Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As we await the Lord Ashcroft polling this afternoon
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As we await the Lord Ashcroft polling this afternoon
I’m expecting the full polling out at 2pm, I’ll do a thread on that, what makes the Lord Ashcroft polling so interesting, is the large sample sizes, in this instance 8,000 people were polled.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
A number of Tory MPs have been approached to defect to Nigel Farage's party by a senior Ukip official working in the office of a member of the Lords.
Matthew Richardson, a barrister and Ukip's legal officer, has approached a series of Tory backbenchers as they enjoy drinks in the autumn evening sunshine by the river Thames.
While Ukip does not have any MPs, Mr Richardson is able to access the corridors and cafes of the Palace of Westminster because he is a member of staff of Lord Willoughby, the Ukip peer."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11125503/Ukips-man-in-the-Commons-bars-woos-Tory-defectors-over-pint-of-beer.html
Lead his party back to majority government after a single term of Opposition...
Isn't he?
Whether the recent defections change things in terms of proportions remains to be seen. Interpreting anything during conference season is fraught with danger due to response bias and genuine short-term volatility.
http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/ukip-vote-decomposed-who-is-being-hurt.html
Besides, although it's difficult to see how the Conservatives can remain the largest party (particularly after yesterday) it's equally difficult to see exactly how Labour can win an overall majority from their current position. They are just not far enough ahead unless we can assume that Scotland is still safe for them.
That being said, as I pointed out yesterday, there are so many unknowns that we are simply guessing at what happens - so you could well be right about the result!
Doing well - net (Scotland)
Cameron: -12 (+4). (-32)
Miliband: -43 (+4). (-53)
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/j77kqbuqsf/YG-Archive-Pol-Sunday-Times-results-260914.pdf
"Clacton today puts us on 56% to the Tory 24%"
twitter.com/UKIP/status/515857352621580288
My analytical method is to take the overall numbers of UKIP voters in a poll as the base and then the overall numbers of 2010 CON/LAB/LD/DNV/OTH etc.
The big feature is the differential switching with the blues being hurt most. But that may change.
Scotland: SNP 43, Labour 27.
LD Deserters: 78% ( Lab 32, UKIP 16, Tory 14, Green 13, SNP 2)
Tory 2010 Vote Retention: 72%
Labour 2010 Vote Retention: 80%
"THERE has been a huge surge in people signing up to vote in the run-up to the by-election.
Since September 11, 1,357 extra voters have registered across the Tendring district, taking the total electorate to 110,648 – of whom about 70,000 are in Clacton.”
Not sure whether I’d describe an extra 1300 voters as “huge”, but there you are. The turnout last time was 64.2%, which means that the electorate was just over 67,000, so the increase is about 2%.
To take the apparently encourage figure from Ashcroft that 1 in 8 of people who didn't vote Tory in 2010 are prepared to consider doing so this time. That's out of 64% (because the Tory figure in 2010 was 36%), so it gives a ceiling of 8% that they might gain, before allowing for any losses to anyone: 56% won't even consider it. Of that 8%, I'd guess that half are merely being politely open-minded - "Of course I'll consider everyone" - and half are genuinely tempted. So the maximum realistic upside is 4%, before allowing for anyone from Carswell & Reckless downwards going elsewhere.
Those who thought there might be an implosion of SNP support after a No vote are so far very wide of the mark. Scotland is still littered with Yes signs and Saltires. I have heard from friends from Glasgow that a number of people are still going around wearing Yes T shirts.
Labour have a major problem on their hands here. The assumptions of a Miliband majority tend to assume a 40+ cohort from Scotland. That may well turn out not to be the case.
At the moment, and it is still relatively early days, I think Scotland may well deny Ed his majority.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2772208/MARK-RECKLESS-Broken-promises-Tory-spin-Cameron-goaded-quit.html
UKIP's own poll in 3 seats shows Labour winning Rotherham today !
Summary of last week:
Miliband fluffs his lines; Labour ahead by 6 points.
Over the entire 18 months from Feb 2013 to Aug 2014, the vote share of CON to UKIP switchers has increased by just 0.4 points, from 5.5 to 5.9. Over the same period, LAB to UKIP switchers have increased by over a point from 0.6 to 1.7 and LIB to UKIP almost as much, from 1.4 to 2.2.
So we can see that UKIP has hurt the Tories the most overall, but have hurt both Labour and the Lib Dems considerably more in the last year or two. One might even conclude that CON to UKIP switchers have been 'maxed out' and that further gains will only come from other parties.
I suppose the question is, with 8 months to go before the GE, how quickly can Ed turn around his image - as Ashcroft observes today, for the uncommitted the GE might as well be 8 years away as 8 months. Perhaps when they start paying attention Ed's ratings will soar.
Doing well net among 2010 voters: (current VI):
Cameron: +51 (+87)
Miliband: +6 (+24)
https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/10665257_10152730941519138_7205947332750311053_n.jpg?oh=8f14c19265c0f1a2be09985ad9989ddc&oe=54CE7127&__gda__=1417828401_b9bf86dc01c0f9e50a52c73644f8ba45
EDIT: Is it possible to embed images?
"...poll perspective on #CON14 tomorrow..."
twitter.com/Survation/status/515822123303321600
For many months PB posters have been grappling with the relationship between Miliband's dire leadership numbers and Labour's consistent and relatively static lead in the polls. Tories have tended to the view that as the election approaches Miliband's evident weaknesses will lead to swing back, resulting in a Tory vote lead, if not a Tory seat lead. Left-leaning posters have tended to believe that the Tories' relative toxicity compared to Labour is an equal and opposing factor to Cameron's advantage over Miliband, and that the resilient Lib Dem-Labour switchers are the only group who really matter in this equation and are much warmer to Miliband. But posters on all sides agree that Miliband is a significant drag on Labour's electoral chances.
You're all wrong.
In fact, THE WORSE ED MILIBAND PERFORMS, THE BETTER LABOUR'S ELECTORAL PROSPECTS. This is the Miliband Paradox.
In 2010 I was one of many posters predicting large Labour mid-term polling leads. It was an obvious call. The Conservatives were going to have to make unpopular decisions, and the Liberal Democrats would no longer be the beneficiary of protest votes, and indeed would likely see some seepage (I did not predict the scale of that seepage). Labour, as the only serious, nationwide party of opposition, would be a magnet for protest votes, even as it recovered from its electoral shellacking.
The polls subsequently narrowed significantly, again as predicted. The cause, in large part, has been the weakness of Labour's leadership. Miliband is only part of that problem, and has been ill-served by most of his shadow cabinet, but as the leader has to take responsibility for that. As Miliband's personal ratings have dived, so has Labour's share in the polls. Labour has not been a sufficiently strong magnet for those protest votes.
But the Conservatives have not benefitted much. UKIP has. It is Miliband's weakness that has led unhappy voters to seek a new home, and allowed UKIP to emerge as a repository for protest votes. This in turn has transformed UKIP from a right-wing fringe party to one that can win national elections (albeit European elections) and appeal to voters from across the political spectrum. As can be seen in the Ashcroft polling (and plenty of other polling evidence) UKIP's current supporters (as opposed to activists) are by no means all from the Conservative right; amongst other things they are comparatively anti-austerity.
Part 2 to follow
But as UKIP grows, whilst it draws support from all quarters of the political spectrum, it presents by far the biggest threat to the Conservatives. Leaving aside special circumstances (e.g. Rotherham) the seats UKIP has the best chance of winning or influencing the outcome of are Conservative-held seats. The politics of UKIP's leadership appeal more to Tory MPs than it does MPs of other parties, making the Tories more susceptible to defections, as we have seen. Defections damage morale and distract the party (as well as resulting in a net loss of seats). These defections would not have happened if UKIP were languishing on 8% of the vote and had failed to win the Euros.
Miliband's failures have led directly to the emergence of a new force in politics that principally damages Labour's main opponent. It is possibly the work of a strategic genius. It is the Miliband Paradox.
twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/515935898077503488
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/
- Ed's ratings soaring in the run up to the GE, or,
- Ed becoming PM with the worst ratings ever?
Still there is the Con party conference bounce to come this week as well as Rotherham and EV4EL effect.
There has been criticism for Labour's "steady as she goes" conference (not least from me) but with the alternative government imploding and arguing over Yerp - again - does Labour need to do much more? Anyway, the real winner will be apathy. A plague on all your houses was already the public mood, and that was before the current "none of the above" politicians offered their non-offers.
A significant part of Labour support voted Yes, especially in Glasgow and Lanarkshire. In contrast the Tories have no seats to lose and pretty much all of their support voted No. In fact they have a chance to pick up from the 18% or so of SNP voters who voted No in the rural areas. This chance will increase and the threat to Labour will also increase when a Sturgeon led SNP unequivocally positions themselves to the left of Labour in Scotland.
The referendum was huge. Scotland is not the same country after it. Labour have a leader who is not popular in Scotland and a support who are seriously split about what is still the issue in Scottish politics.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10857198/Ukip-has-torn-up-the-map.html
The labour supporters aren't listening. I'm afraid. Since yesterday, they have been walking in an Ed wonderland.
- Personally, he's no great loss to the Conservative party. He is an unpleasant individual, a persistent rebel and had no future in the party
- But his defection is none the less significant and damaging, because it turns Carswell's defection, which could have been dismissed as a curiosity, into the beginning of a trend, and it lends credibility, of a sort, to UKIP. Also, with each defection, the decision to defect becomes a little easier for others
- The timing of his defection, on the eve of the Conservative Party conference, will make this defection far harder to forgive than Carswell's. Whether it was Reckless's intention or not, this looks like a calculated attempt to wound his colleagues, rather than simply a principled decision to move to a party that better reflects his views. The Tories really need a good conference this week as a platform for the election. Reckless has made that much less likely.
- Reckless is to be applauded for triggering a by-election. Unlike Carswell, I sincerely hope he loses
- But his defection demonstrates his intellectual inadequacy. The evidence is plain to see that there will never be significant public support, let alone a plurality, for the kind of ultra-Thatcherite, hard right, slash the state, lower taxes, back to the 50s kind of Britain that he seems to support. He has mistaken UKIP's recent successes as evidence of broad support for that kind of prospectus, rather than being the product of protest votes having nowhere else to go.
- He has also failed to heed the clear evidence that Cameron polls significantly ahead of his party. Cameron (and his close team) are the only reason the Conservatives are in a position to govern and to implement, however inadequately, Conservative policies. That is not to say that a more right-wing leader could not lead the Conservatives to victory in the future, and govern better, but there's no obvious candidate, nor is there any obvious route for the Conservatives to track much further to the right without damaging their electoral prospects.
- But all that said Cameron has a serious problem with his party. It is not enough to blame the limited patronage available as a result of coalition. Cameron rose too quickly to build a genuine, deep base of support within the party, and as leader he has neglected to do so. While in some respects I applaud him for trying to reach over the heads of his party and talk directly to the people, as Blair did, Cameron has to recognise that his position within the party has never been as secure as Blair's (Brown notwithstanding). Cameron did not lead the Tories to an epoch-defining victory in 2010. He cannot afford to disregard his malcontents in the way Blair could. He must do more to build bridges.
Mr Cameron: +25% / -48%
Conservative Party: +25% / -48%
Mr Farage: +26% / -44%
UKIP: +27% / -43%
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/IoS_SM_Political_Poll_28th_September_2014_8723.pdf
20-30 short of a majority.
Ed seems to have mislaid Scotland, and Wales isn't far behind.
Are there enough winnable seats in the North and London for Ed to gain 68, plus what he seems likely to lose North of the Border?
Three polls yesterday. Average score down to 35, with eight months to go.
The majority of the collapsing Lib Dems seats have the Tories second. What is going to happen in these?
What I am not so sure about is how much of his time Cameron should spend trying to build bridges in the party. There is no upside to gratuitous rudeness but Cameron needs his supporters to do this work for him rather than getting too hands on. He certainly does not want to be seen throwing "red meat" to this section of the party. Firstly, that does not work and secondly it taints his own brand which is key to a good result.
The message at Conference is that this is a job for Constituency Chairmen and women and all elected representatives of the party. They need self discipline, not discipline imposed upon them. They need to think through the implications for both the party and the country of a Conservative party going into the next election weak and divided. A Miliband premiership would be the result and at the moment that looks pretty frightening.
http://order-order.com/2014/09/27/mark-reckless-defects-to-ukip/
The only logical conclusion is that Ed is Crap will be PM.
Yes, Labour may not win some seats like Thurrock, South Thanet etc. In fact, it is difficult to predict which party will win those seats.
Is there a prospect of Reckless losing his by-election?
"I haven’t really been asked the outright questions point blank that have required me to say something that wasn’t true."
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/09/mark-reckless-the-row-in-witney-that-made-me-lose-my-faith-in-david-cameron/
- Hollande on the ropes
- Right hoping to gain control
- FN looking to get their first senators.
Ultimately the election will come down to who they think is most connected with their reality. And for a lot of people not seeing any signs of economic recovery the Tories campaigning on "didn't we do well" doesn't go down at all well as I'm seeing on the doorstep in what should be Tory areas. Too many PB Tories dismiss voters not crediting them with economic recovery as ungrateful. The reality is that for large swathes of the country there hasn't been economic recovery. That you don't get this is why regardless of Ed the Tories will lose.
On tensions between Farage et al: this may prove serious in the long-term but, ironically, I suspect the party will hold together probably better than the ill-disciplined Conservatives and with more enthusiasm than Miliband-led Labour (and a good deal more optimism than the Lib Dems).
Until the election, at least.
I haven't been able to follow the last few threads, exciting though they must have been. I've got a relatively unimportant question to ask: what happens to Reckless's position on the Home Affairs Select Committee? I assume he'll continue to sit in it until the by-election is called?
Ultimately I would far rather Cameron focus on the big issues of state, but most of all I want the Conservatives to still be in government after the next election (either alone or in coalition) and at the moment the biggest threat to that is the splintering of the right.
I would assume not? As he has resigned from Parliament, it would be unlikely for him to retain any posts granted by it?
CON 43
LAB 34
LD 6
GRN 3
UKIP 14 [ there was an English Democrat in 2010.]
However, R & S is in KENT. The question is how much UKIP will gain from Tories and Labour [ over and above the swings already built in the National polls ] and that will decide if the Tories, UKIP or indeed Labour wins !
Tories should still be favourite in my opinion.
2/5 UKIP
3/1 Cons
8/1 Labour
Some of his tweets were pretty definitive.
I see also that they propose to scrap the jobs of street sweepers and cleaners etc and replace them with unemployable youths. That should improve the quality of service no end. God help those who have to supervise them.
And I see that they propose to cut the "maximum benefit" per family from £26k to £23k. This strongly suggests that they have no idea what it ought to be and are plucking numbers out of the air to see who, if anyone cheers them. I look forward to the Tory Peebies' explanation of why it's right in principle that the "maximum benefit" should pay no attention to family size.
Finally I am heartened to see that Ashcroft's poll is more consistent with my Tory 10 point lead on Election Day than is Nick Palmer's doorstep experience. Well, actually I'm disheartened too, but mainly by the likes of Chuka Umunna - can't say what I think of him, there are laws against libel.
Economical with the actualité?
What's going to be harder for him is holding it in 2015, when the party of government is at stake. If Lab can make second place this time they may be able to snaffe it then.
Unemployment in particular has been the dog that didn't bark. The Coalition has robbed Labour of its expected 2015 election slogan by already providing "Work For The Workers!!" Jobs was the word not heard last week in Manchester. All we had was Ed going on about more apprenticeships - something that this Government has turned around after Labour singularly neglected them in the period 1997 - 2010, preferring instead to slot them into the public sector. A public sector it was hopelessly unable to fund.
When it comes to the economy, you are going to be disappointed if you think Labour owns connection to reality. The reality is that Labour has a broken business model. And the people who suffer every time they trash the economy are not the rich, or even the squeezed middle. It is the poor. That is who Labour hurts every time.
He was talking about government and economics. The same holds true for diplomacy. We elect the government ro represent the nation's interests. Sometimes that involves doing stuff we wouldn't want to do (or know) ourselves.
Reckless lied, disembled, or if you want to be charitable, practiced sophistry (lying by misdirection)
I think there's a Denzel Washington film version of The Equalizer out soon.
His sophistry pales into insignificance compared to that of David Miliband when asked if he supported Gordon Brown: "I support the government led by Gordon Brown". Now that was truly excruciating.
Just a simple fact: 650 seats. 326 to get a majority
Let's say Labour wins [ 35 seats or even 30 ]. Remember FPTP exists in Scotland too !
Instead of needing to win 68 seats, Labour would need to win 75 [ 80 ]seats !
I think Carswell's an idiot with his head in the clouds. But he's an honourable idiot.
Reckless lied to his colleagues and actively sought to harm them. That's a bad leaver in my book.
I suppose you see a space between the two which you regard as some kind of Nirvana. That is your entitlement.