Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why the Tories could need to be 10% ahead in England and Wa
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why the Tories could need to be 10% ahead in England and Wales just to stand still
One of the reasons why the latest Electoral Calculus projection, see previous thread, appeared to be so good for LAB was the way Scotland and England/Wales were treated. This is the response I got from Martin Baxter on the computation:-
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
They will certainly hold on to the seats they gained in the north last time like Harrogate and York Outer.
Looks like another Cameron, Clegg coalition to me in 2015.
Which will finish the Lib Dems as a UK wide party for a generation.
(PS You didn't miss much)
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=184794.0
In 2010 Labour recorded a swing towards them in most Scottish seats, while the Tories recorded very large swings in the SE, Wales, Cornwall and in most cities in England apart from East London, Inner Birmingham and Liverpool.
@DavidL has explained the logic several times in a very convincing manner; I am sure that someone better at maths than me could easily work out the statistical implications.
Past performance is not a guide to future performance
Well, 15% vote share for UKIP will win them a lot of seats (25+) if the LibDems also have 15% and the Greens 10% (simply because it means nobody is going to have more than 30% vote share). On the other hand, if UKIP get 15%, the LibDems 5% and the Greens 2%, then UKIP is going to struggle to get more than a handful of seats.
UNS no longer works, with five or six parties in contention nationally. As OGH keeps reminding us, we have 650 elections this year, one in each constituency, not just one national one.
This will not stop Labour and the Tories trying to polarise the election around the person of the next prime minister. But since I do not want either Cameron or Milliband to be prime minister, that is not a very persuasive argument. And that does rather blow the Tory campaign strategy out of the water, doesn´t it?
Antifrank is doing an interesting job, looking at the prospects for individual seats on the basis of current betting odds. I think this is a step in the right direction, in that it takes us away from UNS. That said, his findings do depend on the amount of money being placed on the various candidates- and presumably at this stage punters are being guided still very largely by the UNS opinion polls, and those with the largest wallets (who might be supposed to be a bit blue, or perhaps purple) are having the greatest influence.
Mark Senior is regularly derided on here by certain people for giving consideration to local by-election results. They are wrong to do so, because a party will do well either when it enjoys a favourable wind generated by the air-war (recently the case of UKIP); or when it has a good organisation and can overcome negative propaganda (the case of the Lib Dems).
This is getting a bit long, so willl break off here.....
In fact I suspect both Labour and Conservative will fail to win more than 300 seats. I wonder what odds I'd get on such an outcome? I'm not looking for a bet, but just kind of curious as to how others here would assess the odds.
Maybe if Shadsy were around I could be tempted...?
Not until Valentines day will they seriously consider who the PM they will put in place will be, and then Labour will tank, in what will become the St Valentines Day Swingback Massacre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se_qAXc4VgM
Of course there are arguments about UNS but if the Tories are only level-pegging with LAB in Enfgland and Wales they could lose a lot of seats.
The prospects for rich pickings for CON from the yellows are not very strong as the Lord A polling has shown.
As it happens, I have a friend who is standing as a Lib Dem candidate in a seat which might go from Tory to Lib Dem. "They" (to conceal his/her identity) were told some time ago that they needed to raise another 50,000 if they wanted to win. No idea whether or not they were successful in this, but no matter.
One poster here (whose name escapes me - sorry) was scandalised recently to learn from the Electoral Commission site that 45,000 had come in in support of Jo Swinson´s campaign. So it does seem that in some seats the Lib Dems have enough money to come close to matching the legendary Tory millions. The Tories are not being allowed to win seats by the sheer weight of their money.
Easterross reported that the Lib Dems had put out two publications in the Caithness constituency just before Christmas; and Fitalass reported that the same had happened in the case of Aberdeenshire West. Nick Palmer reported a glossy Lib Dem leaflet in the Ashfield constituency part of Broxtowe District, well before Christmas - a seat that the Lib Dems very nearly won from Labour last time.
These are just four seats where it is very clear that the Lib Dems are fighting to win. Contrary to popular thought on this site, the Lib Dems are not just rolling over and waiting to be slaughtered everywhere.
These are four seats which PB posters regularly put into a different column after May - and I have no doubt there are many others where there is strong Lib Dem campaigning going on.
So do your own research - just saying - and have an enjoyable and profitable New Year.
But how many seats would that give the Blues? My guess is 280 or so, but even that is dependent on middling performances from the LDs, UKIP and Greens. If the minor Parties poll well, that 5% lead might be worth no more than 250.
And it's hard to devise a plausible scenario in which it would deliver DC an Overall Majority.
1987: 69.4%
1992: 68.1%
1997: 77.8%
2001: 77.8%
2005: 69.5%
2010: 69.5%
Amazing how stable the figure has been. As the figures show it didn't change at all between 1997 and 2001, between 2005 and 2010 and hardly changed between 1987 and 1992.
http://xkcd.com/1122/
In 2010 they got 42% in Scotland vs. c. 30% in England & Wales.
The Ashcroft polling had this very close with the LDs ahead amongst all those expressing a preference. 13/8 seemed good price.
The media seem to be fussing about Richard Smith (ex-editor of the BMJ) stating the bleeding obvious - that cancer is the best way to die. It probably is, if well-controlled. Cancer is an inevitable consequence of living.
You cure some and you will then probably die of another if your cells divide long enough.
But saying it to the media is casting pearls before swine. They will certainly claim he's saying something he isn't. No wonder politicians lie, there's no point telling the truth anyway.
"...if the GB polls are right overall, the Liberal Democrats must be falling more where they started stronger, and the BES data suggest the drop is broadly proportional to their prior strength. This mirrors the pattern of change at the local authority level at the European Parliament elections this year, adding confidence that the effect is real.
The implications for Liberal Democrat seats are straightforward. If they are indeed losing most heavily in the seats they are defending they are set to lose several more seats than national polls with uniform swing would predict.
Maybe closer to the election the Liberal Democrats will benefit from voters focusing more on the specific situation in their constituency, with tactical voting and incumbency effects kicking in. Constituency polls by Lord Ashcroft suggest that prompting people to think about the candidates in their constituency when asking people whom they will vote for results in much more Liberal Democrat voting in Liberal Democrat seats. But there is a danger that such prompting over-states incumbency advantage. For many Liberal Democrat MPs to hold on to their seats they will need to become even more personally popular than they were in 2010: a tough task under the circumstances.
It is also worth noting that even with a much smaller sample size, a similar analysis of the 2009 wave of the BES internet panel rightly suggested little difference in Liberal Democrat 2010 performance in the seats they previously won compared with those where they came second in 2005. So the above finding for 2014 is not just a usual pre-election campaign poll finding. Moreover the constituency variation in the 2010 BES data corresponds well to the actual result. So there are various good reasons to believe the Liberal Democrats are facing a bigger uphill battle in their own seats. The 2014 BES data, suggest they will do 10 points worse in their own seats compared with where they were previously second. Even if this difference is somewhat attenuated by the time of the election, it is quite a gap to close."
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/what-the-bes-suggests-about-constituency-variation-in-party-performance-by-stephen-fisher-university-of-oxford/
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/dec/30/labour-revolt-consultants-coach-election-candidates-labour-people?CMP=twt_gu
Is anyone really thinking about the general election yet? It's barely 4 months away yet I'm yet to hear it mentioned amongst any of my friends or work colleagues.
I am still struck by the Ashcroft poll quotation on this of a voter a few months ago. "8 months away? It may as well be 8 years away."
Time is running out but it's still my view that the fundamentals for Miliband are very poor and when people finally turn their attention to choosing a government hese will show through into the final voting figures.
I can't see the Conservatives dropping below 280 seats but what's less clear to me is how Cameron can stay in power if he settles out at, say, just under 295 seats. I'm currently reading David Law's excellent 22 days in May and what's absolutely clear is just how crucial the parliamentary arithmetic was in the hung parliament negotiations and taking the 'unpalatable' option of the Conservatives over the 'impossible' option of Labour.
Greens to get 1.
Respect 0.
My prediction: 40+ seats for UKIP and San fairy ann for all other results.
It strikes me as he is searching for evidence to support his views rather than building his views on the evidence.
- UKIP under 18% (with you)
- LibDems to have >4x UKIP seats (isam)
- Cameron to still be leader of the Tory party after the election (HurstLlama)
Mr. K, 40+ seats for UKIP strikes me as very optimistic. Given their recent slight slide in the polls, I'd be very surprised if they achieved that.
If he'd implemented a more robust immigration or European policy, and been seen to believe in it, would that have mitigated against the rise of UKIP? Or if he'd just been more diligent with his party management - courteous and respectful to his party activists and MPs - and less rude to those considering voting UKIP, would that have done the trick?
I suspect it's a bit of both and, in reality, too many Conservatives ending up concluding he wasn't really on their side.
"40+ seats for UKIP"
If that were the case, "Ca ne fait rien" for the others is even more unlikely.
I suspect I'm in the majority but 5 seats would be very satisfactory for the Kippers, although I'm sure Mr Senior would call 40plus seats a disaster for them.
His approval ratings are positively North Korean.
My fear is if the Tory party loses in May, they'll revert back to Papua New Guinea-style orgies of cannibalism and chief-killing as the fault line over the EU widens.
There's a wing of the Tory party that likes to destroy Prime Ministers over the EU, in a few years time they might finally click.
I suspect if we do have an in/out referendum, and we vote to remain in the EU, the BOOers will emulate the Nat approach, so there's no point trying to appease The BOOers/UKIPers.
Do they have cash to spare in this constituency?
Of course it could well be the latter subtly influenced the flawed conclusions of the former, neatly summing up the issue of metropolitan elites.
Cameron could have mitigated against this by broadening his inner circle, but he's always had a weakness of preferring his longstanding friends.
That serious failure of leadership is his fault and his alone.
On your second point, I don't think the cancer in the Conservative party over Europe will end until we finally end up in a position where we advocate leaving the EU. Which we will.
Can you tell us which seats will be amongst the 40?
I've come to a view that Reckless has a good chance of holding on and have bet accordingly. Carswell is clear and I'm not convinced by the Lord A polling in Thanet S which had CON ahead.
I've got some hopes for my 40/1 bet on UKIP in Camborne & Redruth though I've written of my 11/2 UKIP bet in Eastleigh.
But where else? We haven't seen any Lord A polling in Boston & Skegness and UKIP's choice of a 22 year old candidate doesn't add to confidence.
Thurrock is clearly a possibility but where else?
Worth recalling the Western Empire could've seen off all external threats if it hadn't become addicted to regicide and consumed its strength in perpetual civil war. In that regard, Cameron's been a strategic failure, having presided over the splitting of the right.
The Conservatives could do with an Aurelian to stitch the Empire back together [and it'd help if they don't assassinate him].
Until the europhile dinosaurs are finally excised from the party, the Tories will remain permanently split.
I have published it here enough!
If the UK votes to stay in the EU, then the Conservatives have a very unpalatable choice regarding Europe. Have a policy that is rejected by referendum by most voters, or allow ukip to continue siphoning off supporters.
Personally, I think UKIP (like the snp) benefits most from a narrow "in" vote. And the LibDems benefit most from an "out" vote (as they lose their most unpopular policy).
#LibDems Great Britain by-election results since GE2010. They won Eastleigh, but 11 lost deposits from 19 contests.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/550716028293251073
If UKIP win only Thurrrock I would be well in profit despite having many more losers than winners
I tipped up Cannock Chase at 150/1... if that cops (5/2 now) it pays for a few losers
Bitter old man, cheer up x
40% of voters would currently vote to remain in the EU = Out of touch europhile dinosaurs
39% of voters would currently vote to leave the EU = The majority (sic/lol) which UKIP are in touch with
Edited extra bit: no idea if the spreads are up yet (not something I bet on), but you should consider a 20 race calendar likely if you're betting on them.
What some Conservative loyalists seem to overlook is that without necessarily changing a single current policy the leadership could have held on to far more of its original voter and activist base simply by listening to them, treating them courteously and with respect, and showing they were on our side.
But they couldn't because they weren't.
Five or so would indeed be a decent result and give them a good base from which to work. My guess is that their results will be patchy and we'll see some surprises, such as Dover and Cleethorpes, and maybe a few disappointments, but they could make more than five, Double figures would be sensational.
(But it ain't gonna be 40. Sorry Mike.)
My experience is that this has become quite a common fault among Libdems since the Euro Election. I think it is because Libdems have over the last forty years gradually built up the party from 6 seats in 1970 to the sixty there are today and had great hopes for a Liberal future. For the first time in modern times this is in peril with the liberals risking being back to where they were in the ealry '80s before the SDP alliance. Until the Euro elections I think they just persuaded themselves it was midterm issues and the pendulum would swing back before the election. Now they are very worried that it might not, which would decimate the party for a generation.
There is also a slight tone of resentment (most noticeable when UKIP matters are discussed), fuelled, I think, by two things:
1) Libdems basically did the decent thing and put country before party in forming the coalition, and feel they have been kicked in the goolies by the electorate as a result (far more so than the Tories - despite UKIPs rise)
2) After forty years where Lab and Tory have become more small "l" liberal in outlook, the rise of UKIP threatens to create a very unliberal political voice in the UK again, especially as they look aghast at how many Libdem voters have switched directly to UKIP, demonstrating that they never had much time for Liberalism but just used the Liberals (as a cad might use a young lady) - to get at the Tories.
Basically I think they are very hurt (in an emotional sense). And to be fair, I have some sympathy for them.
On the postitive side, there has however, been more "passion" in Mikes posts since this shift than previously.
One thing that he found out, which shocked me, and might be useful if SPIN introduce a 3-2-1 market
UKIP are favourites in 5 seats but 2nd (or joint 2nd) favourite in 289
His twitter account is here
https://twitter.com/MitchellSt/with_replies
...
...
So far.
Your best chance is to get Shadsy drunk and get him to take place bets. ;-)
These do tell me however that UKIP wins will come almost exactly 60/40 from the Tories and Labour.
So it made betting on total performance across the country.
Or am I misremembering?
There aren't that many europhiles who are that significant in terms of authority within the party any more. The media pays far more attention to Heseltine, Clark et al. than MPs or members
Poor publicity shy Paddy Power, who paid out on Chelsea winning the title back in November.
*For those unaware, they lost Byzantium and most of the Empire. The city was later recovered, but the Empire never did.
Spurs have scored some cracking goals today.
you started at 300/2 and you can lay at, say, 10/2 and crystalise 95% of your potential profit.
You are wrong to be so siure I would try and hide or lie
If you want I will publish every bet I have on the GE, and you can judge for yourself next May how I did
Although I did back Harry Kane to score the 5th goal in this game at 14/1 at half time
Cheer Up, and try not to be so bitter by accusing people you don't know of lying x
or
walk over?
Typical Tory, trying to pretend that we can have something that we can't.
Do you think the deposit will cover it?