However surprisingly for me especially regarding Southam as a soothsayer.
I agree with his comment.
"A lot of Labour voices came out very quickly after the last GE to say Labour had lost and should not seek to form a coalition. I'd expect the same to happen if Labour suffers a net loss of seats - especially given Ed's lack of a base and the huge challenges a Tory government will face following the GE. Getting a better leader while watching the Tories fight with the Scots, with each other over Europe and with a faltering economy may well deliver a better result in the following GE than going a year or two at the head of a rainbow grouping with a bare Commons majority that will never be certain. EdM may push for it; but he may find himself in a small minority."
I believe the Conservatives will have the most seats, therefore Cameron will remain PM. This will be due to the SNP.
Douglas Carswell (@DouglasCarswell) 11/04/2015 08:37 George Osborne is in charge of it. Of course it's a tepid, uninspiring negative campaign
Douglas who ? Haven't seen him in the news all campaign, seems to have been hiding in Clacton, not sure why with his rock solid personal vote, would have expected him out pressing the flesh for the party.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 7th April Projection) :
Con 308 (-4) .. Lab 250 (+4) .. LibDem 28 (-2) .. SNP 38 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 18 seats short of a majority ......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC from Likely Con Hold Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 7 Apr - Warwickshire North moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC and Enfield North moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain.
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Without the national emergency arguments from 2010, what could convince the LDs of the need to enter into a coalition or other agreement, especially with the Tories, which would only cement them as pseudo-Tories for many.
That's how I see it. The result of the 2010 GE put the Lib Dems in a difficult position. For years they had wanted to be in the position of having real influence on the Government but most of their supporters probably never envisage it being with the Tories.
One explanation for for why the post-Easter polls haven't shown much movement when compared to 2010 could be the weather.
During the equivalent period in 2010, when Easter occurred a day earlier, outbreaks of rain or showers moved eastwards with a few sleet and snow showers affecting northern hills at first. There was heavy rainfall over northern and western parts early on 5th, with totals over 20 mm recorded in Cumbria, and the west or south-westerly winds were particularly strong on 5th and 6th. This weather system cleared eastwards on the evening of 7th after which things improved for the rest of the month.
This year, we have seen far better weather, and yesterday's radio traffic reports suggest that significant numbers of people were finally heading homewards, having potentially stayed away to make the most of the weather. Many others will have been simply occupied outdoors enjoying the sunshine and away from the media influence.
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Fwiw, Tabman, I do think the Conservatives treated their co-alition partner poorly, and it is rebounding to hurt them now. But it hurt the LibDems badly too and it is perfectly understandable that they would be reluctant to go into coalition with anybody again.
Douglas Carswell (@DouglasCarswell) 11/04/2015 08:37 George Osborne is in charge of it. Of course it's a tepid, uninspiring negative campaign
Douglas who ? Haven't seen him in the news all campaign, seems to have been hiding in Clacton, not sure why with his rock solid personal vote, would have expected him out pressing the flesh for the party.
I think you may find that he is busy sharpening his knife ;-)
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).
IF EIC And DISPM then its job done AFAIAC. The Tory strategy is to do exactly that. winning a majority is not an option from what I can see.
If DISPM and he can't get anything through the house, the trick is going to be making sure the blame for that falls in the right place at the subsequent election.
"But up to this week the story has been that it's all very delicate and utmost caution is required, so suddenly saying there's loadsamoney available just sounds weird."
What they have done thanks to Osborne's last budget is create in the public's mind a set of scales with public services on one side and tax giveaways on the other.
It is now impossible to offer money for anything without people mentally adding or subtracting from the other side of the scale.
It always looked like a floored plan. I much preferred Labour's magic money tree which I think is more in line with people's experiences
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
There's too many people aligned with a party throwing muck on the other party's campaign. The last thread was polluted with it.
As for the Conservatives campaign: the manifestos have not even been launched yet, ffs. There's everything to play for, for all the parties.
When do the postal voters go out ?
Next week, and apparently some 20% of the electorate will be casting their votes by post. In my experience, postal voters don't tend to sit on their ballot papers, but send them back by return of post.
Is there any research on the postal voters. Are they more or less inclined to be party loyalists or are they more or less inclined to be swing voters? They could even be typical.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 7th April Projection) :
Con 308 (-4) .. Lab 250 (+4) .. LibDem 28 (-2) .. SNP 38 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 18 seats short of a majority ......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC from Likely Con Hold Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 7 Apr - Warwickshire North moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC and Enfield North moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain.
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
Is is a good assumption that you see the SNP to have gained two from the Scottish Yellow Peril, and the four seat turnaround between the Con and Lab reflects this week's adverse polls from the Con point of view?
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Surely not so much "OGH quaking in his boots" than chewing his sandals ?!?
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 7th April Projection) :
Con 308 (-4) .. Lab 250 (+4) .. LibDem 28 (-2) .. SNP 38 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 18 seats short of a majority ......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC from Likely Con Hold Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 7 Apr - Warwickshire North moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC and Enfield North moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain.
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
Is is a good assumption that you see the SNP to have gained two from the Scottish Yellow Peril, and the four seat turnaround between the Con and Lab reflects this week's adverse polls from the Con point of view?
It's not an unreasonable assumption but not the case this time. Today it's simply a somewhat more complex multi cross party churn at the margin.
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
The polls have been pretty consistent for years that this view only has about a third of the population behind it (37% in today's YG "approve of the government's record to date", made up principally of Conservative voters, as you'd expect, though nearly half the remaining LibDems agree).
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Fwiw, Tabman, I do think the Conservatives treated their co-alition partner poorly, and it is rebounding to hurt them now. But it hurt the LibDems badly too and it is perfectly understandable that they would be reluctant to go into coalition with anybody again.
To be honest Peter, I don't believe the LibDems were ever forgiven for reneging on one binding cornerstone of their agreement, namely to see the Boundaries Commission's recommendations implemented. At the time it was even being suggested that this could lead to a break-up of the coalition, but Dave evidently decided that discretion was the better part of valour and resolved to soldier on, but I doubt whether he ever really trusted Clegg again.
Must admit to being surprised how close Williams were to Ferrari in qualifying. Pre-race piece will be up today, but it'll not be for quite a while yet.
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
The polls have been pretty consistent for years that this view only has about a third of the population behind it (37% in today's YG "approve of the government's record to date", made up principally of Conservative voters, as you'd expect, though nearly half the remaining LibDems agree).
I would expect another large chunk to be DK or indifferent. In my limited experience lots of people have no idea what a government is going unless its been a spectacular success (rare) or a complete fiasco (less rare) and would probably think that the coalition had done neither well nor badly. Personally I would say a government that was rarely on the news has probably got it about right
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Fwiw, Tabman, I do think the Conservatives treated their co-alition partner poorly, and it is rebounding to hurt them now. But it hurt the LibDems badly too and it is perfectly understandable that they would be reluctant to go into coalition with anybody again.
It is very noticeable that wealth creation is absent from the Labour, LD, PC agendas. Tax swapping or more likely tax increasing will not help the economic health of the UK to improve. EdM, coming out with his one-a-day money consuming policies, obviously is not bothered about the UK's economic health, but only his personal wealth tomorrow and in the future.
Indeed many of these increased tax promises could well harm the economy of the UK, permanently, and encourage others not to work, but just put up their feet in front of their 60" TV whilst supping on their aluminium cans.
I think Jack's ARSE should be seen for what it is. A soft soothing full body massage for Conservatives before a long hard day on the campaign trail.......
If the result was Con 290 and Lab 253 would Labour be of one mind to accept government? The circumstances the day after the election are less important than those 12 - 18 months after. A minority Labour government propped up by a ragbag of mischief makers would have no authority or mandate, and would quickly lose popularity. By 2017 Labour would probably be polling in the teens IMO. Wiped out in Scotland and then facing an English wipe out too, how would that serve the party's long-term interest?
It's not entirely in Miliband's hands though.
The two vital questions in forming a government are:
- Is a Labour-led government viable? - Is a Tory-led government viable?
If the Con+LD total drops below 320 then it's not viable (I don't believe they can continually rely on UKIP and the DUP and the UUP and Hermon, never mind any of the rest). If the Lib Dems can't come to an arrangement, and the Tories alone have less than 320 then it's not viable.
In either event, Cameron would (or most certainly should) resign. At which point, HM will call Miliband to the Palace. What's he going to do then? Say no?
I think Jack's ARSE should be seen for what it is. A soft soothing full body massage for Conservatives before a long hard day on the campaign trail.......
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Applying lice to open wounds would certainly qualify as messy action...
It is very noticeable that wealth creation is absent from the Labour, LD, PC agendas. Tax swapping or more likely tax increasing will not help the economic health of the UK to improve. EdM, coming out with his one-a-day money consuming policies, obviously is not bothered about the UK's economic health, but only his personal wealth tomorrow and in the future.
Indeed many of these increased tax promises could well harm the economy of the UK, permanently, and encourage others not to work, but just put up their feet in front of their 60" TV whilst supping on their aluminium cans.
I can't actually say Ive noticed it in the Conservative one.
If the polls next week after most easter hols are over don't show the same mini uptick of the long bank holiday then the Guardian front cover will = the 1992 Sheffield rally.
Wait & see. Not today but next week when the worlds back home & back to work.
I think Jack's ARSE should be seen for what it is. A soft soothing full body massage for Conservatives before a long hard day on the campaign trail.......
.....because you're worth it
Thank you Rogerdamus.
Your regular lack of appreciation of my fine organ is a total and complete vindication of its undoubted veracity.
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
There's too many people aligned with a party throwing muck on the other party's campaign. The last thread was polluted with it.
As for the Conservatives campaign: the manifestos have not even been launched yet, ffs. There's everything to play for, for all the parties.
When do the postal voters go out ?
Next week, and apparently some 20% of the electorate will be casting their votes by post. In my experience, postal voters don't tend to sit on their ballot papers, but send them back by return of post.
Is there any research on the postal voters. Are they more or less inclined to be party loyalists or are they more or less inclined to be swing voters? They could even be typical.
I once ran for District Council when it came to my attention one afternoon that the postal voters had received their ballot papers that morning. I spent the rest of the day driving around like a madman trying to meet these people, only to discover that more or less to a man, they had returned their ballot papers already.
During the 2010 election 83% of postal ballots were returned, which makes the physical turnout pale by comparison.
I think Jack's ARSE should be seen for what it is. A soft soothing full body massage for Conservatives before a long hard day on the campaign trail.......
.....because you're worth it
Your scepticism is noted - and none of us save Jack knows quite how the model is constructed. The inconvenient truth is that it does have a track record as a predictor of elections in the UK and the US.
I think it's a vital point that although 323 is the magic number in terms of an effective majority, it'd mean the governing party would need total compliance from its backbenchers to pass every vote. In the Conservatives case I don't think they'd get much help passing their legislation from other parties with the SNP and Labour in opposition.
If the result was Con 290 and Lab 253 would Labour be of one mind to accept government? The circumstances the day after the election are less important than those 12 - 18 months after. A minority Labour government propped up by a ragbag of mischief makers would have no authority or mandate, and would quickly lose popularity. By 2017 Labour would probably be polling in the teens IMO. Wiped out in Scotland and then facing an English wipe out too, how would that serve the party's long-term interest?
A lot of Labour voices came out very quickly after the last GE to say Labour had lost and should not seek to form a coalition. I'd expect the same to happen if Labour suffers a net loss of seats - especially given Ed's lack of a base and the huge challenges a Tory government will face following the GE. Getting a better leader while watching the Tories fight with the Scots, with each other over Europe and with a faltering economy may well deliver a better result in the following GE than going a year or two at the head of a rainbow grouping with a bare Commons majority that will never be certain. EdM may push for it; but he may find himself in a small minority.
I agree. And when was the time that the Largest party did not provide the PM? 1923 I think.
It was 1924 - though off the results of the 1923 election - unless you count 1931, though I wouldn't as the various parties in the National Coalition were clear that MacDonald would be PM irrespective of how Nat Lab, Nat Lib and Con ended up.
However, most elections since then have produced overall majorities and in the most recent two which didn't - Feb 1974 and 2010 - the smaller of the two main ones (which happened to be the incumbent in both cases), tried to do a deal. There's nothing at all constitutionally amiss with the largest party forming a government. It's all about holding the confidence of the House, which may (and usually does) come from a single party but doesn't have to.
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
Kevin Maguire appeared on yesterday's Daily Politics Show, and said that he had expected the Tory campaign to be much better. He was clearly quite astonished as to how poor it had been.
You're taking Maguire's word on that? Really?
Chortle.
My point is that people from across the political spectrum are noticing how poor the Tory campaign has been over the last week or so.
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Fwiw, Tabman, I do think the Conservatives treated their co-alition partner poorly, and it is rebounding to hurt them now. But it hurt the LibDems badly too and it is perfectly understandable that they would be reluctant to go into coalition with anybody again.
To be honest Peter, I don't believe the LibDems were ever forgiven for reneging on one binding cornerstone of their agreement, namely to see the Boundaries Commission's recommendations implemented. At the time it was even being suggested that this could lead to a break-up of the coalition, but Dave evidently decided that discretion was the better part of valour and resolved to soldier on, but I doubt whether he ever really trusted Clegg again.
That was very poor of the LDs and petulant stupidity. The Tory backbenchers were stalling the HoL reforms, but such a radical change does need extensive discussion. There would have been plenty of time to pass it over to the next Queens speech.
There are some movements in Jacks ARSE with an unusually large shift. It will be interesting to have another look next week after the manifestos are out. Fortunately the ARSE seems leakproof...
If the result was Con 290 and Lab 253 would Labour be of one mind to accept government? The circumstances the day after the election are less important than those 12 - 18 months after. A minority Labour government propped up by a ragbag of mischief makers would have no authority or mandate, and would quickly lose popularity. By 2017 Labour would probably be polling in the teens IMO. Wiped out in Scotland and then facing an English wipe out too, how would that serve the party's long-term interest?
It's not entirely in Miliband's hands though.
The two vital questions in forming a government are:
- Is a Labour-led government viable? - Is a Tory-led government viable?
If the Con+LD total drops below 320 then it's not viable (I don't believe they can continually rely on UKIP and the DUP and the UUP and Hermon, never mind any of the rest). If the Lib Dems can't come to an arrangement, and the Tories alone have less than 320 then it's not viable.
In either event, Cameron would (or most certainly should) resign. At which point, HM will call Miliband to the Palace. What's he going to do then? Say no?
I wonder whether Labour could whip all its MPs against the Queen's Speech. SO pointed out that in 2010 senior Labour figures spoke out against trying to form a government when the party had lost the election - it just didn't feel right. The Tories would be left in office but not in power. The only sensible thing would be to repeal the FTPA and hold an October election.
I think it's a vital point that although 323 is the magic number in terms of an effective majority, it'd mean the governing party would need total compliance from its backbenchers to pass every vote. In the Conservatives case I don't think they'd get much help passing their legislation from other parties with the SNP and Labour in opposition.
In the same veins an Ed minority government is going to have Denis Skinner and chums to contend with if they try and do anything that has a slight chance of continuing to mend the economy.
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
Kevin Maguire appeared on yesterday's Daily Politics Show, and said that he had expected the Tory campaign to be much better. He was clearly quite astonished as to how poor it had been.
You're taking Maguire's word on that? Really?
Chortle.
My point is that people from across the political spectrum are noticing how poor the Tory campaign has been over the last week or so.
So, '...just 15 net losses for Cameron would see Ed in No 10.' And just how likely do you think that is? You're a betting man. What are the odds?
Betfair makes it slight odds against. Would you concur?
As things stand, Miliband should clearly be favourite to be PM within a month of the election (I'm not sure what Betfair's terms are - the transition may not be quick if the result's ambiguous and Cameron takes it to the Commons).
However, there's still four weeks to go (yes, postal votes yah-de-yah), and of the two, Miliband is IMO more likely to goof than Cameron. The press are more likely to try to drop him in it too, though that may be offset by the centre-left bias in the electronic media. For various reasons, I've not yet been on the doorstep in Wakefield this election yet. I'd really like to take a temperature check here before giving a more considered opinion but my impression is that the odds on Ed are generous.
Whats it gonna take for the betfair odds to shift more towards Labour? hmph
Probably as our revered Sean Fear has oft been want to note - David Cameron being found in bed with a dead girl or live boy .... and then some ....
Probably Ed Miliband spinning around in a phone box and appearing as Wonder Ed - Super Hero to the world and saving the nation from the iniquity and despair of eating bacon sarnies without dignity.
There is little doubt in my mind that the Labour party have had a more successful second week of the campaign. I think the Conservatives have darted from issue to issue more obviously than last week, but when they have a very clear 'long term economic plan' strategy, any deviation from this gets more easily noticed.
My view is that we political followers notice things in far more detail than most voters and we over-egg every poll, speech and twitter post. I don't think fundamentally much has changed this week and with Easter still upon us in terms of holidays I think we risk exaggerating notions of momentum.
Ultimately as Lord Ashcroft notes you cannot undo 5 years of activity in 6 weeks of campaigning. I think this helps the Conservatives because while they are not loved, there is a respect for their financial management and this will see them through i May.
Another dimension to this week from the Conservatives is that it is about reminding voters that they can offer more than just economy, economy, economy and thus they want to be able to point to this weeks announcements on Trident, Volunteering, Schools, NHS as having a comprehensive offer before they go back to relentlessly discussing the economy for the next 4 weeks. It is also about trying to close down some Labour attack lines - today's NHS will muddy the waters politically I assume they hope so that the Conservatives can point to this when the Labour party run with the NHS as their core issue. Have Labour got a legitimate counter to the Conservative economy card? I don't think so.
All in all then this week has been Labour's, but I am not sure many voters will have noticed and in the 6 week campaign nevermind the 5 year Parliament, Labour to me have simply not done the hard ground work to get the victory they crave.
If the Conservatives or Labour just get the required 323, it will still be a struggle to govern . Major had many a problem with a 19 Majority. I hate to think how Blair would have coped with less than twenty. At times he had problems with 179 and 66.
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
That sounds a bit more plausible than the usual emoting cr*p we get on here, 70% of voters "hate" "despise" "can't stand" "spit upon" etc, the Tories. Do they hell. A small number of self-obsessed activists do, the majority of voters don't feel that strongly about their politics, they feel a government has either "not done to badly" or "maybe its time for a change".
It's my view as well. I have been very impressed with the coalition: it's outperformed and outlasted the predictions of many distinguished pundits and posters. In fact, it's had less splits than the Labour 2005 to 2010 parliament.
I'm intrigued as to whether Labour would have managed in coalition as well. Somehow I doubt it (but then I would).
I would put one little caveat to your second paragraph: talking to people over the years, I agree there are relatively few people who hate or despise parties. However it is much more common to come across people who dislike someone prominent within a party, and cannot vote for that party whilst that person is in it.
I wonder whether personality matters more in politics than policy?
Nobody on the planet could have worked with Brown, he would have been throwing furniture everywhere. Can you imagine that halfwitted egotistical dullard listening to anyone's opinion.
But to lead the LD's into coalition again? Not convinced he'd bring the LD MPs with him unless he's in the Commons as their leader?
I have no idea, but the concept has previously been mooted on here. I detect something of a desire for a continuing coalition, and imagine that there could yet be a way of making this happen, depending upon how the numbers eventually pan out.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly throught the campaign, Tabbers?
And finally, in case either of my readers missed it yesterday, my Grand National selection is Spring Heeled, a mouth-watering 28/1 with Hills.
Mine are Rocky Creek and First Lieutenant.
Quick point, Bet Victor are paying six places and probably best offer is bet365 who will give you half your money back on losing bets up to £125, not as a free bet but back into your account. Read the T&C's though.
First Lieutenant would be my second pick, and Rocky Creek has obvious claims - but just sticking to the one bet today.
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
That sounds a bit more plausible than the usual emoting cr*p we get on here, 70% of voters "hate" "despise" "can't stand" "spit upon" etc, the Tories. Do they hell. A small number of self-obsessed activists do, the majority of voters don't feel that strongly about their politics, they feel a government has either "not done to badly" or "maybe its time for a change".
It's my view as well. I have been very impressed with the coalition: it's outperformed and outlasted the predictions of many distinguished pundits and posters. In fact, it's had less splits than the Labour 2005 to 2010 parliament.
I'm intrigued as to whether Labour would have managed in coalition as well. Somehow I doubt it (but then I would).
I would put one little caveat to your second paragraph: talking to people over the years, I agree there are relatively few people who hate or despise parties. However it is much more common to come across people who dislike someone prominent within a party, and cannot vote for that party whilst that person is in it.
I wonder whether personality matters more in politics than policy?
Nobody on the planet could have worked with Brown, he would have been throwing furniture everywhere. Can you imagine that halfwitted egotistical dullard listening to anyone's opinion.
I recieved an i- photo from Edinburgh yesterday evening with my relatives and the great man during his sojourn to the town and apparently he's 'quite delightful' which is encouraging.
As to your barb about unemployment I understand they're mildly optimistic
Nobody here, I suspect, will like this, but I fully expect that if there are 100+ seats which return an MP who is neither Tory nor Labour, the talk in the media the following week-end will focus more and more on Grand Coalition. The first thing such a Coalition would do would be to scrap the 5 Year Act (probably replacing it with a 3 Year Act for one Parliament only). As to the second thing it would do - you tell me!
I would make the chances of a Grand Coalition forming after this May's election less than 1%. Outside of a major national crisis - economy tanks worse than 1931, major and ongoing terrorism combined with substantial civil disturbance etc. - one won't be formed unless it appears to be the clear will of the people. Possibly three elections in short succession in which neither Con nor Lab could sustain their position might do it, but certainly one which produced that result wouldn't.
I recieved an i- photo from Edinburgh yesterday evening with my relatives and the great man during his sojourn to the town and apparently he's 'quite delightful' which is encouraging.
As to your barb about unemployment I understand they're mildly optimistic
If the result was Con 290 and Lab 253 would Labour be of one mind to accept government? The circumstances the day after the election are less important than those 12 - 18 months after. A minority Labour government propped up by a ragbag of mischief makers would have no authority or mandate, and would quickly lose popularity. By 2017 Labour would probably be polling in the teens IMO. Wiped out in Scotland and then facing an English wipe out too, how would that serve the party's long-term interest?
A lot of Labour voices came out very quickly after the last GE to say Labour had lost and should not seek to form a coalition. I'd expect the same to happen if Labour suffers a net loss of seats - especially given Ed's lack of a base and the huge challenges a Tory government will face following the GE. Getting a better leader while watching the Tories fight with the Scots, with each other over Europe and with a faltering economy may well deliver a better result in the following GE than going a year or two at the head of a rainbow grouping with a bare Commons majority that will never be certain. EdM may push for it; but he may find himself in a small minority.
A minority Tory government would scarcely be able to pass legislation under that scenario. I expect that grand coalition - the outcome that dare not speak its name - would appear on the agenda of serious possibilities.
With 290 or so seats the Tories could soldier on for a while. Confidence and supply with the LDs and DUP on the budget and Queen's speech should work OK. But it'll be tough, a lot if stuff won't get through and there'll be plenty of arguing. Someone has to govern though. A grand coalition just isn't going to happen. It would destroy both sides.
Agreed any notion of a Grand Coalition in the UK is laughable. Both sides would rather see the other struggle in government than prop them up.
Think of it from the point of view of the front bench. A promotion now, or a promotion in five years, possibly?
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
That sounds a bit more plausible than the usual emoting cr*p we get on here, 70% of voters "hate" "despise" "can't stand" "spit upon" etc, the Tories. Do they hell. A small number of self-obsessed activists do, the majority of voters don't feel that strongly about their politics, they feel a government has either "not done to badly" or "maybe its time for a change".
It's my view as well. I have been very impressed with the coalition: it's outperformed and outlasted the predictions of many distinguished pundits and posters. In fact, it's had less splits than the Labour 2005 to 2010 parliament.
I'm intrigued as to whether Labour would have managed in coalition as well. Somehow I doubt it (but then I would).
I would put one little caveat to your second paragraph: talking to people over the years, I agree there are relatively few people who hate or despise parties. However it is much more common to come across people who dislike someone prominent within a party, and cannot vote for that party whilst that person is in it.
I wonder whether personality matters more in politics than policy?
Nobody on the planet could have worked with Brown, he would have been throwing furniture everywhere. Can you imagine that halfwitted egotistical dullard listening to anyone's opinion.
Good morning everyone and another Herders special. Hurrah for the ARSE, talking more sense than most of the so called political experts including OGH and his wee Scots pal and SLAB apologist John Curtice.
They all keep going on about seats lost or gained but don't seem to actually look at the seats and clearly UNS is as useful now as a chocolate teapot.
Wonder how many leaflets we will get from the Viscount next week.
The LibDems have targeted a leaflet at known SCons and frankly it would make any right thinking SCon think "fcuk them I hope they lose all their Scottish seats." Not their best move.
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
My sense of a desire for a continuing coalition comes more from the wider public, rather than party members. Plenty of people seem fairly content about how the country has been governed for the last 5 years.
That sounds a bit more plausible than the usual emoting cr*p we get on here, 70% of voters "hate" "despise" "can't stand" "spit upon" etc, the Tories. Do they hell. A small number of self-obsessed activists do, the majority of voters don't feel that strongly about their politics, they feel a government has either "not done to badly" or "maybe its time for a change".
It's my view as well. I have been very impressed with the coalition: it's outperformed and outlasted the predictions of many distinguished pundits and posters. In fact, it's had less splits than the Labour 2005 to 2010 parliament.
I'm intrigued as to whether Labour would have managed in coalition as well. Somehow I doubt it (but then I would).
I would put one little caveat to your second paragraph: talking to people over the years, I agree there are relatively few people who hate or despise parties. However it is much more common to come across people who dislike someone prominent within a party, and cannot vote for that party whilst that person is in it.
I wonder whether personality matters more in politics than policy?
Nobody on the planet could have worked with Brown, he would have been throwing furniture everywhere. Can you imagine that halfwitted egotistical dullard listening to anyone's opinion.
I guess it takes one to know to know one.
So crap you said it twice, I assume you were looking in a mirror as you posted that. What did you squander your JSA on this week then.
One of OGH's favourite bets was Labour most seats and Con most votes. What are the odds now on the opposite happening? Pretty long 6 months ago I'd have thought.
The main stumbling block will be the party members. I fear that if as is expected at least half our MPs go, the membership will take the view that another 5 years coalition would kill off the rest. Confidence and supply is the most to be hoped for and only if Clegg survives
C&S is the worst of all political worlds - All the blame and none of the power - Think Lib/Lab pact in 78/79.
Have to agree with that, Young Jack.
And welcome back Tabman, one of PB's great posters. Will you be posting regularly through the campaign Tabbers?
Thank you PtP, I hope to be more present than absent!
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
Fwiw, Tabman, I do think the Conservatives treated their co-alition partner poorly, and it is rebounding to hurt them now. But it hurt the LibDems badly too and it is perfectly understandable that they would be reluctant to go into coalition with anybody again.
To be honest Peter, I don't believe the LibDems were ever forgiven for reneging on one binding cornerstone of their agreement, namely to see the Boundaries Commission's recommendations implemented. At the time it was even being suggested that this could lead to a break-up of the coalition, but Dave evidently decided that discretion was the better part of valour and resolved to soldier on, but I doubt whether he ever really trusted Clegg again.
I'd agree with that. And from well-informed sources, I've heard it said that the Lib Dems took the decision to block boundary changes in response to the AV referendum vote i.e. to go back on their word solely because they lost a public vote in which the Tories had been upfront about campaigning against their proposal. It wasn't even a strop; it was calculated payback and the Tories have naturally reacted against that rebuff.
FWIW, I've long argued that I believe the wrong deal was originally struck. The referendum was always a dagger pointing at the heart of the coalition. A more substantive deal on the Lords would have been a better return for boundary reform, not least because it wouldn't have needed a public vote.
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
Pulpstar pointed out that the bet does carry a fair bit of risk, but I followed you in and so far so good.
Jack's ARSE looking less lustrous than usual this morning.....
This chart shows how Labour have historically lost ground in the run up to elections. Click to enlarge...
It comes from a Telegraph article about Labour losing ground in the last 100 days of a campaign, although the chart indicates that the fall off has typically occurred within the last couple of weeks. Past performance is of course no indication of the future.
"Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt is challenged about the Tory proposals to increase funding to the NHS by £8bn a year on BBC Breakfast. He says the Conservatives will find the money by sticking to their "economic plan which is working."
Mr Maguire never makes an honest assessment - it's all sledging and mind games. And trying to make it personal about Lynton Crosby - last time it was Ashcroft's Millions.
It's what Labour does. It's the same as repeatedly using someone's full name in an effort to make it seem almost embarrassing to be mentioned.
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
Kevin Maguire appeared on yesterday's Daily Politics Show, and said that he had expected the Tory campaign to be much better. He was clearly quite astonished as to how poor it had been.
You're taking Maguire's word on that? Really?
Chortle.
My point is that people from across the political spectrum are noticing how poor the Tory campaign has been over the last week or so. Maguire wasn't point scoring, but he was clearly scratching his head about Lynton Crosby's strategy. Watch this from 7 minutes in...
Risibly sanctimonious post from a supporter of the party whose core election strategy was to focus on Ed's crapness, not realising that market only had an upside.
If the result was Con 290 and Lab 253 would Labour be of one mind to accept government? The circumstances the day after the election are less important than those 12 - 18 months after. A minority Labour government propped up by a ragbag of mischief makers would have no authority or mandate, and would quickly lose popularity. By 2017 Labour would probably be polling in the teens IMO. Wiped out in Scotland and then facing an English wipe out too, how would that serve the party's long-term interest?
It's not entirely in Miliband's hands though.
The two vital questions in forming a government are:
- Is a Labour-led government viable? - Is a Tory-led government viable?
If the Con+LD total drops below 320 then it's not viable (I don't believe they can continually rely on UKIP and the DUP and the UUP and Hermon, never mind any of the rest). If the Lib Dems can't come to an arrangement, and the Tories alone have less than 320 then it's not viable.
In either event, Cameron would (or most certainly should) resign. At which point, HM will call Miliband to the Palace. What's he going to do then? Say no?
I wonder whether Labour could whip all its MPs against the Queen's Speech. SO pointed out that in 2010 senior Labour figures spoke out against trying to form a government when the party had lost the election - it just didn't feel right. The Tories would be left in office but not in power. The only sensible thing would be to repeal the FTPA and hold an October election.
You assume that Cameron would put a Queens Speech to parliament. The last time a government that lost its majority at an election continued in office up to and past the new parliament meeting was 1923. Both Heath and Brown could have done but didn't because the writing was on the wall. It also threw the initiative to their opponents rather than have their opponents take the initiative at a time of their own choosing.
Re the FTPA, there's no need to repeal it. There are provisions for an early election election either if two-thirds of the Commons votes for it or if a government is No Confidenced and no new one can be formed with the explicit Confidence of the House within two weeks.
Is this the worst attempt to explain something of the election so far, from the BBC Live Blog?
"If you're also wondering why Labour would have so many more seats that the Tories, despite being only 2% ahead nationally, part of that comes from Labour's seats largely being concentrated in urban areas - constituencies are based around population density."
If anyone wants to lay 5/4, therefore getting Best price 4/5 about the unders I will play
5/6 over 3.5 also looks v nice as does 11/4 15-20 (% of the vote)
These prices are all off the back of massive assumptions
If UKIP really are polling 14% on average, then 11/4 15-20 cant be right.. and the assumption that UNS will hurt them and they will poll 11-14% and only get 3-4 seats is just a guess
They are ahead on raw data in Basildon South, Castle Point, S Thanet and Boston. Most shrewdies think they are favs in Rochester. Clacton is a shoo in, not to mention the 5-6 seats north of Watford where they are live chances
The yougov tracker has them ahead or TCTC in several other seats as well
So lets go if you disagree, I will play in any size £1 upwards
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
Beware! What we see in others is but a reflection of what we fail to see in ourselves.
One of OGH's favourite bets was Labour most seats and Con most votes. What are the odds now on the opposite happening? Pretty long 6 months ago I'd have thought.
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
Pulpstar pointed out that the bet does carry a fair bit of risk, but I followed you in and so far so good.
Jack's ARSE looking less lustrous than usual this morning.....
The great thing about the bet is that every LAB gain from CON closes the gap by two. Every LAB loss to SNP increases gap by 1 but could be offset by CON losses to UKIP.
I'm assuming that CON and LAB will fare the same against the LDs.
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
There's too many people aligned with a party throwing muck on the other party's campaign. The last thread was polluted with it.
As for the Conservatives campaign: the manifestos have not even been launched yet, ffs. There's everything to play for, for all the parties.
When do the postal voters go out ?
Next week, and apparently some 20% of the electorate will be casting their votes by post. In my experience, postal voters don't tend to sit on their ballot papers, but send them back by return of post.
Is there any research on the postal voters. Are they more or less inclined to be party loyalists or are they more or less inclined to be swing voters? They could even be typical.
I once ran for District Council when it came to my attention one afternoon that the postal voters had received their ballot papers that morning. I spent the rest of the day driving around like a madman trying to meet these people, only to discover that more or less to a man, they had returned their ballot papers already.
During the 2010 election 83% of postal ballots were returned, which makes the physical turnout pale by comparison.
That was very poor of the LDs and petulant stupidity. The Tory backbenchers were stalling the HoL reforms, but such a radical change does need extensive discussion. There would have been plenty of time to pass it over to the next Queens speech.
There are some movements in Jacks ARSE with an unusually large shift. It will be interesting to have another look next week after the manifestos are out. Fortunately the ARSE seems leakproof...
Lol, turkeys didn't vote for xmas shock! The way the Tories behaved over the AV referendum and HoL they utterly had it coming. Their hubris and lack of strategy was truly awesome.
I'm currently worried Labour is doing well. A weak febrile Tory minority government that implodes within 12 months is much the best outcome of GE 2015
I still think the best bet is Tories as largest party. Labour just aren't going to take enough seats off the blues and yellows to compensate for not only SNP gains against Labour but also Conservative gains against the Lib Dems.
There can be a Tory-Lib Dem coalition even if it doesn't have a majority of seats as important votes like the Queens Speech and Budget can be bought for Unionist, Ukip and maybe even Plaid and SNP votes - depending on how close the numbers are obviously.
And the polling points to the Tories scrambling over the line, if you care to read into the headline numbers which are very misleading.
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
I note OGH has been sniffing the hair tonic in an extravagant fashion this morning which has clearly and not for the first time reinforced his own "confirmation bias" that after May 8th :
David Cameron Will Never Be Prime Minister
I also fear our beloved Mike is clinging onto the comfort blanket of the 2010 "Watford Phenomenon" more tightly than Peter the Punter does to his favourite black evening dress.
That said the Bedford betting sage is correct that from the day UNITE anointed Ed as their standard bearer I have been unequivocal in my determination that :
You're not factoring the SNP in properly. And since they will almost certainly be the third-largest party, that mucks up the whole analysis.
The SNP aren't "100% committed" to kicking the Tories out. That's what they're saying because it's Labour they're taking votes from, and because in Scotland the ideas of 'English' and 'Tory' are very close. After the election, things could change dramatically.
Consider a result where the only viable governments (whether coalition or minority-with-support) are 1) CON-SNP and 2) LAB-LD-SNP-rainbow.
That's similar to the 2010 result, except with LD and SNP swapped.
If neither CON nor LAB win a majority, that’s likely to be the big picture.
You're the leader of the SNP. What would you do?
They're spending the support they got in the indyref on building up some clout in London. They want some more autonomy in Scotland, and in the long term considerably more. They’re politicians, for goodness sake. The ‘dream of independence’ is for the peasants. They want power (pork). You get power by cutting deals and being realistic. What they don't want is to be 'one of the seven' parties, along with whatsername and that guy with the beer glass, etc. They want to hold the Scottish card and keep it.
And when they're in London, their approach works best if they can get someone to sit across the table and play the English card. So far, they’ve never achieved that.
Here's the line Sturgeon could come up with after the election: "I like Ed Miliband. But the party with the most support in England is the Conservative Party. It's not for me to gainsay that. As the leader of the party with the most support in Scotland, it's my duty as a responsible leader to deal with the leader of the party which won the most votes in England."
Bye-bye Miliband.
That would be win-win for the SNP. Lots of power in London, and the collapse of LAB in Scotland. (Scotland against England where both sides recognise the other plays well in Scotland. Believe me.) This is assuming the English Tories realise they’ve got to wave the English flag. They will. It comes naturally.
If the voting results are anything like the above, expect the English question to raise its head, big time.
The civil service would love a CON-SNP government too; they’d get a rest from dealing with the LibDems.
If the LAB leadership had any sense, they would have got themselves a proper policy on the English question either immediately after the indyref or before it. The truth is that none of the party leaderships could lead a dog around the park.
But if neither CON nor LAB achieve an overall majority (and the SNP have probably put paid to the latter eventuality), a CON-SNP pact is what I’ll predict.
(For the trainspotters: the last time a CON or CON-led govt has been voted out of office after a single term was when the miners brought them down in 1974. Before that, you’ve got to go back to the 1920s before arguing about definitions.)
If anyone wants to lay 5/4, therefore getting Best price 4/5 about the unders I will play
5/6 over 3.5 also looks v nice as does 11/4 15-20 (% of the vote)
These prices are all off the back of massive assumptions
If UKIP really are polling 14% on average, then 11/4 15-20 cant be right.. and the assumption that UNS will hurt them and they will poll 11-14% and only get 3-4 seats is just a guess
They are ahead on raw data in Basildon South, Castle Point, S Thanet and Boston. Most shrewdies think they are favs in Rochester. Clacton is a shoo in, not to mention the 5-6 seats north of Watford where they are live chances
The yougov tracker has them ahead or TCTC in several other seats as well
So lets go if you disagree, I will play in any size £1 upwards
Won't bet with you Sam because I think you are right. UKIP odds are starting t look tasty again.
On the Grand National, I've had a little more time than I expected and have expanded my portfolio. In addition to Spring Heeled (already advised), I've had small bets on: First Lieutenant 25/1 Pinea de Re 33/1 Rocky Creek 10/1
At big odds I also like Chance du Roy, Dolatulo and Owega Star, but they are obviously very speculative and you can only back so many.
Off out now. Good luck if you wade in after me....
Hmm ....so only modest changes this morning from JackW. He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).</p>
Fear not Peter. My judgement is superior to Jack's as we saw at Watford in 2010. I sold the CON lead over LAB at 12. This has now dropped to 8.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
Pulpstar pointed out that the bet does carry a fair bit of risk, but I followed you in and so far so good.
Jack's ARSE looking less lustrous than usual this morning.....
My ARSE took something of an overnight pounding .... what with all the new topical items being digested.
I've had my annual horse-racing bet and followed your advice with an EW bet on Spring Heeled. If it loses my eldest will have to go to school with no shoes (he is 38) and we'll have to live on gruel and pease pudding until next year. I will, of course, also make a voodoo doll of you so you may find shooting pains in your nether regions.
Bottom line is - it is very likely that the Tories will be largest party, and that puts Cameron and Co in the driving seat. They will have a few days to cobble together a coalition and back-room promises of votes in case of emergencies
With little of cheer in the recent polls for the Tories, the sands of time appear to be running out for them. It would now seem to require a significant degree of late switching for the Blue Team to have any realistic chance of achieving 290+ seats which has to be their minimum target to have any hope of remaining in power. A 2% shift from Lab to LibDems would certainly help as would a similar shift from UKIP to Con. I can't see either happening though and both would probably be required for Dave to remain in No. 10.
Running a proper campaign would help. I don't know what the Conservatives have been doing this week.
Considering you're no longer a Conservative, and seem to despise Cameron, perhaps you're not the best person to judge?
Back to the 1950s with you ...
I don't know about anyone else but I respect Sean F's opinions whether they're about his own party's campaign or anyone else's.
Do you think the Con campaign so far has been good?
There's too many people aligned with a party throwing muck on the other party's campaign. The last thread was polluted with it.
As for the Conservatives campaign: the manifestos have not even been launched yet, ffs. There's everything to play for, for all the parties.
When do the postal voters go out ?
Next week, and apparently some 20% of the electorate will be casting their votes by post. In my experience, postal voters don't tend to sit on their ballot papers, but send them back by return of post.
Is there any research on the postal voters. Are they more or less inclined to be party loyalists or are they more or less inclined to be swing voters? They could even be typical.
I once ran for District Council when it came to my attention one afternoon that the postal voters had received their ballot papers that morning. I spent the rest of the day driving around like a madman trying to meet these people, only to discover that more or less to a man, they had returned their ballot papers already.
During the 2010 election 83% of postal ballots were returned, which makes the physical turnout pale by comparison.
"Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt is challenged about the Tory proposals to increase funding to the NHS by £8bn a year on BBC Breakfast. He says the Conservatives will find the money by sticking to their "economic plan which is working."
Well, that cleared that up at least?
Very true that often repeated long term economic plan that changes weekly.
I vote by post, on the day, via the polling station. Jumps the queues
Queues? I've only been voting since 1992, but as far as I can recall I've never had to queue at a polling station. Perhaps because I generally vote in the morning, or more likely the areas I've lived (i.e. never inner-city) ?
You're not factoring the SNP in properly. And since they will almost certainly be the third-largest party, that mucks up the whole analysis.
Consider a result where the only viable governments (whether coalition or minority-with-support) are 1) CON-SNP and 2) LAB-LD-SNP-rainbow.
That's similar to the 2010 result, except with LD and SNP swapped.
Here's the line Sturgeon could come up with after the election: "I like Ed Miliband. But the party with the most support in England is the Conservative Party. It's not for me to gainsay that. As the leader of the party with the most support in Scotland, it's my duty as a responsible leader to deal with the leader of the party which won the most votes in England."
Bye-bye Miliband.
That would be win-win for the SNP. Lots of power in London, and the collapse of LAB in Scotland. (Scotland against England where both sides recognise the other plays well in Scotland. Believe me.) This is assuming the English Tories realise they’ve got to wave the English flag. They will. It comes naturally.
If the voting results are anything like the above, expect the English question to raise its head, big time.
The civil service would love a CON-SNP government too; they’d get a rest from dealing with the LibDems.
If the LAB leadership had any sense, they would have got themselves a proper policy on the English question either immediately after the indyref or before it. The truth is that none of the party leaderships could lead a dog around the park.
But if neither CON nor LAB achieve an overall majority (and the SNP have probably put paid to the latter eventuality), a CON-SNP pact is what I’ll predict.
(For the trainspotters: the last time a CON or CON-led govt has been voted out of office after a single term was when the miners brought them down in 1974. Before that, you’ve got to go back to the 1920s before arguing about definitions.)
It would be political suicide for Holyrood 2016 , it will never ever ever happen unless Tories offered independence on a plate.
Bottom line is - it is very likely that the Tories will be largest party, and that puts Cameron and Co in the driving seat. They will have a few days to cobble together a coalition and back-room promises of votes in case of emergencies
Correct. Coalition or other pact, according to figures. And if it's a well hung parliament (pardon my French), it makes sense to go with the party with the third most seats.
Comments
However surprisingly for me especially regarding Southam as a soothsayer.
I agree with his comment.
"A lot of Labour voices came out very quickly after the last GE to say Labour had lost and should not seek to form a coalition. I'd expect the same to happen if Labour suffers a net loss of seats - especially given Ed's lack of a base and the huge challenges a Tory government will face following the GE. Getting a better leader while watching the Tories fight with the Scots, with each other over Europe and with a faltering economy may well deliver a better result in the following GE than going a year or two at the head of a rainbow grouping with a bare Commons majority that will never be certain. EdM may push for it; but he may find himself in a small minority."
I believe the Conservatives will have the most seats, therefore Cameron will remain PM.
This will be due to the SNP.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 7th April Projection) :
Con 308 (-4) .. Lab 250 (+4) .. LibDem 28 (-2) .. SNP 38 (+2) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 3 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 18 seats short of a majority
......................................................................................
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold
Pudsey - Likely Con Hold
Broxtowe - TCTC
Warwickshire North - TCTC from Likely Con Hold
Cambridge - LibDem Hold
Ipswich - Con Hold
Watford - TCTC
Croydon Central - Con Hold
Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC
Cornwall North - TCTC
Great Yarmouth - Con Hold
Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold
Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 7 Apr - Warwickshire North moves from Likely Con Hold to TCTC and Enfield North moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain.
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes
Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes
Gain/Hold - Over 2500
.......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division
JNN - Jacobite News Network
ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors
APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
I agree with you and Jack about C&S and the mood of the country; it's just that coalition has been such a traumatic experience for the minor party I think there's a strong desire to crawl off and lice their wounds and let someone else draw the flak for a while.
Not my desire at all; I always prefer messy action to impotence!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11528077/David-Starkey-why-Ed-Miliband-is-poison-and-David-Cameron-muddle-headed.html?WT.mc_id=e_DM10900&WT.tsrc=email&etype=Edi_FAM_New&utm_source=email&utm_medium=Edi_FAM_New_2015_04_11&utm_campaign=DM10900
During the equivalent period in 2010, when Easter occurred a day earlier, outbreaks of rain or showers moved eastwards with a few sleet and snow showers affecting northern hills at first. There was heavy rainfall over northern and western parts early on 5th, with totals over 20 mm recorded in Cumbria, and the west or south-westerly winds were particularly strong on 5th and 6th. This weather system cleared eastwards on the evening of 7th after which things improved for the rest of the month.
This year, we have seen far better weather, and yesterday's radio traffic reports suggest that significant numbers of people were finally heading homewards, having potentially stayed away to make the most of the weather. Many others will have been simply occupied outdoors enjoying the sunshine and away from the media influence.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/summaries/2010/april
What's needed is some flair, panache, boldness, risk-taking to give it vim.
He'll have OGH quaking in his boots with his Con Seats - Lab Seats = <12 Seats spread bet. Based on this latest projection, he'd face a loss of 46 Units x his unit stake (NOT £20).
"But up to this week the story has been that it's all very delicate and utmost caution is required, so suddenly saying there's loadsamoney available just sounds weird."
What they have done thanks to Osborne's last budget is create in the public's mind a set of scales with public services on one side and tax giveaways on the other.
It is now impossible to offer money for anything without people mentally adding or subtracting from the other side of the scale.
It always looked like a floored plan. I much preferred Labour's magic money tree which I think is more in line with people's experiences
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/former-mp-jim-mcgovern-escorted-from-pub-by-police-1-3742959
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afRE3RwLwaE
Must admit to being surprised how close Williams were to Ferrari in qualifying. Pre-race piece will be up today, but it'll not be for quite a while yet.
Can't be long till postal voting starts.
Nice views of Edinburgh though.
Indeed many of these increased tax promises could well harm the economy of the UK, permanently, and encourage others not to work, but just put up their feet in front of their 60" TV whilst supping on their aluminium cans.
.....because you're worth it
The two vital questions in forming a government are:
- Is a Labour-led government viable?
- Is a Tory-led government viable?
If the Con+LD total drops below 320 then it's not viable (I don't believe they can continually rely on UKIP and the DUP and the UUP and Hermon, never mind any of the rest). If the Lib Dems can't come to an arrangement, and the Tories alone have less than 320 then it's not viable.
In either event, Cameron would (or most certainly should) resign. At which point, HM will call Miliband to the Palace. What's he going to do then? Say no?
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/04/10/yes-the-tories-were-in-the-gutter-yesterday-but-thats-where-elections-are-won/#more-19509
If the polls next week after most easter hols are over don't show the same mini uptick of the long bank holiday then the Guardian front cover will = the 1992 Sheffield rally.
Wait & see. Not today but next week when the worlds back home & back to work.
Your regular lack of appreciation of my fine organ is a total and complete vindication of its undoubted veracity.
.......every little helps
During the 2010 election 83% of postal ballots were returned, which makes the physical turnout pale by comparison.
http://commonslibraryblog.com/2014/05/01/postal-voting-in-the-uk/
However, most elections since then have produced overall majorities and in the most recent two which didn't - Feb 1974 and 2010 - the smaller of the two main ones (which happened to be the incumbent in both cases), tried to do a deal. There's nothing at all constitutionally amiss with the largest party forming a government. It's all about holding the confidence of the House, which may (and usually does) come from a single party but doesn't have to.
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/04/10/yes-the-tories-were-in-the-gutter-yesterday-but-thats-where-elections-are-won/#more-19509
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04/10/labour-edged-the-week-but-it-could-and-should-have-been-a-much-bigger-win/
Noone claims to like "gutter politics" but it works.
There are some movements in Jacks ARSE with an unusually large shift. It will be interesting to have another look next week after the manifestos are out. Fortunately the ARSE seems leakproof...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11527516/This-may-surprise-you-but-the-Tories-are-delighted-with-how-the-campaign-is-going.html
However, there's still four weeks to go (yes, postal votes yah-de-yah), and of the two, Miliband is IMO more likely to goof than Cameron. The press are more likely to try to drop him in it too, though that may be offset by the centre-left bias in the electronic media. For various reasons, I've not yet been on the doorstep in Wakefield this election yet. I'd really like to take a temperature check here before giving a more considered opinion but my impression is that the odds on Ed are generous.
Probably Ed Miliband spinning around in a phone box and appearing as Wonder Ed - Super Hero to the world and saving the nation from the iniquity and despair of eating bacon sarnies without dignity.
There is little doubt in my mind that the Labour party have had a more successful second week of the campaign. I think the Conservatives have darted from issue to issue more obviously than last week, but when they have a very clear 'long term economic plan' strategy, any deviation from this gets more easily noticed.
My view is that we political followers notice things in far more detail than most voters and we over-egg every poll, speech and twitter post. I don't think fundamentally much has changed this week and with Easter still upon us in terms of holidays I think we risk exaggerating notions of momentum.
Ultimately as Lord Ashcroft notes you cannot undo 5 years of activity in 6 weeks of campaigning. I think this helps the Conservatives because while they are not loved, there is a respect for their financial management and this will see them through i May.
Another dimension to this week from the Conservatives is that it is about reminding voters that they can offer more than just economy, economy, economy and thus they want to be able to point to this weeks announcements on Trident, Volunteering, Schools, NHS as having a comprehensive offer before they go back to relentlessly discussing the economy for the next 4 weeks. It is also about trying to close down some Labour attack lines - today's NHS will muddy the waters politically I assume they hope so that the Conservatives can point to this when the Labour party run with the NHS as their core issue. Have Labour got a legitimate counter to the Conservative economy card? I don't think so.
All in all then this week has been Labour's, but I am not sure many voters will have noticed and in the 6 week campaign nevermind the 5 year Parliament, Labour to me have simply not done the hard ground work to get the victory they crave.
Major had many a problem with a 19 Majority.
I hate to think how Blair would have coped with less than twenty.
At times he had problems with 179 and 66.
DOH I have now read your earlier post
The tories haven't so far come up with a pledge that is in any way conservative or in any way attractive.
Everything they have proposed could easily have come from labour.
So why not just vote labour. At least they believe in this stuff.
"How's your relative facing up to unemployment ?"
I recieved an i- photo from Edinburgh yesterday evening with my relatives and the great man during his sojourn to the town and apparently he's 'quite delightful' which is encouraging.
As to your barb about unemployment I understand they're mildly optimistic
I think you'll have to wait for the make up. Punters clearly believe the polls are bullsh8t.
Another week of this rubbish from the tories might do it, though.
This is an excellent point, and under recognised Mr Yorkcity. Imagine an SNP Labour coalition under those circumstances.
Could ed really control his party as the money flowed north? I very, very much doubt it.
They all keep going on about seats lost or gained but don't seem to actually look at the seats and clearly UNS is as useful now as a chocolate teapot.
Wonder how many leaflets we will get from the Viscount next week.
The LibDems have targeted a leaflet at known SCons and frankly it would make any right thinking SCon think "fcuk them I hope they lose all their Scottish seats." Not their best move.
Jack's problem is that he made a big call several years ago and what you are seeing is confirmation bias.
I have made no call on GE15 and try to bet in the most effective way possible with the aim of making money not making political statements.
Got a few thoughts on the old F1 business. Done most of the pre-race piece, but the tips will take a while [markets need to appear and get into gear].
FWIW, I've long argued that I believe the wrong deal was originally struck. The referendum was always a dagger pointing at the heart of the coalition. A more substantive deal on the Lords would have been a better return for boundary reform, not least because it wouldn't have needed a public vote.
Jack's ARSE looking less lustrous than usual this morning.....
"Has he joined the SNP ?"
...Just think of all the family anxt they could avoid if they could just find him a nice safe Tory seat like Ludlow
It comes from a Telegraph article about Labour losing ground in the last 100 days of a campaign, although the chart indicates that the fall off has typically occurred within the last couple of weeks. Past performance is of course no indication of the future.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11366259/General-Election-2015-with-100-days-to-go-this-chart-should-scare-Ed-Miliband.html
"Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt is challenged about the Tory proposals to increase funding to the NHS by £8bn a year on BBC Breakfast. He says the Conservatives will find the money by sticking to their "economic plan which is working."
Well, that cleared that up at least?
Re the FTPA, there's no need to repeal it. There are provisions for an early election election either if two-thirds of the Commons votes for it or if a government is No Confidenced and no new one can be formed with the explicit Confidence of the House within two weeks.
"If you're also wondering why Labour would have so many more seats that the Tories, despite being only 2% ahead nationally, part of that comes from Labour's seats largely being concentrated in urban areas - constituencies are based around population density."
I think that is a crazy price given the polls.
If anyone wants to lay 5/4, therefore getting Best price 4/5 about the unders I will play
5/6 over 3.5 also looks v nice as does 11/4 15-20 (% of the vote)
These prices are all off the back of massive assumptions
If UKIP really are polling 14% on average, then 11/4 15-20 cant be right.. and the assumption that UNS will hurt them and they will poll 11-14% and only get 3-4 seats is just a guess
They are ahead on raw data in Basildon South, Castle Point, S Thanet and Boston. Most shrewdies think they are favs in Rochester. Clacton is a shoo in, not to mention the 5-6 seats north of Watford where they are live chances
The yougov tracker has them ahead or TCTC in several other seats as well
So lets go if you disagree, I will play in any size £1 upwards
Ahem.
I'm assuming that CON and LAB will fare the same against the LDs.
I'm currently worried Labour is doing well. A weak febrile Tory minority government that implodes within 12 months is much the best outcome of GE 2015
There can be a Tory-Lib Dem coalition even if it doesn't have a majority of seats as important votes like the Queens Speech and Budget can be bought for Unionist, Ukip and maybe even Plaid and SNP votes - depending on how close the numbers are obviously.
And the polling points to the Tories scrambling over the line, if you care to read into the headline numbers which are very misleading.
David Cameron Will Never Be Prime Minister
I also fear our beloved Mike is clinging onto the comfort blanket of the 2010 "Watford Phenomenon" more tightly than Peter the Punter does to his favourite black evening dress.
That said the Bedford betting sage is correct that from the day UNITE anointed Ed as their standard bearer I have been unequivocal in my determination that :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister
The SNP aren't "100% committed" to kicking the Tories out. That's what they're saying because it's Labour they're taking votes from, and because in Scotland the ideas of 'English' and 'Tory' are very close. After the election, things could change dramatically.
Consider a result where the only viable governments (whether coalition or minority-with-support) are 1) CON-SNP and 2) LAB-LD-SNP-rainbow.
That's similar to the 2010 result, except with LD and SNP swapped.
If neither CON nor LAB win a majority, that’s likely to be the big picture.
You're the leader of the SNP. What would you do?
They're spending the support they got in the indyref on building up some clout in London. They want some more autonomy in Scotland, and in the long term considerably more. They’re politicians, for goodness sake. The ‘dream of independence’ is for the peasants. They want power (pork). You get power by cutting deals and being realistic. What they don't want is to be 'one of the seven' parties, along with whatsername and that guy with the beer glass, etc. They want to hold the Scottish card and keep it.
And when they're in London, their approach works best if they can get someone to sit across the table and play the English card. So far, they’ve never achieved that.
Here's the line Sturgeon could come up with after the election: "I like Ed Miliband. But the party with the most support in England is the Conservative Party. It's not for me to gainsay that. As the leader of the party with the most support in Scotland, it's my duty as a responsible leader to deal with the leader of the party which won the most votes in England."
Bye-bye Miliband.
That would be win-win for the SNP. Lots of power in London, and the collapse of LAB in Scotland. (Scotland against England where both sides recognise the other plays well in Scotland. Believe me.) This is assuming the English Tories realise they’ve got to wave the English flag. They will. It comes naturally.
If the voting results are anything like the above, expect the English question to raise its head, big time.
The civil service would love a CON-SNP government too; they’d get a rest from dealing with the LibDems.
If the LAB leadership had any sense, they would have got themselves a proper policy on the English question either immediately after the indyref or before it. The truth is that none of the party leaderships could lead a dog around the park.
But if neither CON nor LAB achieve an overall majority (and the SNP have probably put paid to the latter eventuality), a CON-SNP pact is what I’ll predict.
(For the trainspotters: the last time a CON or CON-led govt has been voted out of office after a single term was when the miners brought them down in 1974. Before that, you’ve got to go back to the 1920s before arguing about definitions.)
The Conservatives would cope much better , then for gods sake just let them go on their own.
On the Grand National, I've had a little more time than I expected and have expanded my portfolio. In addition to Spring Heeled (already advised), I've had small bets on:
First Lieutenant 25/1
Pinea de Re 33/1
Rocky Creek 10/1
At big odds I also like Chance du Roy, Dolatulo and Owega Star, but they are obviously very speculative and you can only back so many.
Off out now. Good luck if you wade in after me....
I've had my annual horse-racing bet and followed your advice with an EW bet on Spring Heeled. If it loses my eldest will have to go to school with no shoes (he is 38) and we'll have to live on gruel and pease pudding until next year. I will, of course, also make a voodoo doll of you so you may find shooting pains in your nether regions.
If it wins, you are forgiven.
Rocky Creek
Alvarado
Better half has gone for
Royale Knight
Night in Milan
True but he doesn't have to placate the Mumsnet tendency.
Dave does. (or at least, he thinks he does).