But will Lord A have named candidates? .... probably not.
I reckon if we can name the candidate easily on here then the locals might know who it is. Alot of them are completely anonymous.
I couldn't name the MP of where I'm sitting right now for instance.
Think it's Clive Betts. Labour will be weighing the vote here, UKIP a very very distant second. Lib Dems to lose deposit methinks.
If constituency polling in the UK has a flaw it's the almost complete failure to name candidates, the more so as polling day looms. The "your constituency" question mitigates the problem but it's still a weakness.
Polls in the US invariably name candidates for Congress and many state wide elections and in a significant number of UK HoC seats this would be appropriate.
In the US, the primaries are run some time before the main election so the candidates are well known. Here we still have plenty of seats that are still missing some candidates 2 months away from the election.
But will Lord A have named candidates? .... probably not.
I reckon if we can name the candidate easily on here then the locals might know who it is. Alot of them are completely anonymous.
I couldn't name the MP of where I'm sitting right now for instance.
Think it's Clive Betts. Labour will be weighing the vote here, UKIP a very very distant second. Lib Dems to lose deposit methinks.
If constituency polling in the UK has a flaw it's the almost complete failure to name candidates, the more so as polling day looms. The "your constituency" question mitigates the problem but it's still a weakness.
Polls in the US invariably name candidates for Congress and many state wide elections and in a significant number of UK HoC seats this would be appropriate.
In the US, the primaries are run some time before the main election so the candidates are well known. Here we still have plenty of seats that are still missing some candidates 2 months away from the election.
Those unnamed candidates 2 months out aren't going to have much time to get local traction. Named vs unnamed polling in Bradford West would reveal a big difference I think.
Another example of why the Labour title inflation was a bad idea. "Judge" should be restricted to the High Court and above.
BTW, who watches porn at work? I can't think of a less conducive environment?
Seems to be plenty of that sort of stupidity around today, like this one from the Mail. Not ideal if shown to be true, and from his .sch.uk (i.e professional) email account as well, no danger of that causing a problem!
I'll judge Jack's ARSE on Bury North, I've got £20 on a Labour gain there at 1-2 and I'm confident I'll win a tenner. If I don't then I'll listen to his ARSE more in the future.
If you'd have paid closer attention to my ARSE over the past two General Elections here and across the pond then you'll have won rather substantially more than a tenner !!
Obviously I've got more on a tenner on the election and if your ARSE comes to fruition I think I'll win money but I'm disagreeing with you on Bury North. This was Ashcroft polled back in October, there hasn't been enough swing since then to dislodge Labour's good position and all the evidence points to the NW being quite kind to them (Far more so than Yorkshire say).
For casting doubt on my ARSE PBers have been cast into the very depth of despair aka ConHome.
However I'm of a generous disposition this morning and accordingly will just issue you with a yellow card and a warning as to your future conduct.
"into the very depth of despair aka ConHome."
That's not a very nice thing for an ex above-the-line contributor to say about ConHome!
Another example of why the Labour title inflation was a bad idea. "Judge" should be restricted to the High Court and above.
BTW, who watches porn at work? I can't think of a less conducive environment?
Seems to be plenty of that sort of stupidity around today, like this one from the Mail. Not ideal if shown to be true, and from his .sch.uk (i.e professional) email account as well, no danger of that causing a problem!
Guy denies it. Not impossible to think it was a tech-savvy kid at his school who hacked his accounts....
Yes, I thought that as well. It would be spectacularly stupid to use your school (headmaster) email account to do it. Personally it doesn't bother me what he does with his own time, so long as it doesn't interfere with the pupils, its the usual sensationalist nonsense from the Rant, for me the main item of interest is the carelessness of using the official email address.
But will Lord A have named candidates? .... probably not.
I reckon if we can name the candidate easily on here then the locals might know who it is. Alot of them are completely anonymous.
I couldn't name the MP of where I'm sitting right now for instance.
Think it's Clive Betts. Labour will be weighing the vote here, UKIP a very very distant second. Lib Dems to lose deposit methinks.
If constituency polling in the UK has a flaw it's the almost complete failure to name candidates, the more so as polling day looms. The "your constituency" question mitigates the problem but it's still a weakness.
Polls in the US invariably name candidates for Congress and many state wide elections and in a significant number of UK HoC seats this would be appropriate.
In the US, the primaries are run some time before the main election so the candidates are well known. Here we still have plenty of seats that are still missing some candidates 2 months away from the election.
A lot of voters won't be following the primaries that closely, especially floating ones. Conventionally, the presidential candidates get introduced to the voters at the conventions.
Bury North - Lab Gain Pudsey - TCTC Broxtowe - Lab Gain Warwickshire North - Lab Gain Cambridge - TCTC Ipswich - Likely Lab Gain Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - TCTC Enfield North - Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Likely Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
IMO
I think Cornwall North will be a fairly easy Con gain.
Want to put some money on Cambridge?
Its TCTC and LD are IMO too short on Betfair at 1.70.
LAB at 2.06 is about right i think
You are devaluing your BJesus with such folly.
Well i am confident that 3.15 on LAB most seats is far too high as regards BJESUS doesn't assume Cambridge goes red anymore but i think it will be a close run affair.
We will see who was right on EICIPM / EWNBPM in 50 days.
I just think the value is not on Cameron at 1.56
One seat where the micro may be more accurate than the macro.
Still no convergence between your BJ and the ARSE - someone is eating humble pie in 50 days
Correct you think i am wrong presumably but do you really think CON hold with a greater than 500 majority in Bury North is credible?
No idea about Bury North - but I'm bawdeep on Huppert (LD) in Cambridge (my constituency).
For what it's worth, my switching matrix model has:
Bury North 1,500 Lab majority Cambridge 3,000 LD majority
I wonder whether the time hasn't arrived for Labour to do some negative campaigning of their own. Perhaps a re-run of Peter Blake's award winning Sgt Pepper cover. "Dave's Mates". Charlie and Rebekkah Liz Murdoch Jeremy Clarkson Anthony Bamford Rachel Whetstone Andy Coulson Paul Dacre Quentin Letts.....and I haven't even had to start thinking yet.
It is no wonder that socialists can't get to grips with advertising - and that they issued that masterful poster comparing Cameron to the much loved but terribly un-PC Gene Hunt sitting on the bonnet of an Audi Quattro.
The point is to appeal outside of the pre-existing base, and not do anything to help popularize the opposition. The only people who know who the others that you mention are, either: a) already read the Guardian and already vote Labour or Green, b) fans of Clarkson who will never vote for the PC-brigade ever, or c) Tories who are grateful of the combined tax take from that group.
Casting Cameron in one of the most popular album covers ever would boost his ratings - so go ahead Roge, make his day!
@TheScreamingEagles Do you think the yellow peril will hold their deposit in Sheffield Central ?
All Sheffield Lib Dems resources are being deployed in Hallam.
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
Somewhere like Sheffield Central could be very interesting in terms of minor parties and how they do. Who comes second in this seat and with what %? What order the parties? You've potentially got LD, Green, Tory, UKIP, (& Pirate?) all plausibly in the 5-10% range in this seat. No idea what order they come in...
@TheScreamingEagles Do you think the yellow peril will hold their deposit in Sheffield Central ?
All Sheffield Lib Dems resources are being deployed in Hallam.
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
Somewhere like Sheffield Central could be very interesting in terms of minor parties and how they do. Who comes second in this seat and with what %? What order the parties? You've potentially got LD, Green, Tory, UKIP, (& Pirate?) all plausibly in the 5-10% range in this seat. No idea what order they come in...
Greens should be favourite for second, I'd have thought.
Given these seats were last polled when Labour were leading in the polls by a few points, it seems safe to assume some Blue improvement will have occurred. I wonder if just punting on the Tories in the first set of Ashcroft poll seats makes a simple trading bet?
"Wouldn't the average voter feel far more uncomfortable having the DUP in government than the SNP? I certaily would. Isn't it time Ed started asking for assurances about the Tories and the DUP?"
Yes of course but that is exactly the problem. Milliband has allowed the Tory press in the pocket of Crosby to dictate who he does or doesn't deal with instead if just saying that Cameron was effectively conceding the election. If you want to be Prime Minister the most important thing is to act like you are going to be Prime Minister. Make that the working assumption.
Salmond is the most naturally gifted politican around. He is the one who won a majority in a PR system as opposed to Cameron not being able to win a majority in a FPP system! In another life he would certainly be the natural Labour leader like John Smith. In this life he is someone you should want in the tent in a balanced parliament not outside it. Outside it he will run rings around Milliband.
Given these seats were last polled when Labour were leading in the polls by a few points, it seems safe to assume some Blue improvement will have occurred. I wonder if just punting on the Tories in the first set of Ashcroft poll seats makes a simple trading bet?
Cash truly tied up for me right now, and individual swings may well go both ways though ofc on average should be SOME swing to the Tories.
Plus will the swing take care of the bookie overround for trading bets ?
Also we don't know where is polled. It's a strategy I suppose but not for me before this set of polls.
@Quincel Also this set of polls needs to be good for the Conservatives to justify Lab at 2-1 for most seats I'd have thought or even worse Dave to be PM after GE trading in the 1.5 - 1.6 range.
@TheScreamingEagles Do you think the yellow peril will hold their deposit in Sheffield Central ?
All Sheffield Lib Dems resources are being deployed in Hallam.
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
Somewhere like Sheffield Central could be very interesting in terms of minor parties and how they do. Who comes second in this seat and with what %? What order the parties? You've potentially got LD, Green, Tory, UKIP, (& Pirate?) all plausibly in the 5-10% range in this seat. No idea what order they come in...
Greens should be favourite for second, I'd have thought.
It is a national target seat (not one of the top 3 but in the next tier) so I would be hopeful of second. The Green party has never finished second in any constituency in a UK GE so that would be a big result.
Incredibly OT: what explodes if you cook it too much? [NB not microwaved].
The Ladbrokes Buzzword Bingo which are worth a look [not backed any myself yet, will give it a proper look later if I remember]: Tough Decision 2.5 Finish The Job 2.75 Hard Choices 3
@TheScreamingEagles Do you think the yellow peril will hold their deposit in Sheffield Central ?
All Sheffield Lib Dems resources are being deployed in Hallam.
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
Somewhere like Sheffield Central could be very interesting in terms of minor parties and how they do. Who comes second in this seat and with what %? What order the parties? You've potentially got LD, Green, Tory, UKIP, (& Pirate?) all plausibly in the 5-10% range in this seat. No idea what order they come in...
Greens should be favourite for second, I'd have thought.
It is a national target seat (not one of the top 3 but in the next tier) so I would be hopeful of second. The Green party has never finished second in any constituency in a UK GE so that would be a big result.
Will you be in Bristol on the election day ?
Am assuming Bristol West is an all hands to the pump effort, make sure you get all the potential Greens registered there
Incredibly OT: what explodes if you cook it too much? [NB not microwaved].
The Ladbrokes Buzzword Bingo which are worth a look [not backed any myself yet, will give it a proper look later if I remember]: Tough Decision 2.5 Finish The Job 2.75 Hard Choices 3
Don't bother with that, sell "tax" on Sporting index.
@TheScreamingEagles Do you think the yellow peril will hold their deposit in Sheffield Central ?
All Sheffield Lib Dems resources are being deployed in Hallam.
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
Somewhere like Sheffield Central could be very interesting in terms of minor parties and how they do. Who comes second in this seat and with what %? What order the parties? You've potentially got LD, Green, Tory, UKIP, (& Pirate?) all plausibly in the 5-10% range in this seat. No idea what order they come in...
Greens should be favourite for second, I'd have thought.
It is a national target seat (not one of the top 3 but in the next tier) so I would be hopeful of second. The Green party has never finished second in any constituency in a UK GE so that would be a big result.
Will you be in Bristol on the election day ?
Am assuming Bristol West is an all hands to the pump effort, make sure you get all the potential Greens registered there
I wont even be in the country on election day. A badly timed committee meeting calls (I pointed out the difficulty it would cause UK based members at the time but to no avail, it's as if these people actively want to encourage Brexit ).
"Overall 53% of people think that Labour should rule out doing a deal with the SNP, but this is largely made up of Labour’s opponents, their own supporters are far more split over the idea. If there was a choice between a minority Labour government or an SNP/Lab coalition with a majority, Labour voters would be evenly divided but if the alternative was another Tory government Labour voters would back a deal with the SNP by 6 to 1."
This from UK Polling Report encapsulates Ed's total stupidity. The people against a Labour/SNP deal were the Tory press and his opponents who don't want him as Prime Minister. The people for were Labour supporters who want the Tories out. In Scotland it always has been by far the most popular option. Once you allow the Tory wolves to taste blood as he has just done then there is real trouble to come.
"Overall 53% of people think that Labour should rule out doing a deal with the SNP, but this is largely made up of Labour’s opponents, their own supporters are far more split over the idea. If there was a choice between a minority Labour government or an SNP/Lab coalition with a majority, Labour voters would be evenly divided but if the alternative was another Tory government Labour voters would back a deal with the SNP by 6 to 1."
This from UK Polling Report encapsulates Ed's total stupidity. The people against a Labour/SNP deal were the Tory press and his opponents who don't want him as Prime Minister. The people for were Labour supporters who want the Tories out. In Scotland it always has been by far the most popular option. Once you allow the Tory wolves to taste blood as he has just done then there is real trouble to come.
The goading on this on Question Time etc was very obviously from Conservative plants. It seems to have worked. Neither Blair nor Brown would have been pushed around like this.
@Quincel Also this set of polls needs to be good for the Conservatives to justify Lab at 2-1 for most seats I'd have thought or even worse Dave to be PM after GE trading in the 1.5 - 1.6 range.
Fair point. The strategy of backing Lab overall and Tory specific seats is getting just silly. There are Tory holds you can get longer than evens on, and then back Lab most seats at 2/1. OK, you could lose both bets if the Tories lose the seat but hold on overall (SNP etc helping out), but frankly if you take a couple of dozen Tory seats and spread the risk you get relatively near an arb.
I've never actually taken the time to do this though. Maybe I should.
Not so. All three of my lads are going to be old enough to vote at this GE for the first time, but it was only due to the lowered voting age that the youngest was also able to vote in the Indy Referendum. My youngest lad was then recently notified that he would have to register himself on the electoral role again to be eligible to vote at the GE, something which he has now done. So this could be an issue for some voters who were not 18 at the time of the Indy Referendum, but will be at the time of the GE in Scotland if they have not also done so.
I would be surprised if turnout in Scotland was not in the low 70s in the aftermath of the referendum which increased political participation to almost unprecedented heights but I tend to agree that in the UK as a whole it will be unimpressive. There is, bluntly, not a lot of enthusiasm for any of the major parties and many supporters of the smaller parties will come to the view that their particular favourite cannot win where they are so what is the point?
Two things that might be contra-indicators relate to the clean up of the registers. In 2010 there were far more people on the registers who were not entitled to vote or who were on the register twice for perfectly legitimate reasons. So we are not directly comparing like with like. Furthermore the register in 2010 would have contained a much greater proportion of young people (who were unlikely to vote) than 2015. In fact I suspect quite a large % of those less inclined to vote will have disappeared from the register.
Because of this I suspect that turnout may well match 2010 even if the underlying reality is lower participation in this wonderful democracy thing.
I don't think the 'headline' turnout figure in Scotland will be that high. It was quite widely reported that over 97% of eligible voters had registered for the referendum, which strikes me as being a really high rate.
Further, it's been confirmed by the relevant bodies that anyone registered for the referendum will also be registered for the general election. This means that the reported registration problems should not be such a big issue in Scotland.
"Overall 53% of people think that Labour should rule out doing a deal with the SNP, but this is largely made up of Labour’s opponents, their own supporters are far more split over the idea. If there was a choice between a minority Labour government or an SNP/Lab coalition with a majority, Labour voters would be evenly divided but if the alternative was another Tory government Labour voters would back a deal with the SNP by 6 to 1."
This from UK Polling Report encapsulates Ed's total stupidity. The people against a Labour/SNP deal were the Tory press and his opponents who don't want him as Prime Minister. The people for were Labour supporters who want the Tories out. In Scotland it always has been by far the most popular option. Once you allow the Tory wolves to taste blood as he has just done then there is real trouble to come.
Nothing is going to change the SNP destroying Labour in Scotland, so Ed's thinking is completely focused on other parts of the UK.
In any case, there is no sustainable agreement that Labour could do with the SNP.
I can't discover from the report if the same polling company polled each time. Given we have had His Lordship's national polling exploring the outer reaches of margin of error each week, it is really hard to have much confidence that there is any consistency across his marginals polling....
I therefore decided to start going back to constituencies where my previous surveys have suggested tight races to see whether narrowing national polls – including a fair number of Conservative leads – were being reflected where it matters.
Wait a minute. Isn't there a chance of a bias being introduced by this selection procedure?
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
This is rather similar to the biases in early US experiments into ESP, for those who are familiar with that story.
I therefore decided to start going back to constituencies where my previous surveys have suggested tight races to see whether narrowing national polls – including a fair number of Conservative leads – were being reflected where it matters.
Wait a minute. Isn't there a chance of a bias being introduced by this selection procedure?
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
Yes, good point.
In addition, the actual swings since his last polls look pretty randomly distributed (a net 8 points better for the Tories in Worcester, a net 10 points worse in City of Chester). I think that, given the margin of error on these polls, the noise outweighs the signal. You may be better advised to look at the national polls.
It seems the problem at the moment is that there are so many undecided voters out there, on the one hand they dont like the tories, on the other they dont like Ed Miliband, there is lot of voter churn going on, and only as the election draws into focus, when the manifestos are out ,and the final budget has fed through will we get a clearer picture of which camp people are moving too. My gut tells me people in the end will stick to the known rather than the unknown, the best of two evils, they will probably opt for the tories by a margin, not enough for a majority government, but tories most seats. But who knows - all to play for.
I therefore decided to start going back to constituencies where my previous surveys have suggested tight races to see whether narrowing national polls – including a fair number of Conservative leads – were being reflected where it matters.
Wait a minute. Isn't there a chance of a bias being introduced by this selection procedure?
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
Yes, good point.
In addition, the actual swings since his last polls look pretty randomly distributed (a net 8 points better for the Tories in Worcester, a net 10 points worse in City of Chester). I think that, given the margin of error on these polls, the noise outweighs the signal. You may be better advised to look at the national polls.
If Lord A picked seats where there had been particularly large or particularly low swings to Labour, it will be susceptible to a reversion to the mean.
I therefore decided to start going back to constituencies where my previous surveys have suggested tight races to see whether narrowing national polls – including a fair number of Conservative leads – were being reflected where it matters.
Wait a minute. Isn't there a chance of a bias being introduced by this selection procedure?
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
Yes, good point.
In addition, the actual swings since his last polls look pretty randomly distributed (a net 8 points better for the Tories in Worcester, a net 10 points worse in City of Chester). I think that, given the margin of error on these polls, the noise outweighs the signal. You may be better advised to look at the national polls.
I can't discover from the report if the same polling company polled each time. Given we have had His Lordship's national polling exploring the outer reaches of margin of error each week, it is really hard to have much confidence that there is any consistency across his marginals polling....
What's annoying about this election is that Lord A is the only one seemingly doing marginals polling.
In 2010 we had regular marginals polling from ICM, YouGov and MORI. Nothing this time - Even ComRes (who did the occasional marginals poll a while ago) seem to have given up polling the marginals....
Is the reason they've all stopped doing marginals polls that they weren't very good before 2010? I mean I know ICM have stopped because the Labour Party and Hacked Off put the NOTW out of business, but what about MORI and YouGov?
I therefore decided to start going back to constituencies where my previous surveys have suggested tight races to see whether narrowing national polls – including a fair number of Conservative leads – were being reflected where it matters.
Wait a minute. Isn't there a chance of a bias being introduced by this selection procedure?
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
This is rather similar to the biases in early US experiments into ESP, for those who are familiar with that story.
The overall swing in the seats polled (from the previous set of polls) is 2% from Con to Lab, which is about what you would expect from the selection bias I suggest above.
Of course, this would still mean that the Tories were not benefiting from Labour's decline in the National polls in these marginals, but, well, it could be worse.
I think the most surprising thing, and worrying from a Con perspective, is that nationally his polling has been the post favourable for the Conservatives over the last few months (except for perhaps ICM).
This is the first time we are seeing a real divergence between what is happening nationally and the marginals.
In the period during which this fieldwork was done Ashcroft polls gave on average a national Con lead of 3% (a swing of 2%), whereas his marginals polls indicate a swing of 5%. Given the national average across the pollsters is actually a tie, the position in the marginals may be even worse for the Conservatives than this indicates.
Personally, I don't think we will see a discrepancy that large - but it is perhaps partially explained by Labour's apparent over performance in England.
These polls are yet more evidence the LD will have a, erm, very efficient vote distribution in May. 8/11 on them losing 200+ deposits may yet still be a bit of value.
Poppycock. I'm simply looking at the statistics. I've been saying for months that we shouldn't put too much faith in the constituency polls - what punters think is a measurement of the difference in swing in different constituencies is likely to be swamped by the statistical error (and that's even without worrying about the difficulties of sampling individual constituencies).
These polls are yet more evidence the LD will have a, erm, very efficient vote distribution in May. 8/11 on them losing 200+ deposits may yet still be a bit of value.
And if believed the Cons whilst still polling around the same nationally must be piling up votes in safe seats as they are down in the marginals ?
Those same seats where it is safe to vote Kipper and hence Kipper are doing well.
Dave better re-think the debates and sharpish. Really, really poor judgment. It will haunt him if he loses because he will always think he could have battered Ed in a one to one.
It seems the problem at the moment is that there are so many undecided voters out there, on the one hand they dont like the tories, on the other they dont like Ed Miliband, there is lot of voter churn going on, and only as the election draws into focus, when the manifestos are out ,and the final budget has fed through will we get a clearer picture of which camp people are moving too. My gut tells me people in the end will stick to the known rather than the unknown, the best of two evils, they will probably opt for the tories by a margin, not enough for a majority government, but tories most seats. But who knows - all to play for.
As I've said before. What voters really want is David Cameron leading a Labour government.
It looks around the 55-60 gains from the Tories mark to me, assuming this swing is replicated elsewhere. I'd knock off 15 seats for local/regional variation.. So say 45 Labour gains.
Probably would put Labour on around 290 seats, the Tories on around 265 seats. SNP around 40 seats and Lib Dems around 30 seats.
These polls are yet more evidence the LD will have a, erm, very efficient vote distribution in May. 8/11 on them losing 200+ deposits may yet still be a bit of value.
And if believed the Cons whilst still polling around the same nationally must be piling up votes in safe seats as they are down in the marginals ?
Those same seats where it is safe to vote Kipper and hence Kipper are doing well.
Can't all be true.
UKIP won't be doing very well in the Tories safest ABC middle class seats, Conservatives majorities to be as big as ever in Surrey and so forth.
Comments
TSE will cover.
That's not a very nice thing for an ex above-the-line contributor to say about ConHome!
Nothing exciting every happens when he is on watch.
Annoyingly I finished my LD analysis last night. So I have 45 minutes to get my bets on.
Con gain Banff & Buchan and Bootle, Lab gain Arundel & South Down, Lib Dems gain Sheffield Central and UKIP gain Doncaster North
Con gain Banff & Buchan perhaps 1000s.
Other three alot longer
Bury North 1,500 Lab majority
Cambridge 3,000 LD majority
The point is to appeal outside of the pre-existing base, and not do anything to help popularize the opposition. The only people who know who the others that you mention are, either:
a) already read the Guardian and already vote Labour or Green,
b) fans of Clarkson who will never vote for the PC-brigade ever,
or c) Tories who are grateful of the combined tax take from that group.
Casting Cameron in one of the most popular album covers ever would boost his ratings - so go ahead Roge, make his day!
I can see it happening, but then again, they polled 40%+ last time, so can't see them shedding nearly 90% of their vote to lose their deposit.
There's very little between the LDs holding 17 seats and saving 32 seats.
"Wouldn't the average voter feel far more uncomfortable having the DUP in government than the SNP? I certaily would. Isn't it time Ed started asking for assurances about the Tories and the DUP?"
Yes of course but that is exactly the problem. Milliband has allowed the Tory press in the pocket of Crosby to dictate who he does or doesn't deal with instead if just saying that Cameron was effectively conceding the election. If you want to be Prime Minister the most important thing is to act like you are going to be Prime Minister. Make that the working assumption.
Salmond is the most naturally gifted politican around. He is the one who won a majority in a PR system as opposed to Cameron not being able to win a majority in a FPP system! In another life he would certainly be the natural Labour leader like John Smith. In this life he is someone you should want in the tent in a balanced parliament not outside it. Outside it he will run rings around Milliband.
Plus will the swing take care of the bookie overround for trading bets ?
Also we don't know where is polled. It's a strategy I suppose but not for me before this set of polls.
The Ladbrokes Buzzword Bingo which are worth a look [not backed any myself yet, will give it a proper look later if I remember]:
Tough Decision 2.5
Finish The Job 2.75
Hard Choices 3
Am assuming Bristol West is an all hands to the pump effort, make sure you get all the potential Greens registered there
This from UK Polling Report encapsulates Ed's total stupidity. The people against a Labour/SNP deal were the Tory press and his opponents who don't want him as Prime Minister. The people for were Labour supporters who want the Tories out. In Scotland it always has been by far the most popular option. Once you allow the Tory wolves to taste blood as he has just done then there is real trouble to come.
It seems to have worked. Neither Blair nor Brown would have been pushed around like this.
I've never actually taken the time to do this though. Maybe I should.
A slow, agonising death sounds like a preferable alternative to that.
Farage guest of the day on for the whole hour
In any case, there is no sustainable agreement that Labour could do with the SNP.
If we remember that there is a margin of error associated with all polls then there is a risk that he has selected those seats where the random noise in his previous polls was to the benefit of the Tories. Then part of the difference with the poll results this time is that the noise around the true level of support is now evenly distributed, thus producing an overall swing away from the Tories as an artefact of the selection procedure.
This is rather similar to the biases in early US experiments into ESP, for those who are familiar with that story.
In addition, the actual swings since his last polls look pretty randomly distributed (a net 8 points better for the Tories in Worcester, a net 10 points worse in City of Chester). I think that, given the margin of error on these polls, the noise outweighs the signal. You may be better advised to look at the national polls.
In 2010 we had regular marginals polling from ICM, YouGov and MORI. Nothing this time - Even ComRes (who did the occasional marginals poll a while ago) seem to have given up polling the marginals....
Is the reason they've all stopped doing marginals polls that they weren't very good before 2010? I mean I know ICM have stopped because the Labour Party and Hacked Off put the NOTW out of business, but what about MORI and YouGov?
Of course, this would still mean that the Tories were not benefiting from Labour's decline in the National polls in these marginals, but, well, it could be worse.
This is the first time we are seeing a real divergence between what is happening nationally and the marginals.
In the period during which this fieldwork was done Ashcroft polls gave on average a national Con lead of 3% (a swing of 2%), whereas his marginals polls indicate a swing of 5%. Given the national average across the pollsters is actually a tie, the position in the marginals may be even worse for the Conservatives than this indicates.
Personally, I don't think we will see a discrepancy that large - but it is perhaps partially explained by Labour's apparent over performance in England.
Bwahahahahaha
Those same seats where it is safe to vote Kipper and hence Kipper are doing well.
Can't all be true.
Better hope for a romper stomper of a budget
No wonder Ossie is planning a gigantic inheritance tax bribe for the older voter.
It won't work. These kippers won;t forgive the tories on their catastrophic immigration record.
Probably would put Labour on around 290 seats, the Tories on around 265 seats. SNP around 40 seats and Lib Dems around 30 seats.
e.g. Chester 15% > 10%; Croydon 19% > 13%; Nuneaton 19% > 14%; Itchen 19% > 17% (differing time periods).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31908431
Cyril Smith child abuse inquiry 'scrapped after his arrest'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31920906
Judges sacked for watching porn
Only one thing to do: vote UKIP to get the smell of corruption out of your nostrils.