Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Topping the polls 2-4 weeks out is not always a guarantee o
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Topping the polls 2-4 weeks out is not always a guarantee of success – just ask Nick Clegg
Coming top in YouGov poll 2-4 weeks before an election doesn't always guarantee success
This from April 20 20010 pic.twitter.com/edWWeX8fnw
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I thought the point of your thread was to say the polls aren't the same as the vote and guarantee nothing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXsk0jroOog
"The UKIP answer is this: there is absolutely nothing to fear from leaving the European Union, because on D+1 we would find ourselves part of the European Economic Area and with a free trade deal. And we should use our membership of the EEA as a holding position, from which we can negotiate, as the European Union's biggest export market in the world, as good a deal - my goodness me, if Switzerland can have one, we can have an even better one."
There is nothing as blind as a man who will not see.
However, as most people perceive the EU Elections to be basically insignificant and a good opportunity to take the p*ss out of the entire political class, I would expect to see UKIP keep their position for this election.
But it IS a warning for those attempting to draw conclusions about the general election, IMO, which is an entirely different kettle of fish.
Nick Cohen @NickCohen4
Nigel Farage is a phoney. Scrutinise him and he'll crumble | Me in this morning's Observer
Marco Giannangeli @marcogiann
Tories launch most scathing attack on Ukip to date. COMMENT by Grant Shapps: Vote Tory if you want EU reform http://shr.gs/OlpeQOa
Mariella Frostrup ✔ @mariellaf1
@LouiseMensch I'd like world peace and Christmas every Sunday-both as likely as "reformed,professional, non-racist UKIP"!
Louise Mensch ✔ @LouiseMensch
.@craigawoodhouse exposes some devastating side by side UKIP-BNP posters in his @TheSunNewpaper piece today
20010 ? - With such advanced warning, I hope you have placed your bets accordingly.
This from April 20 20010 "
Is it going to take the LibDems THAT long to recover?
So far as UKIP are concerned they are clearly the protest party. Labour should worry that they are not. They have picked up the left wing of the Lib Dems but have completely failed to motivate or enthuse those who oppose the many decisions made by the Coalition (right or wrong). This is an unusual position for one of the main parties in opposition. It certainly gives them a much lower starting point as we come close to the last year before the election.
It may be that this is because Ed is a failure and completely uninspirational. It may be that Labour remain tainted with past failures. It may however also result in any swingback being extremely muted because Labour does not have this oppositionist support now. In short the Labour vote may be firmer than we are used to.
There may also be a significant strand of the electorate who either permanently or temporarily are prised free of either of the major parties. Where did they come from (since the tories are not very far short of their election support and Labour are well ahead) and where will they go if they do not stay with UKIP? On these questions turn the next election.
As long as we try to negotiate from within the EU, the other countries will think it's possible to get us to change our minds if they're tough enough. Once we've already left, they'll accept it's a done deal and do their best to retain access to their largest export market. In addition, once we are in the EEA we will be able to negotiate our own trading deals elsewhere, which will show the EU we are less dependent on them, providing us with greater leverage for a better deal.
Opinion polls show the thing the British public want to renegotiate most from the EU is control of immigration. Richard Nabavi has already admitted that this will never happen within the EU. So if you want that, your best bet is not the Tories at all.
I think its fair to say that view is believed more fervently by its proponents than by more sceptical observers.....
"He (rightly) attacked EU waste but then voted against David Cameron’s plan to slash more than £8billion from the EU budget. "
The reason UKIP voted against it is that it was a deal that increased the UK's contribution to Brussels. This is considered a win to the Tories.
This is why they're all afraid of debating Farage. These bullshit Tory claims sound great on their own, but if you have anyone challenging it, they quickly fall apart.
"The EEA is based on the same "four freedoms" as the European Community: the free movement of goods, persons, services, and capital among the EEA countries. Thus, the EFTA countries that are part of the EEA enjoy free trade with the European Union.
As a counterpart, these countries have to adopt part of the Law of the European Union. However they also contribute to and influence the formation of new EEA relevant policies and legislation at an early stage as part of a formal decision-shaping process.[7]
The EFTA countries that are part of the EEA do not bear the financial burdens associated with EU membership, although they contribute financially to the European single market. After the EU/EEA enlargement of 2004, there was a tenfold increase in the financial contribution of the EEA States, in particular Norway, to social and economic cohesion in the Internal Market (€1167 million over five years).
EFTA countries do not receive any funding from EU policies and development funds."
So we still would have free movement of persons, we would still have to contribute significant sums to the "social and economic cohesion in the internal market", we would have much less of a say on EU law and we would still have to comply with it in any area connected with the single market.
Is this really UKIP's solution?
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges
@sundersays So it's OK if Ukip's racism is directed at others - Romanians, Poles, Bulgarians etc - just not at you.
Hodges is really making himself look silly.
Tory Europhiles seem to have a habit of asking a question, putting their fingers in their ears and singing "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU", and then bemoaning the fact they never get a good answer.
A situation that only applies to one of the parties between Scotland and rUK.....
Dan Hodges @DPJHodges
@sundersays Sunder, what's the answer. If Farage said people should be wary of Indian family moving into their street would that be racist
UKIP are racists = Dan Hodges making himself look silly
Con: 50:43
Lab: 31:51
LibD: 30:58
UKIP: 84:10
So it's really only UKIP supporters who are very upset about Cameron's negotiation - and to an extent Lab and Lib Dem, some of whom fear he is asking too much....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/10781350/End-to-Mediterranean-dream-for-90000-Britons-who-left-Spain-last-year.html
And how do you explain swing back happening to both Con and Lab governments.
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/india14/
Also now out is South Africa, which closes a week later:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/sa14/
Links for opinion polls, party profiles, media sites, and background in both games.
Many thanks,
DC
The final SWIFT Index nowcast for Q1 2014 GDP growth was published on Friday.
Not much change since last month. UK, US and OECD Aggregate nowcasts are unchanged.
Germany notches down 0.1% on both quarter and year in Q1 2014 but remains unchanged for Q2.
EU(28) notches up 0.1% on for the quarter and 0.2% for the year in the quarterly and annual measures for both Q1 and Q2. Both Q1 and Q2 predictions have been upgraded in each of the last three months.
The SWIFT Index forecast for the UK in Q1 2014 is below analyst and market expectations at 0.6% (2.9%).
SWIFT undershot Q4 2013 last time, nowcasting 0.4% against the ONS outturn of 0.7%. My expectations are that SWIFT will be closer than last time, but still below the ONS figure which is due on Tuesday 20 April at 9:30 am.
First up the UK:
This is an old 'story' but on the most-read list and quite amusing (I imagine many will have seen it before). It's about doctors' slang:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3159813.stm
She did 112 laps the other day:
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/simona-does-112-laps/
The number matters because to race in F1 you need a super licence, and part of that is having driven a certain mileage in an F1 car (you *can* get around this, but the usual route is F1 car mileage in testing). However, that's no guarantee she's being lined up for a race seat, it might just be to enable her to drive during practice sessions.
Sauber's driver lineup now could be described as expendable. Sutil's competent and Gutierrez seems ok but neither are setting the world alight. Sirotkin, as far as I know, is still pencilled-in for next year (bringing money with him) and a lady driver would be very marketable (perhaps especially in a team with a female team principal).
*NB not a crack at Sauber. The team does well on a shoestring but it, Lotus, Caterham and Marussia are either on financial life support or heading there. They really do need cash (almost as much as me, in fact).
Edited extra bit: just checked her Wikipedia page. She's 26 this year. Slightly on the older side (Kvyat's just 19, and Vettel's only 27 this year) but not past it.
When Ed Miliband goes to Scotland and declares that ‘It is Labour that’s got to win this referendum’ it is a statement of political reality as much as it is braggadocio. The Tories have only one MP north of the border and the Liberal Democrats are the fourth party in the Scottish parliament. If this vote is to be won, Labour—as by far the largest Unionist party—will have to get the No camp over the line.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/can-ed-miliband-save-the-union/
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scotland-is-eu-resources-lynchpin-says-salmond-1-3390389
http://www.iea.org.uk/publications/research/the-iea-brexit-prize-a-blueprint-for-britain-openness-not-isolation
There are, allegedly, some drives to correct this with some of the teams. And it involves starting young, and sackings.
(BTW, remember when Red Bull sent a woman to collect the constructor's trophy in Bahrain last year? There's a story behind that.)
Mr. Foxinsox, they're really quite creative.
However, sometimes governments lose _more_ vote share. For example in 79: Tories went from 46 in April 78, to 44 in GE, but Labour went from 44 to 38. So, based on that you'd predict that Lab vote share next year would be lower than is now, but you'd be much less certain that Tory vote share will be higher -especially as Mike often points out, as this is a coalition, things could be different this time.
It's not in the interests of any Labour MSP to upset a lot of their voters (at least 1/4 of Labour voters) by standing up and declaring for union, which means losing their seats at the next election, if they think they are likely to keep their seats whatever happens with indy.
And even MPs in Scottish seats have (in my current estimate) a 50% chance of keeping their seat for say 2 years after a yes, and 50% for longer in the case of a no, if they do the same and keep shtum.[edit: assuming 1: 1 odds for yes/no, very roughly]. But if they get up on their hind legs that last percentage decreases rapidly given the polling we are getting. 1 in 4 or something.
So that leaves the Tories, who have their own problems, the LDs who have the same problem as Labour, the Labour peers, and Labour from down south. Which includes people like Mr Miliband who might as well be from the Planet Tralfamadore by comparison with what the average Scottish Labour voter expects. Not even telling the locals in Motherwell that a Labour shadow cabinet was in town was a big mistake, and it did not go down well - and that is core territory.
I don't agree with Mr SeanT that the heart will be ripped out of the Labour party if Scotland votes yes - simply because Labour has long pulled itseld out of its Scottish roots. The question is whether it can reconnect with those for long enough and it may be too late now: even Mr Brown is not as respected as he once was.
Mind you, recent history tells us Labour sometimes prioritises tactical, short-term gains over strategic ones (cf devolution).
Separately, what a pathetic bunch the scribes on ConHome are. You would hardly believe we are on the fringes of crossover. From the moaning among the posters you would think we are being led by Gordon Brown!
OK, let's make the assumption it is UKIP's policy NOT to remain part of the EEA. I'd like to see them state that clearly, but, as you rightly point out, in some interviews that does appear to be Farage's position, whereas in others he says we'd be like Norway.
If it is the case, then he was talking dishonest garbage citing EEA membership as a reason not to fear leaving the EU. In addition, he talks dishonest garbage when he cites Norway as a model (which he did as recently as the Clegg/Farage debates). If we're not going to remain in the EEA, Norway is completely irrelevant, and he should be honest enough to admit it is completely irrelevant.
That leaves Switzerland as a possible model, with a tailored agreement, whereby we would negotiate access to the Single Market. If we look at Switzerland, that tailored agreement includes the free movement of workers and citizens - which is why there was such a fuss about the recent referendum:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20140221IPR36669/html/EU-cannot-accept-cherry-picking-by-Switzerland
Now, it might be that we could negotiate access to the Single Market excluding free movement of workers, but frankly I doubt it. It would be a key negotiating point, and I think our position on that point would be quite weak, for three reasons. Firstly, as Richard T pointed out on the previous thread, it is a founding principle of the EU and Single Market. Secondly, we have too many Britons living in other EU countries to be able to act tough. Thirdly, we actually want free movement of, say, French and German bankers, in order to retain the City as the prime financial centre in Europe, so it would be hard for us to argue against it.
It's always hard to predict exactly what the outcome of negotiations would be, but I would extremely surprised, bordering on dumbfounded, if PM Farage was able to come back from Brussels (or more likely Berlin) waving a trade agreement giving us access to the Single Market which was substantially different, in terms of movement of people, from what we already have.
Let's just suppose UKIP led the UK or rUK out of the EU. The first thing the French would do is tell Nigel Farage to fcuk off as De Gaul did for 2 decades to successive UK PMs and money would evaporate from the City of London faster than Labour donors from the Coop bank.
If Tories are to win, they have to do two things, one get a big slice of the UKIP vote, and see Lab vote soften, either by sitting at home, or (less likely?) converting to Tories. Their problem, I think, is that trying to do both might lead to contradictory strategies.
Finally the idea that business would disappear from London as a result of our leaving the EU is just laughable. It is exactly the same argument that Eurofanatics made about the UK joining the Euro and we all know how accurate those scare stories turned out to be. The EU needs the UK as a trading partner. Should we choose to leave that will remain the case and negotiations will be on that basis not on the scaremongering by those who can't bare to even consider our leaving.
We are, I think, agreed (though Richard T oddly isn't) that leaving the EU but relying on the existing EEA structure is a waste of time, the worst of all worlds. In particular, it would mean no substantive difference on the free movement of workers and citizens. Agreed?
So, if we leave the EU, we would have to NEGOTIATE some different deal with them. That does not mean that we can simply insist on full access to the Single Market on terms we want. It would be a negotiation - and my contention is that, as for Switzerland, the other side would not budge on the principle of the free movement of workers (there might be a bit of wriggle room on non-workers). I have explained my reasons for saying this. Farage (like Alex Salmond) seems to think a negotiation is a one-way street, where your counterparty's priorities are irrelevant. Well, it's not.
As for the Switzerland position following the referendum, it's early days, but my prediction is that the EU view will prevail.
It's the classic conundrum: snipe from the sidelines but have no impact on the outcome, or compromise a little and get most of what you want
To kind of throw a spanner in my own argument as well but in the interests of fairness it is also not entirely clear whether or not we would automatically be in the EEA/EFTA if we left the EU. This is something that RIchard North and I have been discussing and something that I believe he was planning on raising in the form of a question with the current EFTA General Secretary.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-23/u-k-manufacturing-confidence-rises-to-highest-in-four-decades.html
Labour's attempt to present this as not a proper recovery and not benefiting the whole country is a neat bit of spin, but not one which stands up to even cursory scrutiny.
My position is that I do guarantee that he will very rapidly be exceptionally unpopular, but sadly that doesn't mean that he wouldn't get a second term. It would depend on whether current and former Conservatives unify or split further. On past (and to an extent present) form, I wouldn't be confident that they wouldn't cut off their noses to spite our faces.
In practice, though, it might be a bit academic - there would surely have to be some new negotiated relationship whatever happens.
There would likely be some changes, but we would get around 90% of what we currently have. The lost 10% pales compared to the huge amount of trade we could get through negotiating FTAs with the USA, Australia, India, China and Latin America.
Unfortunately, I doubt whether any politician would be "courageous" enough to advocate such a policy.
No doubt he bet on Chelsea as a hedge, so at least he'll have made some money!!
His job is to provide that macro framework, and he has done it extremely well. It's up to others to build their businesses within that stable framework, and there is every sign that that is exactly what is happening (and as you rightly say that gives him some photo-opportunities).
Anyone who doesn't think Miliband can wreck all this is frankly out with the fairies.