I think the main point is simply that it shows that the incumbency bonus doesn't exist this time (for whatever reason).
Possibly Nick - though not necessarily.
This poll is only looking at 12 Con marginals - will they be precisely representative of all Con marginals?
Surely the point is that incumbency is a highly personal thing - out of say the tightest 40 marginals it's entirely possible say 15 get a bonus and 25 don't.
The Ashcroft poll of just 12 isn't necessarily enough to pick this up once we allow for MOE in his samples. Which is why I think it would be far, far better for him to do twice as many Con marginals next time and forget Lab marginals.
I think the main point is simply that it shows that the incumbency bonus doesn't exist this time (for whatever reason).
Looking at the way they did the questions, it doesn't seem like they actually named the candidates. This seems sub-optimal, since the incumbency bonus is probably partly a name recognition benefit, and some of the people who have had good experiences with their incumbent may not even know what party they belong to.
Actually the subsets do indicate a very mild incumbency in many of the seats of 1-2% based on party name alone. Moreso in the Labour defence, but in over half the Tory defence too.
The swing is 5.7% to Lab in Con defence seats, which would give Ed a majority of 8 assuming Lib Dems on 10 and UKIP on 17 with Tories national vote share winners by 1.5% provoking a constitutional crisis of some level.
Not actually as bad as I first thought looking at it
I think the main point is simply that it shows that the incumbency bonus doesn't exist this time (for whatever reason).
Looking at the way they did the questions, it doesn't seem like they actually named the candidates. This seems sub-optimal, since the incumbency bonus is probably partly a name recognition benefit, and some of the people who have had good experiences with their incumbent may not even know what party they belong to.
Actually the subsets do indicate a very mild incumbency in many of the seats of 1-2% based on party name alone. Moreso in the Labour defence, but in over half the Tory defence too.
The swing is 5.7% to Lab in Con defence seats, which would give Ed a majority of 8 assuming Lib Dems on 10 and UKIP on 17 with Tories national vote share winners by 1.5% provoking a constitutional crisis of some level.
Not actually as bad as I first thought looking at it
Yes, I should have said that there isn't an incumbency bonus on average. As you say, there's a bit of one in some seats and what appears to be a bit of an anti-incumbency bonus in others like Broxtowe.
It's plausible to think that this variation extends to other seats too. But essentially it seems too small to be a major factor (it could even just be random sampling effects), which many commentators had assumed it would be. EiT could be right that actually naming the candidates would make a bigger difference (which way, who knows?) and it'd be good if Ashcroft would do that nearer the election - it woudn't need much extra effort.
For once I agree with you. Whichever party came first, both the reds and the blues will find it hard going, so it'll be a coalition with a smaller party (could it be with UKIP?), a minority administration or, how about this, a National government. We haven't had one of those since the late 1930's.
I guess the other caveat is Kippers on 20%. If they can't muster that in a nationwide local poll, they ain't getting it at a GE. It rather trashes everything.
A nationwide local poll? Which one was that? I hope you are not talking about last Thursday because that was in no way nationwide as far as the elections to local councils were concerned.
Alright, their national equivalent share of the vote in a local election then.
Ah, Mr. Woolie, you mean a projection, what used to be called a guess, based upon some data from areas and which may, to greater or lesser extent, be rationally applied to others.
I guess the other caveat is Kippers on 20%. If they can't muster that in a nationwide local poll, they ain't getting it at a GE. It rather trashes everything.
A nationwide local poll? Which one was that? I hope you are not talking about last Thursday because that was in no way nationwide as far as the elections to local councils were concerned.
Alright, their national equivalent share of the vote in a local election then.
Ah, Mr. Woolie, you mean a projection, what used to be called a guess, based upon some data from areas and which may, to greater or lesser extent, be rationally applied to others.
Yes, a much more accurate projection than an opinion poll, for example.
Interesting King Hodges of PBshire debunking Ashcrofts poll. Ashcroft announces poll and provides figures to back it up. King Hodges of PBshire announces a poll and then when asked "show me the figures" heads for the hills and talks about the different textures of custard in the 20th century.
Anyone remember the time (was it in the 80s?) when Peter Snow used to do a projection of the GE based on locals which showed the Opposition getting approx 600 seats and the Government about 1 or 2?
Anyone remember the time (was it in the 80s?) when Peter Snow used to do a projection of the GE based on locals which showed the Opposition getting approx 600 seats and the Government about 1 or 2?
These results are a far cry from those days!
If these results are repeated at a General Election...
Anthony Wells has updated - apparently Ashcroft polled Con marginals first when Lab national lead was higher - result is that Con marginals swing of 5.5% is identical to national swing at same time.
Anyone remember the time (was it in the 80s?) when Peter Snow used to do a projection of the GE based on locals which showed the Opposition getting approx 600 seats and the Government about 1 or 2?
These results are a far cry from those days!
I remember the SDP in 589 seats based on a by-election
May I commend the DT for their more balanced reporting in relation to the BBC's obvious media bias.Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story seems to be the beeb's new motto.It must be these closet maoists,Robinson and Neil,behind it. I expect GCHQ is on the case already.
Sunder Katwala@sundersays·6 mins Iain Martin praises Lord Ashcroft as "strategic genius" for poll timing. "Has calmed down Labour + secured position of Ed Miliband" (!)
Lord Ashcroft website mentions a different and more recent one he has had carried out on people who voted UKIP in the Euros on Thursday . Only half of them said they would probably vote UKIP again .He says ( I think ) that there will be a LD marginals poll next month .
I think the Ashcroft poll has made the penny drop with some Conservative supporters - if we are all square on national vote share, then Labour wins most seats. We might not win a majority, but the removal van will be pulling up outside No. 10.
Lord Ashcroft website mentions a different and more recent one he has had carried out on people who voted UKIP in the Euros on Thursday . Only half of them said they would probably vote UKIP again .He says ( I think ) that there will be a LD marginals poll next month .
TSE If you are around Many thanks for the Buzzfeed link on UKIP you posted on here yesterday. Some of the comments from lefties at the bottom of the page are an absolute hoot. Like PB would be if everyone here consumed vast quantities of LSD or magic mushrooms.
Lord Ashcroft website mentions a different and more recent one he has had carried out on people who voted UKIP in the Euros on Thursday . Only half of them said they would probably vote UKIP again .He says ( I think ) that there will be a LD marginals poll next month .
I think the main point is simply that it shows that the incumbency bonus doesn't exist this time (for whatever reason).
I doubt whether that conclusion is justified. Although it's hard to be certain because we don't have enough polling evidence, my strong expectation would be that the incumbency bonus only shows up in the actual election, not in opinion polls beforehand.
Eh? Abolish them retrospectively at once and I'd still be an MP. The Conservatives are in most constituencies MUCH better at getting people to vote by post. It's a bit hard to quantify since PVs tend to be older voters and older voters tend to be more Tory, but in every election since 1997 I've seen the Tories do subtantially better among PVs. I suspect that it will hlep them pull out a decent performance tomorrow, given the lower turnout than at GEs.
There is a lot of confusion about this. Just because Conservative voters are more likely to use postal votes (or, conversely, that postal votes tend to show a large Tory vote share than votes on the day), that does not by any means necessarily imply that postal votes benefit the Tories. It may be that those voters would have voted on the day anyway, if they were not allowed postal votes.
The question of which party (if any) is helped by postal votes is a completely different one, which you can't form any view on simply by looking at the numbers of postal votes. You'd need to know whether the availability of postal votes makes a given party's supporters more likely to actually vote. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the party which benefits is Labour, which seems likely given the smaller proportion of elderly supporters who are known to be reliable voters, but I don't know that there is any solid evidence either way.
Kle4:just watch it happen! Most of us work and we don't want labour taking any more of our money to give to spongers the illegal immigrants and public sector!
"As I have found in the Ashcroft National Poll, half of voters say they may change their mind before the election – and there is still a year to go."
Intuitively that seems massive, I'd expect 30% or less to say that.
Presumably the unanswered questions which voters expect to see answered before the GE are - will the recovery benefit me and my family? (that there is some form of recovery is not in doubt), and will ed make a passable PM? (whether he will make a good one is not in doubt).
So blue need to fine-tune their housing boom, and red need to fine-tune ed's public outings, every day for 11 months. Squeaky bum time both ways.
@TimMontgomerie: Good point from @mjhsinclair - if Tories had internal democracy UKIP would've been unnecessary. Members wld have deKen-Clarked Tories
How sad for Ken Clarke that after 44 years as an MP, I presume 50+ years in the party, his name is a byword for the type of person and views who should have been excised from the party.
I tend to scoff at rebel Tories who bitterly complain that Cameron and co are not 'real' Tories, because what parties stand for and specific policies they support mutates over time even if you attempt to keep a consistent ideology, and there are no doubt aspects of their own thinking which would be regarded as the antipathy of Toriness to their views, so their insistence on what makes a 'real' Tory is merely an opinion. But Clarke in particular is apparently singled out as am example where someone has been in the party long enough to see it transform into something else around him.
For me this poll, though hardly definitive, is good news, and should be put in a yellow box.I applaud Lord A. for trying to put some sense into the intrinsically statistical polling process. It's the sort of thing I would do if I had the dough, and time.
Kle4:just watch it happen! Most of us work and we don't want labour taking any more of our money to give to spongers the illegal immigrants and public sector!
Ave_it as always bang on the money. His money, our money. A year to go. Increasing lefty crud from Ed. More weird Ed moments. And Lab and Tories even's now.
Kle4:just watch it happen! Most of us work and we don't want labour taking any more of our money to give to spongers the illegal immigrants and public sector!
If most people want that why have the Tories found it impossible to win a majority in so long? I was in favour of a Cameron premiership in 2010, but I think it will be much much harder than you imagine to get more votes than Labour, let alone more seats. So many areas are certainties for Labour, and they are areas with plenty of MPs.
Interesting from the Ashcroft post-Euro polling that although only half of those who said they voted UKIP say they stick with them for the GE, only 20% say they will return to the Tories. That doesn't strike me as anywhere near enough of an unwind to keep Cameron in No 10.
Interesting from the Ashcroft post-Euro polling that although only half of those who said they voted UKIP say they stick with them for the GE, only 20% say they will return to the Tories. That doesn't strike me as anywhere near enough of an unwind to keep Cameron in No 10.
Not even close I'd guess, especially as those calling for the Tories to tack right to get those voters back ususally act as though it means the entire UKIP vote will return home to them.
Unless that number changes significantly, the Tories are done for, and it's just a question of whether Ed M gets his majority or misses out by a fraction.
Interesting King Hodges of PBshire debunking Ashcrofts poll. Ashcroft announces poll and provides figures to back it up. King Hodges of PBshire announces a poll and then when asked "show me the figures" heads for the hills and talks about the different textures of custard in the 20th century.
Good God, 'pouter, you're back!
Where have you been over the past few days?
I was beginning to think you had done your back in while laying down your goalposts.
Do you have a date for Basil's funeral? I would like to pay my last respects.
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
It really is looking like the LD vote is somewhere between 6-10, as opposed to say 9-13ish, which would be slighly encouring for them. Atrocious after so long, no sign of recovery. Will be very fortunate to get close to 15% nationally. I may revise down my estimate of retaining their MPs from 35is to 25ish.
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
I have a couple of Ed is crap threads for next week, starting Tuesday.
Oh and one thread that combines the Indyref and electoral reform.
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
Oh and one thread that combines the Indyref and electoral reform.
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
I'll try and make it through to those then...although that reform/indy one might be too much fun for me to take.... in the meantime come on Mr. Bale! Win the CL for the lilywhites....
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
I'll try and make it through to those then... in the meantime come on Mr. Bale! Win the CL for the lilywhites....
I did read if Real don't win today, Carlo will get sacked and become your new manager.
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
Has an opposition lead of 1% 12 months out from a GE ever resulted in a change of Government?
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
It really is looking like the LD vote is somewhere between 6-10, as opposed to say 9-13ish, which would be slighly encouring for them. Atrocious after so long, no sign of recovery. Will be very fortunate to get close to 15% nationally. I may revise down my estimate of retaining their MPs from 35is to 25ish.
My first chance to comment on last Thursday's events. In Newham, Labour won every seat and convincingly. In my Ward, on a 49% turnout, Labour got 58% of the vote and the Conservatives 27% with the Liberal Democrats on 11% so oddly enough a better result for the non-Labour parties than in 2010.
The CPA were routed in Canning Town and the Conservatives thumped in Royal Docks. The Liberal Democrats were nowhere and Labour piled up 66% of the vote across the Borough.
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
It really is looking like the LD vote is somewhere between 6-10, as opposed to say 9-13ish, which would be slighly encouring for them. Atrocious after so long, no sign of recovery. Will be very fortunate to get close to 15% nationally. I may revise down my estimate of retaining their MPs from 35is to 25ish.
Nah, wait until we're out of the European storm.
UKIP at 19 for GE is Euro noise bleeding through.
I don't believe UKIP will get more than 5-10 range max at the GE, but I don't see where the LD revival might come from if there has been no upswing by now. The polls have been too consistent, and if anything it seems like they still have room to fall.
I expect the LDs to get into the low teens on the basis of at least some Lab voters in LD seats being prepared to vote tactically, in addition to the LD vote holding up better in many of those areas, but anything in the high teens looks unachievable at this point.
And while being eliminated from vast swathes of the country where they kept coming second or third might mean they can retain more MPs than a uniform swing might suggest and so is not as bad as it seems, the fact that so many parts of the country are for the foreseeable future off limits to various parties (with the LDs most affected) is deeply troubling. The LDs will have nothing to build on in so many areas, there are places that is true for Con and Lab as well.
I really want at least one strong third party, preferably a fourth party as well, and it's only the fact that the Liberals fell so low and slowly recovered that has me convinced the LDs are not finished.
It's fine to be a party that regularly gets 5-15%, but it doesn't feel like the LDs have accepted that that is the extent of their forseeable future yet.
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
It really is looking like the LD vote is somewhere between 6-10, as opposed to say 9-13ish, which would be slighly encouring for them. Atrocious after so long, no sign of recovery. Will be very fortunate to get close to 15% nationally. I may revise down my estimate of retaining their MPs from 35is to 25ish.
Nah, wait until we're out of the European storm.
UKIP at 19 for GE is Euro noise bleeding through.
The R+L council by-election poll had UKIP ~18% back in Feb. I think 18-20 may well be UKIP's true range. YouGov publish so many polls they become the perceived truth, but they're just polls, not elections.
Just looking over 2009/10 polls and its interesting how in Feb 2010 the double digit leads dried up and the polls from then on were pretty much within the margin of error of the final result. Could it be it is only really 3 months from the election when people make up their mind?
Re Ashcroft, obviously a good poll for Labour, with two caveats. The first is that the numbers are not particularly secure: "half of voters say they may change their mind before the election". The second is that the leadership ratings tilt heavily to the Tories: "only three in ten would rather see Mr Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron".
Summary: a strong current advantage to Labour but the tide is running the Tories' way.
A 26,000 sample size is impressive but is still no match for a real election even on a below 40% turnout.
Mmm
*that's a sort of skeptical mm sound*
Nah, it is an "I'm far too lazy to crunch the numbers but if I mention it someone might" sound...
Otherwise I am supremely relaxed about the council outcomes.
Given the likely direction of travel over the next year for each of the major players they could hardly be a better starting point for the coalition.
No one is talking of replacing Cameron, or even Clegg for that matter. It is Miliband's future which is being questioned.
I agree about the comparisons that need to be made (and we'll have the Euros to overlay it all as well).
I'm skeptical about the "no match" comment.
You are right to question the "no match".
What needs to be determined is the degree to which shares in a low turnout election can be scaled up to a likely GE result.
Sam's comments on Ashcroft 29% in Thurrock vs 39% in Locals is a clear example of a difference that needs explaining/justifying.
If the Tories had gained 300 odd seats no such expalnation would have been necessary.
Fascinating to read about the Ashcroft marginal poll and the only conclusion one can reach is that there is all still to play for.
I said on here a long time ago that I considered the London Borough Elections of 2014 would be the key electoral barometer and on that basis you'd be pretty happy if you were a Labour fan but clearly developments in London aren't and haven't been matched elsewhere.
With much more volatility than some might have inferred from fairly static polls, it appears there's plenty of opportunities for all parties up to and throughout the campaign and indeed right up to polling day. I suspect the Party Conferences will in effect be the start of what I fear will be a protracted campaign which may be the last thing a disillusioned electorate wants or needs.
Anthony Wells doesn't think it's such good news for Labour. He says, the average swing in national opinion polls during the period of this survey was 5.25% Con to Lab. In the Conservative-held marginal seats it was 5.5%.
In Labour-held marginal seats, it was higher, at 6.5%.
You are or A Wells is D Hodges and please give my £5 to a charity.
It's not good news for Labour. They will hav eto solve the problems being in government !
Re Ashcroft, obviously a good poll for Labour, with two caveats. The first is that the numbers are not particularly secure: "half of voters say they may change their mind before the election". The second is that the leadership ratings tilt heavily to the Tories: "only three in ten would rather see Mr Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron".
Summary: a strong current advantage to Labour but the tide is running the Tories' way.
A 26,000 sample size is impressive but is still no match for a real election even on a below 40% turnout.
Mmm
*that's a sort of skeptical mm sound*
Nah, it is an "I'm far too lazy to crunch the numbers but if I mention it someone might" sound...
Otherwise I am supremely relaxed about the council outcomes.
Given the likely direction of travel over the next year for each of the major players they could hardly be a better starting point for the coalition.
No one is talking of replacing Cameron, or even Clegg for that matter. It is Miliband's future which is being questioned.
I agree about the comparisons that need to be made (and we'll have the Euros to overlay it all as well).
I'm skeptical about the "no match" comment.
You are right to question the "no match".
What needs to be determined is the degree to which shares in a low turnout election can be scaled up to a likely GE result.
Sam's comments on Ashcroft 29% in Thurrock vs 39% in Locals is a clear example of a difference that needs explaining/justifying.
If the Tories had gained 300 odd seats no such expalnation would have been necessary.
Surby
Tory success needs neither explanation nor justification. It is the norm from which all other outcomes deviate.
Someone better start solving the problems, Rebuilding a failed economy and not addressing the flaws, leads inevitably to the same thing happening all over again.
Re Ashcroft, obviously a good poll for Labour, with two caveats. The first is that the numbers are not particularly secure: "half of voters say they may change their mind before the election". The second is that the leadership ratings tilt heavily to the Tories: "only three in ten would rather see Mr Miliband as Prime Minister than David Cameron".
Summary: a strong current advantage to Labour but the tide is running the Tories' way.
A 26,000 sample size is impressive but is still no match for a real election even on a below 40% turnout.
Mmm
*that's a sort of skeptical mm sound*
Nah, it is an "I'm far too lazy to crunch the numbers but if I mention it someone might" sound...
Otherwise I am supremely relaxed about the council outcomes.
Given the likely direction of travel over the next year for each of the major players they could hardly be a better starting point for the coalition.
No one is talking of replacing Cameron, or even Clegg for that matter. It is Miliband's future which is being questioned.
I agree about the comparisons that need to be made (and we'll have the Euros to overlay it all as well).
I'm skeptical about the "no match" comment.
You are right to question the "no match".
What needs to be determined is the degree to which shares in a low turnout election can be scaled up to a likely GE result.
Sam's comments on Ashcroft 29% in Thurrock vs 39% in Locals is a clear example of a difference that needs explaining/justifying.
If the Tories had gained 300 odd seats no such expalnation would have been necessary.
Surby
Tory success needs neither explanation nor justification. It is the norm from which all other outcomes deviate.
Huh?
Last time the Tories won a majority was in 1992. Twenty two years ago.
At the rate duffer Cameron is going it'll be another twenty two years. He can't even creep ahead of duffer Miliband in the polls.
"Could it be it is only really 3 months from the election when people make up their mind? "
For a lot of swing voters, yes.
The "trouble & strife" and I only finally made up our minds about the Euros on Thursday.
That is typical voter behaviour. The true converts on here simply cannot comprehend voters like you. For them politics is a religion, not a rational choice.
Who'd've thunk that we'd look back with nostalgia upon the dire Broon.
Absence makes the hear grow fonder. It was something of a cliché in the medieval period that pernicious rulers, once dead, were admired when compared with their successors. Thus in his Historia Anglorum, Henry of Huntingdon claimed of the anarchy of Stephen's reign:
[I]n the troublesome times which succeeded from the atrocities of the Normans, whatever King Henry [I] had done, either despotically, or in the regular exercise of his royal authority, appeared most excellent in comparison.
Likewise, "Hugo Falcandus" states in the History of the Tyrants of Sicily that during the minority of William II of Sicily:
Many mourned the dead king William [I] during these days who had hated him as the most wicked tyrant when he was alive.
Comments
How are things this weekend with the Hallam Conservatives ? Has there been any rejoicing over these constituency totals:
LibDem 12,134 38%
Labour 7,413 23%
UKIP 4,549 14%
Grn 3,939 12%
Con 3,361 10%
Oth 779 3%
This poll is only looking at 12 Con marginals - will they be precisely representative of all Con marginals?
Surely the point is that incumbency is a highly personal thing - out of say the tightest 40 marginals it's entirely possible say 15 get a bonus and 25 don't.
The Ashcroft poll of just 12 isn't necessarily enough to pick this up once we allow for MOE in his samples. Which is why I think it would be far, far better for him to do twice as many Con marginals next time and forget Lab marginals.
The swing is 5.7% to Lab in Con defence seats, which would give Ed a majority of 8 assuming Lib Dems on 10 and UKIP on 17 with Tories national vote share winners by 1.5% provoking a constitutional crisis of some level.
Not actually as bad as I first thought looking at it
Which isn't going to help the Conservative 'fear and smear' strategy against UKIP.
"Vote Conservative or you might get a very weak Labour minority government or hopelessly pathetic Lab-Lib coalition" isn't the greatest threat.
Actually a 5.7% swing with letting the Libs have 13 and UKIP 16 would give Ed a majority of 26......
1% swing back leaves Ed 3 short and 2% swing back leaves him 13 short
It's plausible to think that this variation extends to other seats too. But essentially it seems too small to be a major factor (it could even just be random sampling effects), which many commentators had assumed it would be. EiT could be right that actually naming the candidates would make a bigger difference (which way, who knows?) and it'd be good if Ashcroft would do that nearer the election - it woudn't need much extra effort.
I have mixed feelings. As I'd backed Red Bull to top score, I'm a bit disappointed. But my initial feeling was that Rosberg didn't do it deliberately.
Mr. Maaaarsh, I don't think it's clear cut.
Anyway, the pre-race piece may be up this evening, depending how the markets look.
These results are a far cry from those days!
If these results are repeated at a General Election...
Mighty big IF.
5.7% national swing to Lab based on Tory defence in the poll
Libs 13
UKIP a generous 16
Dave needs either
3.5% swing back OR
2.5% swing back and UKIP down to 12 with returners breaking 3 to 1 in his favour
To tie at 300 apiece with the Libs unable to bridge the remaining 26 required.
Tory lead of 3% nationally with Libs sub 14 sees Dave remain PM
Anything else/worse puts Ed in Downing Street
Labour 'on course to win general election' http://tgr.ph/1mizmx9
May I commend the DT for their more balanced reporting in relation to the BBC's obvious media bias.Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story seems to be the beeb's new motto.It must be these closet maoists,Robinson and Neil,behind it.
I expect GCHQ is on the case already.
Sunder Katwala@sundersays·6 mins
Iain Martin praises Lord Ashcroft as "strategic genius" for poll timing. "Has calmed down Labour + secured position of Ed Miliband" (!)
Betting PostPre-race piece is up here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/monaco-pre-race.html
Backed Alonso at 10 (each way) to be winner without Hamilton/Rosberg with Ladbrokes.
Mr. Briskin, to win? Hat trick?
http://www.conservativehome.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Post-Euro-Election-Poll-Summary-May-2014.pdf
It's about EU vote, not locals one.
Many thanks for the Buzzfeed link on UKIP you posted on here yesterday.
Some of the comments from lefties at the bottom of the page are an absolute hoot.
Like PB would be if everyone here consumed vast quantities of LSD or magic mushrooms.
The question of which party (if any) is helped by postal votes is a completely different one, which you can't form any view on simply by looking at the numbers of postal votes. You'd need to know whether the availability of postal votes makes a given party's supporters more likely to actually vote. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the party which benefits is Labour, which seems likely given the smaller proportion of elderly supporters who are known to be reliable voters, but I don't know that there is any solid evidence either way.
Intuitively that seems massive, I'd expect 30% or less to say that.
Presumably the unanswered questions which voters expect to see answered before the GE are - will the recovery benefit me and my family? (that there is some form of recovery is not in doubt), and will ed make a passable PM? (whether he will make a good one is not in doubt).
So blue need to fine-tune their housing boom, and red need to fine-tune ed's public outings, every day for 11 months. Squeaky bum time both ways.
How sad for Ken Clarke that after 44 years as an MP, I presume 50+ years in the party, his name is a byword for the type of person and views who should have been excised from the party.
I tend to scoff at rebel Tories who bitterly complain that Cameron and co are not 'real' Tories, because what parties stand for and specific policies they support mutates over time even if you attempt to keep a consistent ideology, and there are no doubt aspects of their own thinking which would be regarded as the antipathy of Toriness to their views, so their insistence on what makes a 'real' Tory is merely an opinion. But Clarke in particular is apparently singled out as am example where someone has been in the party long enough to see it transform into something else around him.
Unless that number changes significantly, the Tories are done for, and it's just a question of whether Ed M gets his majority or misses out by a fraction.
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
Where have you been over the past few days?
I was beginning to think you had done your back in while laying down your goalposts.
Do you have a date for Basil's funeral? I would like to pay my last respects.
There's a lot of rejoicing in that.
Means more and more Tories are moving to Penistone & Stocksbridge, which should be a nailed on Tory gain in 2020.
Even up to May the 1st 1997, even most non Tories in Sheffield Hallam would have said Hallam is a safe Tory seat.
Toby Helm@tobyhelm·4 mins
Labour has 1pt lead in latest Opinium/Observer national poll. Labour 33 (n/c), Tories 32 (+3), Ukip 19 (-1), Lib Dems 7 (-2).
Oh and one thread that combines the Indyref and electoral reform.
I think he's a great manager.
UKIP at 19 for GE is Euro noise bleeding through.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDV9G1PA-_w
My first chance to comment on last Thursday's events. In Newham, Labour won every seat and convincingly. In my Ward, on a 49% turnout, Labour got 58% of the vote and the Conservatives 27% with the Liberal Democrats on 11% so oddly enough a better result for the non-Labour parties than in 2010.
The CPA were routed in Canning Town and the Conservatives thumped in Royal Docks. The Liberal Democrats were nowhere and Labour piled up 66% of the vote across the Borough.
I expect the LDs to get into the low teens on the basis of at least some Lab voters in LD seats being prepared to vote tactically, in addition to the LD vote holding up better in many of those areas, but anything in the high teens looks unachievable at this point.
And while being eliminated from vast swathes of the country where they kept coming second or third might mean they can retain more MPs than a uniform swing might suggest and so is not as bad as it seems, the fact that so many parts of the country are for the foreseeable future off limits to various parties (with the LDs most affected) is deeply troubling. The LDs will have nothing to build on in so many areas, there are places that is true for Con and Lab as well.
I really want at least one strong third party, preferably a fourth party as well, and it's only the fact that the Liberals fell so low and slowly recovered that has me convinced the LDs are not finished.
It's fine to be a party that regularly gets 5-15%, but it doesn't feel like the LDs have accepted that that is the extent of their forseeable future yet.
"Could it be it is only really 3 months from the election when people make up their mind? "
For a lot of swing voters, yes.
I said on here a long time ago that I considered the London Borough Elections of 2014 would be the key electoral barometer and on that basis you'd be pretty happy if you were a Labour fan but clearly developments in London aren't and haven't been matched elsewhere.
With much more volatility than some might have inferred from fairly static polls, it appears there's plenty of opportunities for all parties up to and throughout the campaign and indeed right up to polling day. I suspect the Party Conferences will in effect be the start of what I fear will be a protracted campaign which may be the last thing a disillusioned electorate wants or needs.
The party conferences will probably not signal the starting gun, just an increase in sniping and shelling....for exactly the reasons you fear.
It's not good news for Labour. They will hav eto solve the problems being in government !
Tory success needs neither explanation nor justification. It is the norm from which all other outcomes deviate.
UKIP 1.26
Lab 4.4
Con 34
Betfair - In-Play - European Parliament Election 2014 - Most Seats (119,700 pounds matched)
UKIP 1.3
Lab 4.6
Con 55
Someone better start solving the problems, Rebuilding a failed economy and not addressing the flaws, leads inevitably to the same thing happening all over again.
Last time the Tories won a majority was in 1992. Twenty two years ago.
At the rate duffer Cameron is going it'll be another twenty two years. He can't even creep ahead of duffer Miliband in the polls.
It'll be like the old days with Brown.