system (which for some has made them workshy) - once sweeties have been given away it is very difficult to withdraw them - even partially.
(c) The almost unrestricted immigration policy and its effects on the capacity of UK's services to deliver.
(d) The decline of our education standards compared with the increasing standards of our competitors.
(e) The inability of our banks (through bad/no regulation) to invest in new UK technology and energy to enable the UK to compete on a global stage,
It may be the actual referendum question wasn't offered. The actual numbers show a NO jump of +7 but comparing apples with pears. IMHO it's likely no change and within MoE.
I rarely agree with Sean Fear, so it's pleasant to be able to say that I do this morning: the electorate has moved to the right (as of course has the Labour party) and it has done so because race is now as important as class as a source of political cleavage in England. Globalisation means that non-graduate labour, at least, which has to be performed in this country (e.g. harvesting) will - where it cannot be mechanised - be performed by immigrants and increasingly by young, single immigrants who live in dormitories and intend to return home a.s.a.p.
The "proletariat" in any sense recognisable to Marx has removed out of Europe and the English-speaking world and won't be returning any time soon, if ever.
The next problem for any government is to reduce the amount of healthcare available to pensioners so we die off sooner.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2602802/How-Liberal-party-police-MI5-concealed-MP-Cyril-Smiths-industrial-scale-child-abuse.html
In 2013, in addition to their wins, UKIP got ~800 (?) second place results. If UKIP can hang onto some of their EU Parliament voters in the locals, they could give us a jaw-dropper result.
The Liberal Democrats Are 'Pointless', Says Their Own MP Jeremy Browne
The Liberal Democrats have become pointless, one of the party’s most senior MPs has claimed.
In a fresh attack on the direction the Lib Dems are being taken in, former minister Jeremy Browne said there was a lot of "conservatism" in the party and raised concerns that it "protects the state and the status quo".
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/04/12/jeremy-browne-liberal-democrats-pointless-_n_5137383.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
'Calum Findlay said...
Let's compare this with Better Together's Jan poll:
Jan YouGov/BT
Independence: 30%
More Powers/Status Quo: 61%
Don't Know: 9%
April YouGov/BT
Independence: 35%
More Powers: 57%
Don't Know: 8% '
Detailed analysis of swingback is in just that category.
What is even more interesting is that the SNP have just parked their tanks on Ms Lamont's front pavement with the guns poking into the wally close to - effectively - encourage the Labour voters and (I am sure) also the lower level party activists and members in Scotland to think separately from London [edit: HQ]. This is very clear in the speeches by Ms Sturgeon and Mr Salmond whose approach may surprise some and is certainly a very interesting tactical move -
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/apr/12/alex-salmond-labour-voters-scottish-independence
Which, on the standard Scottish Labour principle of waiting for the SNP to say X and then plimping for the complete opposite, will make the Labour hierarchy and nomenklatura even more determined that indy for SLAB of the kind you suggest will not happen. It would be seen as a defeat for Labour per se. Which will increase the tensions within SLAB still further.
I have employed another couple of Eastern european doctors this week, to work with our Spanish and Portuguese nurses. This is what the future looks like to me.
Betfair - Scottish independence referendum
Latest prices
Yes 2.84
No 1.33
Matched: £264,534
It means Labour don't need to try and win the main political arguments, just coast along throwing mud at the Tories and relying on enough sticking to pick up a couple of points along the way.
The fact that they can get in despite having clearly less votes is a ludicrous situation.
As for Labour's best Scottish talent, that's no doubt true for future talent, yes. But one very interesting little point is that Labour in Holyrood is already selecting its MSP candidates for the 2016 Scottish elections - in other words making dam' sure that those comradely MPs who don't find safe Labour seats and peerages down south in the event of a Yes can't just come home and push them off the chairs with a sideways shove of the bum. Which makes it all even odder that the MPs aren't all coming north and fighting. Some months to go, mind.
However I'm sure the Yes price will balloon after yesterday's game changing Yougov. Or not.
The guy (if he exists) holding a 100k slip from Hills at 1/6 must be feeling great.
If I were putting money on the general election outcome, I would put a small bet on Labour winning between 290 and 310 seats. Labour should achieve a net gain of atleast 40 seats, given that 2010 was one of their worst ever performances. In 2010 Labour would have had anti-government votes, given the financial crash and Brown not being popular with middle England. Labour also suffered lost votes to Lib Dems, due to the Iraq war.
The other point I would make is that the Lib Dems are still doing really well against Tories in some areas of the country. I think there have been a number of local election results, where the Lib Dems had unexpectedly beaten the Tories. In Eastleigh the Lib Dems achieved a good result. So many Lib Dems in England will retain their seats and I even expect the Lib Dems to win a few seats from the Tories. My instinct is that the Tories will lose over 40 seats in 2015, as in 2010 they won many seats with wafer thin majorities and I am not sure the incombency factor will save them.
I also seem to recall Mike Smithson or Shadsy naming a couple of vast NO bets placed at miniscule odds. I can imagine that an awful lot of people who place significant NO bets last year are kicking themselves at their own stupidity.
Euros - Most votes
Lab 6/5 Lad
UKIP 5/4 Lad
Con 10/1 Betfair
LD 400/1 Betfair
I can see why the blues would be third, but to such an extent is quite contrary to the polling.
As for crossover (Yes, I said the dreaded word!) occurring, it might not necessarily just be a case of swingback. More well-timed interventions from Osborne (PBUH) or other cabinet colleagues could be enough to tip the balance. We shall have to wait and see what unfolds.
"He also owns factory facilities in Brussels, which are likely to be key for a European base."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/27001113