Is it possible for RodCrosby to tell us what the outcome of the 1970 election would have been on the basis of L&N? I ask that simply because I recall that as an election when Wilson ran very strongly in relation to Heath.
Yes, according to L&N's original paper, the Tories did a little better than "forecast"* in 1970. About 1% larger vote lead, and 11 seats greater seat lead.
*of course the model wasn't in existence in 1970, but they used "out-of-sample" techniques to simulate the "forecast".
It loooks to me like the Tories will get pretty close to 300 seats now.
Looking more like a floor than a ceiling, to me...
Perhaps. I'd want to see consistent 4-5% Tory leads before I believe that. If we have that by the end of the month then, yes, possibly.
I agree with that. Consistent 4-5% leads across the pollsters will surely signify CON most seats & sniffing a majority.
Real problem for blues are the LD seats they have to pick up and defending at least 2 seats where serious campaign going on.
But to make a point that you have alluded to yourself, if Labour were to be 4 - 5% adrift of the Tories in GB as a whole it would still tend to imply a Con to Lab swing in England of about 2.5% - if we assume that a collapse in Scotland has knocked 1.5% off its national vote share. Such a swing could still hand Labour 30 or so Tory seats - plus 6 - 10 LibDem seats.
Tory plus LD must surely need 315 seats for Cameron to remain PM I'd have thought. That means less than 50 losses. Given the Lib Dems will surely lose 15 seats to Labour and SNP, that leaves a maximum 33 losses by the Tories to Labour.
That's assuming the SNP are as good as their word that they would not back up a Tory government. Given the current Tory campaign tactic of stoking English grievance at Scottish nationalist influence that must be receding by the day.
What can it say that the Ashcroft polling hasn't? The only surprise would be a massive swing back from SNP to Labour and that wouldn't push "Most Seats" out!
how is it Ed Miliband has four one hour programs on BBC3, surely this is against BBC impartiality rules?? along with the interview with his wife, the bias is blatant
He hasn't.
Prog 1 - Miliband Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
What can it say that the Ashcroft polling hasn't? The only surprise would be a massive swing back from SNP to Labour and that wouldn't push "Most Seats" out!
What can it say that the Ashcroft polling hasn't? The only surprise would be a massive swing back from SNP to Labour and that wouldn't push "Most Seats" out!
An SNP vote share of 55% (which I fully expect at least once in Scottish polling before May 7th would give people a lot to talk about.
how is it Ed Miliband has four one hour programs on BBC3, surely this is against BBC impartiality rules?? along with the interview with his wife, the bias is blatant
He hasn't.
Prog 1 - Miliband Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
The description for the series stated "leading figures" from each of the major parties....that suggests that one or more of the other parties leaders aren't going to be interviewed (I presume they rejected the offer).
Is it possible for RodCrosby to tell us what the outcome of the 1970 election would have been on the basis of L&N? I ask that simply because I recall that as an election when Wilson ran very strongly in relation to Heath.
Yes, according to L&N's original paper, the Tories did a little better than "forecast"* in 1970. About 1% larger vote lead, and 11 seats greater seat lead.
*of course the model wasn't in existence in 1970, but they used "out-of-sample" techniques to simulate the "forecast".
It loooks to me like the Tories will get pretty close to 300 seats now.
Looking more like a floor than a ceiling, to me...
Perhaps. I'd want to see consistent 4-5% Tory leads before I believe that. If we have that by the end of the month then, yes, possibly.
I agree with that. Consistent 4-5% leads across the pollsters will surely signify CON most seats & sniffing a majority.
Real problem for blues are the LD seats they have to pick up and defending at least 2 seats where serious campaign going on.
What do you think the two are, Mike? Watford and OW&A?
I've been given a briefing on the polling for background. If they choose to release it then I can talk about them.
What can it say that the Ashcroft polling hasn't? The only surprise would be a massive swing back from SNP to Labour and that wouldn't push "Most Seats" out!
An SNP vote share of 55% (which I fully expect at least once in Scottish polling before May 7th would give people a lot to talk about.
Is it possible for RodCrosby to tell us what the outcome of the 1970 election would have been on the basis of L&N? I ask that simply because I recall that as an election when Wilson ran very strongly in relation to Heath.
Yes, according to L&N's original paper, the Tories did a little better than "forecast"* in 1970. About 1% larger vote lead, and 11 seats greater seat lead.
*of course the model wasn't in existence in 1970, but they used "out-of-sample" techniques to simulate the "forecast".
It loooks to me like the Tories will get pretty close to 300 seats now.
Looking more like a floor than a ceiling, to me...
Perhaps. I'd want to see consistent 4-5% Tory leads before I believe that. If we have that by the end of the month then, yes, possibly.
I agree with that. Consistent 4-5% leads across the pollsters will surely signify CON most seats & sniffing a majority.
Real problem for blues are the LD seats they have to pick up and defending at least 2 seats where serious campaign going on.
But to make a point that you have alluded to yourself, if Labour were to be 4 - 5% adrift of the Tories in GB as a whole it would still tend to imply a Con to Lab swing in England of about 2.5% - if we assume that a collapse in Scotland has knocked 1.5% off its national vote share. Such a swing could still hand Labour 30 or so Tory seats - plus 6 - 10 LibDem seats.
Tory plus LD must surely need 315 seats for Cameron to remain PM I'd have thought. That means less than 50 losses. Given the Lib Dems will surely lose 15 seats to Labour and SNP, that leaves a maximum 33 losses by the Tories to Labour.
That's assuming the SNP are as good as their word that they would not back up a Tory government. Given the current Tory campaign tactic of stoking English grievance at Scottish nationalist influence that must be receding by the day.
I also don't share the view of many that all LibDem MPs would be up for supporting another Tory-led Government. Clegg may well want that but I suspect a good number will decline to follow any lead he might try to give. His authority is pretty well gone anyway.
On the L&N figures you'd still have a 43% chance of regaining Broxtowe...
(^_-)
About right Soubry is up for the fight could go either way.
I'm pretty hopeful - the 17% Libdems are very much the Red Liberal type rather than the NOTA type, and they still don't have a candidate at all.
I'm not sure I believe in this red liberal stuff. Perhaps some people could have come to the view in 2010 that the Lib Dems were the best hope for socialism in the future, but I suspect they are wolly liberals who are aghast at the coalition and a Lib Dem leadership that seems drunk on Economist editorials. The sort of people who cant stand the likes of Osborne, Gove and Grayling and will do what's necessary to get the out of government. Rather than 'coming home to Labouur' I suspect many could abandon you quite quickly and go back to don't know next time.
how is it Ed Miliband has four one hour programs on BBC3, surely this is against BBC impartiality rules?? along with the interview with his wife, the bias is blatant
He hasn't.
Prog 1 - Miliband Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
Surely no chance Cameron would go on a show like this. One hour of non stop questions from an unforgiving audience.
Don't Tories understand the difference between nationality and race?
Although perhaps it is this that has got them spitting feathers. Farage in the Indy:
I’m afraid that what this incident has really shown us is that the mainstream establishment, including the press and the media, are perhaps racist themselves. Because when I said “British” they heard “white”, and set a course for the media narrative to pretend I made a distinction between people of different skin colours. This is their own, inbuilt racism. And it’s shameful.
I'm sure Goebbels would have been proud of the Tory conflation........
Nigel Farage was asked specifically whether he would scrap regulation based on race or colour, and he said he would.
Of course, the Telegraph is (perhaps willfully) misreporting the matter when it states that Farage was calling for discrimination.
Indeed in as Trevor Phillips put it in 'UKIP land' which given such a thing isn't likely to exist anytime soon sounds pretty aspirational to me. Farage said also that he took that view because UKIP are colour blind which clearly implies that the colour of ones skin was not a consideration in his mind and that things had moved on considerably in the country and race was no longer an issue. Yet the Prime Minister and others have wilfully misinterpreted what was said in such a manner to suit their own purposes.
Now if you ask me Farage was being optimistic and perhaps overly so in expressing his views that the issue was resolved. There are still legacy challenges regarding race not least with those who insist on viewing issues purely through the divisive prism of race rather than the prism of our British nation. There are also new challenges largely resulting out of two decades of uncontrolled immigration (e.g. the growing concerns within the Jewish community) which need to be assessed and addressed.
Either way, I don't think Farage is far from the mark when he says that there are those within the establishment with a distinctly racist mindset. Not in the establishment sense perhaps but in the sense of moving to a situation where race is no longer a consideration. In that certainly he is right.
Miliband getting a really hard time over cannabis. Audience is clearly keen on legalisation.
Some of the audience seem quite clued up on certain areas.
One has to think that in terms of UK politics the pretence that the War on Drugs is working and expecting supporting it to be a vote gain over legalisation has to be reaching crossover.
how is it Ed Miliband has four one hour programs on BBC3, surely this is against BBC impartiality rules?? along with the interview with his wife, the bias is blatant
He hasn't.
Prog 1 - Miliband Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
If they're having Prog 3 Farage and Clegg and Prog 4 Cameron, it seems the SNP and UKIP are in the wrong boxes. UKIP and their 0-2 seat projection should be in with PC and the Greens while Prog 3 should be Sturgeon and Clegg.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." - Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." -Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
@Dair Cannabis questions are a nightmare for the major parties at election time. There is way to much prejudice and misinformation in the media to make it anything other than a front page vote loser if anyone gives a positive view of legalization.
Is it possible for RodCrosby to tell us what the outcome of the 1970 election would have been on the basis of L&N? I ask that simply because I recall that as an election when Wilson ran very strongly in relation to Heath.
Yes, according to L&N's original paper, the Tories did a little better than "forecast"* in 1970. About 1% larger vote lead, and 11 seats greater seat lead.
*of course the model wasn't in existence in 1970, but they used "out-of-sample" techniques to simulate the "forecast".
It loooks to me like the Tories will get pretty close to 300 seats now.
Looking more like a floor than a ceiling, to me...
Perhaps. I'd want to see consistent 4-5% Tory leads before I believe that. If we have that by the end of the month then, yes, possibly.
I agree with that. Consistent 4-5% leads across the pollsters will surely signify CON most seats & sniffing a majority.
Real problem for blues are the LD seats they have to pick up and defending at least 2 seats where serious campaign going on.
But to make a point that you have alluded to yourself, if Labour were to be 4 - 5% adrift of the Tories in GB as a whole it would still tend to imply a Con to Lab swing in England of about 2.5% - if we assume that a collapse in Scotland has knocked 1.5% off its national vote share. Such a swing could still hand Labour 30 or so Tory seats - plus 6 - 10 LibDem seats.
Tory plus LD must surely need 315 seats for Cameron to remain PM I'd have thought. That means less than 50 losses. Given the Lib Dems will surely lose 15 seats to Labour and SNP, that leaves a maximum 33 losses by the Tories to Labour.
That's assuming the SNP are as good as their word that they would not back up a Tory government. Given the current Tory campaign tactic of stoking English grievance at Scottish nationalist influence that must be receding by the day.
I also don't share the view of many that all LibDem MPs would be up for supporting another Tory-led Government. Clegg may well want that but I suspect a good number will decline to follow any lead he might try to give. His authority is pretty well gone anyway.
Yep, I'm not saying with 315 combined it will happen. But less than that it's hard to see it being workable. And that means no more than 33 losses from Tory to Labour.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." -Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
I'm pretty sure the Tories don't use shortlists.
Wasn't Rochester and Strood an all women shortlist? Well two women and noone else. I am sure the poorest of male candidates local to the area would perform better than Kelly Tolhurst.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." -Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
I can only imagine non white people whose families have lived here for generations must feel patronised beyond belief
Mark Littlewood put it well today on Daily Politics. There used to be a lot of thoughtless racism about a generation or so ago. There isn't anywhere near as much now. So relaxing the race relations laws is a positive move that acknowledges that progress
People that insist on these draconian measures probably never let their kids take the stabilisers off their bikes
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." -Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
I'm pretty sure the Tories don't use shortlists.
Wasn't Rochester and Strood an all women shortlist? Well two women and noone else.
Not sure of the specifics in that case. Were the candidates imposed by CCHQ? It could have just been that the top two candidates were women.
@Dair Cannabis questions are a nightmare for the major parties at election time. There is way to much prejudice and misinformation in the media to make it anything other than a front page vote loser if anyone gives a positive view of legalization.
Miliband getting a really hard time over cannabis. Audience is clearly keen on legalisation.
Some of the audience seem quite clued up on certain areas.
One has to think that in terms of UK politics the pretence that the War on Drugs is working and expecting supporting it to be a vote gain over legalisation has to be reaching crossover.
I can't speak for the UK, which I'm sure is in the same boat as the US, but the US has spent decades and billions of dollars trying to stem the flow of drugs into the country. From interdiction at sea to searching northbound vehicles on I-95 all attempts have been unsuccessful.
At some point you have to accept that what you're doing is not having the desired effect and merely to keep doing the same is pointless.
The only alternative is to legalize and tax the less harmful ones.
Miliband getting a really hard time over cannabis. Audience is clearly keen on legalisation.
Some of the audience seem quite clued up on certain areas.
One has to think that in terms of UK politics the pretence that the War on Drugs is working and expecting supporting it to be a vote gain over legalisation has to be reaching crossover.
I can't speak for the UK, which I'm sure is in the same boat as the US, but the US has spent decades and billions of dollars trying to stem the flow of drugs into the country. From interdiction at sea to searching northbound vehicles on I-95 all attempts have been unsuccessful.
At some point you have to accept that what you're doing is not having the desired effect and merely to keep doing the same is pointless.
The only alternative is to legalize and tax the less harmful ones.
And prescribe and control the use of the more harmful ones.
On the L&N figures you'd still have a 43% chance of regaining Broxtowe...
(^_-)
About right Soubry is up for the fight could go either way.
I'm pretty hopeful - the 17% Libdems are very much the Red Liberal type rather than the NOTA type, and they still don't have a candidate at all.
Maybe but how many WWC votes have you lost to UKIP and will Soubry maximise her skills in the media to get her fullest possible vote out, with the improving economy in the area. I think there were doubts how interested she would be but pretty clear now she really wants the prize. Might all come down to how your leader performs in the next 2 months.
how is it Ed Miliband has four one hour programs on BBC3, surely this is against BBC impartiality rules?? along with the interview with his wife, the bias is blatant
He hasn't.
Prog 1 - Miliband Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
If they're having Prog 3 Farage and Clegg and Prog 4 Cameron, it seems the SNP and UKIP are in the wrong boxes. UKIP and their 0-2 seat projection should be in with PC and the Greens while Prog 3 should be Sturgeon and Clegg.
Perhaps they are doing it on the number of voters each party might expect. Now go on tell us that the SNP will poll more votes than UKIP........
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." -Martin Luther King.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
I can only imagine non white people whose families have lived here for generations must feel patronised beyond belief
Mark Littlewood put it well today on Daily Politics. There used to be a lot of thoughtless racism about a generation or so ago. There isn't anywhere near as much now. So relaxing the race relations laws is a positive move that acknowledges that progress
People that insist on these draconian measures probably never let their kids take the stabilisers off their bikes
Their kids don't get bikes in the first place......
The Taxpayer shelled out £757,000 on transport for Ed Miliband last year, amounting to £63,000 a month....that is up from £600k in the first year he was LOTO.
Mike Smithson retweeted Danny Blanchflower @D_Blanchflower 2h2 hours ago Here is the chart that should get Lynton Crosby fired - poll support for Tories remained flat at 32% since March 2012
Miliband getting a really hard time over cannabis. Audience is clearly keen on legalisation.
Some of the audience seem quite clued up on certain areas.
Thats always a sign of a fitup. Clued up means already an activist. What self respecting 18 to 24 year old would even entertain the idea of asking someone like Miliband questions? Everyone of them will be party activists one way or another.
Comments
Lib Dems to outpoll UKIP £50@5/2
I will take £45
That's assuming the SNP are as good as their word that they would not back up a Tory government. Given the current Tory campaign tactic of stoking English grievance at Scottish nationalist influence that must be receding by the day.
Prog 1 - Miliband
Prog 2 - SNP + PC + Green
Not sure about 3 and 4 - maybe Clegg and Farage. Has Cameron rejected invite?
Or Clegg and Farage on one prog and Cameron on other?
Some of the audience seem quite clued up on certain areas.
Evening OGH.
Now if you ask me Farage was being optimistic and perhaps overly so in expressing his views that the issue was resolved. There are still legacy challenges regarding race not least with those who insist on viewing issues purely through the divisive prism of race rather than the prism of our British nation. There are also new challenges largely resulting out of two decades of uncontrolled immigration (e.g. the growing concerns within the Jewish community) which need to be assessed and addressed.
Either way, I don't think Farage is far from the mark when he says that there are those within the establishment with a distinctly racist mindset. Not in the establishment sense perhaps but in the sense of moving to a situation where race is no longer a consideration. In that certainly he is right.
This will clearly not happen if the LibLabCon have their way. Quotas and shortlists are the their only solution.
Cannabis questions are a nightmare for the major parties at election time.
There is way to much prejudice and misinformation in the media to make it anything other than a front page vote loser if anyone gives a positive view of legalization.
Mark Littlewood put it well today on Daily Politics. There used to be a lot of thoughtless racism about a generation or so ago. There isn't anywhere near as much now. So relaxing the race relations laws is a positive move that acknowledges that progress
People that insist on these draconian measures probably never let their kids take the stabilisers off their bikes
Not suggesting yougov manipulate them but it seems after Tory leads come Labour revivals.
I'm just not convinced it is still true.
guffaw
He has form for this doesn't he.
I seem to remember a cunning stunt on a train.
Man of the people my arse.
At some point you have to accept that what you're doing is not having the desired effect and merely to keep doing the same is pointless.
The only alternative is to legalize and tax the less harmful ones.
@GdnPolitics: Kitchen sink drama for Miliband as homely photo backfires http://t.co/j7bXCj7sLl
It is a lot less so than it used to be for the general population, but it would still be a front page frothing meltdown for the usual suspects.
The Taxpayer shelled out £757,000 on transport for Ed Miliband last year, amounting to £63,000 a month....that is up from £600k in the first year he was LOTO.
That can't be right can it? £2k a day?
Danny Blanchflower @D_Blanchflower 2h2 hours ago
Here is the chart that should get Lynton Crosby fired - poll support for Tories remained flat at 32% since March 2012