My sons primary (C of E) had links with a primary school in an asian part of Leicester, developed by the heads for just the same reason of promoting understanding. It was a good source of grants too.
I remember the odd faux pa; notably when our headmaster arranged a sports day between the schools for the Queens golden jubilee. All fine and dandy until the hogroast arrived...
"Rural school deemed 'too white' by Ofsted visits London to mix with ethnic pupils Payhembury Primary in Devon was criticised for not being multicultural So visit planned to a school in London where most pupils are from minorities Smallberry Green primary in Isleworth, West London, will host 29 pupils Parents have called the £35 trip 'patronising' - though others welcome it"
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
The difference now is that there are far more alternatives ready and waiting to fill a vacuum if one of the big parties stumbles badly. Those long-established still have substantial structural advantages over the newcomers but by a good deal less than in the past.
Has he checked the results of the 2005 General Election ?
Unlike 2005 though, incumbency is favouring Conservative this time, so I don't think Labour would be able to pull off that ridiculous 2005 result/majority in 2015.
That said, I think they WOULD have a comfortable majority with 7%. I reakon 2-3% lead is about the minimum they need to get to 326 this time. 7% lead would give them a 2005 type majority...
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
It's going to be a very confusing day come GE2015 for a Thanet South left leaning Lib Dem voter.
So you've voted Lib Dem in the previous election, and you realise that quite honestly voting Lib Dem again would be more of a wasted vote than the Bus Pass Elvis party.
Your preferred second choice is Labour, but they look a long way off. You're desperate to get rid of the Conservatives, but you don't want Farage to win either. Quite honestly a vote for Labour may well be wasted too.
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
Has he checked the results of the 2005 General Election ?
Unlike 2005 though, incumbency is favouring Conservative this time, so I don't think Labour would be able to pull off that ridiculous 2005 result/majority in 2015.
I had a great-great-great uncle who fought at that with the 29th Foot...
Rod, how's your swingback model looking after Newark?
1.2% forecast Labour lead, down from 2.0%...
Hung Parliament, Lab largest party then?
That's a Labour Majority as it stands.
Hope Ashcroft does a Vote "why" on Newark !
I think with incumbency favouring Con, Lab would struggle to get 326 with less than a 2% lead?
Disagree. LAB can win majority if shares are =. Ashcroft showed in latest marginals poll in that the red team doing better than national polling in key seats.
Has he checked the results of the 2005 General Election ?
One would imagine so given that he is one of the most knowledgeable pollsters / pundits in the country.
His view is also noteworthy given that it is contrary to the normal cheerleading posts which are churned out on here ad nauseam, ie:
- Supporter of Party X predicts Party X will win / do better than expected - Supporter of Party Y predicts Party Y will win / do better than expected - Supporter of Party Z predicts Party Z will win / do better than expected
Whereas Kellner is a Lab supporter predicting that Lab will underperform UNS.
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
I had a great-great-great uncle who fought at that with the 29th Foot...
Rod, how's your swingback model looking after Newark?
1.2% forecast Labour lead, down from 2.0%...
Hung Parliament, Lab largest party then?
That's a Labour Majority as it stands.
Hope Ashcroft does a Vote "why" on Newark !
I think with incumbency favouring Con, Lab would struggle to get 326 with less than a 2% lead?
Disagree. LAB can win majority if shares are =. Ashcroft showed in latest marginals poll in that the red team doing better than national polling in key seats.
Well yes, if the marginals swung more than UNS of course Labour would have a bigger majority. But expecting the marginals to swing more is a fall's game, IMO.
In the end, the swing in the marginals is usually very similar to the national swing once you average it all out.
Of course 2015 might be different, but I doubt it...
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
I had a great-great-great uncle who fought at that with the 29th Foot...
Rod, how's your swingback model looking after Newark?
1.2% forecast Labour lead, down from 2.0%...
Hung Parliament, Lab largest party then?
That's a Labour Majority as it stands.
Hope Ashcroft does a Vote "why" on Newark !
I think with incumbency favouring Con, Lab would struggle to get 326 with less than a 2% lead?
Disagree. LAB can win majority if shares are =. Ashcroft showed in latest marginals poll in that the red team doing better than national polling in key seats.
Marginals polls, as we know from history, are hardly conclusive evidence of anything...
I said all along May was just playing with this to try and bolster her own prospects for the leadership (which diminishes her, in my view). But she and Gove are not the only potential contenders.
I was watching some of the 1992 election on YouTube a few day's ago and Labour was pinning all their hopes of the marginals swinging more than the national swing that year.
Even at 2am Labour politicians were still coming on telly claiming the Tories were going to lose their majority once the marginals had all declared.
I said all along May was just playing with this to try and bolster her own prospects for the leadership (which diminishes her, in my view). But she and Gove are not the only potential contenders.
Hmm they might be the two big ones though, once Hunt, Hammond and Patel's supporters split off.
If they are May will slaughter Gove. Absolutely annihilate him.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
Sure, Liberals did great in the 1950's, they even managed to get elected in seats, though only 6.
I'm genuinely confused. Politics was severely polarised through the 80s for example, moreso than in 1979.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
Sure, Liberals did great in the 1950's, they even managed to get elected in seats, though only 6.
I'm genuinely confused. Politics was severely polarised through the 80s for example, moreso than in 1979.
But the LibDems only took off in seats won in 1997 when Blair's Third Way was all the rage.
Conservative, Labour and Lib Dems vote went down by 23,997 in Newark
UKIPs went up by 8,074
The Conservative vote went down 10,159
If Labour and Lib Dems voted for them in any significant number, where did all the 2010 Conservatives go?
For instance, if 20% of 2010 LDs (2,049) and 10% of 2010 Labs (1,143) voted Conservative to stop UKIP, that would mean 13,351 2010 Conservatives, or 48%, didnt vote for them in 2015
Is that really plausible?
A YouGov poll for the Sun this week shows that 40% of 2010 Tories are planning to vote for someone else or are don't knows/refused to say.
Newark Tories from 2010?
This is all Tories, so if Newark Tories are representative of all Tories, then add in the by-election factor, your 48% figure plausible
The brackets are the actual %s after getting rid of the Indys/Greens and others
I have just wasted 10 mins working that out when I should be getting ready to go out, and it proves absolutely nothing as far as where 2010 voters went/who stayed at home.
Any reason the Lib Dems will outperform in St Ives relative to the rest of the South West ?
Hmm.
Andrew George is a long-time MP, he's local and was the first LD to hold the seat (and local plays in Cornwall as much as anywhere in the country and more than most places). The Conservatives were a little delayed by the whole boundary thing but not much. Iirc the Lib Dems have been holding their seats on Cornwall council well (largest party I believe) but that tends to be more north Cornwall.
What I would say is I think St Ives is going to see a sizable UKIP jump, but a big split in the vote is really the only way I see the LDs holding the seat.
I had a great-great-great uncle who fought at that with the 29th Foot...
Rod, how's your swingback model looking after Newark?
1.2% forecast Labour lead, down from 2.0%...
Hung Parliament, Lab largest party then?
That's a Labour Majority as it stands.
Hope Ashcroft does a Vote "why" on Newark !
I think with incumbency favouring Con, Lab would struggle to get 326 with less than a 2% lead?
Disagree. LAB can win majority if shares are =. Ashcroft showed in latest marginals poll in that the red team doing better than national polling in key seats.
That's not what Ashcroft found. Per Anthony Wells:
Ashcroft swing in Con marginals = 5.5% National swing in polls done at the same time = 5.5%
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
Sure, Liberals did great in the 1950's, they even managed to get elected in seats, though only 6.
I'm genuinely confused. Politics was severely polarised through the 80s for example, moreso than in 1979.
But the LibDems only took off in seats won in 1997 when Blair's Third Way was all the rage.
Due to a strategy change, focus on seats etc coming off.
Any reason the Lib Dems will outperform in St Ives relative to the rest of the South West ?
Hmm.
Andrew George is a long-time MP, he's local and was the first LD to hold the seat (and local plays in Cornwall as much as anywhere in the country and more than most places). The Conservatives were a little delayed by the whole boundary thing but not much. Iirc the Lib Dems have been holding their seats on Cornwall council well (largest party I believe) but that tends to be more north Cornwall.
What I would say is I think St Ives is going to see a sizable UKIP jump, but a big split in the vote is really the only way I see the LDs holding the seat.
CON 5-4 Paddy Power. Just put the remainder of my current balance (£11.79) on it.
Any reason the Lib Dems will outperform in St Ives relative to the rest of the South West ?
Hmm.
Andrew George is a long-time MP, he's local and was the first LD to hold the seat (and local plays in Cornwall as much as anywhere in the country and more than most places). The Conservatives were a little delayed by the whole boundary thing but not much. Iirc the Lib Dems have been holding their seats on Cornwall council well (largest party I believe) but that tends to be more north Cornwall.
What I would say is I think St Ives is going to see a sizable UKIP jump, but a big split in the vote is really the only way I see the LDs holding the seat.
CON 5-4 Paddy Power. Just put the remainder of my current balance (£11.79) on it.
I said all along May was just playing with this to try and bolster her own prospects for the leadership (which diminishes her, in my view). But she and Gove are not the only potential contenders.
Hmm they might be the two big ones though, once Hunt, Hammond and Patel's supporters split off.
If they are May will slaughter Gove. Absolutely annihilate him.
Gove is a resolute supporter of Osborne (who will be a very strong contender if the Tories win next year), so the premise is dubious).
In any event, would May slaughter Gove among Tory MPs (who decide which two candidates go forward),still less the members themselves - I don't think so whatever ComHome polls may say.
Any reason the Lib Dems will outperform in St Ives relative to the rest of the South West ?
Hmm.
Andrew George is a long-time MP, he's local and was the first LD to hold the seat (and local plays in Cornwall as much as anywhere in the country and more than most places). The Conservatives were a little delayed by the whole boundary thing but not much. Iirc the Lib Dems have been holding their seats on Cornwall council well (largest party I believe) but that tends to be more north Cornwall.
What I would say is I think St Ives is going to see a sizable UKIP jump, but a big split in the vote is really the only way I see the LDs holding the seat.
CON 5-4 Paddy Power. Just put the remainder of my current balance (£11.79) on it.
I like Andrew, and I think everything I mentioned will play, but with things the way they are it's very hard to make a LD 1700 majority a favourite.
(Checks betting slips) They should certainly give up on Redcar!
Which would achieve what though ?
The nearest LibDem constituencies to Redcar are Leeds NW, Westmoreland and Berwick.
Are the Redcar LibDems to be told to campaign in the others ? Leeds NW and Westmoreland should be safe, Berwick is likely to be lost in any case.
At least in Redcar the LibDems can actually show something that they've achieved in government.
On a wider point writing off seats already LibDem or where the LibDems have been strong previously will make it harder for the LibDems to rebuild.
Eagles is wrong saying that this would only be for one electoral cycle. If they lose by 10,000+ votes rather than 2-3,000 the LibDems will need several electoral cycles to rebuild, in many places they could disappear forever.
The worst recent bad result for the Lib Dems/Liberals was in the 1979 GE . Many said then that they would never recover , the reality was that the recovery started almost immediately even prior to the formation of the SDP , see the results of the early by elections of the 1979-83 Parliament .
Its actually proof that when there is political polarisation the liberal center loses votes, but neither the 1979 nor the 1992 GE was a bad result for the Liberals they only fell 4-5% and lost only 2 MP's. We are talking about them losing 2/3 of their vote and half their MP's next year, now that's a bad result, plus the chances that Labour are going to split again in the near future are nil.
Nonsense, the biggest advances were during polarisation.
Sure, Liberals did great in the 1950's, they even managed to get elected in seats, though only 6.
I'm genuinely confused. Politics was severely polarised through the 80s for example, moreso than in 1979.
But the LibDems only took off in seats won in 1997 when Blair's Third Way was all the rage.
Due to a strategy change, focus on seats etc coming off.
I had a great-great-great uncle who fought at that with the 29th Foot...
Rod, how's your swingback model looking after Newark?
1.2% forecast Labour lead, down from 2.0%...
Rod - is there a problem with the by-election model this time because by-elections have been very heavily skewed, ie
- Vast majority in first half of the Parliament - 6 by-elections in November 2012 - Very high proportion in Lab seats
It's possible, but taking the average swing tries to dampen the effect. But still, you may have something...
But the point is that it's the average of a skewed sample.
It's not that skewed actually...
I've played around with a model which takes the average of the yearly average BE swing (as opposed to the average of them all) to try and correct for skewness, and it makes no substantive difference (fractionally less predictive power in fact).
I'm testing another model which inputs both BEs and LEs. Looks promising. R^2 of 98.5%.
Gove is a total non-starter for Con leader unless Con MPs want to guarantee they lose the next GE.
But one would have thought that enough Con MPs would realise that he would put their own seats in serious danger that they wouldn't entertain the idea - even if they don't mind the Con party staying in opposition.
There's support from the central party that costs money, and there's support that doesn't. Not to give any of the latter - outside some phone canvassing - was counter-productive. If nothing else, Clegg turning up could have got him some people willing to go to nearby Sheffield come the general election.
If the Cambridge by-election happens, it's going to be interesting to see what happens with the LibDem campaign. They're not going to win, but coming fourth, say, after being so clearly in second place would be bad for morale everywhere.
Comments
I remember the odd faux pa; notably when our headmaster arranged a sports day between the schools for the Queens golden jubilee. All fine and dandy until the hogroast arrived...
That said, I think they WOULD have a comfortable majority with 7%. I reakon 2-3% lead is about the minimum they need to get to 326 this time. 7% lead would give them a 2005 type majority...
Wonderfully quirky, with a mad scientist, staring Lord Denethor
How many 2010 C said theyd vote UKIP? 22% ish?
So you've voted Lib Dem in the previous election, and you realise that quite honestly voting Lib Dem again would be more of a wasted vote than the Bus Pass Elvis party.
Your preferred second choice is Labour, but they look a long way off. You're desperate to get rid of the Conservatives, but you don't want Farage to win either. Quite honestly a vote for Labour may well be wasted too.
So do you vote Conservative to stop Farage ?
For UKIP, it was 20%
His view is also noteworthy given that it is contrary to the normal cheerleading posts which are churned out on here ad nauseam, ie:
- Supporter of Party X predicts Party X will win / do better than expected
- Supporter of Party Y predicts Party Y will win / do better than expected
- Supporter of Party Z predicts Party Z will win / do better than expected
Whereas Kellner is a Lab supporter predicting that Lab will underperform UNS.
Dont 2010 Cons split 69/6/1/24?
Do I divide the 69 by 115 (13+2 DK WNV) to get 60%?
In the end, the swing in the marginals is usually very similar to the national swing once you average it all out.
Of course 2015 might be different, but I doubt it...
So that 69 becomes 69 out of 115 = 60%, which means 40% of 2010 Tories aren't planning to vote Tory.
She has a rebuttal video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kyry6lQ0go
I said all along May was just playing with this to try and bolster her own prospects for the leadership (which diminishes her, in my view). But she and Gove are not the only potential contenders.
Even at 2am Labour politicians were still coming on telly claiming the Tories were going to lose their majority once the marginals had all declared.
It got pretty embarrassing in the end, LOL.
If they are May will slaughter Gove. Absolutely annihilate him.
Any reason the Lib Dems will outperform in St Ives relative to the rest of the South West ?
Got it thanks.
If that pattern followed in Newark we would get
Con 44 (49)
Lab 30 (19)
LD 7.6 (2.8)
UKIP 18.4 (28.4)
The brackets are the actual %s after getting rid of the Indys/Greens and others
I have just wasted 10 mins working that out when I should be getting ready to go out, and it proves absolutely nothing as far as where 2010 voters went/who stayed at home.
"The LibDems are playing out one of those zombie movies in which half the cast get their brains eaten."
Must have been the filming of the zombie movie in Glasgow with Brad Pitt which put him in zombie rather than Zulu mental mode!
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/ukip-are-still-englands-little-problem.24361757
It's one of those facts that you have to look at a while to realise it's true.
Andrew George is a long-time MP, he's local and was the first LD to hold the seat (and local plays in Cornwall as much as anywhere in the country and more than most places). The Conservatives were a little delayed by the whole boundary thing but not much. Iirc the Lib Dems have been holding their seats on Cornwall council well (largest party I believe) but that tends to be more north Cornwall.
What I would say is I think St Ives is going to see a sizable UKIP jump, but a big split in the vote is really the only way I see the LDs holding the seat.
Ashcroft swing in Con marginals = 5.5%
National swing in polls done at the same time = 5.5%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/page/2
Lab 35% (+2)
Con 31% (-1)
UKIP 19% (nc)
LD 6% (-1)
CON 5-4 Paddy Power. Just put the remainder of my current balance (£11.79) on it.
In any event, would May slaughter Gove among Tory MPs (who decide which two candidates go forward),still less the members themselves - I don't think so whatever ComHome polls may say.
I'm testing another model which inputs both BEs and LEs. Looks promising. R^2 of 98.5%.
Predicts Labour losing by 4.3% at the moment...
But one would have thought that enough Con MPs would realise that he would put their own seats in serious danger that they wouldn't entertain the idea - even if they don't mind the Con party staying in opposition.
If the Cambridge by-election happens, it's going to be interesting to see what happens with the LibDem campaign. They're not going to win, but coming fourth, say, after being so clearly in second place would be bad for morale everywhere.