Great poll for Labour, as much as it's dire for the Lib Dems.
If that were the eventual result it'd be disappointment for UKIP, a shrug for the Conservatives, reassurance for Miliband, and curtains for Clegg (sooner or later. They may prefer to axe him after the General Election. Or not).
Labour would come first or joint first in seats in all regions...
Anyone believe it?
Funny how Ukip ICM euro polls are the same as Ukip Comres GE polls. ICM reallocate some don’t knows to the party they voted for last time, weight down people who didn’t vote last time and interview by phone… all things that tend to produce lower UKIP scores. I mean we dont do elections by phone do we? Phone polling may be fine under a 2 or even 3 party system. ICM may end up looking incredibly unreliable soon unless they buck their ideas up.
We don't do elections online either, so we should ignore online polls as well by your logic.
THINK about the ballot box scenario - you are offered a list of parties and are not under pressure to respond to a human voice.
You do not have the option of 'some other party' with online pollsters. Human beings react differently over the phone and only given 3 options (minus the 'other'). Think about it.
Not sure if mentioned but there was London poll in the Evening Standard today which shows the Lib Dems doing a little bit better. Can't find it in the online edition, but reported here:
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
Labour would come first or joint first in seats in all regions...
Anyone believe it?
Funny how Ukip ICM euro polls are the same as Ukip Comres GE polls. ICM reallocate some don’t knows to the party they voted for last time, weight down people who didn’t vote last time and interview by phone… all things that tend to produce lower UKIP scores. I mean we dont do elections by phone do we? Phone polling may be fine under a 2 or even 3 party system. ICM may end up looking incredibly unreliable soon unless they buck their ideas up.
We don't do elections online either, so we should ignore online polls as well by your logic.
Perhaps ICM should pioneer a postal poll. Share boost for Royal Mail carpetbaggers?
Not sure if mentioned but there was London poll in the Evening Standard today which shows the Lib Dems doing a little bit better. Can't find it in the online edition, but reported here:
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
Labour would come first or joint first in seats in all regions...
Anyone believe it?
Funny how Ukip ICM euro polls are the same as Ukip Comres GE polls. ICM reallocate some don’t knows to the party they voted for last time, weight down people who didn’t vote last time and interview by phone… all things that tend to produce lower UKIP scores. I mean we dont do elections by phone do we? Phone polling may be fine under a 2 or even 3 party system. ICM may end up looking incredibly unreliable soon unless they buck their ideas up.
We don't do elections online either, so we should ignore online polls as well by your logic.
THINK about the ballot box scenario - you are offered a list of parties and are not under pressure to respond to a human voice.
You do not have the option of 'some other party' with online pollsters. Human beings react differently over the phone and only given 3 options (minus the 'other'). Think about it.
Yes: and some elderly people vote but don't have computers. And some young people have phones and tablets, but no laptop.
I suspect, and I could be wrong, that the Libs will keep one Euro seat, the one in SE England (85% chance).
London and SW England are probably a little less than 50/50 shots. And the others are extremely unlikely to be held.
The NorthWest is a good chance too. Beyond those four, it's hard to see a hold...
The LDs best hope, under D'Hondt, is if the polls are vastly overstating Labour and the Big Three end up bunched fairly close together in the mid 20%s nationally.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
How about a "swingforward" thread, just to wind some of us up? Say that UKIP do really well in the Euros, up to 30%, and the Tories go sub-20. Endless interviews with a gloating Farage and mumbling second team Tories and the Tories go into freefall. The result next year heads for something like Lab 36, Con 25, UKIP 20, LD 10. Could UKIP make it in a Westminster poll to 2nd place? Would Cameron face a challenge if they did?
I don't know what to do for the best regarding the Euro elections. I thought I was going to stay at home or spoil my ballot paper - seeing as how I'm not hugely happy with any of the parties at the moment. But I've always cast a vote before... I'm not sure I have it in me to sit it out even if I think it's the right thing to do.
You must have some sort of preference (if only "least evil") between the four main parties? It seems a pity not to express it?
Not sure if mentioned but there was London poll in the Evening Standard today which shows the Lib Dems doing a little bit better. Can't find it in the online edition, but reported here:
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
Hard to believe Londoners are more likely to vote LD in Euros than in Westminster, but hey, who knows...
Isn't London the only UK region that is Europhile? I remember a poll in the Observer a few years back showing how it was the only region that advocated Euro entry and the only region where capital punishment was opposed by a majority of the population.
That all said, the Liberals have never been popular in GE voting, except in the SW burbs.
Labour would come first or joint first in seats in all regions...
Anyone believe it?
Funny how Ukip ICM euro polls are the same as Ukip Comres GE polls. ICM reallocate some don’t knows to the party they voted for last time, weight down people who didn’t vote last time and interview by phone… all things that tend to produce lower UKIP scores. I mean we dont do elections by phone do we? Phone polling may be fine under a 2 or even 3 party system. ICM may end up looking incredibly unreliable soon unless they buck their ideas up.
We don't do elections online either, so we should ignore online polls as well by your logic.
THINK about the ballot box scenario - you are offered a list of parties and are not under pressure to respond to a human voice.
You do not have the option of 'some other party' with online pollsters. Human beings react differently over the phone and only given 3 options (minus the 'other'). Think about it.
YOU do know that the phone pollsters were more accurate than online pollsters at the last general election.
BECAUSE I TYPED THE FIRST WORD OF MY REPLY IN CAPS MAKES MY POST MORE VALID
Not sure if mentioned but there was London poll in the Evening Standard today which shows the Lib Dems doing a little bit better. Can't find it in the online edition, but reported here:
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
Hard to believe Londoners are more likely to vote LD in Euros than in Westminster, but hey, who knows...
Isn't London the only UK region that is Europhile? I remember a poll in the Observer a few years back showing how it was the only region that advocated Euro entry and the only region where capital punishment was opposed by a majority of the population.
That all said, the Liberals have never been popular in GE voting, except in the SW burbs.
And North London: Hampstead is a three way marginal. Brent is LibDem, as is Hornsey and Wood Green.
I would expect the LibDems to get hammered in Hampstead and Kilburn, to the benefit of Labour. Brent is a sure-fire Labour gain. Honsey and Wood should go Labour in theory, but Lynne Featherstone is an outstanding constituency MP. She used to run MP surgeries even before she was an MP, and I knew several local residents who actually thought she was the MP. She's probably 50/50 to hold the seat, as I know several people who revile Nick Clegg (and the Libs in general) who will vote for her. They probably aren't alone.
That would be disastrous for the Libs in places like Sutton & Cheam, Kingston, Hornsey and Wood Green and Southwalk. In fact, you'd have to reckon they'd probably lose everything except (possibly) Twickenham,
I wouldn't be so pessimistic in the General. Lynne Featherstone has a good change of holding on and Simon Hughes likewise. Kingston is the interesting one...
I think the Lib Dems will obtain about 14% of the vote in the 2015 general election, but they will still hold onto between 30 and 40 seats. Where they are strong, they dominate holding many of the local council seats. This has taken them over 15 years to achieve and is totally different to the situation they were in say 1997 for example, where they won 17.8% of the votes, but only 20 seats.
I agree with Rupert Murdoch that Labour will win in 2015, if the Tories don't do some form of deal with UKIP. I cannot see Cameron allowing his party to do any deal with Farage.
If Scotland votes YES, Cameron, or his successor, could easily do a deal with UKIP, and romp home.
Because after Scottish secession Brexit will look like an obvious and agreeable doddle.
There are two things wrong with this:
1. Scotland is going to vote overwhelmingly to stay part of the union. 2. The Conservatives can't do a deal with UKIP without: a) losing some gay/metropolitan/business elite voters to the LibDems and Labour b) permanently splitting the right
But other than that, spot on.
If your analysis of Scotland is as retarded as your analysis of Catalonia ("most Spaniards want the Catalans to leave"), then Salmond is going to win his referendum 70/30.
Oh, you used the word 'retarded', you must be *really* clever,
Would you like to go back and read the post on Spain, or would you just like to make it up? I prefaced it with "One CEO said". It wasn't my view, I was telling you what someone told me.
Now if you want to put your money where you mouth is, put £500 on the under/over line (currently 57/43). That means I'd be offering you evens against the 5/6 the bookies are offering.
Definitely should be a thread on suspected Ukip underpolls. Interestingly Beast Nick Palmer backs you up saying that many Kippers are former non-voters.
"I’m informed that UKIP’s scores have been largely underrated before by Lord Ashcroft in past by elections, that being 13%, 11% and 8% to my knowledge. This insinuates the presence of a shy-UKIP factor? Are people embarrassed to vote UKIP? When UKIP is protested against a number of time by embarrassingly loud and violent hipster kids and organisations with dubious reputations, it is no wonder some are scared to go out and say they’re voting purple.
Definitely should be a thread on suspected Ukip underpolls. Interestingly Beast Nick Palmer backs you up saying that many Kippers are former non-voters.
"I’m informed that UKIP’s scores have been largely underrated before by Lord Ashcroft in past by elections, that being 13%, 11% and 8% to my knowledge. This insinuates the presence of a shy-UKIP factor? Are people embarrassed to vote UKIP? When UKIP is protested against a number of time by embarrassingly loud and violent hipster kids and organisations with dubious reputations, it is no wonder some are scared to go out and say they’re voting purple.
I suspect the issue is more under-weighting rather than shy UKIP; nobody I know who's a UKIP supporter (either on the board, or more generally) is shy about it. I think much more of an issue is that as many were non voters in 2010, the pollsters models tend to 'down weight' them.
Seems like another site already has an article on UKIP, 2010 supporters and the effects on its polling
"If you want to measure where UKIP’s support is really coming from, then I truly urge to disband measuring it against 2010 support, it just isn’t accurate enough. Instead, go for location on a County basis rather than unhelpful regionals such as ‘north’ and ‘south’: that’ll really start telling stories"
Not sure if mentioned but there was London poll in the Evening Standard today which shows the Lib Dems doing a little bit better. Can't find it in the online edition, but reported here:
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
Hard to believe Londoners are more likely to vote LD in Euros than in Westminster, but hey, who knows...
Isn't London the only UK region that is Europhile? I remember a poll in the Observer a few years back showing how it was the only region that advocated Euro entry and the only region where capital punishment was opposed by a majority of the population.
That all said, the Liberals have never been popular in GE voting, except in the SW burbs.
Scotland is also Europhile (admittedly by a small margin), I believe, acc to recent polling.
That would be disastrous for the Libs in places like Sutton & Cheam, Kingston, Hornsey and Wood Green and Southwalk. In fact, you'd have to reckon they'd probably lose everything except (possibly) Twickenham,
I wouldn't be so pessimistic in the General. Lynne Featherstone has a good change of holding on and Simon Hughes likewise. Kingston is the interesting one...
Kingston has become a bit leftie professional overspill in recent years - solid tactical vote to save Davey do we think?
With the Lib Dems getting 7 in ComRes (wasn't it?) - are we now witnessing the strange death of the liberal party?
Blah blah incumbency blah blah activists blah blah tactical voting blah fecking blah - the fact is when you are scoring 6 and 7 in national polls you are staring total annihilation in the face.
Indeed. As Anthony Wells points out in an excellent article here:
There comes a tipping point for all parties where their losses / gains start to pick up disproportionately. It's quite low for the Lib Dems due to their famed local strength, however, as in Scotland in 2011, they actually saw bigger swings in their stronger seats simply because they fell so far that they couldn't lose much in their weaker ones by definition (if you start on 10% you can only lose 10% and in reality, only about 8%, so if your national share falls by 14%, there's got to be a bigger fall where there were more votes to start with).
One other aspect of a party on 6-7% is that they'll lose a bucket load of deposits.
F1: Ladbrokes have their markets up for China. I might have an early tip [for those bothered by this: I won't count early tips in my race weekend graphs/records, as they will be made pre-practice and therefore not as part of any of the three articles I write per race weekend. I've made a few so far this year, and generally they've turned out ok].
Jeremy Browne's Liberal leadership bid spells disaster for Ed Miliband. Tory polling slump spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
I suggest "Are Sun readers views under represented in Polling and political reporting?"
As I said, I am sure not many on here ever pick up a copy, and its not available freraks don't factor their (illogical)?) views into their forecasts and opinions
isam: don't forget pollsters try to weight replies to try and get a representative sample. So, if you're surveyed and say "I'm a Sun reader", then you'll probably get weighted more heavily than if you said "I read the Guardian" because pollsters tend to get more answers from Guardian readers than from Sun ones.
Effectively, many current UKIP voters were disenfranchised in 2010, and therefore didn't vote. If they vote in 2015 (and I suspect many will), then the pollsters will have to revise their models. (Ironically, as these people will have actually voted in 2015, their stated voted intentions in 2020 will be taken more seriously, and therefore you probably won't need to change the model at this point, but that's another story.)
There is also an enthusiasm factor at play: I feel (rightly or wrongly) that UKIP voters are the most fired up, based upon this board at least! This means that in low-turnout elections, like the Euros or the Locals or by-elections, then they are likely to do rather better than their poll scores.
I can't reconcile the fact that a non-trivial proportion of current Kippers are NOTA/it's-all-gone-to-hell-in-a-handbasket with the supposed huge enthusiasm to GOTV all guns blazing political activism.
If you think the country's gone to the dogs and someone phones you up and asks you if you think the country's gone to the dogs you will tell them your thoughts.
Getting out to the polling station and registering your vote which, after all, only enourages them is a different thing entirely
You can get 2/1 on the Conservatives winning Carshalton & Wallington. If you think that's more likely than not, that's a mandatory bet.
It isn't, however, a bet that I'm yet making.
antifrank - what constituency bets have you been been making? I recall that at this stage prior to the 2010 GE you, me, RN and a couple of others were already very active although it has to be said that there was by then more competition between the bookies and therefore better odds available. So far this time it's been Laddies, PP and not much else. Hills are particularly disappointing, given their size and resources.
Jeremy Browne's Liberal leadership bid spells disaster for Ed Miliband. Tory polling slump spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
I suggest "Are Sun readers views under represented in Polling and political reporting?"
As I said, I am sure not many on here ever pick up a copy, and its not available freraks don't factor their (illogical)?) views into their forecasts and opinions
isam: don't forget pollsters try to weight replies to try and get a representative sample. So, if you're surveyed and say "I'm a Sun reader", then you'll probably get weighted more heavily than if you said "I read the Guardian" because pollsters tend to get more answers from Guardian readers than from Sun ones.
Effectively, many current UKIP voters were disenfranchised in 2010, and therefore didn't vote. If they vote in 2015 (and I suspect many will), then the pollsters will have to revise their models. (Ironically, as these people will have actually voted in 2015, their stated voted intentions in 2020 will be taken more seriously, and therefore you probably won't need to change the model at this point, but that's another story.)
There is also an enthusiasm factor at play: I feel (rightly or wrongly) that UKIP voters are the most fired up, based upon this board at least! This means that in low-turnout elections, like the Euros or the Locals or by-elections, then they are likely to do rather better than their poll scores.
I can't reconcile the fact that a non-trivial proportion of current Kippers are NOTA/it's-all-gone-to-hell-in-a-handbasket with the supposed huge enthusiasm to GOTV all guns blazing political activism.
If you think the country's gone to the dogs and someone phones you up and asks you if you think the country's gone to the dogs you will tell them your thoughts.
Getting out to the polling station and registering your vote which, after all, only enourages them is a different thing entirely
Those people don't get the phone call though do they? They are more likely to vote than be signed up to a pollster
Puts a hole in the received wisdom about a 'bedrock' LD support around 10 to 12%. Of course, they've been on life support here in Scotland since they lost all their mainland MSPs in 2011.
The true, rock-bottom, come-hell-or-high-water core vote for the Lib Dems is about 2%, as evidenced by various by-elections up and down the country.
I suspect the issue is more under-weighting rather than shy UKIP; nobody I know who's a UKIP supporter (either on the board, or more generally) is shy about it.
Wouldn't the point of a shy UKIP voter be that you WOULDN'T know they were a UKIP voter atall, because they'd be too ashamed to admit it to anyone?
With the Lib Dems getting 7 in ComRes (wasn't it?) - are we now witnessing the strange death of the liberal party?
Blah blah incumbency blah blah activists blah blah tactical voting blah fecking blah - the fact is when you are scoring 6 and 7 in national polls you are staring total annihilation in the face.
Unlikely, but with scores so low, cannot be entirely discounted. Taking a long view, the party has actually been in worse situations in previous incarnations, and who could have predicted then they would get 24% in a GE at some point, but it does seem to be the case that the party will not enjoy the same level of prominence it has managed to accrue in the last couple of decades.
24% seems like a high point in their path as a party, as even at the time their most prominent positions, on Europe, voting reform etc, were hardly very popular, and so with any kind of protest vote or soft Labour vote now gone, along with annihilation in Scotland, it does seem to be a question of whether they will be culled by minimum of third, or a maximum of two thirds, and after that you cannot say the same things, do the same things, or be the same thing as you were before.
Nevertheless, having been written off as a spent force long ago, only to find a way to slowly build a resurgence, I would be wary of believing the end is finally nigh.
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
Very much do at your own risk. I'll see how a few early tips go and then either continue or stop them.
Two bets with Ladbrokes, both Hulkenberg. Backed him to be winner without Hamilton and Rosberg at 9 (each way, 1/5 the odds for the top 3). This compares to 6 for a podium. Unless the Mercedes break down or get a 600 second stop and go penalty it seems likely the two markets are effectively the same thing.
If so, top 3 (each way) covers him down to 5th, and he's been 6th, 5th and 5th so far (assuming Ricciardo stays disqualified). The other top drivers include Vettel (car too slow on straights, and seems to have gremlins), Alonso/Raikkonen (car too slow, engine too thirsty) and Button (McLaren was a little off the pace in Bahrain).
Also backed him to be top 6 at 5/6. I would've backed him previously on Betfair but my account there is skinnier than my Ladbrokes one.
China is apparently pretty similar to Bahrain. The focus has been on that being helpful to Mercedes (it is), but Force India were the second best team, I would argue, in Bahrain. With a proper qualifying Hulkenberg may well have ended up with the podium there.
I'd also be interested in laying the Ferraris to score points on a similar basis (if the McLarens had finished neither Prancing Horse would have gotten any points). The odds aren't there, yet, however.
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
The LDs have gone from NOTA shedload of bonkers policies to the left of all known leftist political compass points to party of govt.
The focus on NClegg is a red (!) herring. They are going through the growing pains of a political party.
The challenge is for them to define, very clearly, what they stand for. If memory servs they were talking at some point about hypothecating taxes (was it for education?) and they need to define where they stand on all those issues now.
It will at least prevent another tuition fees debacle which was made during their most naive la-la land period of thinking that they needn't worry about actually getting elected.
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
I think reaching their peak again is very very unlikely, and that the next five years will be wholly consumed with redefining the party. I think their best bet might be to try to condemn everything about the current leadership and purge all its remaining senior figures from their positions, and commit to being a 10-15% party of the centre left, the natural coalition partner for Labour, and hope that, MPs or not (probably not), UKIP fill the gap on the other side as the (future) natural coalition allies of the Tories.
Of course as the only people left in the LDs are those either supportive of the current strategem or so tribal they will never leave no matter the approach, I have no idea if they have the will to commit to an identiy like that which is more limited and achievable than their current 'we can act as a brake on either major party' approach.
I haven't done a huge amount of constituency betting. There are few Labour constituency bets worth making (just betting on them getting most seats or an overall majority offers better value).
With Ladbrokes:
Seat Winner - Great Grimsby Conservatives 10/1 Seat Winner - St Ives Conservatives 11/10 Seat Winner - Cornwall North Conservatives 11/10 Seat Winner -Edinburgh North & Leith SNP 50/1 Seat Winner - Portsmouth North Conservatives 8/11 Seat Winner - Dunbartonshire East Labour 1/2 Seat Winner - Cambridge Liberal Democrats 5/4 Seat Winner - Battersea Conservatives 8/11 Seat Winner - Brighton Pavilion Greens 5/6 Seat Winner - Kingswood Conservatives 3/1
With Paddy Power:
Cons Ilford North 4/6 Colne Valley 10/11 Elmet & Rothwell 7/4 Cannock Chase 5/2 Calder Valley evens Broxtowe 7/2 Hove 7/2 Morecambe & Lunesdale 4/1 North Warwickshire 7/2 Weaver Vale 5/2 Hastings & Rye 2/1 Corby 6/1
These were about value (or matched with related bets) rather than predictions.
Jeremy Browne's Liberal leadership bid spells disaster for Ed Miliband. Tory polling slump spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
I suggest "Are Sun readers views under represented in Polling and political reporting?"
As I said, I am sure not many on here ever pick up a copy, and its not available freraks don't factor their (illogical)?) views into their forecasts and opinions
s.
If you think the country's gone to the dogs and someone phones you up and asks you if you think the country's gone to the dogs you will tell them your thoughts.
Getting out to the polling station and registering your vote which, after all, only enourages them is a different thing entirely
Those people don't get the phone call though do they? They are more likely to vote than be signed up to a pollster
Don't they use randomised phone numbers rather than signing people up? (Of course there's still a level of self-selection bias in answering the questions, but that's impossible to eradicate fully).
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
The LDs have gone from NOTA shedload of bonkers policies to the left of all known leftist political compass points to party of govt.
NOTA was much more successful for them than being a 'party of government'. Better for the party, if not necessarily the country, to being an ill definied NOTA party with a shedload of bonkers policies and, crucially, a significant number of MPs, than a more defined party of government with an insignificant number of MPs.
Just run the ICM figure through my straw clutching system. Very interesting results
Lambert and Butler model:
Pony Juice flatulence derivative (10,000 Brighton swimming baths simulations)*
Tory Majority - 202% Chance Tory most seats - 237% Chance Coalition - 136% Chance Labour most seats - 0.000001% chance Labour majority - -126% chance
* These figures are derived using the PB Hodge Squirrel Method of only using polls I feel like and have ignored all the others. I have also multiplied swingback by the gold standard formula and added it to the shy Tory multiple. I like other model generators use whatever information we want to and if new information is obtained between now and the election (or the opinion polls continue to show Labour leading) we will pick up the goalposts and run like feck so we can use the last poll on the last day before the election and mirror it to prove the model works. If the model fails we will blame UKIP.
What is noticeable with the above results is that the 202% chance of a Tory majority and 237% chance of Tory most seats is the lowest it has been this parliament. Also Labours -126% chance of a majority is their best figure.
With the Lib Dems getting 7 in ComRes (wasn't it?) - are we now witnessing the strange death of the liberal party?
Blah blah incumbency blah blah activists blah blah tactical voting blah fecking blah - the fact is when you are scoring 6 and 7 in national polls you are staring total annihilation in the face.
Unlikely, but with scores so low, cannot be entirely discounted. Taking a long view, the party has actually been in worse situations in previous incarnations, and who could have predicted then they would get 24% in a GE at some point, but it does seem to be the case that the party will not enjoy the same level of prominence it has managed to accrue in the last couple of decades.
24% seems like a high point in their path as a party, as even at the time their most prominent positions, on Europe, voting reform etc, were hardly very popular, and so with any kind of protest vote or soft Labour vote now gone, along with annihilation in Scotland, it does seem to be a question of whether they will be culled by minimum of third, or a maximum of two thirds, and after that you cannot say the same things, do the same things, or be the same thing as you were before.
Nevertheless, having been written off as a spent force long ago, only to find a way to slowly build a resurgence, I would be wary of believing the end is finally nigh.
It has to be said that over the last century and a quarter, the Liberals / Lib Dems have been extraordinarily enthusiastic at trying different ways of killing their party.
Jeremy Browne's Liberal leadership bid spells disaster for Ed Miliband. Tory polling slump spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
I suggest "Are Sun readers views under represented in Polling and political reporting?"
As I said, I am sure not many on here ever pick up a copy, and its not available freraks don't factor their (illogical)?) views into their forecasts and opinions
s.
If you think the country's gone to the dogs and someone phones you up and asks you if you think the country's gone to the dogs you will tell them your thoughts.
Getting out to the polling station and registering your vote which, after all, only enourages them is a different thing entirely
Those people don't get the phone call though do they? They are more likely to vote than be signed up to a pollster
Don't they use randomised phone numbers rather than signing people up? (Of course there's still a level of self-selection bias in answering the questions, but that's impossible to eradicate fully).
Do they? I really don't know
I thought they just phoned 1000 people out of the phone book so to speak, but I am sure someone on here told me that you have to register and the pollsters then phone a selection of those registered.
I don't know to be honest, someone on here will do
Bank of Scotland & Markit PMI for Scotland released today. It appears George is bringing good will and cheer North of the Border.
BANK OF SCOTLAND PMI: MARCH PMI SHOWS STRONG GROWTH IN PRIVATE SECTOR ECONOMY
• March sees marked growth in manufacturing and service sector output • Rate of job creation is solid but slower than in February • Cost inflation drops to 54-month low
Scotland‟s private sector economy ended the opening quarter with another strong month of growth, according to the Bank of Scotland PMI report for March. Improving business conditions and confidence supported increases in output and new business, in turn leading companies north of the border to bolster payroll numbers. March data meanwhile highlighted a cooling of inflationary pressures as both input and output prices rose at slower rates.
At 56.4, up slightly from February‟s mark of 56.2, the seasonally adjusted headline Bank of Scotland PMI – a single-figure measure of the month-on-month change in combined manufacturing and services business activity – signalled further strong growth of business activity in March. Moreover, the index‟s quarterly average improved slightly from the final three months of 2013. Growth was broad-based across manufacturing and services in March, with the former seeing a pick-up from only a modest pace of expansion one month before.
Can you imagine any other British politician allowing access in this way? Its why Farage is the most popular leader
Seems far safer and less access than Clegg's phone in for example. Is there a wider thing, or just a couple of set piece interviews?
A bit of bumph either side... started with the ComRes 20% poll being highlighted and finished with the Newsreader interviewing the reporter who said he was a normal bloke, very engaging, no flunkies or Press advisors butting etc etc
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
The LDs have gone from NOTA shedload of bonkers policies to the left of all known leftist political compass points to party of govt.
NOTA was much more successful for them than being a 'party of government'. Better for the party, if not necessarily the country, to being an ill definied NOTA party with a shedload of bonkers policies and, crucially, a significant number of MPs, than a more defined party of government with an insignificant number of MPs.
Well yes but being charitable, they stood up, were a bit naive and now they need to work out if it was all worth it - I have a feeling that unfocused as they (currently) are they like being in power and perhaps their supporters like it also.
So they will need to choose the next step in their progression carefully (it could be, as you infer, a step backwards).
I'm not so sure that's the reason, though it may play some role. As corporeal states, Clegg allows plenty of access, or at the least open and transparent public contact to a degree rarely seen from a politician. I think it's much simpler than Farage allowing access - he's just much more interesting and engaging than other politicians, because his style is so vastly different, and because he does not need to compromise in government or seek the 'centre ground' like the other three, he's ususally a lot more direct and a lot more consistent in what he thinks about things, which people appreciate and makes his key supporters deliriously happy with him when things are going well.
Mr. L, it's worth recalling 2009, when Button won the drivers' title. He came second in SPOTY with Ryan Giggs winning for no apparent reason. Even if Hamilton wins this year (and the season could be a real classic) I can't see him beating a Premiership-winning Gerrard.
Edited extra bit - just on 'passion', I stopped watching the race right after it finished (as usual), but apparently Rosberg was so high on adrenaline he almost rugby-tackled Hamilton. With luck, this could be a great rivalry this year.
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
The LDs have gone from NOTA shedload of bonkers policies to the left of all known leftist political compass points to party of govt.
NOTA was much more successful for them than being a 'party of government'. Better for the party, if not necessarily the country, to being an ill definied NOTA party with a shedload of bonkers policies and, crucially, a significant number of MPs, than a more defined party of government with an insignificant number of MPs.
But a party that proclaims itself to be nice, centrist and consensual cannot simultaneously grow its number of MPs and remain outside government indefinitely. At some point, the 2010 scenario was going to happen. The Lib Dems might have been unlucky that it was straight after a recession when money was tight but the NOTA strategy was never sustainable long-term either way.
Jeremy Browne's Liberal leadership bid spells disaster for Ed Miliband. Tory polling slump spells disaster for Ed Miliband.
I'm kinda guest editing the site over the next couple of days.
I'm willing to take on suggestions.
Perhaps a thread on electoral reform will keep everyone happy?
I suggest "Are Sun readers views under represented in Polling and political reporting?"
As I said, I am sure not many on here ever pick up a copy, and its not available freraks don't factor their (illogical)?) views into their forecasts and opinions
s.
Those people don't get the phone call though do they? They are more likely to vote than be signed up to a pollster
Don't they use randomised phone numbers rather than signing people up? (Of course there's still a level of self-selection bias in answering the questions, but that's impossible to eradicate fully).
Do they? I really don't know
I thought they just phoned 1000 people out of the phone book so to speak, but I am sure someone on here told me that you have to register and the pollsters then phone a selection of those registered.
I don't know to be honest, someone on here will do
I'm not totally up to date, but afaik common practice is to generate random phone numbers (so you don't just get people willing to be listed in the phone book) and call them to ask if people are willing to take part in a survey.
Mr. Herdson, if UKIP aren't careful they're in danger of making the same mistake. It'll be interesting to see how the purples hold together and how leftish or rightish they'll end up being once their extraordinary growth spurt slows a bit.
Going off on a slight tangent on the Lib Dem discussions. All the talk about how it might be better for the Lib Dem leadership contenders to wait til after the election.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
The LDs have gone from NOTA shedload of bonkers policies to the left of all known leftist political compass points to party of govt.
NOTA was much more successful for them than being a 'party of government'. Better for the party, if not necessarily the country, to being an ill definied NOTA party with a shedload of bonkers policies and, crucially, a significant number of MPs, than a more defined party of government with an insignificant number of MPs.
But a party that proclaims itself to be nice, centrist and consensual cannot simultaneously grow its number of MPs and remain outside government indefinitely. At some point, the 2010 scenario was going to happen. The Lib Dems might have been unlucky that it was straight after a recession when money was tight but the NOTA strategy was never sustainable long-term either way.
I think NOTA strategy is overstating it frankly.
It's always been easier to gain votes in opposition than in government, but that the biggest gainer of Lib Dem departure was Labour doesn't speak to a very large NOTA contingent.
Just run the ICM figure through my straw clutching system. Very interesting results
Lambert and Butler model:
Pony Juice flatulence derivative (10,000 Brighton swimming baths simulations)*
Tory Majority - 202% Chance Tory most seats - 237% Chance Coalition - 136% Chance Labour most seats - 0.000001% chance Labour majority - -126% chance
* These figures are derived using the PB Hodge Squirrel Method of only using polls I feel like and have ignored all the others. I have also multiplied swingback by the gold standard formula and added it to the shy Tory multiple. I like other model generators use whatever information we want to and if new information is obtained between now and the election (or the opinion polls continue to show Labour leading) we will pick up the goalposts and run like feck so we can use the last poll on the last day before the election and mirror it to prove the model works. If the model fails we will blame UKIP.
What is noticeable with the above results is that the 202% chance of a Tory majority and 237% chance of Tory most seats is the lowest it has been this parliament. Also Labours -126% chance of a majority is their best figure.
Some fascinating analysis, thanks, that's what makes PB great.
Interesting divergence though, I ran the simulation 40 trillion times and got a probability of a labour majority of -127.5%, slightly lower than your superb work, thanks for the great analysis.
Do you think I need to tweak the "swingback is happening" parameter a little?
Thanks for the interesting analysis though, this is very valuable work.
I believe I may have overestimated the Shy Tory Multiple between simulation 2,367 and simulation 4,944 which may have effected the over-calculation of the Labour majority chance. I intend to run it again after the Euro election/Local elections and will use the one poll that shows a shortening of the Labour lead and ignore the decimation that was the Tory campaign. I would never try and second guess what the next run might say, but I have a hunch it may show a Tory majority nailed on.
I haven't done a huge amount of constituency betting. There are few Labour constituency bets worth making (just betting on them getting most seats or an overall majority offers better value).
With Ladbrokes:
Seat Winner - Great Grimsby Conservatives 10/1 Seat Winner - St Ives Conservatives 11/10 Seat Winner - Cornwall North Conservatives 11/10 Seat Winner -Edinburgh North & Leith SNP 50/1 Seat Winner - Portsmouth North Conservatives 8/11 Seat Winner - Dunbartonshire East Labour 1/2 Seat Winner - Cambridge Liberal Democrats 5/4 Seat Winner - Battersea Conservatives 8/11 Seat Winner - Brighton Pavilion Greens 5/6 Seat Winner - Kingswood Conservatives 3/1
With Paddy Power:
Cons Ilford North 4/6 Colne Valley 10/11 Elmet & Rothwell 7/4 Cannock Chase 5/2 Calder Valley evens Broxtowe 7/2 Hove 7/2 Morecambe & Lunesdale 4/1 North Warwickshire 7/2 Weaver Vale 5/2 Hastings & Rye 2/1 Corby 6/1
These were about value (or matched with related bets) rather than predictions.
Thanks for that - some of those longer-priced Tory bets with PP look brave but could deliver handsome rewards if Dr Fisher is proved right!
Mr. Herdson, if UKIP aren't careful they're in danger of making the same mistake. It'll be interesting to see how the purples hold together and how leftish or rightish they'll end up being once their extraordinary growth spurt slows a bit.
Much as I criticise UKIP (and I criticise them a lot) I do get the long game angle to their approach. Start off with a central idea and then build on that over the next few generations to a greater critical mass.
Trouble is, rather than being overly idealistic and desirous of some kind of nirvana on earth, there is instead negativity at the heart of their party. No to EU, no to immigration, no to this, no to that.
Such sentiments are not only not going to take the broad swathe of voters with them but they also fly in the face of historical progress (much as they may loathe such a term which is in itself indicative).
But a party that proclaims itself to be nice, centrist and consensual cannot simultaneously grow its number of MPs and remain outside government indefinitely. At some point, the 2010 scenario was going to happen. The Lib Dems might have been unlucky that it was straight after a recession when money was tight but the NOTA strategy was never sustainable long-term either way.
You're quite right, but when have politicians ever not put off today that which can be done tomorrow? They likely assumed they would take a hit but that they would be able to rise to the occasion and retain enough of a core vote despite that, but they have proven incapable of stemming the tide of the much more visceral than expected hatredthat has arisen toward them in some circles.
"theakes 14th Apr '14 - 8:19pm Latest ICM Euro Poll, Lib Dems 6% level with Greens. God help us next month"
Stop giggling at the back.
I think the party was briefing about the possibility of losing all their MEPs quite some time ago, so they'll have been expecting it I guess, if not for it to be quite so bad. It really still comes down to whether, however bad it gets, is there any benefit to kicking Clegg out prior to the GE - I've always felt he would go prior to the GE, as even if it won't help, it can hardly hurt to give it a try and put in a new leader 6 or 8 months from the GE, in which case why not a full year? With the Coalition winding down could a new leader avoid contaminating the brand even more in that time
Topping: Well yes but being charitable, they stood up, were a bit naive and now they need to work out if it was all worth it - I have a feeling that unfocused as they (currently) are they like being in power and perhaps their supporters like it also.
So they will need to choose the next step in their progression carefully (it could be, as you infer, a step backwards).
I cannot see how it will be otherwise, and to be quite frank I think their idea of acting as a check on the other two is a good idea, but as I believe you are saying, their lack of focus is hindering any possible recovery (even if regaining that focus is no guarantee of restoring some support).
ComRes asked a series of questions about UKIP’s appeal to voters:
- 32 per cent of the public believe UKIP offer a “realistic alternative political vision of Britain”, while 51 per cent disagree. - One third of Britons (33 per cent) say they are attracted to UKIP “because they say what they think” with more than half (54 per cent) disagreeing. - The electorate is divided on whether UKIP is a party of the far right, with 40 per cent agreeing and 38 per cent disagreeing. - The suggestion that Mr Farage is a danger to Britain is dismissed by British adults by a margin of two to one (49 per cent to 24 per cent), with the remaining 27 per cent saying they do not know.
Mr. Herdson, if UKIP aren't careful they're in danger of making the same mistake. It'll be interesting to see how the purples hold together and how leftish or rightish they'll end up being once their extraordinary growth spurt slows a bit.
Much as I criticise UKIP (and I criticise them a lot) I do get the long game angle to their approach. Start off with a central idea and then build on that over the next few generations to a greater critical mass.
Trouble is, rather than being overly idealistic and desirous of some kind of nirvana on earth, there is instead negativity at the heart of their party. No to EU, no to immigration, no to this, no to that.
Such sentiments are not only not going to take the broad swathe of voters with them but they also fly in the face of historical progress (much as they may loathe such a term which is in itself indicative).
One mans freedom fighter is another's terrorist!
Yes to freedom to trade with the rest of the world without EU restrictions, Yes to selective education, Yes to controlling our own borders
No to meddling in foreign wars though, I'll give you that
Even many opposed to Gay Marriage see themselves as in favour of traditional marriage rather than particularly anti Gay marriage
It all depends what side you are on.. the opposite of every anti is a pro
Almost bang on last week's YouGov average which was 4.4.
Budget bounce has faded a touch but only a touch.
Question is the magnitude of the Miller effect. With no Miller these numbers would be mildly encouraging for Lab. But if there is a Miller effect then the larger it is the better for Con as it should fade fairly quickly.
@TimMontgomerie: BREAKING: Farage faces expenses investigation into almost £60K of “missing” EU funds paid into his own bank account http://t.co/zDl839REK2
@TimMontgomerie: BREAKING: Farage faces expenses investigation into almost £60K of “missing” EU funds paid into his own bank account http://t.co/zDl839REK2
The next batch of polls could be interesting with Budget and Miller factors fading and PAYE tax reductions to the fore + warmer weather (yes seriously!) If the Tories are to make meaningful progress, one feels it has to start soon.
Comments
Great poll for Labour, as much as it's dire for the Lib Dems.
If that were the eventual result it'd be disappointment for UKIP, a shrug for the Conservatives, reassurance for Miliband, and curtains for Clegg (sooner or later. They may prefer to axe him after the General Election. Or not).
You do not have the option of 'some other party' with online pollsters. Human beings react differently over the phone and only given 3 options (minus the 'other'). Think about it.
London voting intentions at a general election stand at CON 34%, LAB 42%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 11%, a swing of three points from Con to Lab, so actually marginally better for the Tories than in GB polls. In European voting intentions the figures are CON 25%, LAB 33%, LDEM 11%, UKIP 24% – so UKIP and the Conservatives fighting for second place behind Labour, a good performance for UKIP in what tends to be a weaker area for them. Finally in Borough elections voting intentions are CON 34%, LAB 40%, LDEM 12%, UKIP 9%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/
Mike would be very cross at me if I divulged the results of any embargoed poll
And some young people have phones and tablets, but no laptop.
There is no perfect way to gauge public opinion.
The LDs best hope, under D'Hondt, is if the polls are vastly overstating Labour and the Big Three end up bunched fairly close together in the mid 20%s nationally.
That all said, the Liberals have never been popular in GE voting, except in the SW burbs.
BECAUSE I TYPED THE FIRST WORD OF MY REPLY IN CAPS MAKES MY POST MORE VALID
Bang right. They might as well cut and run. But they won't. Dream scenario for Labour is they keep him.
*grumbles*
Slow to load, even seems to be affecting other tabs of mine. Sure there's no virus?
Con 34%, Green 3%, Lab 40%, LD 12%, UKIP 9%
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/n4ojuqo0a6/YG-Archive-140411-Eveningstandard-London.pdf
I would expect the LibDems to get hammered in Hampstead and Kilburn, to the benefit of Labour. Brent is a sure-fire Labour gain. Honsey and Wood should go Labour in theory, but Lynne Featherstone is an outstanding constituency MP. She used to run MP surgeries even before she was an MP, and I knew several local residents who actually thought she was the MP. She's probably 50/50 to hold the seat, as I know several people who revile Nick Clegg (and the Libs in general) who will vote for her. They probably aren't alone.
I wouldn't be so pessimistic in the General. Lynne Featherstone has a good change of holding on and Simon Hughes likewise. Kingston is the interesting one...
Lab 35%
Con 33%
UKIP 13%
LD 11%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8744#comments
I have been worried.
Would you like to go back and read the post on Spain, or would you just like to make it up? I prefaced it with "One CEO said". It wasn't my view, I was telling you what someone told me.
Now if you want to put your money where you mouth is, put £500 on the under/over line (currently 57/43). That means I'd be offering you evens against the 5/6 the bookies are offering.
http://www.columnist.org.uk/2014/02/08/that-special-thing-about-the-ukip-vote/
Their problems are in Sutton & Cheam and perhaps Carshalton & Wallington.
Ashcroft's by-election polls this Parliament have understated UKIP by 1%,2%,8%,11%,13% and 7%. So what does the Wythenshawe 15% really mean?
"If you want to measure where UKIP’s support is really coming from, then I truly urge to disband measuring it against 2010 support, it just isn’t accurate enough. Instead, go for location on a County basis rather than unhelpful regionals such as ‘north’ and ‘south’: that’ll really start telling stories"
http://www.columnist.org.uk/2014/04/13/the-big-issue-with-polling-ukip-and-its-2010-supporters/
It isn't, however, a bet that I'm yet making.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7687
There comes a tipping point for all parties where their losses / gains start to pick up disproportionately. It's quite low for the Lib Dems due to their famed local strength, however, as in Scotland in 2011, they actually saw bigger swings in their stronger seats simply because they fell so far that they couldn't lose much in their weaker ones by definition (if you start on 10% you can only lose 10% and in reality, only about 8%, so if your national share falls by 14%, there's got to be a bigger fall where there were more votes to start with).
One other aspect of a party on 6-7% is that they'll lose a bucket load of deposits.
If you think the country's gone to the dogs and someone phones you up and asks you if you think the country's gone to the dogs you will tell them your thoughts.
Getting out to the polling station and registering your vote which, after all, only enourages them is a different thing entirely
Blah blah incumbency blah blah activists blah blah tactical voting blah fecking blah - the fact is when you are scoring 6 and 7 in national polls you are staring total annihilation in the face.
Unlikely, but with scores so low, cannot be entirely discounted. Taking a long view, the party has actually been in worse situations in previous incarnations, and who could have predicted then they would get 24% in a GE at some point, but it does seem to be the case that the party will not enjoy the same level of prominence it has managed to accrue in the last couple of decades.
24% seems like a high point in their path as a party, as even at the time their most prominent positions, on Europe, voting reform etc, were hardly very popular, and so with any kind of protest vote or soft Labour vote now gone, along with annihilation in Scotland, it does seem to be a question of whether they will be culled by minimum of third, or a maximum of two thirds, and after that you cannot say the same things, do the same things, or be the same thing as you were before.
Nevertheless, having been written off as a spent force long ago, only to find a way to slowly build a resurgence, I would be wary of believing the end is finally nigh.
Am I the only one who actually thinks it might get even worse for the Lib Dems after the next election? Historically, whenever a party suffers an absolute shellacking in an election, it takes atleast one or two more election cycles just to stop the rot before they can even think about making a resurgence. If the Libs do as badly as I expect next year (about 10% in the popular vote, number of MPs halved) then I think the idea of them bouncing back to peak poll ratings within 5 years is very optimistic, no matter who the leader is and no matter how leftwing their rhetoric is.
Betting PostVery much do at your own risk. I'll see how a few early tips go and then either continue or stop them.
Two bets with Ladbrokes, both Hulkenberg. Backed him to be winner without Hamilton and Rosberg at 9 (each way, 1/5 the odds for the top 3). This compares to 6 for a podium. Unless the Mercedes break down or get a 600 second stop and go penalty it seems likely the two markets are effectively the same thing.
If so, top 3 (each way) covers him down to 5th, and he's been 6th, 5th and 5th so far (assuming Ricciardo stays disqualified). The other top drivers include Vettel (car too slow on straights, and seems to have gremlins), Alonso/Raikkonen (car too slow, engine too thirsty) and Button (McLaren was a little off the pace in Bahrain).
Also backed him to be top 6 at 5/6. I would've backed him previously on Betfair but my account there is skinnier than my Ladbrokes one.
China is apparently pretty similar to Bahrain. The focus has been on that being helpful to Mercedes (it is), but Force India were the second best team, I would argue, in Bahrain. With a proper qualifying Hulkenberg may well have ended up with the podium there.
I'd also be interested in laying the Ferraris to score points on a similar basis (if the McLarens had finished neither Prancing Horse would have gotten any points). The odds aren't there, yet, however.
The focus on NClegg is a red (!) herring. They are going through the growing pains of a political party.
The challenge is for them to define, very clearly, what they stand for. If memory servs they were talking at some point about hypothecating taxes (was it for education?) and they need to define where they stand on all those issues now.
It will at least prevent another tuition fees debacle which was made during their most naive la-la land period of thinking that they needn't worry about actually getting elected.
Of course as the only people left in the LDs are those either supportive of the current strategem or so tribal they will never leave no matter the approach, I have no idea if they have the will to commit to an identiy like that which is more limited and achievable than their current 'we can act as a brake on either major party' approach.
Can you imagine any other British politician allowing access in this way? Its why Farage is the most popular leader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk8uCxHnGIo
With Ladbrokes:
Seat Winner - Great Grimsby Conservatives 10/1
Seat Winner - St Ives Conservatives 11/10
Seat Winner - Cornwall North Conservatives 11/10
Seat Winner -Edinburgh North & Leith SNP 50/1
Seat Winner - Portsmouth North Conservatives 8/11
Seat Winner - Dunbartonshire East Labour 1/2
Seat Winner - Cambridge Liberal Democrats 5/4
Seat Winner - Battersea Conservatives 8/11
Seat Winner - Brighton Pavilion Greens 5/6
Seat Winner - Kingswood Conservatives 3/1
With Paddy Power:
Cons
Ilford North 4/6
Colne Valley 10/11
Elmet & Rothwell 7/4
Cannock Chase 5/2
Calder Valley evens
Broxtowe 7/2
Hove 7/2
Morecambe & Lunesdale 4/1
North Warwickshire 7/2
Weaver Vale 5/2
Hastings & Rye 2/1
Corby 6/1
These were about value (or matched with related bets) rather than predictions.
Nick Clegg vows to stay as Lib Dem leader until 2020 http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/c1858776-c3e9-11e3-870b-00144feabdc0.html …
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/
Lambert and Butler model:
Pony Juice flatulence derivative (10,000 Brighton swimming baths simulations)*
Tory Majority - 202% Chance
Tory most seats - 237% Chance
Coalition - 136% Chance
Labour most seats - 0.000001% chance
Labour majority - -126% chance
* These figures are derived using the PB Hodge Squirrel Method of only using polls I feel like and have ignored all the others. I have also multiplied swingback by the gold standard formula and added it to the shy Tory multiple. I like other model generators use whatever information we want to and if new information is obtained between now and the election (or the opinion polls continue to show Labour leading) we will pick up the goalposts and run like feck so we can use the last poll on the last day before the election and mirror it to prove the model works. If the model fails we will blame UKIP.
What is noticeable with the above results is that the 202% chance of a Tory majority and 237% chance of Tory most seats is the lowest it has been this parliament. Also Labours -126% chance of a majority is their best figure.
Overall analysis - Tory Majority.....Nailed on!!!!
I thought they just phoned 1000 people out of the phone book so to speak, but I am sure someone on here told me that you have to register and the pollsters then phone a selection of those registered.
I don't know to be honest, someone on here will do
"theakes 14th Apr '14 - 8:19pm
Latest ICM Euro Poll, Lib Dems 6% level with Greens. God help us next month"
Stop giggling at the back.
You don't need many votes to win. Last year Murray got 400,000 - over 50% as only 700,000 votes were cast in total.
If Liverpool win the league then he could easily win SPOTY by an absolute landslide.
His passion at the final whistle yesterday was something we very rarely see in sport these days.
Bank of Scotland & Markit PMI for Scotland released today. It appears George is bringing good will and cheer North of the Border.
BANK OF SCOTLAND PMI: MARCH PMI SHOWS STRONG GROWTH IN PRIVATE SECTOR ECONOMY
• March sees marked growth in manufacturing and service sector output
• Rate of job creation is solid but slower than in February
• Cost inflation drops to 54-month low
Scotland‟s private sector economy ended the opening quarter with another strong month of growth, according to the Bank of Scotland PMI report for March. Improving business conditions and confidence supported increases in output and new business, in turn leading companies north of the border to bolster payroll numbers. March data meanwhile highlighted a cooling of inflationary pressures as both input and output prices rose at slower rates.
At 56.4, up slightly from February‟s mark of 56.2, the seasonally adjusted headline Bank of Scotland PMI – a single-figure measure of the month-on-month change in combined manufacturing and services business activity – signalled further strong growth of business activity in March. Moreover, the index‟s quarterly average improved slightly from the final three months of 2013. Growth was broad-based across manufacturing and services in March, with the former seeing a pick-up from only a modest pace of expansion one month before.
Pretty much a UKIP ad
So they will need to choose the next step in their progression carefully (it could be, as you infer, a step backwards).
The lessons for UKIP are pretty transparent.
Edited extra bit - just on 'passion', I stopped watching the race right after it finished (as usual), but apparently Rosberg was so high on adrenaline he almost rugby-tackled Hamilton. With luck, this could be a great rivalry this year.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead five points: CON 33%, LAB 38%, LD 9%, UKIP 12%
If Liverpool are 4/5 to win League, he must be a great bet at 3s
If they win the PL then I make Gerrard 90%+ to win SPOTY.
Only way he wouldn't win would be something massive from eg Rooney / Hart in the World Cup Finals.
I want to watch the news.
It's always been easier to gain votes in opposition than in government, but that the biggest gainer of Lib Dem departure was Labour doesn't speak to a very large NOTA contingent.
The Screaming Eagles @TSEofPB 26s
Comres Phone poll for the Independent
Con 30% (-1) Lab 36% (NC) LD 9% (NC) UKIP 12% (+1)
Fieldwork 11th to 13th April
Trouble is, rather than being overly idealistic and desirous of some kind of nirvana on earth, there is instead negativity at the heart of their party. No to EU, no to immigration, no to this, no to that.
Such sentiments are not only not going to take the broad swathe of voters with them but they also fly in the face of historical progress (much as they may loathe such a term which is in itself indicative).
Topping: Well yes but being charitable, they stood up, were a bit naive and now they need to work out if it was all worth it - I have a feeling that unfocused as they (currently) are they like being in power and perhaps their supporters like it also.
So they will need to choose the next step in their progression carefully (it could be, as you infer, a step backwards).
I cannot see how it will be otherwise, and to be quite frank I think their idea of acting as a check on the other two is a good idea, but as I believe you are saying, their lack of focus is hindering any possible recovery (even if regaining that focus is no guarantee of restoring some support).
PS felix.....oh look another poll showing a 6% lead.....strange eh.
ComRes asked a series of questions about UKIP’s appeal to voters:
- 32 per cent of the public believe UKIP offer a “realistic alternative political vision of Britain”, while 51 per cent disagree.
- One third of Britons (33 per cent) say they are attracted to UKIP “because they say what they think” with more than half (54 per cent) disagreeing.
- The electorate is divided on whether UKIP is a party of the far right, with 40 per cent agreeing and 38 per cent disagreeing.
- The suggestion that Mr Farage is a danger to Britain is dismissed by British adults by a margin of two to one (49 per cent to 24 per cent), with the remaining 27 per cent saying they do not know.
Nicely placed and needing to earn our eventual majority is how I see it.
Yes to freedom to trade with the rest of the world without EU restrictions, Yes to selective education, Yes to controlling our own borders
No to meddling in foreign wars though, I'll give you that
Even many opposed to Gay Marriage see themselves as in favour of traditional marriage rather than particularly anti Gay marriage
It all depends what side you are on.. the opposite of every anti is a pro
ICM - 5
ComRes - 6
YouGov - 5
Populus - 2
Average = 4.5
Almost bang on last week's YouGov average which was 4.4.
Budget bounce has faded a touch but only a touch.
Question is the magnitude of the Miller effect. With no Miller these numbers would be mildly encouraging for Lab. But if there is a Miller effect then the larger it is the better for Con as it should fade fairly quickly.
which makes it easier for me to wish everyone bon nuit - that's goodnight for you @isam
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4063573.ece
Convicted fraudster @JasnaBadzak who fleeced UKIP MEP is source of most @Times smears on #UKIP . Has no credibility http://dailym.ai/15hNG1J