Mr. 565, the delivery's weaker, but word-for-word, Miliband now speaks in Blairite terms. Next time he's on TV, imagine Blair saying what Miliband says, and you'll see the words are practically identical.
Mr. Johnno, I agree that the broadcasters are overstepping the mark by some way, but it's also worth noting print media will generally be against the debates for similar reasons of self-interest.
Mr Dancer,I'm against the leaders debate even if Cameron was in opposition and wanted them.
I watched the 2010 debates which took so much coverage away from the rest of the GE campaign in which we had graphs showing who won the debates or leaders coached on what to do or say.
@TGOHF "If the SNP win 50+ seats will they really want to bring down a Con govt and roll the dice again ? I suspect not.
You think they would prop one up?"
Riiiiiight!......are you allowed out on your own? The SNP are running on a platform of painting the Labour party as being "in bed" with the Tories? And you think they would help them stay in government?
But in a follow up GE they might only get 40 MPs.
Or 30.
or 20.
Would it look such a smart move then ?
Or the Tories might make sufficient gains and then give them nothing.
I expect the SNP will act in the interests of the SNP.
The SNP are running on a platform of painting the Labour party as being "in bed" with the Tories? And you think they would help them stay in government?
I don't imagine they'd very much care about the 'UK' government' if they were given free reign over Scotland which is their ultimate objective.
One thing - all the models look to have the Lib Dems losing Bristol West - if you look at local election results there, well you can see why.
I'm not sure if Labour or the Greens will win there but by taking Coral 4-1 (Green) and Hills 12-5 (Labour) you can effectively lay the Lib Dems at Evens there.
@TGOHF "If the SNP win 50+ seats will they really want to bring down a Con govt and roll the dice again ? I suspect not.
You think they would prop one up?"
Riiiiiight!......are you allowed out on your own? The SNP are running on a platform of painting the Labour party as being "in bed" with the Tories? And you think they would help them stay in government?
But in a follow up GE they might only get 40 MPs.
Or 30.
or 20.
Would it look such a smart move then ?
I expect the SNP will act in the interests of the SNP.
I don't think there is any way to integrate the two, and I'm too much of a lazy bum to update the wiki with a new image each time I update the spreadsheet!
Dave better hope he doesn't fall behind in the polls for any reason, or he is going to look very foolish in the last weeks of the election. Still, his point blank refusal to compromise is commendable.
Whistling in the dark comes to mind but I had lunch with an ex Lib Dem Parliamentary Candidate who believes on the back of some internal polling that the Tsunami heading their way in Scotland has got marginally lower since Christmas.
Dave better hope he doesn't fall behind in the polls for any reason, or he is going to look very foolish in the last weeks of the election. Still, his point blank refusal to compromise is commendable.
Posters here have made the argument that If he is seen weak by folding to the BBC, it won't leave much hope for EU renegotiations.
Frequency of update is related to Kipper % - hence why it isn't updated much anymore.
Your obsession with that particular purple line is unique.
As I understand it the bod who does the graph, does lots of them for various different Wikipedia articles, and isn't especially interested in British politics. (I think he's spanish).
I don't think there is any way to integrate the two, and I'm too much of a lazy bum to update the wiki with a new image each time I update the spreadsheet!
Fair enough.
Do you mind if I mention your graph on the Wikipedia talk page as an alternative option for them to consider?
RobD Between a rock and a hard place Rob. The strategy of avoiding the debates was probably made with the assumption of a decent poll lead at this point.
I don't think there is any way to integrate the two, and I'm too much of a lazy bum to update the wiki with a new image each time I update the spreadsheet!
Fair enough.
Do you mind if I mention your graph on the Wikipedia talk page as an alternative option for them to consider?
Go ahead. It does contain all the numbers so that someone can easily extract the values and plot it in their software package of choice.
I like the graphs in some of the other election pages where they use a nice statistical method to work out the trend lines and uncertainties. Might have a go at that for the 2015-only data.
On the other side of the 2015 site I reckon that Nuneaton and Lincoln will be won by more than the predicted margins by Labour. Sanders could hold on in Torbay too.
Edwina lives there now if she gets involved maybe Labour have a chance!! In reality though it is a near certain Cons hold the sitting MP for a politician is generally held in very high regard.
Yes, that's what I meant - I don't see Labour winning High Peak.
Note also that this Nowcast has Labour most Votes, Conservatives most seats.
Naively, I would have thought Tory most votes Lab most seats would be more likely, especially if they lose all those seats in Scotland where they used to weigh votes.
Labour have lost 1% of the UK vote and 5% of the UK seats at a rough estimate with Scotland.
That sort of thing has implications for all the markets.
Lab most votes, Con most seats is still 25/1 at Labrokes. Scotland makes it more likely, but add in a good kipper performance in Tory seats increasing the efficiency of the Con vote and it is not the outlandish though it once was.
He didn't do especially well last time, but says they've made some improvements to their modelling., so the site might be worth keeping an eye on.
I like Nate, he's funny.
"Apparently I’ll even be visiting something called Skegness"
Not much point looking at the site for the election forecasts, since it looks like they're simply using those from elsewhere...
Yeah, this time we’re partnering with Chris Hanretty, Benjamin Lauderdale and Nick Vivyan, three professors who together run the site electionforecast.co.uk. They’ve developed a model that’s very much in the spirit of FiveThirtyEight’s U.S. election forecasts — it’s empirical, it’s probabilistic, it emphasizes uncertainty. But they’ve had much more time to study these questions thoroughly instead of taking the (let’s be honest) half-assed approach we did in 2010.
The biggest problem with the debates from Cameron's point of view is not that the great British public is upset (they are not) or that it might change their vote (it won't) but that he has denied those self important ***** that run our news Channels their opportunity to waddle centre stage and sound important.
They will be very reluctant to forgive him for that and it will adversely affect the coverage/spin that they provide. Probably still worth it though.
Whatever the perception or reality of the news channels' bias, it is not a good look for a politician, especially the PM, to make them any kind of target.
Isn't that what Labour's entire strategy about the press is? To make them a target? And to claim that this shows Milliband standing up for the little guy?
("Little guy" in this context means the Hugh Grants of this world.)
You mean those who would play at being our Prime Minister?
He didn't do especially well last time, but says they've made some improvements to their modelling., so the site might be worth keeping an eye on.
I like Nate, he's funny.
"Apparently I’ll even be visiting something called Skegness"
Not much point looking at the site for the election forecasts, since it looks like they're simply using those from elsewhere...
Yeah, this time we’re partnering with Chris Hanretty, Benjamin Lauderdale and Nick Vivyan, three professors who together run the site electionforecast.co.uk. They’ve developed a model that’s very much in the spirit of FiveThirtyEight’s U.S. election forecasts — it’s empirical, it’s probabilistic, it emphasizes uncertainty. But they’ve had much more time to study these questions thoroughly instead of taking the (let’s be honest) half-assed approach we did in 2010.
Christ, Populus are already out, TNS still haven't released their data for (what must surely be) last week. The previous TNS online polls were 16th Feb and 2nd Feb.
Sunil are you sure this poll even took place. TNS seem to have no obvious sponsor..
They've been doing fortnightly online polls for months. This year they did them (fieldwork end dates) on 8th Jan, 19th Jan, 2nd Feb and 16th Feb.
(Not to be confused with their phone poll with end-date 26th Jan!)
Frequency of update is related to Kipper % - hence why it isn't updated much anymore.
Your obsession with that particular purple line is unique.
As I understand it the bod who does the graph, does lots of them for various different Wikipedia articles, and isn't especially interested in British politics. (I think he's spanish).
Reel em in... I was kidding. He doesn it regularly around the first week of the month. Not many wouldnt agree that that isn't often enough in the run up to the GE.
However the purple line is still trending down - now sub 15.
Christ, Populus are already out, TNS still haven't released their data for (what must surely be) last week. The previous TNS online polls were 16th Feb and 2nd Feb.
Sunil are you sure this poll even took place. TNS seem to have no obvious sponsor..
They've been doing fortnightly online polls for months. This year they did them (fieldwork end dates) on 8th Jan, 19th Jan, 2nd Feb and 16th Feb.
(Not to be confused with their phone poll with end-date 26th Jan!)
He didn't do especially well last time, but says they've made some improvements to their modelling., so the site might be worth keeping an eye on.
I like Nate, he's funny.
"Apparently I’ll even be visiting something called Skegness"
Not much point looking at the site for the election forecasts, since it looks like they're simply using those from elsewhere...
Yeah, this time we’re partnering with Chris Hanretty, Benjamin Lauderdale and Nick Vivyan, three professors who together run the site electionforecast.co.uk. They’ve developed a model that’s very much in the spirit of FiveThirtyEight’s U.S. election forecasts — it’s empirical, it’s probabilistic, it emphasizes uncertainty. But they’ve had much more time to study these questions thoroughly instead of taking the (let’s be honest) half-assed approach we did in 2010.
So it'll just be the same values on both sites?That is my assumption, until shown otherwise.
Yep! And MikeL is the one who spots all my mistakes!
I'm gonna give TNS till midnight and then publish ELBOW for week-ending 8th Mar. At present, Lab are only 0.3% ahead across all nine polls for last week. For YG polls only it's a dead-heat (33.7 each), but the non-YouGov polls (exc. TNS) give Lab a 0.7% lead.
Yep! And MikeL is the one who spots all my mistakes!
I'm gonna give TNS till midnight and then publish ELBOW for week-ending 8th Mar. At present, Lab are only 0.3% ahead across all nine polls for last week. For YG polls only it's a dead-heat (33.7 each), but the non-YouGov polls (exc. TNS) give Lab a 0.7% lead.
@richardDodd Those absentee landlords have supplied meat for my freezer for many a year, gord bless 'em!
If that is true (to which I assign probability <1)
Is it beef/lamb? If it is you are almost certainly involved in stealing from a tenant farmer who is likely to be so rolling in it, his family gets tax credits. Do you not understand "landlord"?
or is it venison? In which case you have been duped into paying for something you should be paid to dispose of, and are unwittingly doing unpaid work for a Danish billionaire in culling his gross overpopulation of deer - a service he would usually pay for.
Well done! Robin Hood eat your heart out, cos Smarmie either or both of steeeeals from the poor, and gives unstintingly to the rich.
Yep! And MikeL is the one who spots all my mistakes!
I'm gonna give TNS till midnight and then publish ELBOW for week-ending 8th Mar. At present, Lab are only 0.3% ahead across all nine polls for last week. For YG polls only it's a dead-heat (33.7 each), but the non-YouGov polls (exc. TNS) give Lab a 0.7% lead.
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
Yep! And MikeL is the one who spots all my mistakes!
I'm gonna give TNS till midnight and then publish ELBOW for week-ending 8th Mar. At present, Lab are only 0.3% ahead across all nine polls for last week. For YG polls only it's a dead-heat (33.7 each), but the non-YouGov polls (exc. TNS) give Lab a 0.7% lead.
Why don't you ring them? [Serious suggestion.] You could ask them about that Women's Hour poll at the same time.
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
I had the Tories down as low as 200 seats (on a UNS basis) one one model
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
At a guess 240 Labour, 240 Conservatives - something like that.
But to do it properly scientifically you could do a meta-analysis involving Electoral Calculus, Electionsetc, ukpollingreport, Lebo-Norpoth, Ladbrokes prices, May2015 model & the Guardian model and set a threshold at say 95% on which a seat does not go red or blue in a single model.
Germans giving the finger to the US as Dave mindlessly continues to take orders from Washington. Time to get yourself out the gutter Cameron, your war mongering is morally bankrupt.
Not sure where Dave Herdson got a Tory lead for his monthly average for February, but the "Super-ELBOW" for last month (43 polls, total sample 49,356) gave Lab a 1.2% lead, basically the same figure for January, accounting for roundings:
Lab 33.5 (33.3 for January) Con 32.4 (32.1) UKIP 14.5 (15.2) LD 7.7 (7.3) Grn 6.3 (6.5)
Of the 43 polls in February, only 20 were YouGov polls. If we only include those 20, we get a Lab lead of 0.8%:
Lab 33.5 Con 32.7 UKIP 14.3 LD 7.3 Grn 6.6
By contrast, if we only include the 23 non-YouGov polls during February, we get a Lab lead of 1.6%:
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
My worst case scenario for Labour is that they lose all their Scottish seats, make very little headway against the Tories and lose a handful of seats to UKIP (but they can't fail to make about ten gains from the Lib Dems). I think that would give them a lower bound of about 230 seats.
The worst-case scenario for the Tories is that tactical voting prevents them making gains from the Lib Dems, and that some of the 2010 gains that are safe from Labour are lost to UKIP instead. Maybe 40 losses to Labour and 20 to UKIP. Puts the Tory lower bound on about 250.
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
Conservatives 0 Labour 0 SNP 650
I've been talking to the sensible Nats, the unsensible ones have even more SNP seats.
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
At a guess 240 Labour, 240 Conservatives - something like that.
But to do it properly scientifically you could do a meta-analysis involving Electoral Calculus, Electionsetc, ukpollingreport, Lebo-Norpoth, Ladbrokes prices, May2015 model & the Guardian model and set a threshold at say 95% on which a seat does not go red or blue in a single model.
I really don't want to do this scientifically. I share a lot of isam's scepticism about polling and what it means. I'm after informed instinctive responses.
Yep! And MikeL is the one who spots all my mistakes!
I'm gonna give TNS till midnight and then publish ELBOW for week-ending 8th Mar. At present, Lab are only 0.3% ahead across all nine polls for last week. For YG polls only it's a dead-heat (33.7 each), but the non-YouGov polls (exc. TNS) give Lab a 0.7% lead.
Why don't you ring them? [Serious suggestion.] You could ask them about that Women's Hour poll at the same time.
Well I did email them yesterday, and tweeted @TNS_global too.
Not sure where Dave Herdson got a Tory lead for his monthly average for February, but the "Super-ELBOW" for last month (43 polls, total sample 49,356) gave Lab a 1.2% lead, basically the same figure for January, accounting for roundings:
Lab 33.5 (33.3 for January) Con 32.4 (32.1) UKIP 14.5 (15.2) LD 7.7 (7.3) Grn 6.3 (6.5)
Of the 43 polls in February, only 20 were YouGov polls. If we only include those 20, we get a Lab lead of 0.8%:
Lab 33.5 Con 32.7 UKIP 14.3 LD 7.3 Grn 6.6
By contrast, if we only include the 23 non-YouGov polls during February, we get a Lab lead of 1.6%:
Lab 33.5 Con 31.9 UKIP 14.8 LD 8.1 Grn 6.0
David Herdson is using telephone pollsters + Yougov.
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
At a guess 240 Labour, 240 Conservatives - something like that.
But to do it properly scientifically you could do a meta-analysis involving Electoral Calculus, Electionsetc, ukpollingreport, Lebo-Norpoth, Ladbrokes prices, May2015 model & the Guardian model and set a threshold at say 95% on which a seat does not go red or blue in a single model.
I really don't want to do this scientifically. I share a lot of isam's scepticism about polling and what it means. I'm after informed instinctive responses.
In that case, Labour 210 seats.
Lose all their Scottish seats or a majority thereof, Lib Dems prove strong incumbents, ans there's very little Con to Lab swing in England.
Con, around 200 seats, Lib Dem prove strong incumbents, the 1 in 5 2010 Tories who have switched to UKIP ensure a rout for the Tories in the marginals and Greens vote tactically for Lab.
Not sure where Dave Herdson got a Tory lead for his monthly average for February, but the "Super-ELBOW" for last month (43 polls, total sample 49,356) gave Lab a 1.2% lead, basically the same figure for January, accounting for roundings:
Lab 33.5 (33.3 for January) Con 32.4 (32.1) UKIP 14.5 (15.2) LD 7.7 (7.3) Grn 6.3 (6.5)
Of the 43 polls in February, only 20 were YouGov polls. If we only include those 20, we get a Lab lead of 0.8%:
Lab 33.5 Con 32.7 UKIP 14.3 LD 7.3 Grn 6.6
By contrast, if we only include the 23 non-YouGov polls during February, we get a Lab lead of 1.6%:
Lab 33.5 Con 31.9 UKIP 14.8 LD 8.1 Grn 6.0
David Herdson is using telephone pollsters + Yougov.
The more, the merrier is what we believe in at ELBOW
Could I do some vox pop? What's the lowest seat count that you can sensibly envisage at the next election for:
a) the Conservatives? b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
At a guess 240 Labour, 240 Conservatives - something like that.
But to do it properly scientifically you could do a meta-analysis involving Electoral Calculus, Electionsetc, ukpollingreport, Lebo-Norpoth, Ladbrokes prices, May2015 model & the Guardian model and set a threshold at say 95% on which a seat does not go red or blue in a single model.
I really don't want to do this scientifically. I share a lot of isam's scepticism about polling and what it means. I'm after informed instinctive responses.
In that case, Labour 210 seats.
Lose all their Scottish seats or a majority thereof, Lib Dems prove strong incumbents, ans there's very little Con to Lab swing in England.
Con, around 200 seats, Lib Dem prove strong incumbents, the 1 in 5 2010 Tories who have switched to UKIP ensure a rout for the Tories in the marginals and Greens vote tactically for Lab.
I have to say the Lib Dems are looking stronger incumbents against the Conservatives over Labour - one thing Labour does have in it's favour... if Clegg is in danger on the face of it then Labour could get the sweep of Lib-Lab marginals.
Germans giving the finger to the US as Dave mindlessly continues to take orders from Washington. Time to get yourself out the gutter Cameron, your war mongering is morally bankrupt.
When we get into the campaign and the broadcast media need to act with impartiality, who is in control of selecting the party representatives that they give air time to?
Can they focus what they consider to be unacceptable representatives of UKIP / Tory / Labour / LibDem, or do they have to give air time to the individuals that the party would like?
If the broadcasters can pick the representatives that they feature, than additional air time could be a negative for any of the parties.
The groups had noticed the latest frenzy over TV debates, but remained unmoved. In previous rounds people have said they would watch the debates if they happened, but those most apt to criticise David Cameron for his reluctance to take part were those already least inclined to vote for him.
This week again we found nothing to suggest Cameron would be seriously damaged if the debates did not go ahead and he was blamed: “he should spend his time running the country rather than standing on stage”. Indeed since the leaders only seem to “act like children” when they get together, the event would probably not be very enlightening anyway.
The groups had noticed the latest frenzy over TV debates, but remained unmoved. In previous rounds people have said they would watch the debates if they happened, but those most apt to criticise David Cameron for his reluctance to take part were those already least inclined to vote for him.
This week again we found nothing to suggest Cameron would be seriously damaged if the debates did not go ahead and he was blamed: “he should spend his time running the country rather than standing on stage”. Indeed since the leaders only seem to “act like children” when they get together, the event would probably not be very enlightening anyway.
"What jobs would the leaders be best suited to outside politics? Mr Cameron would be a headmaster, or a company director “in charge of things”. Mr Farage would almost certainly be a pub landlord, and a good one at that, or would run his own small but successful business. The groups struggled to place Mr Clegg in the outside world: probably something administrative or perhaps a supermarket store manager. Mr Miliband’s ideal job – and this from people who did not know of his previous career – was to be a university professor. Make of that what you will."
Not sure where Dave Herdson got a Tory lead for his monthly average for February
A magic system whereby you ignore all labour leads
Don't talk rubbish, odd you never criticised David's methodology when he chose not to include populus, when they were the most favourable pollster to the Tories.
44% of Labour supporters would be happy with the SNP in government. They presumably think that they would add some anti-austerity backbone to the Labour leadership.
Comments
Considering the possible candidates may while away a tedious afternoon.
I watched the 2010 debates which took so much coverage away from the rest of the GE campaign in which we had graphs showing who won the debates or leaders coached on what to do or say.
Let this stay with Presidential democracies ;-)
I expect the SNP will act in the interests of the SNP.
Maximum autonomy whilst within the union.
Could you volunteer yours via the wikipedia talk page?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election
I'm not sure if Labour or the Greens will win there but by taking Coral 4-1 (Green) and Hills 12-5 (Labour) you can effectively lay the Lib Dems at Evens there.
"Apparently I’ll even be visiting something called Skegness"
Still, his point blank refusal to compromise is commendable.
Mind you, at that point it reached the sky.
As I understand it the bod who does the graph, does lots of them for various different Wikipedia articles, and isn't especially interested in British politics. (I think he's spanish).
Do you mind if I mention your graph on the Wikipedia talk page as an alternative option for them to consider?
Between a rock and a hard place Rob.
The strategy of avoiding the debates was probably made with the assumption of a decent poll lead at this point.
I like the graphs in some of the other election pages where they use a nice statistical method to work out the trend lines and uncertainties. Might have a go at that for the 2015-only data.
(Not to be confused with their phone poll with end-date 26th Jan!)
However the purple line is still trending down - now sub 15.
55,555 seconds
Is it beef/lamb? If it is you are almost certainly involved in stealing from a tenant farmer who is likely to be so rolling in it, his family gets tax credits. Do you not understand "landlord"?
or is it venison? In which case you have been duped into paying for something you should be paid to dispose of, and are unwittingly doing unpaid work for a Danish billionaire in culling his gross overpopulation of deer - a service he would usually pay for.
Well done! Robin Hood eat your heart out, cos Smarmie either or both of steeeeals from the poor, and gives unstintingly to the rich.
The NHSCrossover!a) the Conservatives?
b) Labour?
The seat predictors have the two main parties tightly bunched, as do the constituency markets and Sporting Index. But how likely do you see it from this point that one or other might fall away badly?
b) 210
But to do it properly scientifically you could do a meta-analysis involving Electoral Calculus, Electionsetc, ukpollingreport, Lebo-Norpoth, Ladbrokes prices, May2015 model & the Guardian model and set a threshold at say 95% on which a seat does not go red or blue in a single model.
Germans giving the finger to the US as Dave mindlessly continues to take orders from Washington. Time to get yourself out the gutter Cameron, your war mongering is morally bankrupt.
What on earth do Rowan Williams and Peter Oborne think they're doing by endorsing this event?
Lab 33.5 (33.3 for January)
Con 32.4 (32.1)
UKIP 14.5 (15.2)
LD 7.7 (7.3)
Grn 6.3 (6.5)
Of the 43 polls in February, only 20 were YouGov polls. If we only include those 20, we get a Lab lead of 0.8%:
Lab 33.5
Con 32.7
UKIP 14.3
LD 7.3
Grn 6.6
By contrast, if we only include the 23 non-YouGov polls during February, we get a Lab lead of 1.6%:
Lab 33.5
Con 31.9
UKIP 14.8
LD 8.1
Grn 6.0
The worst-case scenario for the Tories is that tactical voting prevents them making gains from the Lib Dems, and that some of the 2010 gains that are safe from Labour are lost to UKIP instead. Maybe 40 losses to Labour and 20 to UKIP. Puts the Tory lower bound on about 250.
Labour 0
SNP 650
I've been talking to the sensible Nats, the unsensible ones have even more SNP seats.
We need more mockery of deranged fundamentalists, instead that award is pissing on the graves of murder victims.
Lose all their Scottish seats or a majority thereof, Lib Dems prove strong incumbents, ans there's very little Con to Lab swing in England.
Con, around 200 seats, Lib Dem prove strong incumbents, the 1 in 5 2010 Tories who have switched to UKIP ensure a rout for the Tories in the marginals and Greens vote tactically for Lab.
Can they focus what they consider to be unacceptable representatives of UKIP / Tory / Labour / LibDem, or do they have to give air time to the individuals that the party would like?
If the broadcasters can pick the representatives that they feature, than additional air time could be a negative for any of the parties.
Changes since last week Con (nc) Lab (-1) LD (-2) UKIP (+1) Greens (+1)
@MSmithsonPB: After last week's @LordAshcroft national poll's 3% CON leads today's poll has
CON 34
LAB 30
LD 5
UKIP 15
GRN 8
Awful figures for the Lib Dems, just awful. And obviously not good for Labour either.
This week again we found nothing to suggest Cameron would be seriously damaged if the debates did not go ahead and he was blamed: “he should spend his time running the country rather than standing on stage”. Indeed since the leaders only seem to “act like children” when they get together, the event would probably not be very enlightening anyway.
Ukip spoof Tory ad: Farage pokes fun at Cameron's poster http://www.cityam.com/211130/ukip-spoof-tory-attack-ad-nigel-farage-has-some-fun-camerons-expense … via @CityAM
that Labour % looks WAY to high :-)
When will Ed rule out a deal?
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/03/ashcroft-national-poll-con-34-lab-30-lib-dem-5-ukip-15-green-8/