Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest round of Lord Ashcroft’s marginals’ polling find
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest round of Lord Ashcroft’s marginals’ polling finds a 5% CON to LAB swing – slightly more than the 3-4% we’ve been seeing in recent national polls
Aggregate shares from latest @LordAshcroft polling of 11 marginals
CON 33
LAB 39
LD 6
UKIP 16
GRN 5
A swing of 5% to LAB from CON
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/uk-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=1214564
People forget, in parts of West Yorkshire and North Yorkshire, the Tories do and have done very well oop North.
Tories Northern Problem? My arse.
Perfect storm for the Tories. 2010 LDs switchers to Lab and Con to Kipper switchers are handing seats to Labour.
I'd expect UKIP to hurt Labour disproportionately more than perhaps Conservative here and thought it could well be very close back at the end of June. There are however a large number of Lib Dems who will break disproportionately to Labour, but at the same time Labour will lose it's own vote to UKIP... I think !
Ashcroft's poll seems to back up my assessment of the constituency.
TLDR 7-4 Tories is still value.
Labour have made themselves the party of urban middle-class liberal values - Guardianistas, in the pejorative. This is unsurprisingly going down well in London but is arguably the source of their UKIP trouble oop North.
Here is what happens when we (accidentally) constrain all parties (including other) to get the same national vote. http://img.ly/A99B
What won't happen though is all those Scottish seats turning true Tory Blue.
I think this just increases the chance of NOM even more.
As much as I loathe UKIP and Farage, there simply has to be a deal or you hand the keys of power to EdM and Labour could rule for a generation. All those seats, bar Brentford, stay Tory without UKIP.
Whatever his price, we may have to pay it in order to stop Ed.
If that means defenestrating Cameron, then with great reluctance, I say so be it.
The Red Liberals and the Purple Tories are all that matters.
The Tory centrist strategy remains correct [regardless of your views of the specific policies]. Given the prevailing headwinds of economic gloom, and the more-or-less instant loss of half the Lib Dem vote to Labour back in 2010, it's pretty astonishing that the Tories are as close as they are. Thanks be to Ed.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/strange-town-london-2015.html
They must have put something in the San Pellegrino this morning.
They campaigned to retain it.
Except it's a terrible (And frankly patronising) piece of logic to do so - because Alliance voters were not Labour on holiday, and UKIP voters are choosing UKIP, not the Tories.
Labour + Lib Dems got over 50% in the last election. Didn't mean a thing.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-latest-election-round-what-have-we_16.html
"with the sort of precision that you could find only in a saloon bar, I set out a cariacature of the previous coalition of each party.
Labour: unionised workers, public sector workers, lower paid workers, the workless, those from ethnic minorities, professionals who are progressive values-driven.
Conservatives: professionals (other than those who are progressive values-driven), higher paid workers, the self-employed, home owners, the elderly, the battlers.
Lib Dems: localists, professionals who are progressive values-driven, protest voters.
UKIP have put together a coalition built on very different lines, comprising those intellectually hostile to the EU, the socially conservative, those hostile to immigration, those in low paid work and protest voters. These cut across former party boundaries.
Labour is vulnerable to losing lower paid workers and some of the workless, while other parts of its coalition, such as those from ethnic minorities or progressive values-driven professionals, are most unlikely to be tempted to vote purple next year. In some geographical areas, this barely affects the Labour vote. We saw that Labour had a very good performance in London in May, reflecting the fact that Labour's vote here largely comes from the UKIP-resistant part of Labour's coalition. Its vote similarly held up well in the Core Cities. Because of the shape of their coalition, they are likely to lose little of their vote in university towns to the Kippers (helping to explain the short prices on Labour in Bristol West, Leeds North West and Cambridge).
But in areas where Labour's vote is much more drawn from those in lower paid work, UKIP appear to have undermined Labour's efforts. They lost control of both North East Lincolnshire and Thurrock. Labour also seem unclear how to identify the categories of voters that they have lost with any precision: in Swindon they won the popular vote but went backwards in seat count. Labour is likely to lose disproportionately high shares of its coalition in less urban and less well-educated workforces."
Red Liberals +150 Labour voters [this is net of the voters the Tories gain from the Lib Dems]
Purple Tories -180 Conservative voters [this is net of the voters that Labour lose to UKIP]
Traditional Swing Voters +51 Labour voters & -51 Conservative voters [remember these count double]
The Greenies -32 Labour voters
The total number of voters that make up the Con-Lab swing is 464. So the percentage from each voter type is:
Red Liberals 32%
Purple Tories 39%
Swing Floaters 22%
Greenies 7%
The contribution from the "Plato-type" swing floaters is pretty large, but that's not why they are important. They're important because - unlike the Red Liberals and the Purple Tories - the pollsters do not agree on which way they will swing. The latest YouGov has the net movement of swingers at near zero. Some recent polls have had substantial net swings from Labour to Tories in this group.
These are the voters who are most likely to change their mind and thus they constitute the most likely source of change from the polling status quo. It is how they vote that will decide the election. Everything else looks like it will be a lot harder to shift.
That’s rather good - you must have been supping a non-alcoholic beverage at the time. ; )
Especially so as most people will be surfing the internet all day at work anyway so nothing those papers contain will be at all new (or interesting, I would argue).
But in the South, the Republicans have picked up the WWC vote via "values based" (God) targeting.
The Republicans used to sit in the middle of the US spectrum with the racist Southern Democrats on their right and the urban progressives on their left. It was a peculiar coalition, to say the least. LBJ blew it up with the Civil Rights Act but it still took 30-40 years for those Southern states to turn reliably Republican (of course this was quite a lot to do with incumbency).
You might draw a [non-racist] parallel with the Scotland Act 1998. It can take a long time for voting habits to shift in response to the changed priorities of the dominant parties.
Good luck with the pact with UKIP though. That's bound to work.
Could it be you are in denial?
If the Cons make a pact with UKIP it will, simply, be the end of them. You can't align yourself with a NOTA party as you are an "A". It would be ludicrous.
As has been pointed out also, you lose the centre at the expense of people 79.7% of whom would return to the fold anyway and who want stability and dependency from their political parties (hence why they are Cons to start with).
Cam/Crosbie would have to be out of their minds even to contemplate anything like that.
We were talking on here about poor productivity in the UK ....
1. He or she would govern more competently than Cameron
2. He or she is not driven by the Europe issue
3. The change is a one-off and not a descent into civil war within the Tories, making them incapable of governing effectively.
I'm far from convinced that any of those conditions can be adequately met but that's a little beside the point. The point being that moving from the centre will not necessarily let Ed back in as there are other factors to consider.
Personally, I don't think religion plays as much of a role here. It's more a matter of cultural identity, of which religion is one part.
There is another part of me that thinks that the reasons why that may be the case won't make it worth the benefit.
There's also a third part that's aware that people who wish to lose elections for tactical reasons usually have cause to rue that desire later.
I have a feeling the site will be £50 richer at year end.
The crucial question will be the extent to which he does once free of the coalition i.e. when campaigning as Tory leader, not governing as PM.
http://politicalbetting.vanillaforums.com/discussion/1535/politicalbetting-com-blog-archive-at-ge15-the-result-in-watford-is-set-once-again-to-be-the-m/p2
"Everyone's favourite EU comissioner, Viviane Reding, is making a speech today setting out her wishes for the development of EU justice policy:
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-481_en.htm
She is doing this in the form of "three messages to the European Council" - ie national governments. Most interesting to me is a passage near the end, picked out in the summary also:
"The right of Europeans to move freely and reside and work wherever they want in our Union must be protected, including against possible abuse or fraudulent claims. Abuse must be fought because it weakens free movement. And the principle of free movement must be defended vigorously. I have said it before, and I will say it again: EU citizens' right to free movement is not up for negotiation. All four freedoms – of people, goods, services and capital – go together, no one has a right to pick and choose. All four freedoms enable our economies to grow and give citizens the chance to acquire skills and find work. All four freedoms need to be protected for citizens to feel secure – and to be assured that this Union is not only about markets, but about people and their rights. That it is made for them."
I wonder who that passage might be aimed at? I wonder which other Luxembourg politicians in the EPP feel strongly about this stuff?"
At the time, I was told that this was just motherhood and apple pie. But it now seems that noises may already have been being made behind the scenes.
Although the headline is (5% swing Conservative to Labour) it is more like
8% swing Lib Dems to Labour
4% swing Lib Dems to Conservatives
11% swing Conservative to UKIP
5% swing Labour to UKIP
There is also one area where UKIP are doing very badly. This is GOOD news for UKIP.
This reflects a) LDs won't vote UKIP and b) There is a key element of the population that will always vote Labour - I'll leave it to the reader to work out what the key element is.
It makes a nonsense of the 'Vote UKIP get Labour' drivel!
A similar bit of muscular politics if well timed could give the Tories an edge with soft-Kippers.
Plenty of evidence of Vote Nige, Get Ed
It's about the Tories and UKIP honing their constituency message.
A sensible collaboration = Labour wipeout, especially with SNP gains in Scotland.
However, what we don't know is how those very different sub-groups of UKIP support will behave when it comes to the election. Broadly speaking, there are three scenarios we can consider:
(1) They stay with UKIP, or perhaps UKIP pick up even more voters from the two main parties.
(2) They partially drift back to their former party allegiances as the election comes into focus. This is the scenario which most observers have expected, and it may still occur, at least to some extent. If so, the net effect on the election may be a slight boost to the Tories compared with current polling, simply because there are more ex-Tory voters amongst those currently saying they'll vote UKIP. It won't be a very big effect, though, unless the UKIP vote share unwinds to a large degree, which is looking less likely now than it did a few weeks ago (thanks, Douglas).
(3) same as (2), but the drift back is not symmetrical. If either Labour or the Conservatives can successfully attract back a disproprotionate number of their former voters compared with the number the other main party can attract back, victory beckons.
I think it will be very hard for Labour to get the advantage in any such asymmetry, essentially because they haven't got any policies to do so and if they did, they'd alienate the ex-LibDem group who are even more important to them.
Can the Conservatives get the advantage here? In principle it should be possible - the Tory-to-UKIP switchers should be responsive both on the EU and immigration issues, and perhaps on the economy as well. At the moment, though, those message are not being heeded. The outcome of the election hinges on whether or not that remains the case.
his group has come from Texas for a weekend organised by Spiro, a luxury cannabis tour operator, and its package includes a visit to a spa, dinner, a trip to a farm and a weed-infused cooking class. Some of them will buy and smoke, some are just curious, but they’re all here for the pot.
•My 420 Tours has packages from $1,295pp, including two nights’ accommodation. Spirotours has half-day tours from $399pp
$1295 for a 2 day tour in a country where you can speak the language and so forth o_O ?!
OK !
He places the bet, the posts it.
It gets smashed into (say to 10/1) and then he either closes out or sells it to someone on here at 12/1 and books the profit...
A keep Labour out coalition beckons in certain areas.
http://juncker.epp.eu/my-priorities
Note number 5:
"My red line in such talks would be the integrity of the single market and its four freedoms; and the possibility to have more Europe within the Eurozone to strengthen the single currency shared so far by 18 and soon by 19 Member States."
Are you accusing Cameron of brinkmanship? if he's going to come out with proposals to get back UKIP voters, he is cutting it very fine.
That said, last nights yougov wasn't a disaster. For the tories to be on 31 when UKIP is on 19 shows there is potentially a bucket of votes up for grabs.
As he pointed out the 'crime figures' Tory Home office ministers are waving around as proof of the dramatic falls in crime in decades does not include the Fraud and Cyber crime figures, the pursuit of such crimes having been hived off to a separate agency, which is the biggest growth area in the crime industry. When those figures are included crime is up!.
Add to that $exual violence is up and hate crimes were up and poor Jack could barely control himself
Meanwhile in other news Cameron is in Rochester obfuscating about Immigration. Go figure
I've a couple of questions in my head about it all.
What's the likelihood of Labour's polling drawing back a % of Kippers, who don't actually TO on the day? After the experience in SIndy, I'm intrigued by the whole TO vs registered to vote phenomenon. Are Kipper activists as well organised as Labour GOTV machine? They've certainly got a better handle on the local issues than some Lab-Safe-Seaters.
Kippers have caught the mood of the nation as Yes did, but Yes didn't get their vote out as they expected. Will the high % of DNV hamper UKIP beyond the pollster weightings?
Maybe some Kippers here can add their 2p re strategy?
Initiatives of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs
Rules concerning the Armaments Agency
Freedom to establish a business
Self-employment access rights
Freedom, security and justice – cooperation and evaluation
Border checks
Asylum
Immigration
Crime prevention incentives
Eurojust
Police cooperation
Europol
Transport
European Central Bank
Culture
Structural and Cohension Funds
Organisation of the Council of the European Union
European Court of Justice
Freedom of movement for workers
Social security
Criminal judicial cooperation
Criminal law
President of the European Council election
Foreign Affairs High Representative election
Funding the Common Foreign and Security Policy
Common defense policy
Withdrawal of a member state
General economic interest services
Diplomatic and consular protection
Citizens initiative regulations
Intellectual property
Eurozone external representation
Sport
Space
Energy
Tourism
Civil protection
Administrative cooperation
Emergency international aid
Humanitarian aid
Response to natural disasters or terrorism
Economic and Social Committee
Committee of the Regions
Economic and Social Committee
The EU budget
Do I hear Tories shouting 'Referendum Lock!' at this massive transfer of power? Of course not. It's all gone quiet over there! Downing Street will soon be totally irrelevant. Brussels will rule.
Whilst some will complain about immigration, it will be nothing compared to the threat of wealth taxes, unemployment, anti-business etc when the big day comes.
That will leave some of those with the most to lose most sliding back into Tory ranks. It will be those who have nothing to lose that will remain most loyal to the Kippers, and they are Labour demographics.
The money will back the path of least risk and disruption.
Low interest rates, excellent employment numbers and an aversion to extra taxes remain trump cards next May.