Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s melting firewall: almost a third of LD switchers h
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s melting firewall: almost a third of LD switchers have since left since 2012
For a long time it looked as if two factors were going to deliver the keys to Downing Street to Ed Miliband. The first was that in the first six months of the parliament, around two-fifths of the Lib Dems’ 2010 vote switched to Labour and appeared firmly embedded there.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
On the Scottish question, John Curtice:
Even on these rather less dramatic figures than those produced by Ipsos MORI, Labour’s Scottish representation at Westminster could fall to just 10 seats, while the SNP might have 47. To avoid such a fate it looks as though the party will badly need to persuade voters that it puts Scotland first (and at the moment only 24% trust the favourite to be Labour’s next Scottish leader, Jim Murphy, in the debate about Scotland’s future, half as many as trust the SNP’s new leader in waiting, Nicola Sturgeon).
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/10/yougov-confirm-snp-well-ahead/
Could you let us know how you went about the data collection task? How actually were the above number calculated?
The best pollsters from a data presentation point of view are Populus and Lord Ashcroft.
So UKIP about to break another record.
This is starting to get boring!
People flirt with alternatives in mid-terms and by elections. That's what they are for. When it comes to the real thing, people get serious. I base that on decades of observation and what people are telling me on the street right now.
Just going semi O/T, but which relates to your Scotland paragraph, I would be extremely interested to see some London polling because I have a strong sense (hunch again) that Labour are going to out-perform in London to their national share, and if every seat counts this could be very important.
As Dorothy remarked - We are not in Kansas anymore.
This is what is going to turn heavy loss into catastrophe for the Libdems, even in supposedly safe seats like Yeovil. (where Greens didn;t stand in 2010) handing a score of Libdem seats to the tories.
Fixed term parliaments changed the narrative. Few people outside cliques like this are thinking one iota about a general election.
It's mid-term.
The complexity of the movements between the various parties, and the possible variation across the country (I suspect more Lab to UKIP switchers in Essex and fewer in Hampstead for example) does make for more unpredictability than other recent elections. Even more than in previous elections it does need to be broken down into individual seat contests.
Both of the big two parties are going to have to defend a lot of what have historically looked like safe seats, and from different directions too. Individual knowledge of individual seats, and voting trends within them has always been a strength of this site, it matters more than ever this time round. Some Ashcroft style analysis of specific individual seats would be interesting for betting purposes.
One thing Ed M might usefully do would be to table a Bill limiting the Five Year Act to this Parliament - "it was an appropriate measure to deal with a particular set of circumstances, but Parliaments should not seek to bind their successors" or some such. Cammo might even be grateful to him!
The nearest parallel to the current situation is the National government of the early 1930's in Britain, not the Weimar governments in Germany. That coalition finished off the Liberals for two generations, and put a major split in Labour too. It was only by the 1950's that a true two party system emerged, and for so long seemed immoveable.
Coalitions are the mechanism of party destruction, merger and rebirth. To expect the usual trends of two party politics to apply this time round is willfully blind.
Leave Sheffield out ( so including boroughs of Barnsley, Rotherham, Doncaster only), an area with ten MPs, all Labour, and the voting proportion is as follows:
Lab - 41,193 (45.6%)
UKIP - 32,197 (35.6%)
C - 11,388 (12.5%)
ED - 5,646 (6.3%)
So had the election not included Sheffield, it would have gone to second preferences and with the other three parties being "right wing" most second votes would have gone to UKIP giving them victory
Had it been first past the post in those three districts, Farage would have been saying Vote Conservative, wake up with Ed Miliband.
Plus Labours vote was inflated by Greens and Libdems not standing.
For this to happen in what is one of Labours rock solid core areas, while not on the scale of the Scottish Meltdown, is fairly disastrous for Labour. It means that come the 2015 election lots of resources will need to be put into TEN Labour seats that previously the proverbial donkey with a red rosette would have won. If that voting pattern is repeated in 2015, UKIP would win some of those seats in the 2015 election
This means far less activist resources available for marginal seats that Labour need to win off the tories to gain power which is not good news for them at all.
This result is far more significant than some would have you believe.
Sharon Shoesmith?
I suspect that the kipper leadership will manage to keep it together until after the GE but not much longer. All parties are internally diverse coalitions, UKIP more than most and it has a lot of splits in its short history. We may not have seen the last of these.
YouGov poll on Scottish Independence for the Times finds
Yes 52 No 48
When those who would not vote or do not know are included, the split is 49 per cent for “yes” and 45 per cent “no”.
But hey, if you think the turnout will be 15% next year, then you might be right.
So mid-term might end when the Labour election manifesto gets published.
I mentioned the General Election to someone quite highly educated on Thursday and she remarked 'oh is there an election next year?'
Amongst the accusations of racism, homophobia and other isms directed at Ukip, I sense another gut feeling towards them from some.
Snobbery ... the feeling that they are ignorant, untutored and not really on the same intellectual plane as the "proper" politiciansm and that supporters of the "cultured" parties are intellectually superior. Another reason for the intense betrayal felt when Reckless defected.
It's overt enough to be picked up by Ukip supporters and a reason why the many of the insults are counterproductive.
The rats and he ferrets are swarming into Toad Hall.
It's called democracy, and UKIP flopped. Get over it. Although I grant you that fascists never did like the concept.
Most of Europe between the wars had similar stresses on their democracies, with falling incomes and divided electorates struggling to come to terms with difficult choices.
This has been wholly absent due to the fixed term parliament act, hence people will still be "mid term" and not even knowing when the next election is.
It will change during January as the pre election hype starts. Then I am expecting the Labour vote to be squeezed in opinon polls as people start to actually tell pollsters who they are voting for rather than using opinion polls as a stick to beat the government with.
No one else out there gives a sh*t about the election and have no idea it's coming. Sorry you don't like this, but it's true.
Mid-term.
I voted Conservative in every election since I turned 18 in the '80s, except 1997 when I voted for the Referendum party (not quite able to bring myself to vote for Blair). Never again, this time I'm voting UKIP.
Shouldn't your party be more concerned that they have lost people like me who voted for them over three decades?
You know UKIP flopped. How does it feel to have so publicly switched to losers Sean?
Over 4.5 4/11
Under 9.5 4/6
Over 9.5 11/10
Indeed. It's pretty odd to see them jeering at a party that thrashed them out of site in yesterday's by-election.
But the long term trend of political disengagement is not good for my party or politics.
Hopefully the result next time ensures electoral reform.
As we saw in North Britain, when every vote counts, people turn out to vote in record numbers.
It's politics, maybe people dislike UKIP because of their policies?
What I am driving at is that the process itself will be put under greater strain than it can handle. I believe that representative democracy can cope with "multiculturalism" (of whatever sort). I believe that it can cope with declining incomes (for all but the very very few). I do not believe that it can cope with both together.
Actually I'm going to apologise as that wasn't polite of me. I do think UKIP flopped, and I suspect you do too. I also think they will fail to advance with any significance next May. I have a bet on with Isam that the LibDems will take 4x as many seats as UKIP. I think you will be very very lucky to make six. Yes, that would be an advance, but it hardly justifies all the hype. Your party would do better to recognise that it is a fringe protest group. UKIP will never, ever, be a governing party of Britain. Nevertheless, the jibe about losers wasn't kind, apologies.
I believe Joyce Thacker may be available.
My only reservation is that if they are bleeding votes on such a scale in Scotland and the South and the North where is their 32% in the polls coming from? They must be doing better somewhere. They better hope it is not in Tory lib dem marginals where it will do them no good
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/the-conservative-battleground-in.html
http://electionsetc.com/2014/10/31/forecast-update-31-october-2014/
There is nothing new about people tuning in late. It has nothing to do with fixed terms.
This bit I've been thinking about for a while
It is possible that Labour could take these seats and not get an overall majority (one set of circumstances might be that Labour lose a slew of seats to the SNP but perform well south of the border).
My take is that if Labour are performing that badly in Scotland, the chances of them doing well enough to get what would otherwise be an overall majority winning performance in England and Wales in standard Labour/Conservative marginals are low enough to make these bets still stand as decent proxies for that bet.
It's not paranoia, it's an instinctive liking for the underdog. I think the Greens are bonkers but they also get a bad press.
I'm happy to know much less about politics than many on here, but to me, it won't really matter who gets in. I claim my state pension in two months so I'm bullet-proof.
My claim to fame is that I voted Labour when Michael Foot was in charge!
I accept that this methodology isn't flawless but I don't think it'll be far off. I accept that YouGov has its faults too but unfortunately for something like this, it's the only game in town as Ashcroft wasn't polling in 2012, never mind early 2011 and Populus changed their methodology significantly in July 2012 after six months without a poll (I accept that YouGov made some alterations to their methodology more recently but these were to bring it back in line with reality and I don't think made as much difference in a study like that as it would comparing figures for Oct 2014 with, say, June 2014). YouGov also produce far more polls which makes aggregated subsamples possible over a short timeframe and therefore (hopefully) more reliable.
One of the reasons I predicted Labour to win was that UKIP's campaign was pretty non-existent and that their candidate was so unimpressive.
Its always fascinating how people claim such knowledge about how electoral campaigns are taking place from a different part of the country.
Their problem is that there is only a limited number of gains they can make there.
Enfield Southgate is still a good outside bet for a Labour gain, unless the odds have come in even more that is.
In some ways we are back in the 1930s with nations being formed and re-formed in a climate of economic difficulty. There was a very interesting series on BBC a few weeks ago looking at how different countries adapted after the first war. The one called Ballots and Bullets was particularly interesting, with the British approach of vastly expanding democracy and building good housing for workers contrasting with the approach on the continent.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04jqxtl
Baldwin is the forgotten PM who kept the Tories in power despite trebling the electorate in the twenties, transforming his party from an aristocratic party to one based on a property owning middle class.
A lot of peoples economic hardship at present relates to the cost of housing. Not only is this a major expense to most households, it is also centrepiece to their aspirations and stake in society. Baldwin got it, the current parties do not.
People do not want social housing, they want their own place. Britain was transformed by private builders covering the land with suburban semis in the twenties and thirties. It was a major mechanism of economic as well as social recovery. It could be done again if planning laws were considerably relaxed.
And what do you think a fair transfer of votes from ED to UKIP would be ? (2nd prefs yesterday's election)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/index.html
Even if we take an above average reallocation rate of 65% (which would be a near-record), that'd only be about 11000 votes, meaning UKIP would have to take about 90% of them to overturn Labour's lead. As some Tories on here, for example, have said they'd prefer Labour to UKIP to have won, I doubt that'd have been achievable.
Had you fooled then if they were not even trying to win.
GE2015 will see UKIP not trying to win in ocer 640 constituencies presumably
For the reason you say and also because it might have led to the removal of EdM.
I don't think the UKIP candidate would have done a good job in any case - far too much of a plod insider.
On a wider note UKIP really need to be more professional in candidate selection. Doubtless they would say "we chose ordinary people not professional politicians" and that's part of UKIP's appeal to those discriminated against by the political establishment.
But there's no reason why they can't chose more impressive 'ordinary people' than they often do.
ALLEN, David English Democrats – “Putting England First!” 2,044
BILLINGS, Alan Labour Party Candidate 15,006
CLARKSON, Jack UK Independence Party (UKIP) 14,228
WALKER, Ian The Conservative Party Candidate 3,936
IIRC Heath's government also took measures to boost home ownership while Conservative councils brought in RTB even before 1979.
Look at the old 'Love Thy Neighbour' episode posted last night. You'd struggle to find many factory workers being able to buy houses in Twickenham nowadays.
The political establishment has lost its understanding of aspiration. This damages all establishment parties but especially the Conservatives as they used their support for aspiration as a counter to their image of privilege.
Police and Crime Commissioner Election Result 15 November 2012
http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/info/200033/councillors_democracy_and_elections/697/police_and_crime_commissioner_election_result_15_november_2012
English Democrats 5034
Labour 16,374
Conservative 4660
UKIP 4737
http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/info/200038/elected_representatives/898/south_yorkshire_police_and_crime_commissioner_by_election_result_30_october_2014
ALLEN, David English Democrats – “Putting England First!” 2,044
BILLINGS, Alan Labour Party Candidate 15,006
CLARKSON, Jack UK Independence Party (UKIP) 14,228
WALKER, Ian The Conservative Party Candidate 3,936
But by golly! I agree with Foxy on something. Baldwin, a mediocre PM in many departments, let the the house building rip and thrive before 1939. We do need planning laws that give builders a chance to build, but also prevent them on heavy sanction from building muck. However we cannot have the old ribbon development over pristine countryside. A new method must be found to build our communities.
It was the Yougov subsamples that lead me to the conclusion that "something" was probably going on in Scotland.
Subsamples are a perfectly valid tool to base evidence on, providing that you use enough of them to achieve statistical significance. I remember @TSE pointing out a subsample recently on a poll where Labour lead the SNP in VI, and I pointed out that obviously as subsamples are unweighted raw data they will have ridiculous margin of error individually as to be meaningless.
But look at enough and there are patterns and clues.
I spent some time yesterday afternoon in the UKIP constituency office on Rochester High Street. I declined to sign-in, as I still seem to be persona-non-grata within the party.
The good news from UKIP's POV was that it was manned by very easy-going, user-friendly people. There was none of the frustration that often shows itself at UKIP meetings. Further, they are preparing different leaflets for different parts of the constituency, aping the LDs with that by-election 'trick'. The bad news was that they only have two of them so far; there are three in the pipe-line, apparently.
AFA winning elections is concerned, UKIP's weakness is still around Postal Votes. I asked who was in charge of PV 'farming'. I was told, by the aghast agent, that that was crooked. "Sure, but all the other parties do it". He replied that UKIP wasn't like other parties.
If UKIP get anywhere near any influnce, their number one priority must to insist on the old rules on PV being restored.
Better and better. Let me give you a hand. "24 short" is -24 to a mathematician. -24+26=2.
Hence the sneering assumptions it appeals to the "left behind". The poor, the old, the uneducated.
After all, no "proper" (educated, well off, young) would vote for them. Would they....