Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB running just 3% behind SNP in Scotland according to the
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB running just 3% behind SNP in Scotland according to the Populus November aggregate
Following my post yesterday about the woeful lack of polling data from what could be the most critical area of all at GE15, Scotland, a PBer contacted me to point out that Populus has resumed its excellent practice of issuing a full monthly data analysis from eight or nine surveys carried out in the previous month.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/12/sturgeon-shows-how-she-means-to-go-on-by-picking-a-fight-with-the-queen/
I must have done it in 1988 because it refers to the Liberal Democrats as the "SLD".
The x-axis shows the Conservative vote ranging from 26% to 44,
the y-axis shows the Labour vote ranging from 20% to 48%,
and the Lib Dems range from 50% in the bottom-left to 4% in the top-right.
It assumes a total of 96% for the three main parties.
With hindsight, the voting percentages from 1992 would have meant about 355 Conservative MPs instead of 336.
http://oi59.tinypic.com/opp6df.jpg
As Mike pointed out yesterday the lack of quality polling in Scotland is a problem and I am not sure this aggregation is an adequate solution. We had similar problems in the referendum and they have the same reasons: a media that is largely hanging on by its fingernails and who simply cannot afford to fund polling in the way that our national media do.
When we had the deadlock of 2010 in Scotland this really didn't matter very much but Scotland will play a major part in determining who is the largest party after the next election and whether that party can form a stable government.
The Welsh government would be about £1bn worse off had it been responsible for raising some of its budget through taxes over the last four years, the shadow Welsh secretary said.
Owen Smith said a shrinking tax base due to lots of low-wage jobs should "start alarm bells" about proposals to devolve tax-varying powers.
The UK government's Wales Bill would hand over powers for some taxes.
They would include partial control of income tax after a referendum.
Mr Smith's comments come after First Minister Carwyn Jones said he would accept even more powers, matching those on offer to Scotland - but only if Wales got a better funding settlement from Westminster.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-30369795
Schools could soon be facing severe financial hardship which could affect standards because of cuts to their budgets, head teachers warn.
A typical secondary school in Wales will be driven into deficits of more than £1m, the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) said.......
Last week, Education Minister Huw Lewis told a conference of head teachers that the education budget had seen a cut of 10%.
He also apologised for the Welsh government's decision to claw back £4.4m from this year's education budget in order to fund the NHS in Wales.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-30366819
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#Scotland
Wales-only, or Northern Ireland-only polls seem to be the rarity.
November: SNP 41%; Labour: 25%
October: SNP 41%; Labour 27%
Tsk ....
On an entirely unrelated matter Sky News reporting a shortage of nuts this Christmas .... frankly I'm amazed given the continuing strong polling of Ukip ?!?
1. Big SNP rise.
2. LDs doing worse in their strongest seats.
"The most significant factor affecting party performance at the constituency level is prior Liberal Democrat strength. The following graph shows how party performance varies with the 2010 Liberal Democrat constituency vote share across England and Wales. If classic uniform swing assumptions held all the lines in the graph would be flat. They very roughly are for the Conservatives and UKIP, but the Liberal Democrats are clearly losing most in the seats where they started strongest and losing least where they started weakest."
3. UKIP not such a disaster for the Conservatives
"Focusing on the seats where the Conservatives and Labour finished first and second (in either order) in England and Wales, there is little association between UKIP performance and the difference between the Conservative and Labour share in 2010. Despite taking more votes from the Tories than Labour overall, there is little sign that UKIP are damaging Tory chances more in the key Con-Lab or Lab-Con marginals than elsewhere. "
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/what-the-bes-suggests-about-constituency-variation-in-party-performance-by-stephen-fisher-university-of-oxford/
(Also discussed on yesterday's Westminster Hour programme, 35m in)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006s624
Must say I'm not entirely convinced by this. If the Scottish sub-set is 1,293 and overall sample size is just over 14,000, that suggests 14 polls which have an average of fewer than 100 Scottish respondents.
It's also just one pollster, so there's the potential for it to be too kind (or, indeed, harsh) to the relevant parties.
Patrick O'Flynn@oflynnmep·29m29 minutes ago
@isaby the good news is we will save so much on HS2, aid, EU, Barnett etc that we can cut deficit and cut taxes too. Tell your Tory mates!
Con 23%, Lab 36%, LD 5%, Plaid 11% UKIP 18%
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2014-12-08/welsh-labour-sees-support-slip-but-faces-no-clear-challenger/
And, if we're having a new line, it seems daft not to make it faster rather than slower.
Cutting aid would be very popular (it's a case, not unlike the green levy [avoided by hypocritical moron Ed Davey] where politicians fall over one another to concur but most people want something else).
Still, UKIP's at the old Lib Dem stage of development, where the moon on a stick can be promised because there's sod all chance of having to actually deliver.
That is the launch of NS&I Pensioner Bonds and the interest rates being set this week.... let me be clear.
This is in no way a pre-election bribe to the most vote-likely part of the electorate.
No siree.
https://mobile.twitter.com/PeterTatchell?p=s
Possibly might have something to do with this letter he wrote back in the day:
https://mobile.twitter.com/1jamiefoster/status/541535243329863680/photo/1
SNP 34 Lab 32 Con 15 LD 12
It sent Stuart Dickson into raptures on here at the time . Turned out accurate - not .
A later poll in Feb 2010 by the same company had
Lab 34 SNP 32 Con 17 LD 12
Oh, wait a minute, ludicrously he has already made that laughable case which will be proved completely wrong :-)
"Finally, despite a hung parliament being the most likely outcome and a fairer reflection of the fragmented distribution of votes, the two main parties are still on course to win 90% of British seats from a combined share of just two-thirds of the vote."
On Scotland, the Scottish leadership result is Saturday. Murphy's camp is fairly confident, partly as Findlay's campaign is a bit amateurish (tweets to Dear Name erc.). Findlay's camp is quoting a phone canvass showing members pretty even. I'm a believer in looking at canvass CHANGES as a good indicator, but canvassing itself is always biased in favour of the canvasser's view - a mixture of canvasser optimism and interviewee politeness.
I think that for better or worse we need to see the impact of that result before coming to a view on what's happening. But in Gordon constituency, I wonder if the LibDems might not benefit from substantial tactical voting from the 39% who voted Labour or Tory (aside from the 36% who voted LibDem). The price for Salmond winning (1-7, someone said??) looks way too short.
On our perennial favourite, BBC bias and funding, today's Red Box poll suggests most people think the BBC unbiased and are satisfied with the licence system:
http://times-deck.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/projects/8efb100a295c0c690931222ff4467bb8.html
I'm less confident Smashwords (more a distributor than retailer) will cover me. So, my books may disappear from there as well as every store they distribute to (pretty much everyone except Amazon). This pisses me off rather a lot, despite the low sales (certainly compared to Amazon). If I have free books at any point I may put them up there but not distribute them anywhere else (some stores have a minimum $0.99 price, so even if you mark something as free you might end up with a sale).
This may have an electoral impact. HMRC estimate 34,000 businesses [from 'proper' small firms to individuals just making a little bit of cash as a second job or from a hobby, such as selling knitwear patterns] will be affected. Newspapers reckon 350,000 could be affected.
HMRC is not being clear enough, and the notice given to firms that aren't large was just a couple of months. The law's indefensibly badly written, and we will see cases of people selling knitwear patterns and the like ending up having to register for VAT in Slovenia, or Denmark, based on a single sale (or they could join HMRC's VATMOSS scheme. Which was reported in October as not being ready and which means registering for VAT in the UK, and many of those who have tried to do it early have been rejected because they're under the £81k threshold (but the vatmess idiocy has a £0 threshold).
The law kicks in on 1 January 2015. Whilst EU designed (I use the term loosely), the Government is vulnerable due to the role HMRC will play.
"There is very little difference between England and Wales in the pattern of change, with the exception of Labour who appear to have made little or no advance in Wales but were up on average 5 points in English constituencies. Importantly for the party this means that GB vote intention polls are understating the increase in Labour support in England and so their potential to take seats from the Conservatives."
and
"[because of UKIP] the Conservatives are doing worse where they started strongest and particularly in seats they are defending".
In view of our past discussions, it'll be ironical if Labour wins the election by doing particularly well in England. Will EV4EL fans remain as keen if it would mainly benefit Labour?
"But in Gordon constituency, I wonder if the LibDems might not benefit from substantial tactical voting from the 39% who voted Labour or Tory (aside from the 36% who voted LibDem)"
The desire to be represented by such a high profile figure as Salmond, particularly when voting for him does not have the immediate consequence of triggering independence or another referendum, will result in either a comfortable or very substantial Salmond win.
If I were the bookies, I would stop taking bets on Salmond winning in Gordon :-)
"most people think the BBC unbiased"
I also think the BBC is unbiased in the sense that it actively tries to be. But their problem is more a representative one in that their 'group think' starts from who they are. I'm sure the Queen tries to be unbiased in her statements despite what blabbermouth Cameron lets slip.
On some views which they feel they ought to promulgate, their heart isn't in it, and it would be the same with any group chosen as they are.
In essence, they do the best they can to be unbiased, and sometimes they succeed.
Your pal Ian Murray had a wafer thin majority last time, but he may sook up a fair few votes from the LD collapse. Murray's reputation will of course be mightily enhanced by the courageous manner in which he dealt with a Yes sticker being placed on his constituency office.
Dan Hodges@DPJHodges·19m19 minutes ago London, England
Chaos on the trains this morning. Wrong kind of immigrants on the tracks, apparently.
I think you are rather missing the elephant in the room.
We saw Lab's lead around 2/3 and the occasional tie but no Tory lead.
Then boom.
In addition, take a look at AndyJS's very helpful spreadsheet linked to at the bottom of Mike's piece. The Populus Lab->SNP swing from 2010 is 12.5%. There is a cluster of further Labour seats which would fall to the SNP at just a smidgen above this swing, meaning that the probability distribution (if you take the Populus figures as your central forecast) includes a reasonable chance of perhaps a further half-dozen SNP gains from Labour. Of course if you take the Ipso-MORI or Survation polls as your central forecast than the whole probability distribution shifts even more dramatically in the SNP's favour.
Of course, as ever we should also bear in mind the political landscape as well as the raw polling. That comes down to a judgement call: the Scottish polls might be miles out from what eventually happens, as they have been in the past. FWIW my judgement on this is that Labour won't recover very much this time in Scotland; they are divided, their strategy has been chaotic, and neither Jim Murphy not Neil Findlay looks in a good position to reunite the party and inculcate a new sense of purpose in the limited time available. On the other hand the SNP are playing their victim card with aplomb.
In betting terms, what this tells me is that the risk/reward ratio of a Buy of the SNP on SPIN at 22 looks pretty favourable. There doesn't seem too much risk on the downside, and there's a sporting chance of a chunky profit on the upside. As always with spread bets, though, this is a potentially risky bet and one you should only consider if you know what you're doing.
They are the direct result of Tory policy and ideological blinkeredness.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9376232/free-speech-is-so-last-century-todays-students-want-the-right-to-be-comfortable/
Foodbanks started under Labour during the boom. They've risen significantly every single year since. Supply has never matched demand. Until it does, and we then see rises and falls due to changes in the population's prosperity, they cannot be used as a political stick against either side.
Well, not legitimately.
Lembit Opik being a case in point.
Putting that together with the suggestion in the BES that the Lib Dems are losing support more in the seats where they are strongest, and the 7/4 on Plaid Cymru in Ceredigion may be worth thinking about. Not that I've made the bet.
I do wish Jack that you of all people could take a more charitable view of Mr. Farage.
However I view foodbanks as an excellent extension of the charitable sector allowing the poor to retain a larger proportion of their income. Further we need to extend their operation especially within the context of supermarkets throwing away vast quantities of perishable foods.
So a gold star for Labour being on watch when food banks were initiated.
One of the reasons why the Tory 2015 vote ceiling is roughly 34%.
"Food banks are not soup kitchens, nor a sign of a society gone bad. In fact, their emergence ought to be seen as a sign of how strong Britain’s social fabric is. The real scandal, according to those who run food banks, is that that they haven’t been around for longer.
They exist as a sticking plaster, usually to help families who have been allocated welfare but are waiting for the bureaucracy to process the payments. They are an emergency support in towns and cities. Without them, families would go hungry for days.
Their existence is not a sign of poverty, but an indication that a welfare state with six million people on its books can get things wrong."
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/8946991/why-its-wrong-to-be-ashamed-of-our-food-banks/
And how do you account for the fact that their use in France, with its massive state largesse, is much higher than in the UK?
And our very own TwistedFireStopper has spoken of the difficulties his force faces.
Every single political party must surely agree that the primary function of the state is to keep the peace - to keep order and security at home - and the emergency services: firemen, policemen etc are key to that.
So even allowing for special pleading why in heaven's name is this sort of nonsense going on? The idea that we should ring fence certain parts of government - or promise to spend so much on desirable matters such as foreign aid - at the expense of essential matters such as security is infuriating.
The state should do what it has to do well and, frankly, stop doing the marginal and the nice to have. Whereas now we have the position where it is trying to do much, doing most of it badly and stuff that is essential is getting done badly or not at all.
And today we have JackW doing exactly that. It's pretty pathetic.
Miss Cyclefree, spot on, as usual. Overseas aid should be slashed. We've got a deficit of about £90bn to deal with.
Under Labour foodbank use was minuscule, they are now commonplace.
As for comparisons to France - we are not France. Most of the UK electorate has no stomach for growing use of foodbanks. They are politically toxic for the Tories.
I wonder whether Nigel will be having turkey breast for Christmas lunch .... duly covered up, naturally.
They were called allotments. Don't seem so popular now.
If the Lib Dems really are losing three quarters of their vote nationally, even the most assiduous constituency MP is going to struggle.
Wow didn't see that coming.
Is Ukip-land to be a laughter free zone - now that would be "pretty pathetic".
But you have not answered the question as to why - if everything was so wonderful under Labour - there was any need for them at all. And as you should know Labour forbade social services from referring anyone to them - which may account, in part, for why their use was less than now.
I refer you to my own post below. Why is it when the state spends such an enormous amount that essential matters are not being provided? If there are people going hungy in this country such that they rely on charity we should be spending our money first on these people not sending it abroad.
And the comparison with France is an apt one - there the state is very much larger, it has not adopted Coalition policies and yet it faces a similar issue. So that would suggest to someone who looks at the issue open-mindedly that the causes and the system failures behind their growth may not be as simple as you are trying to make out.
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/03/12/icm-poll-ukip-the-least-liked-and-most-disliked-party/
Shooting the messenger doesn't change that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30323682
Note the Trussell Trust chart tracking the Tory driven rise in foodbank use.
Thanks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#Graphical_summary
"Have to smile at the Tories attempting to defend the explosion in foodbank use."
I couldn't agree with you more. It has the same toxic value for the Tories as the homeless did for them in the 80's when London became the begging capital of Europe and it became known as cardboard box city.
My issue though is with Ed Milliband. At last he is faced with an open goal. He has the opportunity to lead lead a campaign and show what Labour values really are but instead he chooses to join Farage in kicking immigrants.
I'm beginning to think he has the political instincts of a bluebottle
We have an explosion of foodbanks and yet the greatest rate of obesity is within the lowest decile of society.
Discuss.