politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP Euro voters are more than twice as likely to say they
Exactly a year to go and this morning I’m off to London for the launch of the British Election Study – a huge academic exercise involving three universities which is monitoring and will produce regular reports on the coming general election.
Comments
-
Given the sample size, we can look forward to a description of the typical Kipper. They can't all drive taxis, can they?
And what have I done to offend Morpheus so...?0 -
Obvious question, did they tell the truth in 2009, who do these figures relate to actual votes in 2010?0
-
What these findings tell us is that approximately 1 in every 5 respondents who currently state they will vote UKIP in the European elections can very easily switch because there is for them another party that is equally or almost equally attractive. Amongst those who now intend to vote for the Conservatives, this is only the case for about 1 in every 10. In other words: those who currently intend to vote Conservative are ‘firmer’ in this choice than those who intend to vote UKIP, and thus less likely to be swayed in the coming month by whatever events or political developments to still change switch in their choice.
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/room-for-switching-european-parliament-vote-intentions/#.U2mgjNq9KK0
0 -
I’ll be reporting further after today’s launch.
The British Electoral Study website has just been launched looks set to become an important resource.
And useful too, if the data was in readily accessible formats......anyone know how to open SPSS or STATA files?0 -
Thank you. Unfortunately that only tells me how to convert files between three different formats, none of which I use.Smarmeron said:
As YouGov did the research, perhaps they will post it on their website in pdf....
0 -
From the same page
" Stat/Transfer allows you to transfer data files to many other file formats, including Statistica, Systat, S-Plus, R, Excel, Access, Minitab, Matlab, LIMDEP and JMP"
Excel should be ok for both "Microsoft Office", and "Open Office" if I remember0 -
Apart from "getting out of Europe" and "cutting back hard on immigration" what policies does UKIP have on, for example, the NHS? Or Defence?
I understand that they' want to expand exploitation of our national energy resources, for example to develop fracking. Zat so?0 -
- "The British Electoral Study website has just been launched looks set to become an important resource."
Agreed.
In fact, I've already found a fascinating little table. It is an attempt to measure the "hardness" of each party's vote. The lower the figure the harder their support. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this is good for the big parties (which are many decades, if not centuries, old, and are thus "built in" to the fabric of society) and poor for the wee parties (which are usually very young).
Something to bear in mind is that the LAB and SNP votes are very hard at high levels, whereas the CON vote is very hard at low levels, and the LIB DEM vote is very soft at low levels.
- Percentage for whom second choice is virtually equally attractive as first choice
Con 9
Lab 9
SNP 12
LD 19
PC 20
UKIP 20
BNP 23
Grn 25
- "We find that many voters have a real choice to make: the two parties most appealing to them are virtually equally attractive, which provides ample scope for changing their mind about which one of these two to vote for. Importantly, these voters are not found in equal measure amongst the intended voters for each of the parties:"
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/room-for-switching-european-parliament-vote-intentions/#.U2m2poF_vZ40 -
YouGov : 34/35/9/14
2010 splits:
Conservatives:
Con:74; LAB:4; LD:2; UKIP:18; Gn: 1
Labour:
Cons:7; LAB:80; LD:1; UKIP:9; GN:1; SNP/PC: 2
LIBDEMS:
Cons16; LAB:29; LD:34; UKIP:12; GN:5; SNP/PC:20 -
-
Morning all.
Last night’s YouGov has Labour on just 1 point lead: LAB 35%, CON 34%, UKIP 14%, LD 9%.
Last night’s Survation poll - LAB 34%, CON 33%, Ukip 18%, LD 8%.
Survation also asked a Euro question: Con 24%, (+3) Lab 28% (-6), LD 7% (-2), UKIP 31% (+4)
And the Guardian reports 'Countdown to least predictable GE outcome for 70 years.'
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/06/general-election-2015-campaigns-voters-0 -
The small move downwards in Labour's vote share on You Gov and Survation, as predicted by me on here last week, seem to lend tentative support to my thesis that "Ed Milliband on television is bad for Labour"0
-
Lord Myners on R4 - we've been hearing a lot about Astra Zeneca - the Coop employs twenty times as many people......he ascribes the problems to the Board which has been captured by insider interests - what was the last thing Ed said about the Coop?0
-
Morning all. I've just put up the companion piece to yesterday's, this time on inland eastern and south eastern England:
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/away-from-coastal-storm-inland-eastern.html0 -
Your Guardian link is broken.SimonStClare said:Morning all.
Last night’s YouGov has Labour on just 1 point lead: LAB 35%, CON 34%, UKIP 14%, LD 9%.
Last night’s Survation poll - LAB 34%, CON 33%, Ukip 18%, LD 8%.
Survation also asked a Euro question: Con 24%, (+3) Lab 28% (-6), LD 7% (-2), UKIP 31% (+4)
And the Guardian reports 'Countdown to least predictable GE outcome for 70 years.'
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/06/general-election-2015-campaigns-voters-
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/06/general-election-2015-campaigns-voters-outcome
0 -
So UKIP poll about 30% for the Euros and about half that for the GE. This tells us that a significant part of their vote is a protest vote - or at least somewhat mobile. I guess the key question is how much of the 'half that' will translate from polls to real votes at the GE? Not all. It's clear that the determined 'hard' vote for UKIP is increasing and Dave cannot realistically hope to get UKIP down to 5%. But equally I don't think it will be the full 'half that' either - so I'm guessing around 12% nationally. What we really don't know and could be crucial is to see how UKIP are doing in the marginals.0
-
Good morning all and the thing which seems to have slipped by is that in the Euro poll the Tories are now at 24%. A fortnight ago they were at 18%. Looking more likely OGH will come home with that 10/1 bet he got some time ago.0
-
UKIP have a year to persuade their EU Parliament voters to stay on board for the GE.Patrick said:So UKIP poll about 30% for the Euros and about half that for the GE. This tells us that a significant part of their vote is a protest vote - or at least somewhat mobile. I guess the key question is how much of the 'half that' will translate from polls to real votes at the GE? Not all. It's clear that the determined 'hard' vote for UKIP is increasing and Dave cannot realistically hope to get UKIP down to 5%. But equally I don't think it will be the full 'half that' either - so I'm guessing around 12% nationally. What we really don't know and could be crucial is to see how UKIP are doing in the marginals.
0 -
Maybe we will start to see the media including Labour seats when they talk about marginal. I cant be the only person hoping that the Portillo moment in 2015 happens in Ed Balls seat!0
-
Kamal Ahmed BBC Business editor tweets: "Lord Myners: Co-op has successfully destroyed £3bn of value built up over 150 years in the last four years"
That's Ed's idea of success, that is.0 -
But I don't understand. Dan Hodges has always said that UKIP would only score 4% at the general election?
How can he be wrong?0 -
Other parties have a year to persuade them to be unfaithful to UKIP.anotherDave said:
UKIP have a year to persuade their EU Parliament voters to stay on board for the GE.Patrick said:So UKIP poll about 30% for the Euros and about half that for the GE. This tells us that a significant part of their vote is a protest vote - or at leasint somewhat mobile. I guess the key question is how much of the 'half that' will translate from polls to real votes at the GE? Not all. It's clear that the determined 'hard' vote for UKIP is increasing and Dave cannot realistically hope to get UKIP down to 5%. But equally I don't think it will be the full 'half that' either - so I'm guessing around 12% nationally. What we really don't know and could be crucial is to see how UKIP are doing in the marginals.
0 -
Neil
You need to start worrying about Dan Hodges bet that if UKIP got 5% or more at the general election he would run down Whitehall naked.
If I am honest - I don't see how UKIP don't get at least 1 in 20 general election votes.0 -
True, but UKIP has already won them over once.philiph said:
Other parties have a year to persuade them to be unfaithful to UKIP.anotherDave said:
UKIP have a year to persuade their EU Parliament voters to stay on board for the GE.Patrick said:So UKIP poll about 30% for the Euros and about half that for the GE. This tells us that a significant part of their vote is a protest vote - or at leasint somewhat mobile. I guess the key question is how much of the 'half that' will translate from polls to real votes at the GE? Not all. It's clear that the determined 'hard' vote for UKIP is increasing and Dave cannot realistically hope to get UKIP down to 5%. But equally I don't think it will be the full 'half that' either - so I'm guessing around 12% nationally. What we really don't know and could be crucial is to see how UKIP are doing in the marginals.
0 -
@anotherDave – cheers for correcting Guardian link, - apols for tardiness. ; )0
-
they have yet to vote at the Euro election let alone remain faithful and turn out again at the GE and vote for any party, never mind UKIP.IOS said:Neil
You need to start worrying about Dan Hodges bet that if UKIP got 5% or more at the general election he would run down Whitehall naked.
If I am honest - I don't see how UKIP don't get at least 1 in 20 general election votes.
0 -
According to the survey, 85% of businesses wanted Scotland to remain part of the Union, while 11% of firms said Scotland should become independent.
However, in the event of a "No" vote, 63% said the current arrangements for funding Britain's devolved nations - calculated under the Barnett formula - had to be reformed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-272916700 -
It seems clear now that 37/38% isn't a firewall for Labour.0
-
Where are Avery and Compouter?0
-
-
I see the Sun has chosen Southampton Itchen as one of its 4 key marginal. Is it John Denham's seat that the ghastly Rowenna Davis has been selected to defend for Labour? Cant stand the condescending metropolitan tosh she spouts every time she does a paper review on Sky. Sounds more like Harriet Manhater every day.0
-
Indeed.JosiasJessop said:Kamal Ahmed BBC Business editor tweets: "Lord Myners: Co-op has successfully destroyed £3bn of value built up over 150 years in the last four years"
That's Ed's idea of success, that is.
Its also the same Co-op which Osborne tried to hand over hundreds of Lloyds branches on the cheap.
I wonder if George had bothered to look at the Co-op's accounts first ?
0 -
These figures finally put the nail in the coffin of Tory hopes for an overall majority next year. It just isn't going to happen. They're not going to be able to increase their lead from 7.3% last time as they need to.0
-
Doesn't look as though 35% is either!Sean_F said:It seems clear now that 37/38% isn't a firewall for Labour.
0 -
A 29 year old PPE graduate. Super.Easterross said:I see the Sun has chosen Southampton Itchen as one of its 4 key marginal. Is it John Denham's seat that the ghastly Rowenna Davis has been selected to defend for Labour? Cant stand the condescending metropolitan tosh she spouts every time she does a paper review on Sky. Sounds more like Harriet Manhater every day.
0 -
Southampton Itchen represents why the Tories aren't even trying for a majority.
It will have at least a 5k majority at the next election.
0 -
The new Survation poll puts the combined Tory and UKIP share on 51%, the highest so far I think.
Lab 34%, Con 33%, UKIP 18%, LD 8%.0 -
I love the way Pb Tories and Lefties just point at each other saying 'our firewall's higher than yours, nyerrrrr' whilst all around them electors are deserting both their prospectuses en masse for fourth, fifth and sixth parties.....
There's real discontent with a system that hides minimal political difference behind alternative coloured rosettes and weekly catcalling in the Commons.0 -
Labour's wwc support is very fragile.Sean_F said:It seems clear now that 37/38% isn't a firewall for Labour.
UKIP really does reach the parts that the Conservatives couldn't in old industrial areas.
To a large extent Labour can afford to lose many of these voters as they tend to be concentrated in safe Labour areas but it will handicap them in some constituencies - Elmet, Cannock and Sherwood for example.
0 -
Newark will be instructive, IF Labour can win there with polling like this then the GE will be an absolute bloodbath for the Conservatives.0
-
Lord Myners described the Co-Op Board as "dysfunctional" and so highlights a problem that faces all mutuals.
Often they start with people with relevant experience on their board, but with time this gets diluted as "people we know" become elected; as the ballot papers put out to the millions of members are largely ignored as most realise that their vote will have little influence. So over time, the original objectives of that co-operative become lost or fail to catch up with market changes.
To avoid this happening, mutuals may have to look at the fundamental structure of their corporate governance.
Regarding Astra-Zenneca, the major problem here is the potential loss of IPR and the ability to create that IPR. It is a bit like energy security. However, are the drug companies flexible enough or skilled enough to switch to gene modification rather than the production of drugs which have potential side effects.
For those who will be needing currency for their holiday in the sun, today the Euro is at 1.22 and the USD near 1.70 - not a bad time to get that currency now.0 -
@another_richard
Sorry was at a retirement party last night for the outgoing CEO of one of our joint ventures so couldn't respond to your comment a couple of threads ago.
You criticised my view that shareholders should decide how much a CEO is paid.
Of course there is significant work to do with improving institutional stewardship of their investments.
But if not the shareholders then who do you think should determine CEO pay? Ed Miliband? The Sun? Graef Crystal? @another_richard?
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graef_Crystal)0 -
The only route to a Tory majority is to hold 99% of their current seats and make 20 to 25 gains from the LDs. If every LD MP were to retire they might have a chance because it's the strong personal votes for LD MPs that stands in their way.IOS said:Southampton Itchen represents why the Tories aren't even trying for a majority.
It will have at least a 5k majority at the next election.0 -
Yes. Also, I understand that they oppose having NHS services free at the point of use. Not sure of their views of defence.OldKingCole said:Apart from "getting out of Europe" and "cutting back hard on immigration" what policies does UKIP have on, for example, the NHS? Or Defence?
I understand that they' want to expand exploitation of our national energy resources, for example to develop fracking. Zat so?
0 -
I don't see the fire that Harriet has.Easterross said:I see the Sun has chosen Southampton Itchen as one of its 4 key marginal. Is it John Denham's seat that the ghastly Rowenna Davis has been selected to defend for Labour? Cant stand the condescending metropolitan tosh she spouts every time she does a paper review on Sky. Sounds more like Harriet Manhater every day.
Rowenna strikes me as utterly utterly ordinary. No insight, no passion, just another mediocre careerist. Don't understand what @Avery sees in her0 -
The other significant factor imho, is both LAB/CON on sub 35% again - this is becoming a trend.AndyJS said:The new Survation poll puts the combined Tory and UKIP share on 51%, the highest so far I think.
Lab 34%, Con 33%, UKIP 18%, LD 8%.0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Mr. Smarmeron, I've been using Open office for a little while now and can confirm Excel works for it. Mildly surprised about the SPSS format. I remember that from university.0 -
Newark is a really important by-election for understanding what polling means in terms of effect on seat counts.Pulpstar said:Newark will be instructive, IF Labour can win there with polling like this then the GE will be an absolute bloodbath for the Conservatives.
0 -
If they need 7.3%AndyJS said:These figures finally put the nail in the coffin of Tory hopes for an overall majority next year. It just isn't going to happen. They're not going to be able to increase their lead from 7.3% last time as they need to.
I do find @DavidL's thesis that Labour's vote distribution efficiency hit a maximum in 2010 compelling. I forget the details, but it makes a material difference even if you just assume 2005 efficiency
(FWIW, my colours remain nailed to the same position they have been since early 2011. I don't see why the choice has changed since 2010: I'm expecting a very similar outcome)0 -
Bollocks IOS.IOS said:Southampton Itchen represents why the Tories aren't even trying for a majority.
It will have at least a 5k majority at the next election.
The Tories have only won Southampton Itchen *twice* since *1950*.
In 1983 and 1987, Chris Chope won because the left was split between Labour and the SDP0 -
It's a shame to move you away from your hate-fest, but the government acted correctly. AFAICR, the EU (yes, them) anti-competition wallahs set a date for the merged Lloyds/HBOS to shed many of its branches by November 2013. This was a tight timescale for any merger. And as we saw with the original Lloyds / HBOS merger, such quick deals can be disastrous.another_richard said:
Indeed.JosiasJessop said:Kamal Ahmed BBC Business editor tweets: "Lord Myners: Co-op has successfully destroyed £3bn of value built up over 150 years in the last four years"
That's Ed's idea of success, that is.
Its also the same Co-op which Osborne tried to hand over hundreds of Lloyds branches on the cheap.
I wonder if George had bothered to look at the Co-op's accounts first ?
From the outside, the Co-op were the best bidders. Can you imagine the ire and righteous indignation from labour if the government had treated the bank any differently?
Lloyds eventually found the problem during the Project Verde negotiations. I'm not sure how the government could have given the constraints.
So: in your mind and without the benefit of hindsight, what should the government have done differently, taking into account the November 2013 deadline?0 -
I think you're right, and it is why the IF is in big capital letters. As @Antifrank says though the VI will be instructive no matter the result.macisback said:
Labour won't win Newark the instructive part will be what chunk UKIP take out of the vote of both main parties.Pulpstar said:Newark will be instructive, IF Labour can win there with polling like this then the GE will be an absolute bloodbath for the Conservatives.
0 -
Hodges: 2012: "Labour will win". 2013: "Labour should win". 2014: "Too close to call". Doesn't need a genius to work out what happens next...
0 -
Conservative record vs Lib Dems is usually poor relative to the overall - last time Solihull really should have gone, and coming 3rd in Eastleigh By-Election doesn't bode well either.AndyJS said:
The only route to a Tory majority is to hold 99% of their current seats and make 20 to 25 gains from the LDs. If every LD MP were to retire they might have a chance because it's the strong personal votes for LD MPs that stands in their way.IOS said:Southampton Itchen represents why the Tories aren't even trying for a majority.
It will have at least a 5k majority at the next election.0 -
Good morning Charles.Charles said:@another_richard
Sorry was at a retirement party last night for the outgoing CEO of one of our joint ventures so couldn't respond to your comment a couple of threads ago.
You criticised my view that shareholders should decide how much a CEO is paid.
Of course there is significant work to do with improving institutional stewardship of their investments.
But if not the shareholders then who do you think should determine CEO pay? Ed Miliband? The Sun? Graef Crystal? @another_richard?
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graef_Crystal)
I'm quite happy for shareholders to decide on directors pay but as you well know most of the 'shareholders' are via a block vote from financial institutions.
Which is decided by people with a vested interest in ever increasing executive earnings.
Here's a radical idea - no more block votes, only individual shareholders get to vote. No more cozy cartels and mutual back scratching for the executive oligarchy but the people who have invested their own money deciding how the businesses they own will be run.
Remind me, how many times does the directors remuneration get voted down ? Or for that matter how many times does anything get voted down - the reappointment of the directors, the reappointment of the auditors etc ?
0 -
Anecdotal point:
On drive from Killamarsh to Guiseley recently counted around 20 signs. All UKIP. Only poster I saw was kipper too. At |GE there were Lib Dem posters. Doubt I will see too many around 2015 !0 -
Surprise surprise, Non Scottish businesses want to keep their advantage intact and also want Scottish funding cut into the bargain to make it even better for them.CarlottaVance said:According to the survey, 85% of businesses wanted Scotland to remain part of the Union, while 11% of firms said Scotland should become independent.
However, in the event of a "No" vote, 63% said the current arrangements for funding Britain's devolved nations - calculated under the Barnett formula - had to be reformed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-272916700 -
Charles she is very pleasant to look at and with some decent pearls and a frontal lobotomy she could make a fine Tory girl.Charles said:
I don't see the fire that Harriet has.Easterross said:I see the Sun has chosen Southampton Itchen as one of its 4 key marginal. Is it John Denham's seat that the ghastly Rowenna Davis has been selected to defend for Labour? Cant stand the condescending metropolitan tosh she spouts every time she does a paper review on Sky. Sounds more like Harriet Manhater every day.
Rowenna strikes me as utterly utterly ordinary. No insight, no passion, just another mediocre careerist. Don't understand what @Avery sees in her
0 -
Farage pretty much disowned the 2010 manifesto, so it's a bit more difficult to tell. I've not come across anything more recent on e.g. health policy, but maybe someone else has.NickPalmer said:
Yes. Also, I understand that they oppose having NHS services free at the point of use. Not sure of their views of defence.OldKingCole said:Apart from "getting out of Europe" and "cutting back hard on immigration" what policies does UKIP have on, for example, the NHS? Or Defence?
I understand that they' want to expand exploitation of our national energy resources, for example to develop fracking. Zat so?0 -
Why should an individual who decides to outsource management of their pension be disenfranchised?another_richard said:
Good morning Charles.Charles said:@another_richard
Sorry was at a retirement party last night for the outgoing CEO of one of our joint ventures so couldn't respond to your comment a couple of threads ago.
You criticised my view that shareholders should decide how much a CEO is paid.
Of course there is significant work to do with improving institutional stewardship of their investments.
But if not the shareholders then who do you think should determine CEO pay? Ed Miliband? The Sun? Graef Crystal? @another_richard?
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graef_Crystal)
I'm quite happy for shareholders to decide on directors pay but as you well know most of the 'shareholders' are via a block vote from financial institutions.
Which is decided by people with a vested interest in ever increasing executive earnings.
Here's a radical idea - no more block votes, only individual shareholders get to vote. No more cozy cartels and mutual back scratching for the executive oligarchy but the people who have invested their own money deciding how the businesses they own will be run.
Remind me, how many times does the directors remuneration get voted down ? Or for that matter how many times does anything get voted down - the reappointment of the directors, the reappointment of the auditors etc ?
Voting down is relative rare, but over the past few years you've seen very significant votes against management remuneration on multiple occasions. These often result in changes either before or after the vote. Recent examples worth highlighting are Glencore, Sports Direct and Barclays.0 -
Mr. G, if they'd wanted a Yes to win you would be writing about how Scotland 'isn't wanted' or 'even the English/Welsh/Northern Irish want the union to end'.0
-
If 30% vote UKIP in the Euros, 57.6% of that would give about 17% at the general election.0
-
That's not very flattering to the intellect of Tory girls. Whether or not it's accurate isn't for me to say..Easterross said:
Charles she is very pleasant to look at and with some decent pearls and a frontal lobotomy she could make a fine Tory girl.Charles said:
I don't see the fire that Harriet has.Easterross said:I see the Sun has chosen Southampton Itchen as one of its 4 key marginal. Is it John Denham's seat that the ghastly Rowenna Davis has been selected to defend for Labour? Cant stand the condescending metropolitan tosh she spouts every time she does a paper review on Sky. Sounds more like Harriet Manhater every day.
Rowenna strikes me as utterly utterly ordinary. No insight, no passion, just another mediocre careerist. Don't understand what @Avery sees in her0 -
Do you know of any person who has ever been asked by their pension provider how they should vote on a specific issue at a specific AGM? Is that what you call "enfranchised"?Charles said:
Why should an individual who decides to outsource management of their pension be disenfranchised?0 -
Boo hoo its all someone elses faults said no successful business ever.malcolmg said:
Surprise surprise, Non Scottish businesses want to keep their advantage intact and also want Scottish funding cut into the bargain to make it even better for them.CarlottaVance said:According to the survey, 85% of businesses wanted Scotland to remain part of the Union, while 11% of firms said Scotland should become independent.
However, in the event of a "No" vote, 63% said the current arrangements for funding Britain's devolved nations - calculated under the Barnett formula - had to be reformed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-272916700 -
I guess "Labour win, despite being behind in the polls" is not what he's thinking...CarlottaVance said:Hodges: 2012: "Labour will win". 2013: "Labour should win". 2014: "Too close to call". Doesn't need a genius to work out what happens next...
0 -
Southampton Itchen might be interesting as parts of it are going through major renovation and rebuilding at the moment.and by the time of the election there will be hundreds of new families living in this area in nice flats overlooking the river. This may make a difference.0
-
LAB drifting in Newark at Betfair: now 3/1.0
-
Stan James have now republished at lot of prices, some of which are a lot better than Ladbrokes, eg. Shadsy prices UKIP at 25/1 in Burton, whereas SJ prices them at 100/10
-
There are some firms that are good at this - Jupiter is an example - but every investor has the right to instruct their managers how to vote. Of course there are some investments - investment trusts, for example - where you don't own the underlying shares so can't vote in those elections although, of course, you can vote in the trust ballot.Neil said:
Do you know of any person who has ever been asked by their pension provider how they should vote on a specific issue at a specific AGM? Is that what you call "enfranchised"?Charles said:
Why should an individual who decides to outsource management of their pension be disenfranchised?
0 -
Is there a market for Kipper GE vote share ?0
-
In fact, the Stan James and Ladbrokes prices are so vastly different in Burton that it is free cash (if you can get enough on):
Next UK GE - Burton - best prices
Con 4/6 Stan James
Lab 4/1 Lad
UKIP 100/1
LD 100/10 -
The Polling Observatory Forecast #1: Lessons for 2015 from polling history
http://sotonpolitics.org/2014/05/07/the-polling-observatory-forecast-1-lessons-for-2015-from-polling-history/
Our forecast model has consistently predicted a very close result – the Conservative vote share is expected to recover from its current level of around 32%, rising to around 36%, within half a percentage point of Labour, whose poll share is not expected to change much from current levels. In vote share, the result is close to a dead heat – the Conservatives are currently forecast to have 36.1%, and Labour 36.5%. The Liberal Democrats are forecast to recover some ground from their current polling position, but still put in their weakest performance in decades, with a forecast vote share of 10.1%.0 -
Another seat with significantly different SJ and Lad pricing is Crawley:
Con 1/5 Lad
Lab 9/2 SJ
LD 100/1
UKIP 150/1 SJ0 -
LOL, MD you are very cynical. We are talking business here, they are only interested in how much money they are making. It is a stupid survey. They may as well have asked French or German businesses. Bit like we know bears sh** in the woods.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. G, if they'd wanted a Yes to win you would be writing about how Scotland 'isn't wanted' or 'even the English/Welsh/Northern Irish want the union to end'.
0 -
CON drifting in Thurrock. New best prices:
Lab 1/3 (Lad, PP)
Con 4/1 (Lad)
UKIP 7/1
LD 100/10 -
Scotland does not conduct over 70% of its business with France or Germany....malcolmg said:
They may as well have asked French or German businesses.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. G, if they'd wanted a Yes to win you would be writing about how Scotland 'isn't wanted' or 'even the English/Welsh/Northern Irish want the union to end'.
0 -
If the Tories cannot hold on to seats like Thurrock then they haven't got a hope in hell at the UK GE next year. 4/1 is either an outstandlingly good price, or else the Tories under Cameron are heading for meltdown.0
-
Harry, you cannot even read now. Why would non Scottish business want to make it harder for themselves. Nobody mentioned anything about fault , I said it was a fact , business is there to make money. You need to stop letting your bias colour your reading of things. Whinge on.TGOHF said:
Boo hoo its all someone elses faults said no successful business ever.malcolmg said:
Surprise surprise, Non Scottish businesses want to keep their advantage intact and also want Scottish funding cut into the bargain to make it even better for them.CarlottaVance said:According to the survey, 85% of businesses wanted Scotland to remain part of the Union, while 11% of firms said Scotland should become independent.
However, in the event of a "No" vote, 63% said the current arrangements for funding Britain's devolved nations - calculated under the Barnett formula - had to be reformed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-272916700 -
If the bookies have their relative pricing of seats right, the Conservatives could have an overall majority and lose Thurrock.Stuart_Dickson said:If the Tories cannot hold on to seats like Thurrock then they haven't got a hope in hell at the UK GE next year. 4/1 is either an outstandlingly good price, or else the Tories under Cameron are heading for meltdown.
0 -
Yes. Two in fact:TGOHF said:Is there a market for Kipper GE vote share ?
Paddy Power
UKIP 8% or over 8/11
UKIP under 8% EVS
Ladbrokes are using a banding system. The most popular bands are:
UKIP 5-10% 7/4
UKIP 10-15% 2/1
UKIP 0-5% 9/2 (this is the band they finished in at UK GE 2010)
UKIP 15-20% 11/2 (this is what some polls are hinting at)
0 -
Indeed. However, that argument would look more convincing if it were not for the fact that Thurrock is far from unusual. A whole raft of CON-held marginals currently have very long CON prices.antifrank said:
If the bookies have their relative pricing of seats right, the Conservatives could have an overall majority and lose Thurrock.Stuart_Dickson said:If the Tories cannot hold on to seats like Thurrock then they haven't got a hope in hell at the UK GE next year. 4/1 is either an outstandlingly good price, or else the Tories under Cameron are heading for meltdown.
Either the bookies are idiots, or else the Tories under Cameron are shafted. It is a very brave man who thinks that he knows more about political odds than Shadsy.
0 -
The 2009 prediction was not fantastic, but not awful. UKIP's 3.1% at the 2010GE was 18.8% of their 2009 Euro vote, rather than 25.5% - though this discrepancy could also be explained by a greater motivation for UKIP voters to turnout for the Euro elections.asjohnstone said:Obvious question, did they tell the truth in 2009, who do these figures relate to actual votes in 2010?
If we assume this holds true for this estimate of 56.7%, then we would expect 41.8% of UKIP's 2014 Euro poll share to vote UKIP at the 2015GE.
With the latest ICM poll of 27% for the Euro elections, this would be a GE2015 share of 11.3%.
The highest recent UKIP share for the Euro elections was 38% from ComRes online poll. That would suggest a GE2015 share of 15.9%.
Interestingly, the April 2014 pb.com polling average has UKIP on 14.6%. This is consistent with the shares estimated above, so it is reassuring that the polling is not contradictory.
What are the odds on the 10-15% band for UKIP at the next general election? That must surely be tempting.
0 -
Where on earth did you get that from?NickPalmer said:
Yes. Also, I understand that they oppose having NHS services free at the point of use. Not sure of their views of defence.OldKingCole said:Apart from "getting out of Europe" and "cutting back hard on immigration" what policies does UKIP have on, for example, the NHS? Or Defence?
I understand that they' want to expand exploitation of our national energy resources, for example to develop fracking. Zat so?
I wouldn't quote any UKIP Policy until they release the new manifesto in September, other than to get out of the EU and toughen up immigration.
It would be like saying you think Lib Dems are going to scrap tuition fees.0 -
You didn't understand my post correctly.Stuart_Dickson said:
Indeed. However, that argument would look more convincing if it were not for the fact that Thurrock is far from unusual. A whole raft of CON-held marginals currently have very long CON prices.antifrank said:
If the bookies have their relative pricing of seats right, the Conservatives could have an overall majority and lose Thurrock.Stuart_Dickson said:If the Tories cannot hold on to seats like Thurrock then they haven't got a hope in hell at the UK GE next year. 4/1 is either an outstandlingly good price, or else the Tories under Cameron are heading for meltdown.
Either the bookies are idiots, or else the Tories under Cameron are shafted. It is a very brave man who thinks that he knows more about political odds than Shadsy.
I went into this in a lot more detail a couple of weeks ago, here:
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-conservatives-overall-chances.html
The odds are a little out of date, but the principle remains.0 -
Crossover update
Avery 25 December - failed
Stark Dawning 1 May - failed
Fitalass 5 May - failed
Rod Crosby 31 May - pending*
*I'm being very generous here - most took Rod's prediction of "by May" to mean 1 May...0 -
UKIPs goal should be to get both of the big 2 vote share down to the low 30s in GE2015 IMOSimonStClare said:
The other significant factor imho, is both LAB/CON on sub 35% again - this is becoming a trend.AndyJS said:The new Survation poll puts the combined Tory and UKIP share on 51%, the highest so far I think.
Lab 34%, Con 33%, UKIP 18%, LD 8%.0 -
I was expecting more of a "yes" or "no"answer tbh. I'm going to go out on a limb and presume the answer is "no".Charles said:
There are some firms that are good at this - Jupiter is an example - but every investor has the right to instruct their managers how to vote. Of course there are some investments - investment trusts, for example - where you don't own the underlying shares so can't vote in those elections although, of course, you can vote in the trust ballot.Neil said:
Do you know of any person who has ever been asked by their pension provider how they should vote on a specific issue at a specific AGM? Is that what you call "enfranchised"?Charles said:
Why should an individual who decides to outsource management of their pension be disenfranchised?0 -
@Stuart
Indeed. Plenty of nice insurance fodder for those of us for whom the prospect of a Tory win makes us shudder. Meanwhile, I assume Moniker will a piling on after his "Labour to come third in the Euros" forecast last night*
*never bother to ask Moniker to back up his predictions with money - he runs a mile every single time. Frit.0 -
I'm sorry Charles but that's remeniscent of a union baron of the 1970s.Charles said:
Why should an individual who decides to outsource management of their pension be disenfranchised?another_richard said:
Good morning Charles.Charles said:@another_richard
Sorry was at a retirement party last night for the outgoing CEO of one of our joint ventures so couldn't respond to your comment a couple of threads ago.
You criticised my view that shareholders should decide how much a CEO is paid.
Of course there is significant work to do with improving institutional stewardship of their investments.
But if not the shareholders then who do you think should determine CEO pay? Ed Miliband? The Sun? Graef Crystal? @another_richard?
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graef_Crystal)
I'm quite happy for shareholders to decide on directors pay but as you well know most of the 'shareholders' are via a block vote from financial institutions.
Which is decided by people with a vested interest in ever increasing executive earnings.
Here's a radical idea - no more block votes, only individual shareholders get to vote. No more cozy cartels and mutual back scratching for the executive oligarchy but the people who have invested their own money deciding how the businesses they own will be run.
Remind me, how many times does the directors remuneration get voted down ? Or for that matter how many times does anything get voted down - the reappointment of the directors, the reappointment of the auditors etc ?
Voting down is relative rare, but over the past few years you've seen very significant votes against management remuneration on multiple occasions. These often result in changes either before or after the vote. Recent examples worth highlighting are Glencore, Sports Direct and Barclays.
Has anyone here ever been asked how their pension fund shares should be voted ?
Voting down is not 'relatively rare' its practically non-existant.
Don't 'very significant votes against management remuneration' tend to amount to about 10% ?
And 'changes before or after a vote' is just a cozy stich up by vested interests.
0 -
Mr. Isam, that's a daft goal. UKIP's goal must be to get the most sceptical government possible.
Instead, there's every chance a strong UKIP showing will see Ed Miliband as PM, possibly in Lab-Lib EU-phile coalition.0 -
Mr. Fett, not every prediction need be backed with money. I make lots of F1 predictions I don't bet on, because the odds aren't good enough.0
![[Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/d2ea526b1b06ed109333f390c7ae956b_100.png)
