Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One thing we can now start to say – the Tories haven’t take

SystemSystem Posts: 11,704
edited March 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » One thing we can now start to say – the Tories haven’t taken a hit over the debates saga

Those who were concluding that Dave and the blue team would not be damaged by the debates issue now have an answer. With both Ashcroft and latest showing 4% leads the strong Tory start to March continues.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    If this move is sustained then the constituencies will be the place to back the Tories.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    I'm struggling to see how Lab wins most seats now with Scotland.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Ed can still become PM Miliband but most seats looks a stretch
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited March 2015
    Pulpstar said:

    Ed can still become PM Miliband but most seats looks a stretch

    As Salmond's glove-puppet, at best, within a rag-tag-and-bobtail coalition.

    Make no mistake, Labour are heading for a hiding in May...
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    1.54 - as short as the Tories have ever been, including in the early days of the administration:

    https://sportsiteexweb.betfair.com/betting/LoadRunnerInfoChartAction.do?marketId=101416473&selectionId=1111885
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,292
    edited March 2015
    Hundreds of convicted sex offenders have gone missing from across the UK, according to police records.

    Figures released by 39 forces under the Freedom of Information Act show 396 sex offenders are currently wanted because their whereabouts are unknown.

    Among those recorded were offenders who have been missing for more than a decade.

    A Scotland Yard spokeswoman said London's "diverse multicultural population" meant a large percentage of sex offenders were "either known or believed to be living abroad, having returned to their country of origin".

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31804999

    And just why don't we register people leaving the country as well as entering...anybody?
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Labour most seats heading for the Moon....
  • Options
    saddosaddo Posts: 534
    Labour gone too early on everything and have no real policy and thoughts what to either.

    They've now fallen into Osborne's huge elephant trap of spending cuts. Osborne will say tax cuts and spending and borrowing reductions in the budget that will impact nealy everyone on tax and nearly nobody it will appear on spending.

    Contrast that to Labour higher taxes, more spending, more borrowing for no benefit other than Ed Miliband in Number 10.

    Why take the risk voter and you're guaranteed to pay more with Labour.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Greece edging toward the door again

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11460214/Defiant-Greece-at-daggers-drawn-with-EU-creditors.html
    Relations between Greece and Europe's creditor powers are dangerously close to breaking point. Both sides have issued ultimatums, each insisting angrily on fixed positions and lashing out at each other with barely concealed animosity.

    Far from subsiding, the defiant language from Athens is growing louder. "If Europe leaves us in crisis, we will flood it with migrants,” said Panos Kammenos, the defence minister and leader of the Independent Greeks party.

    “Too bad for Berlin if there are some Jihadis from Islamic State in that wave of millions. If they strike us, we will strike them,” he told La Repubblica, vowing to give illegal migrants valid documents and open Europe’s Schengen frontiers to all comers.

    One Syriza MP said the government itself has no idea how this high-stakes brinkmanship will end, but emotions are hardening by the day. “The party has learned quickly over the last three weeks that Europe is not a nice place,” he said.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Those £1000 hand-outs looking a bit more toxic today

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2987252/The-despot-bought-Blair-16million-Cherie-320k-s-deal-shames-Britain-ex-PM-sold-virtual-gangster-linked-torture-money-laundering-bribery-murder.html
    This last contract, worth a massive £16 million for the first two years alone, would lead many to ask if a former Prime Minister of a Western democracy should even be associating with someone with the record for human rights abuse that its president Nursultan Nazarbayev has, let alone giving him public relations advice.

    Nazarbayev has held power for 23 years, ever since the country was hived off from the old Soviet Union. In that time he has built up an appalling human rights record. Criticising him is illegal, the police routinely torture opponents and child labour is used in the country’s tobacco industry.

    A newspaper that attacked him had its offices burned down and a dead dog left hanging from a window. Attached to the corpse was a note stating simply: ‘You won’t get a second warning.’
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Indigo said:

    Criticising him is illegal,.’

    Is appearing in preelection TV debates compulsory?
  • Options
    Edin_RokzEdin_Rokz Posts: 516
    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    What is interesting about that? The whole debate thing is classic Westminster bubble nonsense - ordinary folk barely care about the election, let alone the silly posturing of the self-inflated egos of TV hacks.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
  • Options
    dugarbandierdugarbandier Posts: 2,596

    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
    Is this really big news in the UK? I'm not there so I don't know. But it seems surprising to me that many people would give two hoots about whether a tv debate went on or not?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    What polling evidence do you have to support any of those assertions?
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    edited March 2015

    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
    Is this really big news in the UK? I'm not there so I don't know. But it seems surprising to me that many people would give two hoots about whether a tv debate went on or not?
    Politicians and journalists care very deeply. It affects their judgment and leads them to grossly overestimate the salience to voters.

    From Ashcroft yesterday:

    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.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
    Is this really big news in the UK? I'm not there so I don't know. But it seems surprising to me that many people would give two hoots about whether a tv debate went on or not?
    Media loves talking about itself, so the debates has dominated the news over the last week. If it has had any effect at all on the polling it seems to be in favour of the Tories. In the real world there still seems to be a massive lack of interest in the election.



  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    YouGov celebrate a 4 point Tory lead by uploading the wrong data tables!
  • Options
    PurseybearPurseybear Posts: 766

    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
    Is this really big news in the UK? I'm not there so I don't know. But it seems surprising to me that many people would give two hoots about whether a tv debate went on or not?
    Noone apart from the hacks gives a shit. Social media'll be way more impt this time for meme setting. Elections not really got under way yet so tories must be pretty pleased if this mini lead is for real. Budget still to come. I've been getting on the tories and pretty happy with my psn.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds
  • Options
    GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,191
    Moving average chart of the 100 most recent YouGov polls. Click to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    Edin_Rokz said:

    Interesting thought: I'm just wondering if people's perception of Cameron has already been factored in his Flashman attitude as the cowardly cad and his behaviour in the TV debate argument as expected of him?

    More than that, the polling swing to the Tories may not just be in spite of Camerons debate veto but because of it.

    A bit of tough negotiation and willingness to walk away from a deal that is not wanted. It leaves the rest looking a bit spineless.
    Is this really big news in the UK? I'm not there so I don't know. But it seems surprising to me that many people would give two hoots about whether a tv debate went on or not?
    Noone apart from the hacks gives a shit. Social media'll be way more impt this time for meme setting. Elections not really got under way yet so tories must be pretty pleased if this mini lead is for real. Budget still to come. I've been getting on the tories and pretty happy with my psn.
    The hacks - and the lefties who have been having a virtual orgasm over the last couple of days about how Dave was toast over the debates and they were going to be riding into the sunset with a Labour majority now nailed on.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,125
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds

    The last look at your ARSE was Con 310, Lab 250, LD 32, SNP 35, UKIP 3, as I recall.

    Ed Milliband must be afraid to look too closely, but who can argue with such methodology?



  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    SLAB Ashcroft conspiracy theory:

    The theory centres on Lord Ashcroft, a former Tory treasurer and billionaire who bankrolled the party’s attack in marginal constituencies against Labour in 2010 but is now apparently performing a public service by commissioning a series of UK-wide and constituency polls.

    Many in Labour, particularly Scottish Labour, do not believe the man they wanted ejected as a peer is doing this simply out of the goodness of his own heart or even a fascination in politics. Instead they believe he is “trying to create a pro-Tory narrative”.....

    The easiest way to help kill the narrative off is for Labour to rule out a deal with the SNP, put a stop to Cameron’s campaign in England and make Scottish Labour look relevant again. The Scottish Labour MPs who begged Ed Miliband to do just that know that to be true, as does shadow Chancellor Ed Balls, defending a marginal English seat.

    The next conspiracy theory might be on why Mr Miliband didn’t rule out an SNP deal if he vacillates much more.


    http://www.scotsman.com/news/david-maddox-scottish-labour-conspiracy-theory-1-3713938

    Most Miliband coverage this morning is on the tory poster.....
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,392
    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :

    2 hours 2 minutes 2 seconds
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    felix said:
    absolutely unsurprising.. it doesn't of course mean that she is a lefty or has any Labour links, but she has to go.

    Notwithstanding that, the BBC is full of lefties , as you say the Pope is a catholic.
  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    JackW said:

    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds

    The last look at your ARSE was Con 310, Lab 250, LD 32, SNP 35, UKIP 3, as I recall.

    Ed Milliband must be afraid to look too closely, but who can argue with such methodology?



    Almost correct. SNP on 32.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,144
    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    Good post. The failure to garner the anti-Coalition vote is very telling - and probably the most damning aspect of Ed's lack of leadership. He has not offered an alternative vision of Govt. for nearly five years. And his battle is now 98% run.

    Agree as well that any further polling shifts are not going to favour Labour. UKIP will come home to the Tories to some extent, not just in Con-Lab marginals, but I am seeing it in Con-LibDem fights too. The notion that the LibDems might switch over and prop up an Ed Miliband government is a great recruiting sergeant to the blue flag.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648

    JackW said:

    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds

    The last look at your ARSE was Con 310, Lab 250, LD 32, SNP 35, UKIP 3, as I recall.

    Ed Milliband must be afraid to look too closely, but who can argue with such methodology?

    With 9 x DUP backing the Tories (assuming they pick up East Belfast this time) that'd be a stable full-term government, assuming no further defections to UKIP. Lab + LD + SNP + Green would be outnumbered, even if they united.

    The votes for an EU referendum are also there given UKIP+DUP would support it. No concessions to the LDs would be needed.

    The Conservatives would be able to implement almost all of their manifesto. 310+ seats really is the sweet spot for them.
  • Options
    For what it's worth, if I plug the polls into my model with the following assumptions (which I think are reasonable):

    1) Scotland votes shares around SNP 39%; LAB 33%
    2) LibDem Incumbents only suffer bleed of around a third as much in seats they hold as seats they don't.
    3) In CON/LAB marginals (defined as majority under 4,000), CON and LAB bleed to UKIP is around a quarter of what it is in non-marginal seats.
    4) UKIP pick up 3 seats which were safe CON in 2010 (even though the straight maths suggests they should not)

    I end up with:

    Populus CON 253; LAB 295; LD 29; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    YouGov CON 321; LAB 239; LD 27; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    Ashcroft CON 329; LAB 236; LD 22; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    I have amended my model to allow input of national vote shares while retaining the opportunity to fiddle with each of the moves from one individual Party to another etc. I am going to tidy it up a bit and then post a link in case anyone has interest in it.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    JackW said:

    JackW said:

    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds

    The last look at your ARSE was Con 310, Lab 250, LD 32, SNP 35, UKIP 3, as I recall.

    Ed Milliband must be afraid to look too closely, but who can argue with such methodology?



    Almost correct. SNP on 32.

    My mistake! I shall study it more carefully this time.

    The real risk is whether it is going to break the internet again. Kim Kardashian just cannot compete.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,144
    JackW said:

    Latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Countdown Prediction :

    150 minutes 150 seconds

    Oh the anticipation! Will Broxtowe move to Too Close To Call?
  • Options
    Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    'Every party politician that expects to lose tries that trick of [TV] debates, and every politician who expects to win says No.' - John Major.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    felix said:
    Remind me, who is the Director of Strategy at the BBC at the moment...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Purnell
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    edited March 2015
    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.


    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    That's simply to misunderstand the critique.

    Cameron has picked up centre votes and could have kept his traditional supporters on board,
    Stand back from the euphoria of a few polls and he's on track to fail to win a majority against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, two of the weakest Labour candidates in living memory.

    Cameron could have been looking at a majority if he had been more adept at managing a wider coalition.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    I had a nightmare last night that Ed Miliband handed back the Falklands to Argentina, divested the UK of all its overseas territories, cashiered the Royal Navy, signed us up to an EU army, increased immigration drastically to the point where there was "camping out" of migrants on my village green, and bankrupted the country. I had to sell my house, and I was in the process of emigrating to Canada when I woke up.

    Thing is: I'm not sure it was a dream.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,392
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    DavidL said:

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    The alternative view is that if we hadn't had that clusterf*ck and the economy recoving nicely as it is, an Labour imitating a circular firing squad we would be romping off with 10% leads and a nailed on Majority, rather than p*ssing around with a probably coalition.

    On the other had for some bizarre reason a few of the Cameroons voiced the opinion that they would prefer a coalition because it let them do all the wet liberal things they wanted to do without having to pay attention to the other half of the party.

  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Even the Scottish Labour Party News Daily Record rate the Salmond/Miliband poster:

    http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/torcuil-crichton-labour-caught-pincer-5299474
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    New Welsh poll for Yougov

    Lab 39% (+3% on 2010), Con 25% (-1%) , UKIP 14% (+ 12%) Plaid 10% (-1%) Green 6% (+4%) Lib Dem 5% (-15%).
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,977
    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    For what it's worth, if I plug the polls into my model with the following assumptions (which I think are reasonable):

    1) Scotland votes shares around SNP 39%; LAB 33%
    2) LibDem Incumbents only suffer bleed of around a third as much in seats they hold as seats they don't.
    3) In CON/LAB marginals (defined as majority under 4,000), CON and LAB bleed to UKIP is around a quarter of what it is in non-marginal seats.
    4) UKIP pick up 3 seats which were safe CON in 2010 (even though the straight maths suggests they should not)

    I end up with:

    Populus CON 253; LAB 295; LD 29; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    YouGov CON 321; LAB 239; LD 27; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    Ashcroft CON 329; LAB 236; LD 22; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    I have amended my model to allow input of national vote shares while retaining the opportunity to fiddle with each of the moves from one individual Party to another etc. I am going to tidy it up a bit and then post a link in case anyone has interest in it.

    I greatly enjoyed a little play with your spreadsheet, and to me the methodology seemed reasonably sound.

    My main thought was on whether UNS has broken down elsewhere other than Scotland. It may well be the case that we see very different swings in different regions of the country.

    Would it be possible to incorporate regional swings into the model?
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,144
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    But it is now looking like they are dependent upon others changing the game for them. The debates debacle shows how much Labour needed them. And the Tories just didn't.

    Labour now look like they are in the relegation zone. They need others to lose matches for them to stay up.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    In a week's time the news is likely to be dominated by the budget. If Osborne gets it right, we will soon see polls with Tory leads of 6's and 7's.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967

    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.

    For Ed, the question is, will he win more seats than Kinnock did in 1987?
  • Options
    Moses_Moses_ Posts: 4,865
    It wasn't the debates that I thought might shift some opinions ( straw men) it was Rifkind-Strawgate.

    If that has actually affected the voting intention then it seems to be in the Tories favour or at least it seems not to had any lasting affect. There is a possibility this has not seeped through yet to the public perceptions but it has been at least a few weeks now and polling surely would have picked this up.

    That alone is I feel is very significant
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787
    Gotta love the Sun - they manage to get "plotting" and "German" into their headline on a possible Labour SNP deal:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6362264/Labour-plotting-German-style-alliance-with-the-SNP.html

    I suspect Ms Sturgeon will have mixed emotions about her depiction too.....
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,392

    DavidL said:

    .


    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    That's simply to misunderstand the critique.

    Cameron has picked up centre votes and could have kept his traditional supporters on board,
    Stand back from the euphoria of a few polls and he's on track to fail to win a majority against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, two of the weakest Labour candidates in living memory.

    Cameron could have been looking at a majority if he had been more adept at managing a wider coalition.
    You can only fight who you are up against. Maggie was pretty lucky in that respect too.

    But the idea that he could have achieved that repositioning without gay marriage, without completely ignoring the fox hunting issue for the entire Parliament, without giving a higher priority to protecting the health budget than the defence budget and without avoiding a fight with the consensus on global warming is for the birds. I may not like his position on some of these points and I am sure that you do not but there is no question that it has got the Tories an audience with a significant segment of the electorate that Blair had put beyond them.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Sean_F said:

    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.

    For Ed, the question is, will he win more seats than Kinnock did in 1987?
    Or a vote share better than Michael Foot?

  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,392

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
  • Options
    RodCrosby said:

    Labour most seats heading for the Moon....

    Happy days....
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    When Ipsos-mori and ICM also show 4 point Tory leads,I will eat humble pie

    Gtg now
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,392
    SMukesh said:

    When Ipsos-mori and ICM also show 4 point Tory leads,I will eat humble pie

    Gtg now

    ICM already have, albeit it looked very much like an outlier at the time.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    .


    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    That's simply to misunderstand the critique.

    Cameron has picked up centre votes and could have kept his traditional supporters on board,
    Stand back from the euphoria of a few polls and he's on track to fail to win a majority against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, two of the weakest Labour candidates in living memory.

    Cameron could have been looking at a majority if he had been more adept at managing a wider coalition.
    You can only fight who you are up against. Maggie was pretty lucky in that respect too.

    But the idea that he could have achieved that repositioning without gay marriage, without completely ignoring the fox hunting issue for the entire Parliament, without giving a higher priority to protecting the health budget than the defence budget and without avoiding a fight with the consensus on global warming is for the birds. I may not like his position on some of these points and I am sure that you do not but there is no question that it has got the Tories an audience with a significant segment of the electorate that Blair had put beyond them.
    Yes, that sort of misses the point.

    The trick was to do all of the above and still keep traditional supporters on board. Despite the views of the cameron partisans most of the people he has lost are not euro fanatics nor are they diehards nutters who must get their own way on everything. Most voters understand that a government will not give them everything they want can expect some of the things that are important to them. In romancing the centre Cameron has forgotten his traditional supporters and childishly gone out of his way to make that point. That tone was one of the factors which persuaded me to stop voting for him as gratuitously insulting his voters just made me think he wasn't up to the job.

    As a result he's lost a chunk of his natural constituncy. So 5+ years of wooing have left him no better off than where he started and he will still never be PM in his own right.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited March 2015
    DavidL said:

    But the idea that he could have achieved that repositioning without gay marriage, without completely ignoring the fox hunting issue for the entire Parliament, without giving a higher priority to protecting the health budget than the defence budget and without avoiding a fight with the consensus on global warming is for the birds. I may not like his position on some of these points and I am sure that you do not but there is no question that it has got the Tories an audience with a significant segment of the electorate that Blair had put beyond them.

    And lost him 10% to the kippers and permanently put WVM beyond his reach.

    The point isn't about substance anyway, its largely about presentation. He could have done most or all of those things in a low key way, without making a song and dance about it, and rubbing people's noses in it (Yes, I know Dr Nabavi doesn't see it that way, I believe the pope is a catholic as well, the fact is a lot of right wing Tories did see it that way). He could have tossed them a few bits of consolation blue meat (keeping Gove in place and not worrying about the votes of teacher that largely vote Labour would have been a good start), adopted a slightly less emollient, slightly less supine tone of the EU etc.

    There seems to have been a certain obsession with trying to gain the votes of people who would never vote Conservative in a million years (the Guardianista) because they were the sort of people in his social group who he meets at dinner parties, and ignoring whole swathes of natural Conservatives voters (WVM, patriots, armed forces etc) because he didn't understand them, or dine with them.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Gotta love the Sun - they manage to get "plotting" and "German" into their headline on a possible Labour SNP deal:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6362264/Labour-plotting-German-style-alliance-with-the-SNP.html

    I suspect Ms Sturgeon will have mixed emotions about her depiction too.....

    She looks rather fetching to me. Good sport to pose like that for the photo too.
  • Options
    MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    The Tory position relative to Labour has been improving steadily for months. Anyone who cares to look at the numbers can see this.

    And just look at Lord Ashcroft's reports on his focus groups to see how badly Miliband comes across.

    Poor Labour people should prepare themselves psychologically for another 5 years of powerlessness.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,763
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
    err no

    even under the most favourable projection he's not on track to improve his number of seats.
    It only counts double if he;s building on constituency totals and since he's lost votes elsewhere it's a zero sum game.
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited March 2015

    Sean_F said:

    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.

    For Ed, the question is, will he win more seats than Kinnock did in 1987?
    Or a vote share better than Michael Foot?

    Foot is several time the politician Miliband is as well, he might have what we could charitably call presentation issues, and he might have been rather to the left of this country at the time he was in with a chance, and he was facing Thatcher, not Cameron, but he had a towering intellect and a powerful oratory.... EdM has neither.

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,072
    I'm not surprised. It's my view that single events rarely lead to sustained, measurable movements in polls. Instead, it's the weight of good or bad news dropping on a party over a sustained long period.

    If you have that weight, then an opposing good or bad news story does little; it's like there is inertia in the system; but once the move starts, it is relatively easy to continue and/or speed it up until you reach the maximum potential base of your vote.

    If this is the case, then one slow bad news story will not particularly harm the Conservatives - they have the inertia at the moment. Likewise, one good news story will not particularly help Labour - the inertia is against them.

    Therefore what Labour need are a series of good news stories between now and the election, or the Conservatives to suffer a series of bad news stories - e.g. another defection combined with a poorly-received budget and Cameron being accused of molesting Mr Dancer's enormo-haddock in a secret Soho club that was also attended by the ghosts of Gadaffi and Linda Lovelace.

    I can't see Miliband or his team being able to deliver the first, which is why they've immediately gone so heavily negative, and the second is largely out of their hands.

    It also means that those who read the entrails of every poll, and ascribe significant changes in the polls to individual measures, are doing little more than observing coincidences - the real cause of the change is cumulative and very hard to discern.

    I think I've used a materials-science parallel in the past - plastic versus elastic bending.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,967
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
    Bear in mind, that if Cameron does get the sort of result that Yougov suggests, he will have had a very narrow escape, at five minutes to Midnight.

    Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament, and UKIP will be riding high, having received the backing of 4-5m voters.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
    Bear in mind, that if Cameron does get the sort of result that Yougov suggests, he will have had a very narrow escape, at five minutes to Midnight.

    Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament, and UKIP will be riding high, having received the backing of 4-5m voters.
    Dave won't stand in 2020. Referendum might have been and gone. Labour could have completely imploded.
  • Options
    chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    edited March 2015
    Sean_F said:

    New Welsh poll for Yougov

    Lab 39% (+3% on 2010), Con 25% (-1%) , UKIP 14% (+ 12%) Plaid 10% (-1%) Green 6% (+4%) Lib Dem 5% (-15%).

    Compared to previous poll

    Lab 39% (+2), Con 25% (+2) , UKIP 14% (-2) Plaid 10% (=) Green 6% (-2) Lib Dem 5% (-1).

    A 2% swing from Con-Lab is equivalent to a 3% Con lead nationally on UNS.

    More evidence of a drift back to the mainstream.
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,787

    Gotta love the Sun - they manage to get "plotting" and "German" into their headline on a possible Labour SNP deal:

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6362264/Labour-plotting-German-style-alliance-with-the-SNP.html

    I suspect Ms Sturgeon will have mixed emotions about her depiction too.....

    She looks rather fetching to me. Good sport to pose like that for the photo too.
    To be a little unchivalrous her diet has been even more successful than Eck's!

    Do you think that's a turnip she's swinging on?
  • Options
    anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited March 2015
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.
    All the polling is that the Conservatives are seen as the party of the rich rather than 'someone like me'.

    According to Lord Ascroft's recent presentation perceptions of the Conservatives have got worse since 2010.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MAA-4-March-presentation-for-website.pdf

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/z7017puitf/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-050315.pdf
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,072
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
    Bear in mind, that if Cameron does get the sort of result that Yougov suggests, he will have had a very narrow escape, at five minutes to Midnight.

    Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament, and UKIP will be riding high, having received the backing of 4-5m voters.
    *If* the Conservatives were to get a narrow majority (and it is a big if), then whether UKIP continue to ride high will depend on how Cameron approaches the promised EU referendum, and how UKIP react to that referendum.
  • Options
    SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited March 2015

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.
    All the polling is that the Conservatives are seen as the party of the rich rather than 'someone like me'.

    According to Lord Ascroft's recent presentation perceptions of the Conservatives have got worse since 2010.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MAA-4-March-presentation-for-website.pdf

    http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/z7017puitf/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-050315.pdf
    Has anyone tracked down the one person in Scotand who according to You Gov thought Ed was doing a really good job>?


    Was it Nicola Sturgeon?

  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.

    For Ed, the question is, will he win more seats than Kinnock did in 1987?
    Or a vote share better than Michael Foot?

    Foot is several time the politician Miliband is as well, he might have what we could charitably call presentation issues, and he might have been rather to the left of this country at the time he was in with a chance, and he was facing Thatcher, not Cameron, but he had a towering intellect and a powerful oratory.... EdM has neither.

    It is probably too late for it now (as it would require ditching Balls) but one option for a fightback would be a manifesto red in tooth and claw. Full Syrizia style loss of grip on reality could really fire up the troops.

    But Scotland would still be the Achilles heel. English people do not want to be ruled by Scots any more than Scots want to be ruled by England.

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

  • Options
    AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    For what it's worth, if I plug the polls into my model with the following assumptions (which I think are reasonable):

    1) Scotland votes shares around SNP 39%; LAB 33%
    2) LibDem Incumbents only suffer bleed of around a third as much in seats they hold as seats they don't.
    3) In CON/LAB marginals (defined as majority under 4,000), CON and LAB bleed to UKIP is around a quarter of what it is in non-marginal seats.
    4) UKIP pick up 3 seats which were safe CON in 2010 (even though the straight maths suggests they should not)

    I end up with:

    Populus CON 253; LAB 295; LD 29; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    YouGov CON 321; LAB 239; LD 27; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    Ashcroft CON 329; LAB 236; LD 22; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    I have amended my model to allow input of national vote shares while retaining the opportunity to fiddle with each of the moves from one individual Party to another etc. I am going to tidy it up a bit and then post a link in case anyone has interest in it.

    With a 6 point lead I think the SNP can only get 31.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002
    Alistair said:

    For what it's worth, if I plug the polls into my model with the following assumptions (which I think are reasonable):

    1) Scotland votes shares around SNP 39%; LAB 33%
    2) LibDem Incumbents only suffer bleed of around a third as much in seats they hold as seats they don't.
    3) In CON/LAB marginals (defined as majority under 4,000), CON and LAB bleed to UKIP is around a quarter of what it is in non-marginal seats.
    4) UKIP pick up 3 seats which were safe CON in 2010 (even though the straight maths suggests they should not)

    I end up with:

    Populus CON 253; LAB 295; LD 29; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    YouGov CON 321; LAB 239; LD 27; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    Ashcroft CON 329; LAB 236; LD 22; SNP 36; PC 5; GRN 1; UKIP 3

    I have amended my model to allow input of national vote shares while retaining the opportunity to fiddle with each of the moves from one individual Party to another etc. I am going to tidy it up a bit and then post a link in case anyone has interest in it.

    With a 6 point lead I think the SNP can only get 31.
    I hope it's more than 6 pts come the night !
  • Options
    Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

    And the Scots would vote Labour. So the SNP aren't going to do that, are they?
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sean_F said:

    Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament

    That depends if they have changed the rules sufficiently to prevent Len doing it again.

    There is also the chance they swing violently left in a wild (and doomed) attempt to take on the SNP
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly

    You can stop right there.

    They don't do it now. They would have no reason to do it while holding Ed's reins
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,727


    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution of their votes will continue to favour them. But they have completely failed to provide a credible alternative vision of how they would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    I had a nightmare last night that Ed Miliband handed back the Falklands to Argentina, divested the UK of all its overseas territories, cashiered the Royal Navy, signed us up to an EU army, increased immigration drastically to the point where there was "camping out" of migrants on my village green, and bankrupted the country. I had to sell my house, and I was in the process of emigrating to Canada when I woke up.

    Thing is: I'm not sure it was a dream.
    http://www.psywww.com/books/interp/toc.htm
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Meanwhile...

    CHELTENHAM !!!!!!
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,010
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Bear, social media might be more noise than insight. People often form self-contained social circles with others who mirror their own views.

    Mr. F, those Welsh figures are interesting. Tiny changes for the big two parties, heftier ones for the smaller parties.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,351
    JJ,

    A lot can still happen before May, but we've had a steady drip, drip, drip of reasonably good economic news and they are facing an incoherent opposition. "The Tories will lay waste to the country like they've been doing for five years but we only do nice cuts."

    As for the debates ... politician does something for political advantage. I'm shocked, I tell ee, shocked.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,010
    F1: Roberto Merhi is Manor Marussia's second driver:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/31808243

    Sounds like he may be replaced later in the season.
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

    And the Scots would vote Labour. So the SNP aren't going to do that, are they?
    SNP abstentionism (other than defence etc) would in effect be Unilateral Devo-max, and would make the case for reciprocation decisive.

    If Salmond wants devo-max (and that was he seemed to be arguing for in the indy ref with currency union etc) then to do it unilaterally is the way to get the rest of Westminster to agree.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    .


    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    That's simply to misunderstand the critique.

    Cameron has picked up centre votes and could have kept his traditional supporters on board,
    Stand back from the euphoria of a few polls and he's on track to fail to win a majority against Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, two of the weakest Labour candidates in living memory.

    Cameron could have been looking at a majority if he had been more adept at managing a wider coalition.
    You can only fight who you are up against. Maggie was pretty lucky in that respect too.

    But the idea that he could have achieved that repositioning without gay marriage, without completely ignoring the fox hunting issue for the entire Parliament, without giving a higher priority to protecting the health budget than the defence budget and without avoiding a fight with the consensus on global warming is for the birds. I may not like his position on some of these points and I am sure that you do not but there is no question that it has got the Tories an audience with a significant segment of the electorate that Blair had put beyond them.
    I think Cameron could have adopted traditional Conservative positions on all of those issues without affecting his audience. In fact, he might have retained even more activists and defectors.

    Frankly, it's laughable to say that had Cameron not passed gay marriage into law or held a free vote on fox hunting that the voters would now be abstaining or turning to Ed Miliband. No one cares that much except those who would never vote Tory anyway. You have more of a point with the NHS but even there the voters distrust the Tories but are still voting for them.

    Antifrank put it best IMHO. It's not policy. The Cameron government has in some areas (and I emphasise 'some') managed to look centrist whilst pursuing some pretty radical reforms in education, welfare, and to a lesser extent health.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    would run the country. And it is getting late. Very late.

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    That is really my first point. Cameron has widened the Tory tent so that it once again gets its fair share of the middle ground. No tory has managed that since Major in 1992.

    As a Scot I think I get a slightly distorted view but I cannot think of any of my Labour friends who have a good word to say about Ed. His polling is, for now, better in England (which is incredible enough when you think about it) but even the English catch on eventually (if not about cricket selections).

    I certainly agree it is not a done deal. A misstep in the budget, for example, could still send this election Labour's way. But Labour desperately need a game changer. Hence the hysteria about the debates.
    I can't see how the claim he has widened the Tory tent stacks up. It's more or less the same size but with different people in it.
    But the ones he has taken from the Centre he has taken from the Lib Dems and Labour. So they count double.
    Bear in mind, that if Cameron does get the sort of result that Yougov suggests, he will have had a very narrow escape, at five minutes to Midnight.

    Labour will surely choose a better leader in the next Parliament, and UKIP will be riding high, having received the backing of 4-5m voters.
    I think this will be the last Conservative 'victory' for a very long time.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,072

    F1: Roberto Merhi is Manor Marussia's second driver:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/31808243

    Sounds like he may be replaced later in the season.

    An untested driver in that car.

    Which makes Sauber's argument in court against Giedo van der Garde seem even more odd, and which might have serious implications: if Sauber wins, does that mean that it's been seen in court that it's dangerous for drivers to drive a car they haven't tested? Will Mehri be allowed to drive?

    I like Sauber, but they're bang out of order on this.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,002

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

    And the Scots would vote Labour. So the SNP aren't going to do that, are they?
    UK parliamentarians can vote however they like in a UK parliament, and it is the will of the UK that puts them there.

    The genie was let out the bottle with the creation of the Holyrood parliament, England too needs a parliament - or scrap Holyrood. Since the latter would lead to howls of anguish and would be politically impossible... an English parliament is probably needed.

    Scrap the Lords or there will simply be too many parliamentarians though.
  • Options
    GadflyGadfly Posts: 1,191
    edited March 2015
    To my mind, the current polling trend began following the May 2012 local elections. Click chart to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Since then, the averaged party shares have changed as follows...

    Labour have fallen 9.1 points from 42.4 to 33.3
    Tories have gained 2.3 points from 31.7 to 34
    LibDem have fallen 1.5 points from 8.9 to 7.4
    UKIP have gained 6.1 points from 8.3 to 14.4
    I don't have full data for the Greens, but they have essentially come from nowhere to 6 points.

    On the face of this, it does appear to be the case that Labour are losing the battle for support, as opposed to the Tories winning it.
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Lefties on here seem to have thrown in the towel already .A party with no fire in its belly does not deserve to rule the country.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648


    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.

    Firstly, those who consistently claim that Cameron is "not very good" at politics are wrong. The critique was that he would not be able to reposition the Tories and pick up as many votes I the centre as he was losing to his right. He has and he is.

    Secondly, Ed has almost completely failed to marshal the anti-government vote. After nearly 5 years of hysteria about austerity (which in reality has been a far more modest adjustment than most countries have endured) the protest vote is going all over the place but not to Labour. It has obviously gone to UKIP but also to the SNP, the Greens and NOTA. Labour must now be in serious danger of polling no better than they did in 2010.

    Thirdly, the potential upside for the Tories is greater than it is for Labour. If Labour were not able to ingather the disaffected in the dog days of government how are they going to do so now? It has to be accepted that many of UKIP are not coming home but some will, especially in Con/Lab marginals where they have to choose the lesser of two evils.

    Labour still has significant advantages. They have the boundary advantage. They have a significant wedge of safe seats (although thanks to Scotland about 45 fewer than they had in 2010). They have the opportunity of the red Liberals in seats where the collapse in Lib Dem support should swing things their way. The distribution

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    I had a nightmare last night that Ed Miliband handed back the Falklands to Argentina, divested the UK of all its overseas territories, cashiered the Royal Navy, signed us up to an EU army, increased immigration drastically to the point where there was "camping out" of migrants on my village green, and bankrupted the country. I had to sell my house, and I was in the process of emigrating to Canada when I woke up.

    Thing is: I'm not sure it was a dream.
    http://www.psywww.com/books/interp/toc.htm
    Thanks. My waking mind has interpreted it as.. perhaps I should go and help in Southampton Itchen.
  • Options


    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    What I continue to find astonishing is that the Tories have such a lead and are within a couple of percent of their 2010 support with UKIP still on 15%. To me this demonstrates at least 3 things.


    on

    The combined vote share for the Conservatives and UKIP is running at c. 49% now, well above where I expected it to be.

    I think that Labour's election of Ed Milliband as leader is really hitting home now, very late in the day. If Labour were actually to suffer a net loss of seats, (which can't be ruled out, now), it would be their worst result since 1987.

    Still, we need more polls. It's too early to say that the Conservatives are in the lead, but we can say for certain that Labour have lost theirs.

    I had a nightmare last night that Ed Miliband handed back the Falklands to Argentina, divested the UK of all its overseas territories, cashiered the Royal Navy, signed us up to an EU army, increased immigration drastically to the point where there was "camping out" of migrants on my village green, and bankrupted the country. I had to sell my house, and I was in the process of emigrating to Canada when I woke up.

    Thing is: I'm not sure it was a dream.
    http://www.psywww.com/books/interp/toc.htm
    Thanks. My waking mind has interpreted it as.. perhaps I should go and help in Southampton Itchen.
    Be careful, there's quite a few Tories, whose hearts end up Itchen for Rowena.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,648
    Gadfly said:

    To my mind, the current polling trend began following the May 2012 local elections. Click chart to enlarge...

    Simple, Free Image and File Hosting at MediaFire

    Since then, the averaged party shares have changed as follows...

    Labour have fallen 9.1 points from 42.4 to 33.3
    Tories have gained 2.3 points from 31.7 to 34
    LibDem have fallen 1.5 points from 8.9 to 7.4
    UKIP have gained 6.1 points from 8.3 to 14.4
    I don't have full data for the Greens, but they have essentially come from nowhere to 6 points.

    On the face of this, it does appear to be the case that Labour are losing the battle for support, as opposed to the Tories winning it.

    Anyone offering a bet that UKIP will take more seats off Labour than the Tories?
  • Options
    Sporting Index's GE Seats spread market this morning is showing the Tories as having a 10 seat lead over Labour with their mid-spread prices being 283 seats vs 273 seats.
  • Options
    On topic, the budget will either be the cherry on the parfait for the Tory lead, then I might start feeling content and describing Ed as the heir to Hannibal.

    Re Cameron taking a hit on the debates, or a lack thereof, I wonder if Cameron/The Tories will take a hit when the debates happen, and he's not there, rather than now when it is all so theoretical .
  • Options
    IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

    Indeed. However as per the Daily Record item linked earlier, the SNP want a weak Tory government, so they are probably not remotely fussed about the poster. Labour winning makes selling an independent Scotland to get away from the baby-eating Tories an uphill fight, and they would probably do worse in a new referendum than the last one when the Tories were in power.

    Tory government = strong case for independence. The trick is to make it look like it isn't their fault.
  • Options

    Lefties on here seem to have thrown in the towel already .A party with no fire in its belly does not deserve to rule the country.

    I feel sure that Nick Palmer still expects Labour to win, although he too has been conspicuously silent since last night's polling numbers were released.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,077

    Indigo said:

    Sean_F said:

    Looks like the only issue is whether the Tories get an overall majority or not. I reckon the odds are against, but Ed's total uselessness may deliver one. At least he will be gone in just a few weeks now.

    For Ed, the question is, will he win more seats than Kinnock did in 1987?
    Or a vote share better than Michael Foot?

    Foot is several time the politician Miliband is as well, he might have what we could charitably call presentation issues, and he might have been rather to the left of this country at the time he was in with a chance, and he was facing Thatcher, not Cameron, but he had a towering intellect and a powerful oratory.... EdM has neither.

    It is probably too late for it now (as it would require ditching Balls) but one option for a fightback would be a manifesto red in tooth and claw. Full Syrizia style loss of grip on reality could really fire up the troops.

    But Scotland would still be the Achilles heel. English people do not want to be ruled by Scots any more than Scots want to be ruled by England.

    If the SNP kept to a policy of only voting on truly national matters such as Defence and promised SF like abstaining on other issues, and did it plausibly, then the Tory poster of Ed in Alex's pocket would be disarmed.

    Time the English ( ie Westminster ) stopped doing it then
  • Options

    Lefties on here seem to have thrown in the towel already .A party with no fire in its belly does not deserve to rule the country.

    I feel sure that Nick Palmer still expects Labour to win, although he too has been conspicuously silent since last night's polling numbers were released.
    I think Nick's currently en route to South Korea, so we shouldn't read too much into his silence.
This discussion has been closed.