politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Well done to the main phone pollsters for now reporting Eng

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Well done to the main phone pollsters for now reporting England only numbers

Congrats to all main phone pollsters for now producing ENGLAND ONLY %
Look at wide range in Dec '14 & GE10 result pic.twitter.com/fHOb3gDxsz

Read the full story here

OldKingCole

First!. And they can’t all be right!

RobD

OldKingCole said:

First!. And they can’t all be right!

Looking forward to election night (the nerd that I am)!

nigel4england

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Easterross

As in 1992 some pollsters are going to look incredibly stupid come May

Sean_F

Com Res have Lab 33, Con 31 for England and Wales, which I make a swing of 6%.

JosiasJessop

Easterross said:

As in 1992 some pollsters are going to look incredibly stupid come May

It might be nice if sometime nearer May we had a review of the polling situation in the run-up to 1992, how much the pollsters were wrong, why, and what they did to try to compensate.

(Edit: I may have seen it somewhere else, but hasn't OGH produced one in the past?)

asjohnstone

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

rottenborough

Morning all,

On topic: are these results sub-samples? Or full 1,000-odd samples.

MikeSmithson

rottenborough said:

Morning all,

On topic: are these results sub-samples? Or full 1,000-odd samples.

They are sub-samples of about 860 from poll overall samples of 1000 - so pretty robust.

MikeSmithson

Sean_F said:

Com Res have Lab 33, Con 31 for England and Wales, which I make a swing of 6%.

The England only shares in 2010 were CON 39.2 LAB 28.1.


Full England only breakdown here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/region/48.stm

MikeSmithson

What many don't appreciate is that the Tories did disproportionately better in England compared with rest of GB at GE10 when, it might be recalled, LAB increased its Scottish vote share by 2.5%.

So the Tories need to be 11.1% ahead in England to be doing the same as GE10.

bigjohnowls

Lab lead Xmas break polls:

Opinium 7
TNS 7
Survtn 5
ICM 5
YouGov 4
ComRe 3
Ashcroft 1
Populus 0
IpsosM -3


EICIPM unless Ipsos Mori is right

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. Smithson, not sure that comparison's valid, due to the surging popularity of the SNP and UKIP (admittedly, the purple tide seems to be receding of late, but it's still significant).

Wulfrun_Phil

If the intention is to strip out the very different pattern of politics in Scotland from the pattern in the rest of the country, shouldn't the focus be on an England and Wales figure rather than one for England alone?

AlastairMeeks

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

bigjohnowls

Todays BJESUS

23.12.14 LAB 320 (318) CON 263(267) LD 31(31) UKIP 1(1) Others 35(33) (Ed is crap is PM)
Last weeks BJESUS in brackets Last weeks BJESUS in brackets
BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing)
Using current polling adjusted for 135 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer


Next BJESUS 6/1/15

nigel4england

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

DavidL

Ipsos-Mori. The gold standard. Never doubted it.

Clearly the fact they have the lowest level for UKIP is no coincidence. The centre right are committing suicide at the moment. Will that still be the same in May? And will some of those dischuffed Lib Dems return home when the Coalition is over?

The polls are all over the place at the moment. In this at least they reflect the electorate.

AlastairMeeks

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

nigel4england

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

Sean_F

bigjohnowls said:

Lab lead Xmas break polls:

Opinium 7
TNS 7
Survtn 5
ICM 5
YouGov 4
ComRe 3
Ashcroft 1
Populus 0
IpsosM -3


EICIPM unless Ipsos Mori is right

When did Survation poll? There's also Com Res online, with Lab 1% ahead..

DavidL

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

AlastairMeeks

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

AlastairMeeks

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Uniform national swing should be treated as an aspect of Occam's Razor. When there is no need to look for a more complicated answer, it should be used. When there is clear evidence that the swing will not be uniform nationally, it should not be treated with any special reverence. Beware, of course, of wishful thinking.

TheScreamingEagles

Telegraph have picked up on the Times story I mentioned last night

Senior Labour figures say the Lib Dem leader's Sheffield Hallam constituency has been identified as worth a 'shot from outside the box'

Labour is targeting Nick Clegg's seat in a "decapitation" strategy to prevent a further coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, it was claimed last night.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/11309641/Nick-Cleggs-Sheffield-Hallam-seat-targeted-by-Labour-to-halt-deal.html

Alanbrooke

TheScreamingEagles said:

Telegraph have picked up on the Times story I mentioned last night

Senior Labour figures say the Lib Dem leader's Sheffield Hallam constituency has been identified as worth a 'shot from outside the box'

Labour is targeting Nick Clegg's seat in a "decapitation" strategy to prevent a further coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, it was claimed last night.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/11309641/Nick-Cleggs-Sheffield-Hallam-seat-targeted-by-Labour-to-halt-deal.html

So time to vote kipper in Doncaster North ?

BenM

Ipsos Mori is the new Gold Standard!

asjohnstone

Politics is about culture and identity more than it's about policy. I wish it was otherwise, but it isn't.

The German protests are just another symptom of a wider working class disconnect with their political masters and the harsh impact that globalisation has on them. It'd be particularly noticeable in Saxony and other areas of the old east germany.

UKIP comes from the same source of disconnect

TheScreamingEagles

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Telegraph have picked up on the Times story I mentioned last night

Senior Labour figures say the Lib Dem leader's Sheffield Hallam constituency has been identified as worth a 'shot from outside the box'

Labour is targeting Nick Clegg's seat in a "decapitation" strategy to prevent a further coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, it was claimed last night.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/11309641/Nick-Cleggs-Sheffield-Hallam-seat-targeted-by-Labour-to-halt-deal.html

So time to vote kipper in Doncaster North ?

The Times is urging Sheffield Hallam Tories to vote Lib Dem next May.

I have decided to follow their advice, assuming Clegg doesn't do something perfidious as his shameful lying over boundary changes between now and May

NickPalmer

One factor in the long campaign is going to be the intense Tory direct mail bombardment. We're repeating the pattern of 2010 in that the Tories are boasting of their huge operation rather than doing it under the radar (my opponent says that she's sent a Christmas card to over 10K voters, unlike every previous year - lots of Labour members have had one) while Labour grumbles that this just shows all the money they're getting from oligarchs and hedge funds. I think this largely cancels out - it helps Labour with tactical votes ("stop them buying the election") but helps the Tories with less political voters ("that nice Tory has sent me a card").

Both effects will tend to squeeze third parties in the marginals, though I think most voters take all sides with a pinch of salt. My predecessor used to buy big boxes of chocolates for all the residential homes every Christmas, but he kept it up in off-years as well, including periods when his seat looked as safe as houses, so it was seen as (and perhaps was) personal generosity rather than something linked to the election.

Alanbrooke

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Telegraph have picked up on the Times story I mentioned last night

Senior Labour figures say the Lib Dem leader's Sheffield Hallam constituency has been identified as worth a 'shot from outside the box'

Labour is targeting Nick Clegg's seat in a "decapitation" strategy to prevent a further coalition between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, it was claimed last night.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/11309641/Nick-Cleggs-Sheffield-Hallam-seat-targeted-by-Labour-to-halt-deal.html

So time to vote kipper in Doncaster North ?

The Times is urging Sheffield Hallam Tories to vote Lib Dem next May.

I have decided to follow their advice, assuming Clegg doesn't do something perfidious as his shameful lying over boundary changes between now and May

Well that does have the advantage of really pissing Labour off.

RobD

NickPalmer said:

... but helps the Tories with less political voters ("that nice Tory has sent me a card").

Bah! A thought no one has ever thought. We are the ones who deliver the medicine

Edit: I see we now have emoticons!

AlastairMeeks

I'm surprised that Labour are devoting time and resources to an outside chance of decapitating Nick Clegg rather than putting all their efforts into winning seats like Pudsey and Elmet & Rothwell. The Lib Dems are a sideshow.

Sean_F

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Without wishing to rub salt in the wound, Peter Kellner reckons that the Conservatives would be heading for victory under AV. If you want evidence for the folly of the British Right, then it lies in their mindless attachment to an electoral system that hurts them.

If it's any consolation, I think UKIP will finish about 3-4% lower than their current rating, and the Conservatives about 3-4% higher.

Alanbrooke

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

Old hat. All the young dashing professionals are ditching London and heading to the bright lights...

... of Birmingham

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/22/birmingham-boom-londoners-move-in

bigjohnowls

First BJESUS ever was on 17th June

17.6.14 LAB 330 CON 263 LD 33 UKIP 0 Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)

Six months later BJESUS forecasts


23.12.14 LAB 320 CON 263 LD 31 UKIP 1( Others 35 (Ed is crap is PM)

Unaltered in England 11 extra SNP seats in Scotland

AlastairMeeks

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

Old hat. All the young dashing professionals are ditching London and heading to the bright lights...

... of Birmingham

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/22/birmingham-boom-londoners-move-in

Once they'd exhausted Peckham, Bethnal Green and Leyton, I suppose they needed to head for even less promising territory.

TheScreamingEagles

antifrank said:

I'm surprised that Labour are devoting time and resources to an outside chance of decapitating Nick Clegg rather than putting all their efforts into winning seats like Pudsey and Elmet & Rothwell. The Lib Dems are a sideshow.

Nick Clegg has the same effect on some Labour people that Mark Reckless has on some Tories.

A few weeks ago a friend asked me which option would I prefer

1) A Tory Majority next year and Reckless holding his seat.

Or

2) A Labour majority and Reckless losing his seat.

I still haven't worked out which option I prefer.

DavidL

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

Alanbrooke

antifrank said:

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

Old hat. All the young dashing professionals are ditching London and heading to the bright lights...

... of Birmingham

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/22/birmingham-boom-londoners-move-in

Once they'd exhausted Peckham, Bethnal Green and Leyton, I suppose they needed to head for even less promising territory.

Grumpy old man in London realises the young and trendy are leaving him behind.

Alistair

TheScreamingEagles said:

antifrank said:

I'm surprised that Labour are devoting time and resources to an outside chance of decapitating Nick Clegg rather than putting all their efforts into winning seats like Pudsey and Elmet & Rothwell. The Lib Dems are a sideshow.

Nick Clegg has the same effect on some Labour people that Mark Reckless has on some Tories.

A few weeks ago a friend asked me which option would I prefer

1) A Tory Majority next year and Reckless holding his seat.

Or

2) A Labour majority and Reckless losing his seat.

I still haven't worked out which option I prefer.

In this Hypothetical Reckless holds his seat with a stonking majority in (1) and is crushed into 3rd place in (2)

TheScreamingEagles

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

Old hat. All the young dashing professionals are ditching London and heading to the bright lights...

... of Birmingham

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/22/birmingham-boom-londoners-move-in

Once they'd exhausted Peckham, Bethnal Green and Leyton, I suppose they needed to head for even less promising territory.

Grumpy old man in London realises the young and trendy are leaving him behind.

The polling shows Antifrank lives in London's trendiest area.

Alanbrooke

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

DavidL

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Without wishing to rub salt in the wound, Peter Kellner reckons that the Conservatives would be heading for victory under AV. If you want evidence for the folly of the British Right, then it lies in their mindless attachment to an electoral system that hurts them.

If it's any consolation, I think UKIP will finish about 3-4% lower than their current rating, and the Conservatives about 3-4% higher.

I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem. Whether anyone thinks it is quite such a problem after the successful Coalition will be interesting to see.

The growth of UKIP will put England in a similar position to Scotland with a splintered vote and a "winner" with an unacceptably modest share of the vote. If UKIP persist some sort of change will become inevitable.

Alanbrooke

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

Alanbrooke said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

antifrank said:

nigel4england said:

asjohnstone said:

nigel4england said:

This is not good at all:

http://news.sky.com/story/1396532/anti-islam-rally-attracts-17000-in-germany

Can you elaborate what the problem is ? Concern about islamification of Europe is perfectly legitimate

Agree that concern is perfectly legitimate as is the right to protest, just can't help but think this will not end well.

Dresden is in Saxony. Under 1% of the population of Saxony is Muslim, according to the Economist.

And still they march?

Off to round up my daughter and granddaughter from different areas of London, hope the traffic isn't too bad.

It's almost as if the marching is prompted by something other than a real problem of Islamification.

Good luck with your journey through London. Allow extra time for all those immigrants.

Old hat. All the young dashing professionals are ditching London and heading to the bright lights...

... of Birmingham

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/22/birmingham-boom-londoners-move-in

Once they'd exhausted Peckham, Bethnal Green and Leyton, I suppose they needed to head for even less promising territory.

Grumpy old man in London realises the young and trendy are leaving him behind.

The polling shows Antifrank lives in London's trendiest area.

Trendy in a David Mellor kind of way.

DecrepitJohnL

NickPalmer said:

One factor in the long campaign is going to be the intense Tory direct mail bombardment. We're repeating the pattern of 2010 in that the Tories are boasting of their huge operation rather than doing it under the radar (my opponent says that she's sent a Christmas card to over 10K voters, unlike every previous year - lots of Labour members have had one) while Labour grumbles that this just shows all the money they're getting from oligarchs and hedge funds. I think this largely cancels out - it helps Labour with tactical votes ("stop them buying the election") but helps the Tories with less political voters ("that nice Tory has sent me a card").

Both effects will tend to squeeze third parties in the marginals, though I think most voters take all sides with a pinch of salt. My predecessor used to buy big boxes of chocolates for all the residential homes every Christmas, but he kept it up in off-years as well, including periods when his seat looked as safe as houses, so it was seen as (and perhaps was) personal generosity rather than something linked to the election.

Wasn't that the plot used in an episode of Minder -- when Arthur Daley stood for election to the council, and gave boxes of chocolates to prospective voters?

Sean_F

bigjohnowls said:

First BJESUS ever was on 17th June

17.6.14 LAB 330 CON 263 LD 33 UKIP 0 Others 24 (Ed is crap is PM)

Six months later BJESUS forecasts


23.12.14 LAB 320 CON 263 LD 31 UKIP 1( Others 35 (Ed is crap is PM)

Unaltered in England 11 extra SNP seats in Scotland

Assuming 18 for Northern Ireland, 4 for Plaid, and the Speaker, I think that's way too low for the SNP.

BenM

If we're seeing polling like this at the end of January the Tories are going to lose.

Alanbrooke

BenM said:

If we're seeing polling like this at the end of January the Tories are going to lose.

There has been precious little to suggest the Tories are going to win throughout this Parliament. They are probably on for largest vote share and perhaps most seats.

malcolmg

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

TheScreamingEagles

On topic by my reckoning the higher the Green vote the lower Con to Lab swing.

Ipsos Mori had the Greens on 9% and ComRes had them on 2%.

If I were a rich Tory donor, I'd defect to the Greens, and fund them so they could stand candidates in every GB seat.

Gadfly

Recent polls do seem to be all over the place, and the festive season seems to attract some blame for this.

I therefore thought it would be interesting to produce an averaged chart of the YouGov polls, which spans 13 months, and therefore includes last year's festive season...

http://www.mediafire.com/view/k2dm60jdve29k8x/YouGov polls 13 months to 23 December 2014.jpg#

The first 20 data points of this chart represent the period 24 November - 20 December 2013 (which was the last YouGov poll for that year). Make of this what you will!

No_Offence_Alan

DavidL said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Without wishing to rub salt in the wound, Peter Kellner reckons that the Conservatives would be heading for victory under AV. If you want evidence for the folly of the British Right, then it lies in their mindless attachment to an electoral system that hurts them.

If it's any consolation, I think UKIP will finish about 3-4% lower than their current rating, and the Conservatives about 3-4% higher.

I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem. Whether anyone thinks it is quite such a problem after the successful Coalition will be interesting to see.

The growth of UKIP will put England in a similar position to Scotland with a splintered vote and a "winner" with an unacceptably modest share of the vote. If UKIP persist some sort of change will become inevitable.

Why would change be inevitable?
In 1983 the Alliance got 20-odd seats on 26% of the vote.
In 1987 the Alliance in England got 10 seats for 6.25m votes, when Labour won 50 seats in Scotland for 1.25m votes.

AndyJS

BenM said:

If we're seeing polling like this at the end of January the Tories are going to lose.

No party will win a majority. It'll be close on who gets most seats, with the Tories winning most votes IMO.

Alanbrooke

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

err malc oil is heading sub $60 a barrel and despite Swinney's desperate hopes, peak oil in Scotland isn't coming back any time soon.

http://sluggerotoole.com/2014/12/22/oil-price-drop-would-have-forced-an-indy-scotland-to-borrow-6-of-national-output/

saddened

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

BenM

Hmmm - explains weaker government finances I guess.

UK annual growth rate revised down

The UK economy grew by 0.7% in the third quarter of 2014, in line with initial expectations, and down from 0.9% in Q2.

BUT the Office for National Statistics has revised down the annual growth rate to 2.6%, from 3% previously.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/dec/23/uk-us-growth-greek-presidential-vote-business-live#block-549936a6e4b0429199373524

Tissue_Price

A Xmas tip for you:

PFA Player Of The Year: Nemanja Matic @ 66/1 (bwin).

I wouldn't normally recommend bwin but this price stands out too far. Of the four favourites, 3 are attacking Chelsea players who may well split the vote between them and the fourth [Aguero] has carried Man City but is currently injured.

What Matic does will be valued by his fellow pros and the fact that Chelsea's only defeat thus far came in a game for which he was suspended will not go unnoticed.

http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/pfa-player-of-the-year

TheScreamingEagles

Tissue_Price said:

A Xmas tip for you:

PFA Player Of The Year: Nemanja Matic @ 66/1 (bwin).

I wouldn't normally recommend bwin but this price stands out too far. Of the four favourites, 3 are attacking Chelsea players who may well split the vote between them and the fourth [Aguero] has carried Man City but is currently injured.

What Matic does will be valued by his fellow pros and the fact that Chelsea's only defeat thus far came in a game for which he was suspended will not go unnoticed.

http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/pfa-player-of-the-year

Many thanks.

One thing. Why can't I see Simon Mignolet on that list?

TGOHF

BenM said:

Hmmm - explains weaker government finances I guess.

UK annual growth rate revised down

The UK economy grew by 0.7% in the third quarter of 2014, in line with initial expectations, and down from 0.9% in Q2.

BUT the Office for National Statistics has revised down the annual growth rate to 2.6%, from 3% previously.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/dec/23/uk-us-growth-greek-presidential-vote-business-live#block-549936a6e4b0429199373524

They revised up Q1 2013 hence 2014 aint such a big leap.

peter_from_putney

TSE: On topic by my reckoning the higher the Green vote the lower Con to Lab swing.

AKA my PUDING* Index (in part).

* Putney Upside Down Inverted Nonsense Guide

MonikerDiCanio

BenM said:

Hmmm - explains weaker government finances I guess.

UK annual growth rate revised down

The UK economy grew by 0.7% in the third quarter of 2014, in line with initial expectations, and down from 0.9% in Q2.

BUT the Office for National Statistics has revised down the annual growth rate to 2.6%, from 3% previously.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/dec/23/uk-us-growth-greek-presidential-vote-business-live#block-549936a6e4b0429199373524

Still much better than the 0.3 % achieved by Hollande's socialist regime in France.

CarlottaVance

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Salmondnomics is dead and discredited along with the Laffer lefties insisting an independent Scotland has to cut corporation tax. The Scottish Government’s first Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin in March 2013 predicted a ‘renewed oil boom’ based on a ‘cautious’ oil price of $113 a barrel for North Sea Brent crude. As of December 9th 2014 the price stood at $66.85 a barrel, a fall of over 40%, with every sign that it will fall lower. This blows a significant hole in the Salmondnomic vision of independence.

http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/message-to-the-messengers-part-two-where-next-after-the-indy-referendum/

Brent is currently $60.33

Indigo

DavidL said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Without wishing to rub salt in the wound, Peter Kellner reckons that the Conservatives would be heading for victory under AV. If you want evidence for the folly of the British Right, then it lies in their mindless attachment to an electoral system that hurts them.

If it's any consolation, I think UKIP will finish about 3-4% lower than their current rating, and the Conservatives about 3-4% higher.

I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem. Whether anyone thinks it is quite such a problem after the successful Coalition will be interesting to see.

The growth of UKIP will put England in a similar position to Scotland with a splintered vote and a "winner" with an unacceptably modest share of the vote. If UKIP persist some sort of change will become inevitable.

I think UKIP will persist in some shape or form, even if it isn't UKIP. CON and LAB seem determined to remain metropolitan liberal parties, so there are loads of votes to be hoovered up in the anti-EU tory and protectionist Labour voters. What should really worry the main parties is that UKIP implodes and is replaced by an altogether more professional operation with some telegenic personality leading it, that party could even sit more or less in the centre economically and campaign as a populist anti-EU, anti-immigration party.

BenM

TGOHF said:

BenM said:

Hmmm - explains weaker government finances I guess.

UK annual growth rate revised down

The UK economy grew by 0.7% in the third quarter of 2014, in line with initial expectations, and down from 0.9% in Q2.

BUT the Office for National Statistics has revised down the annual growth rate to 2.6%, from 3% previously.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/dec/23/uk-us-growth-greek-presidential-vote-business-live#block-549936a6e4b0429199373524

They revised up Q1 2013 hence 2014 aint such a big leap.



Q1 2013 revised up.

Q2, Q3, Q4 2013 and Q1, Q2 2014 revised down.

TGOHF

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

The Saudi's are predicting $20 a barrel - a microbe of sand in the desert outside Riyadh knows more about oil than wee Jimmy Sturgeon.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

Scotland dodged a huge bullet.

TGOHF

BenM said:

TGOHF said:

BenM said:

Hmmm - explains weaker government finances I guess.

UK annual growth rate revised down

The UK economy grew by 0.7% in the third quarter of 2014, in line with initial expectations, and down from 0.9% in Q2.

BUT the Office for National Statistics has revised down the annual growth rate to 2.6%, from 3% previously.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/dec/23/uk-us-growth-greek-presidential-vote-business-live#block-549936a6e4b0429199373524

They revised up Q1 2013 hence 2014 aint such a big leap.

Q1 2013 revised up.

Q2, Q3, Q4 2013 and Q1, Q2 2014 revised down.

Indeed - and if Q1 2013 is revised up AGAIN soon then Q2, Q3, Q4 2013 and Q1, Q2 2014 will be revised down AGAIN.

Sean_F

No_Offence_Alan said:

DavidL said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Given that we know that the Conservatives have lost support to UKIP primarily in England and given that we can reasonably suspect that loss of support is not evenly distributed, I'm wary about assuming that we can work on the basis of a uniform swing.

Lord Ashcroft's constituency polls (of which I am wary, but they're as good evidence as we're going to get) suggest that Labour is not benefiting to this extent in the marginals. The latest batch suggests that Labour is getting a swing in England in the marginals of roughly 3 or 4%. That would be consistent with UKIP picking up Conservative support disproportionately in safer Conservative seats (which if you look at the geographical distribution of UKIP targets, seems entirely possible).

I have been running this theory for a while. Significant chunks of support in the shires and the east going to UKIP must mean that the drop in tory support elsewhere is lower than you would otherwise expect on universal swing.

In short I think Labour's "efficiency" advantage will be much reduced by the loss of seats in Scotland and a better distribution of the tory vote. How much it is reduced will be an important factor in the most uncertain election I can recall.

Without wishing to rub salt in the wound, Peter Kellner reckons that the Conservatives would be heading for victory under AV. If you want evidence for the folly of the British Right, then it lies in their mindless attachment to an electoral system that hurts them.

If it's any consolation, I think UKIP will finish about 3-4% lower than their current rating, and the Conservatives about 3-4% higher.

I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem. Whether anyone thinks it is quite such a problem after the successful Coalition will be interesting to see.

The growth of UKIP will put England in a similar position to Scotland with a splintered vote and a "winner" with an unacceptably modest share of the vote. If UKIP persist some sort of change will become inevitable.

Why would change be inevitable?
In 1983 the Alliance got 20-odd seats on 26% of the vote.
In 1987 the Alliance in England got 10 seats for 6.25m votes, when Labour won 50 seats in Scotland for 1.25m votes.

Unlike the 1980s, FPTP can probably no longer deliver a Labour majority, and can almost certainly no longer deliver a Conservative majority.

MonikerDiCanio

CarlottaVance said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Salmondnomics is dead and discredited along with the Laffer lefties insisting an independent Scotland has to cut corporation tax. The Scottish Government’s first Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin in March 2013 predicted a ‘renewed oil boom’ based on a ‘cautious’ oil price of $113 a barrel for North Sea Brent crude. As of December 9th 2014 the price stood at $66.85 a barrel, a fall of over 40%, with every sign that it will fall lower. This blows a significant hole in the Salmondnomic vision of independence.

http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/message-to-the-messengers-part-two-where-next-after-the-indy-referendum/

Brent is currently $60.33

Ex-RBS economist and oil expert Salmond was predicting $ 150 a barrel for late 2014. Is he ever right about anything ?

chestnut

AndyJS said:

BenM said:

If we're seeing polling like this at the end of January the Tories are going to lose.

No party will win a majority. It'll be close on who gets most seats, with the Tories winning most votes IMO.

Indeed.

People seem to be getting excited about a small number of polls produced in the run up to Christmas but the general pattern of 2014 has been of a falling Labour lead to the point where parity has been pretty much achieved.

Once Father Christmas takes another well earned rest and Ed is back on the telly, normal service will be resumed.

In the last two years, Labour's vote share has dropped 6 and 7 points with ICM between "NHS Winter Crisis Season" and the actual Budget and May elections.

CarlottaVance

MonikerDiCanio said:

CarlottaVance said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Salmondnomics is dead and discredited along with the Laffer lefties insisting an independent Scotland has to cut corporation tax. The Scottish Government’s first Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin in March 2013 predicted a ‘renewed oil boom’ based on a ‘cautious’ oil price of $113 a barrel for North Sea Brent crude. As of December 9th 2014 the price stood at $66.85 a barrel, a fall of over 40%, with every sign that it will fall lower. This blows a significant hole in the Salmondnomic vision of independence.

http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/message-to-the-messengers-part-two-where-next-after-the-indy-referendum/

Brent is currently $60.33

Ex-RBS economist and oil expert Salmond was predicting $ 150 a barrel for late 2014. Is he ever right about anything ?

You mean apart from the currency union and automatic EU membership?

Richard_Nabavi

Sean_F said:

Unlike the 1980s, FPTP can probably no longer deliver a Labour majority, and can almost certainly no longer deliver a Conservative majority.

Why not? The Conservatives came within a smidgen of getting a majority in 2010 - a further swing of a percent or so would have done it. In 2005, Labour got a comfy majority. It remains to be seen what happens in 2015, but it's hard to imagine that Labour at least couldn't get a majority if they had a half-way decent leader and some vaguely credible strategy.

Support for political parties ebbs and flows. I remember pundits in around 1991 saying Labour were bound to win the next election easily. After the 1992 Labour defeat some of the same pundits were saying Labour was finished. It didn't work out quite like that...

Who knows what will happen in 2015, let alone 2020? If UKIP continue to split the right, Labour majorities look extremely plausible.

OldKingCole

Up until the late 80’s or thereabouts FPTP had a built in bias towards the Tories. That changed, I suspect because of depopulation of seats with large numbers of heavy industrial workers, and consequent boundary changes.
The bias now seems to be in Labour’s favour, at least in England.
Consequently AV wasn’t seen to be to the Tories advantage; gave a chance for tactical voting between the Left and Centre Left. How many seats are there which are Lab/LD battlegrounds, compared with those which are Con/Lab or Con/LD?
Now there’s another party on the Right and there’s a strong chance that the former Tory vote will be split.
I recognise that Clacton and Rochester & Strood were straight Tory/UKIP scraps in the by-elections, but, while I’m prepared to be proved wrong, I don’t expect either Labour or the LD’s to do as badly in those seats in May.

Jonathan

Inbuilt electoral system advantage or poor electoral strategy?

Tories should be trying to broaden their geographic appeal and stop piling up useless mega-majorities in the South East.

Instead, they prefer a nice old whinge about how unfair the world is and why others such as UKIP don't do what they're told.

rottenborough

MonikerDiCanio said:

CarlottaVance said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Salmondnomics is dead and discredited along with the Laffer lefties insisting an independent Scotland has to cut corporation tax. The Scottish Government’s first Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin in March 2013 predicted a ‘renewed oil boom’ based on a ‘cautious’ oil price of $113 a barrel for North Sea Brent crude. As of December 9th 2014 the price stood at $66.85 a barrel, a fall of over 40%, with every sign that it will fall lower. This blows a significant hole in the Salmondnomic vision of independence.

http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/message-to-the-messengers-part-two-where-next-after-the-indy-referendum/

Brent is currently $60.33

Ex-RBS economist and oil expert Salmond was predicting $ 150 a barrel for late 2014. Is he ever right about anything ?

Don't think its reasonable to single out Salmond on this one. Dominic Lawson had interesting piece on ST at weekend on how poor forecasting generally is.

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/columns/dominiclawson/article1498259.ece

rottenborough

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Bloomberg quoting Brent at $60

Richard_Nabavi

Gadfly said:

I therefore thought it would be interesting to produce an averaged chart of the YouGov polls, which spans 13 months, and therefore includes last year's festive season...

http://www.mediafire.com/view/k2dm60jdve29k8x/YouGov polls 13 months to 23 December 2014.jpg#

The first 20 data points of this chart represent the period 24 November - 20 December 2013 (which was the last YouGov poll for that year). Make of this what you will!

That's brilliant, thank you. By sticking to one pollster, we don't need to worry about house bias or methodological details, we can look at the overall trends very clearly. Here's my reading:

- Conservative vote share hardly changing over the 13 months

- Labour falling steadily, except for a slight uptick right at the end - we need to watch whether that persists.

- LibDems also falling steadily, which is not what one would have expected 13 months ago

- The Greens rising in what looks like almost a mirror image of the LibDem decline

- UKIP support volatile, with a marked increase a few months ago, but now flat at that higher level

BenM

Jonathan said:

Inbuilt electoral system advantage or poor electoral strategy?

Tories should be trying to broaden their geographic appeal and stop piling up useless mega-majorities in the South East.

Instead, they prefer a nice old whinge about how unfair the world is and why others such as UKIP don't do what they're told.

This.

JPJ2

David L

"I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem"

That makes no sense to me. AV is not even a PR system of voting, and would likely have made only a minor difference to the seats allocation.

It is a testimony to the political incompetence of Nick Clegg and his Lib Dem dopes that they had a referendum on a voting system in which scarcely anyone had the slightest interest.

Bobajob_

Interesting to see that Labour have clearly edged up in the Elbow polling average as we run in to the New Year. Looks like the Autumn Statement was a dud. And with just 19 weeks to go, three of them in the Christmas recess, the Tories are running out of road.

Richard_Nabavi

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income tax, give all Aberdonian men a night with the Duchess of Cambridge.

Ed Miliband is unable to persuade England, or the royal family, of the necessity of complying with these requests. So the SNP removes its support, the government falls, and we have another GE in early 2017, were the Tories led by XXXXX sweep back into power with an overall majority.

Seems entirely feasible to me. Except, PERHAPS, for the bit about Kate Middleton.

That's not a bad prediction, Kate aside, except that you've forgotten UKIP. In the scenario you describe, the Conservatives are likely to be in disarray with defectors peeling off to UKIP, leaving Labour, no matter how incompetent and unpopular they are, in a position to win the second election. If they're smart (a big 'if', admittedly) they'll find a way of ditching Ed along the way.

FluffyThoughts

CarlottaVance said:

saddened said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Alan, hard for them to say anything given they said the oil was almost finished and would contribute little to Scotland. They were forecasting oil at tuppence a gallon so hard for even those lying tossers to try and point it out.

What price is oil at the moment?

Salmondnomics is dead and discredited along with the Laffer lefties insisting an independent Scotland has to cut corporation tax. The Scottish Government’s first Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin in March 2013 predicted a ‘renewed oil boom’ based on a ‘cautious’ oil price of $113 a barrel for North Sea Brent crude. As of December 9th 2014 the price stood at $66.85 a barrel, a fall of over 40%, with every sign that it will fall lower. This blows a significant hole in the Salmondnomic vision of independence.

http://www.gerryhassan.com/blog/message-to-the-messengers-part-two-where-next-after-the-indy-referendum/

Brent is currently $60.33

The price of a barrel of Brent in US-dollars is not relevant: It is best denominated in the currency in which goods-and-services are sourced locally. Maybe Wee-Eck now prefers the price to be expressed in Euros and not English-Sterling...?

stodge

Morning all

On-topic, I'm sceptical as to the value of England-only polls given the apparent divergences within England as well. UKIP are clearly doing very well in some areas but in large parts of London are irrelevant as witnessed by their mediocre showings in the Newham and Kingston Council by-elections.

Indeed, London as a whole is probably atypical as the local elections in May were very good for Labour but within that there are, as the Ashcroft poll of marginals suggested, nuances. Brentford & Isleworth looked a solid Labour gain but other suburban marginals were much closer while otoh the LDs looked set to increase their majority in Carshalton & Wallington.

Populus yesterday showed the duopoly at 70% and gave the highest Conservative rating of any poll for several days at 35% - in truth, draw the line at 33% and see how many times the Tories have been above it and how many times Labour have been below it in the past fortnight and that tells you a lot.

Plenty of the Conservatives on here seem to be whistling to keep their spirits up and coming up with ever more complex data sets and theories to explain why they are doing all right and going to win a majority in May.

Perhaps. I really don't know what is going to happen and I think a lot of the psephological theories can be thrown out of the window with the arrival of UKIP whose vote profile is different and may behave differently to the old-fashioned Lib Dem midterm surge.

Jonathan

Richard_Nabavi said:

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income tax, give all Aberdonian men a night with the Duchess of Cambridge.

Ed Miliband is unable to persuade England, or the royal family, of the necessity of complying with these requests. So the SNP removes its support, the government falls, and we have another GE in early 2017, were the Tories led by XXXXX sweep back into power with an overall majority.

Seems entirely feasible to me. Except, PERHAPS, for the bit about Kate Middleton.

That's not a bad prediction, Kate aside, except that you've forgotten UKIP. In the scenario you describe, the Conservatives are likely to be in disarray with defectors peeling off to UKIP, leaving Labour, no matter how incompetent and unpopular they are, in a position to win the second election. If they're smart (a big 'if', admittedly) they'll find a way of ditching Ed along the way.

Coalition with the SNP would surely mean Salmond int he cabinet. DPM or ForSec perhaps? Whilst he is clearly an able politician, I find it hard to see that happening.

More likely a minority govt and second election.

Richard_Nabavi

SeanT said:

Nah. I reckon that once voters realise Miliband AND Labour, when in power, are obliged to pursue identical economic policies to the Tories, then Labour's unpopularity will be Hollande-esque. Historic. Epochal.

They will get utterly tonked in the GE I envisage. Voters will think "We might as well have a competent party doing horrible things", and they will return to the Tories.

I agree, except that they'll only return to the Tories if the Tories are united. The history of the party since 1990 suggests that might be optimistic.

Sean_F

Jonathan said:

Inbuilt electoral system advantage or poor electoral strategy?

Tories should be trying to broaden their geographic appeal and stop piling up useless mega-majorities in the South East.

Instead, they prefer a nice old whinge about how unfair the world is and why others such as UKIP don't do what they're told.

The Tories' problem isn't so much piling up useless majorities (Labour wins far more seats with 55% + of the vote than the Tories do) as winning 20-30% of the vote in places that are secure for Labour (the Labour vote by contrast drops away far more rapidly in safe Conservative seats). Those are wasted votes. The danger for Labour if those Tory voters realise their wasting their votes and switch behind UKIP.

But, you're right about the whinging. If the Conservatives lose in May, the fault will be theirs alone.

Richard_Nabavi

Jonathan said:

Coalition with the SNP would surely mean Salmond int he cabinet. DPM or ForSec perhaps? Whilst he is clearly an able politician, I find it hard to see that happening.

More likely a minority govt and second election.

Yes, I agree that a formal coalition is unlikely - it would be the SNP offering opportunistic support and generally throwing their weight around in an awkward and unpredictable way. Whatever the arithmetic, we're unlikely to be as lucky next time as we were in 2010 in terms of getting a stable government in a hung parliament.

BenM

Today's rather poor GDP figures showing GDP down, Trade deficit up and business investment down means the ONS has caught up with the electorate in reading that the Autumn Statement was the largest Turkey of the season. Matched only by the enormous Turkey who delivered it.

AlastairMeeks

Jonathan said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income tax, give all Aberdonian men a night with the Duchess of Cambridge.

Ed Miliband is unable to persuade England, or the royal family, of the necessity of complying with these requests. So the SNP removes its support, the government falls, and we have another GE in early 2017, were the Tories led by XXXXX sweep back into power with an overall majority.

Seems entirely feasible to me. Except, PERHAPS, for the bit about Kate Middleton.

That's not a bad prediction, Kate aside, except that you've forgotten UKIP. In the scenario you describe, the Conservatives are likely to be in disarray with defectors peeling off to UKIP, leaving Labour, no matter how incompetent and unpopular they are, in a position to win the second election. If they're smart (a big 'if', admittedly) they'll find a way of ditching Ed along the way.

Coalition with the SNP would surely mean Salmond int he cabinet. DPM or ForSec perhaps? Whilst he is clearly an able politician, I find it hard to see that happening.

More likely a minority govt and second election.

I don't see why a Labour minority government would necessarily be unstable, even if it didn't have supply and confidence from any other party (which I expect in practice it could secure). Its policies are generally individually popular, so it could put them forward and dare other parties to vote them down.

In a hung Parliament, it's rarely in the interest of a majority to have an early election.

OldKingCole

JPJ2 said:

David L

"I don't think anyone ever wins under AV which is part of the problem"

That makes no sense to me. AV is not even a PR system of voting, and would likely have made only a minor difference to the seats allocation.

It is a testimony to the political incompetence of Nick Clegg and his Lib Dem dopes that they had a referendum on a voting system in which scarcely anyone had the slightest interest.

To be fair to Clegg, it wasn’t his choice. It was the only option Cameron would let him have. I don’t know whether Clegg thought, or was led to believe, that Cameron would instruct his lot to soft pedal but they didn’t.
It may be that Cameron couldn’t deliver what he’d suggested, of course.

It’s the season of goodwill, so I won’t discuss other possible duplicity!

It’s also fair to say that Labour weren’t backwards in coming forwards with opposition, but they did have the excuse that Clegg had “let the Tories in”!

Sean_F

Richard_Nabavi said:

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income tax, give all Aberdonian men a night with the Duchess of Cambridge.

Ed Miliband is unable to persuade England, or the royal family, of the necessity of complying with these requests. So the SNP removes its support, the government falls, and we have another GE in early 2017, were the Tories led by XXXXX sweep back into power with an overall majority.

Seems entirely feasible to me. Except, PERHAPS, for the bit about Kate Middleton.

That's not a bad prediction, Kate aside, except that you've forgotten UKIP. In the scenario you describe, the Conservatives are likely to be in disarray with defectors peeling off to UKIP, leaving Labour, no matter how incompetent and unpopular they are, in a position to win the second election. If they're smart (a big 'if', admittedly) they'll find a way of ditching Ed along the way.

If Labour proved to be so useless and incompetent, they'd probably be running third behind Conservatives and UKIP, and/or facing horrendous levels of tactical voting.

TGOHF

BenM said:

Today's rather poor GDP figures showing GDP down, Trade deficit up and business investment down means the ONS has caught up with the electorate in reading that the Autumn Statement was the largest Turkey of the season. Matched only by the enormous Turkey who delivered it.

What figures have been revised "down" Ben ?

YoY Growth %'s or GDP totals ?

Richard_Nabavi

antifrank said:

I don't see why a Labour minority government would necessarily be unstable, even if it didn't have supply and confidence from any other party (which I expect in practice it could secure). Its policies are generally individually popular, so it could put them forward and dare other parties to vote them down.

In a hung Parliament, it's rarely in the interest of a majority to have an early election.

Hmm, it doesn't work like that. Firstly, even if they can get majorities on various measures which are individually popular, they would be in combination incoherent without some unpopular measures for which they couldn't get a majority. This has disagreeable consequences which would require sudden, chaotic and highly unpopular U-turns, most notably in slashing public spending in a panic.

Those of us of a certain age have been there, and have seen the T-shirt. 1974 is now receding from the collective memory, which is why people are now contemplating minority government with equanimity. They are likely to have a rude awakening when the reality presents itself.

Flightpath

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income

SeanT said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

SeanT said:

Wild Christmassy prediction.

Based on these figures, Ed Miliband wins with NOM, and goes into some kind of Coalition with the SNP.

After a year or two of further, unavoidable austerity, he is massively unpopular. The SNP take the opportunity to show who's boss, and how much they hate everyone south of Berwick, and they (deliberately) make some impossible and divisive demands - e.g. remove Trident, cancel Scottish income tax, give all Aberdonian men a night with the Duchess of Cambridge.

Ed Miliband is unable to persuade England, or the royal family, of the necessity of complying with these requests. So the SNP removes its support, the government falls, and we have another GE in early 2017, were the Tories led by XXXXX sweep back into power with an overall majority.

Seems entirely feasible to me. Except, PERHAPS, for the bit about Kate Middleton.

As for UKIP, it all depends how they do in 2015. If they get over 10% I suspect the next Tory leader, after Cameron's resignation, will be minded to cut an informal electoral deal with Farage.

Why would any tory leader be minded to cut a deal with Farage? He/she might as well shout 'roll up roll up vote UKIP'. And cutting a deal with ukip just tars the tories with ukip's sticky brush.

Sean_F

SeanT said:

I begin to despair of this country. 1400 white girls raped by racist pedophiles in Rotherham.... silence. Inertia. Maybe an MBE for the "director of children's services".

But man posts vile and racist remarks on Facebook!!!?? A YEAR IN JAIL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-30580265

Joyce Thacker will probably be a future Minister for Children. Once you rise above a certain level in this country, you get rewarded for incompetence.

Jonathan

antifrank said:

I don't see why a Labour minority government would necessarily be unstable, even if it didn't have supply and confidence from any other party (which I expect in practice it could secure). Its policies are generally individually popular, so it could put them forward and dare other parties to vote them down.

In a hung Parliament, it's rarely in the interest of a majority to have an early election.

The ideal model for a minority/small majority govt is 1966.

TGOHF

SeanT said:

I begin to despair of this country. 1400 white girls raped by racist pedophiles in Rotherham.... silence. Inertia. Maybe an MBE for the "director of children's services".

But man posts vile and racist remarks on Facebook!!!?? A YEAR IN JAIL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-30580265

Sorry but weren't 5 men given lengthy jail sentences in 2010 with more criminal cases about to come to court ?

AlastairMeeks

Richard_Nabavi said:

antifrank said:

I don't see why a Labour minority government would necessarily be unstable, even if it didn't have supply and confidence from any other party (which I expect in practice it could secure). Its policies are generally individually popular, so it could put them forward and dare other parties to vote them down.

In a hung Parliament, it's rarely in the interest of a majority to have an early election.

Hmm, it doesn't work like that. Firstly, even if they can get majorities on various measures which are individually popular, they are in combination incoherent without some unpopular measures for which they couldn't get a majority. This has disagreeable consequences which would require sudden, chaotic and highly unpopular U-turns, most notably in slashing public spending in a panic.

Those of us of a certain age have been there, and have seen the T-shirt. 1974 is now receding from the collective memory, which is why people are now contemplating minority government with equanimity. They are likely to have a rude awakening when the reality presents itself.

The SNP had a wafer-thin plurality in Scotland in 2007. Its administration was neither chaotic nor incoherent.

We might be in for quite a lot of excitement at times when Labour were facing down other parties and daring them to provoke a change of government or new election, but generally one or more of the minor parties (or possibly in some circumstances the Conservatives) would blink.

PClipp

OldKingCole said:

JPJ2 said:

David L
It is a testimony to the political incompetence of Nick Clegg and his Lib Dem dopes that they had a referendum on a voting system in which scarcely anyone had the slightest interest.

To be fair to Clegg, it wasn’t his choice. It was the only option Cameron would let him have. I don’t know whether Clegg thought, or was led to believe, that Cameron would instruct his lot to soft pedal but they didn’t.
It may be that Cameron couldn’t deliver what he’d suggested, of course.
...
It’s also fair to say that Labour weren’t backwards in coming forwards with opposition, but they did have the excuse that Clegg had “let the Tories in”!

Leaving aside, of course, Mr Cole, that fact that support for AV was in the Labour manifesto. If Labour had played straight, the next general election ought to have been the first one under AV. What fun that would have been for us punters!

sarissa

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

The Saudis are really playing hardball with marginal production: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11308952/Opec-Oil-plummets-after-Saudis-says-20-crude-is-possible.html

As a net oil importer UK plc should be a net gainer from this and there will undoubtedly be a positive effect on the BoP which will increase growth but the effect on Scotland will be quite severe. Aberdeen has been one of the best performing housing markets in the UK this year on a promised new wave of investment which will undoubtedly now be put on hold.

I may even be able to get an hotel room next time I have a case up there which will be a bonus. Aberdeen is about the only place I end up paying anything close to the "official" rate.

I'm sort of left puzzled why the Unionist parties aren't making more of this.

Salmond's vision of an oil economy, with big banks and using the Euro would be bankrupting Scots right now, an arc of austerity from Dumfries to Shetland

Assuming (a big if) the current depressed oil price lasts for another 16 months, then reducing the N Sea revenue from £6.8 billion (Indy white paper figure) to current estimate of £2.5 billion would increase the theoretical Scottish deficit to about 5.5% of GDP from the 2.4% in the white paper.

For comparison, the UK deficit for the for the four years 2009-13 was -7.6%, -6.7%, -5.7%, -5.8%.

Bankrupt? I don't think so.