Mr. Cooke, that's fairly close to my predictions from a month or two ago (had blues around 280 and Labour around 265). It's still far too close to call.
As in the previous round, Labour seem to be having the better of the ground war in all ten of these seats. Between 55% and 78% had had literature, letters, visits, phone calls or emails from Labour; between 34% and 62% said they heard from the Tories.
14.4.15 LAB 292 (292) CON 271(272) LD 31(30) UKIP 2(2) Others 54(54) (Ed is crap is PM) Last weeks BJESUS in brackets BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) BJESUS (Big John Election Service Uniform Swing) Using current polling adjusted for 22 days left to go factor and using UKPR standard swingometer
'Today's "slapdown" by Labour's shadow business spokesman, Chuka Ummuna, and Ed Balls, undermines just about everything that Jim Murphy has been agitating so antically to promote: Labour as an anti austerity alternative, his own office as robust, independent, "patriotic", in charge of the Scottish contingent in Westminster, paying the piper and calling the tune. But Chuka was having none of that [...]
This doesn't even leave Mr Murphy the wriggle room to be a critical friend of the UK leadership, pursuing different priorities from within the UK Labour Party. If you want to give the Labour party the heart and stomach to pursue different priorities -- there is clearly no point backing Jim. Even his own senior colleagues apparently see him as an irrelevance, and do not have the good grace to conceal their indifference to his opinion from the public.'
Interesting to note though that in Bolton West the Labour vote had hardly risen at all and the gap was due to the Tories haemorrhaging support (presumably, on those numbers, to UKIP). That's one result that might bear watching if UKIP have a car crash moment in the next couple of weeks.
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
I never quite get the ground war theme. Maybe it's because I'm in a rural constituency.
Bei Brooke leaflets go straight to recycling and are never read, canvassers get politely told to go away, telephone calls get told to go away less politely.
The only thing I can see where ground war is meaningful is taking known supporters to the polling station, but increasingly postal voting makes that irrelevant, and it only matters in marginal consitituencies.
Or is it simply the ground war theme is to make politcal activists think their doing something effective when in fact it's of questionable value ?
I'm sure there are a lot of households where overly enthusiastic political obsessives knocking on your door can have a negative effect and put voters off the party that is nagging, bullying, pestering, whining, bleating or nuisance calling.
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
As I suspected, moving votes between the minor parties changes their share of the vote but has zero effect on number of seats.
Dover I think is quite a significant Seat as it is a bell-weather seat being held by every election winner since the early sixties ( With the exception of 1974 when Peter Rees retained the seat for the conservatives)
Interesting to note though that in Bolton West the Labour vote had hardly risen at all and the gap was due to the Tories haemorrhaging support (presumably, on those numbers, to UKIP). That's one result that might bear watching if UKIP have a car crash moment in the next couple of weeks.
Just a further thought - I'm a little sceptical about some of the UKIP numbers in Ashcroft's polls anyway. For example, his poll for Cannock Chase has them in second, which is definitely not in line with my experience living in the seat. There's been a lot of direct switching from Tory to Labour that simply isn't represented at all in that poll. Even though UKIP have the best candidate, it's unlikely that they will even manage a strong third. So it might be worth knocking a few points off the UKIP numbers.
However, it may be of course that a number of them are disgruntled Labour voters, so it would be unwise to assume that the Conservatives would benefit.
I never quite get the ground war theme. Maybe it's because I'm in a rural constituency.
Bei Brooke leaflets go straight to recycling and are never read, canvassers get politely told to go away, telephone calls get told to go away less politely.
The only thing I can see where ground war is meaningful is taking known supporters to the polling station, but increasingly postal voting makes that irrelevant, and it only matters in marginal consitituencies.
Or is it simply the ground war theme is to make politcal activists think their doing something effective when in fact it's of questionable value ?
I keep the candidates' leaflets as they are so useful for when they knock my door. Last night had visit from the Greens and LDs. I ask them in and give them light refreshments.and then the fun starts.
Green said he would remove social inequality and when pressed implied that all should have more equal wages. When asked if he would be in favour of reducing MPs pay to nearer that of the average wage - just got lots on mumbling and mutters of must go on now.
The LD candidate, being in a farming area, said that they would ensure that farmers would receive an economic price for their milk. (recently they have had price reductions as supermarkets are using milk as a loss leader and milk production is becoming uneconomic). However he did not know about the EU removing milk quotas and could not respond to the scenario of a E European country upping their production to sell to the UK at a lower price due to their lower cost structure.
8.5 NW City of Chester 7.5 NW Crewe and Nantwich 7.0 GL Finchley and Golders Green 6.0 EM Milton Keynes South 5.5 GL Harrow East 5.5 NW Wirral west 5.0 EM Nuneaton 5.0 GL Croydon Central 5.0 SE Hove 5.0 NW Rossendale and Darwen 5.0 NW South Ribble 4.0 NW Morecambe and Lunesdale 4.0 SW South Swindon 3.5 SE Southampton Itchen 3.5 YH Cleethorpes 3.0 NE Stockton South 3.0 WM Dudley South 3.0 WM Halesowen 2.0 NW Pendle 1.5 YH Pudsey 1.0 SE Dover 0.5 EE Harlow 0.5 EM Loughborough 0.5 NW Blackpool North 0.5 SW Gloucester 0.5 SW Worcester -2.0 SW Kingswood -3.5 SW NE Somerset
Big swing in London and bigger in the north-west than in Yorkshire as expected.
It would be nice if we could have a Broxtowe poll.
Jacob Rees-Mogg has been one of the big successes of the new MPs, Edward Timpson would be no less in Crewe considering the way he's gone missing as Childrens Minister regarding Rotherham and Oxfordshire.
UKIP would reach 10,000 votes in Dover, 8,000 in Dudley South, and 7,000 in Cleethorpes on these numbers, so I don't think they'd be too disappointed. Note, though, how a big UKIP vote doesn't hurt the Conservatives at all, here, or in Harlow.
I heard that ukip were letting the Tories have Cleethorpe
I never quite get the ground war theme. Maybe it's because I'm in a rural constituency.
Bei Brooke leaflets go straight to recycling and are never read, canvassers get politely told to go away, telephone calls get told to go away less politely.
The only thing I can see where ground war is meaningful is taking known supporters to the polling station, but increasingly postal voting makes that irrelevant, and it only matters in marginal consitituencies.
Or is it simply the ground war theme is to make politcal activists think their doing something effective when in fact it's of questionable value ?
activists know they've got the time between doormat and bin to make an impression with a leaflet. Hence it's about volume to show strength and create a subliminal impression.
canvassing is to identify support to be targeted (or omitted) for squeeze messages and gotv
the other thing you have to remember is the massive pool of dnv and to a lesser extent undecideds in most constituencies - probably less than half the electorate have fixed affiliations and therefore in a marginal even a small percentage can make a difference
As in the previous round, Labour seem to be having the better of the ground war in all ten of these seats. Between 55% and 78% had had literature, letters, visits, phone calls or emails from Labour; between 34% and 62% said they heard from the Tories.
I honestly don't know what the Tories are playing at with their ground game. This used to be a strength of theirs.
But, then again, they've lost an awful lot of members under Cameron.
I still come back to how important is the ground game ?
Do you read election literature ? Nobody in my house does. Canvassers get quickly dispatched. Postal voting is sort of making GOTV a bit irrelevant.
The ground game isn't significant in any one election. But, if one party works a seat significantly harder than another for several years, and builds up solid canvassing data, it will give them an edge.
As in the previous round, Labour seem to be having the better of the ground war in all ten of these seats. Between 55% and 78% had had literature, letters, visits, phone calls or emails from Labour; between 34% and 62% said they heard from the Tories.
I honestly don't know what the Tories are playing at with their ground game. This used to be a strength of theirs.
But, then again, they've lost an awful lot of members under Cameron.
I still come back to how important is the ground game ?
Do you read election literature ? Nobody in my house does. Canvassers get quickly dispatched. Postal voting is sort of making GOTV a bit irrelevant.
The ground game isn't significant in any one election. But, if one party works a seat significantly harder than another for several years, and builds up solid canvassing data, it will give them an edge.
I never quite get the ground war theme. Maybe it's because I'm in a rural constituency.
Bei Brooke leaflets go straight to recycling and are never read, canvassers get politely told to go away, telephone calls get told to go away less politely.
The only thing I can see where ground war is meaningful is taking known supporters to the polling station, but increasingly postal voting makes that irrelevant, and it only matters in marginal consitituencies.
Or is it simply the ground war theme is to make politcal activists think their doing something effective when in fact it's of questionable value ?
I keep the candidates' leaflets as they are so useful for when they knock my door. Last night had visit from the Greens and LDs. I ask them in and give them light refreshments.and then the fun starts.
Green said he would remove social inequality and when pressed implied that all should have more equal wages. When asked if he would be in favour of reducing MPs pay to nearer that of the average wage - just got lots on mumbling and mutters of must go on now.
The LD candidate, being in a farming area, said that they would ensure that farmers would receive an economic price for their milk. (recently they have had price reductions as supermarkets are using milk as a loss leader and milk production is becoming uneconomic). However he did not know about the EU removing milk quotas and could not respond to the scenario of a E European country upping their production to sell to the UK at a lower price due to their lower cost structure.
Any candidate who enters alone into a voter's home should be disqualified on the spot.
8.5 NW City of Chester 7.5 NW Crewe and Nantwich 7.0 GL Finchley and Golders Green 6.0 EM Milton Keynes South 5.5 GL Harrow East 5.5 NW Wirral west 5.0 EM Nuneaton 5.0 GL Croydon Central 5.0 SE Hove 5.0 NW Rossendale and Darwen 5.0 NW South Ribble 4.0 NW Morecambe and Lunesdale 4.0 SW South Swindon 3.5 SE Southampton Itchen 3.5 YH Cleethorpes 3.0 NE Stockton South 3.0 WM Dudley South 3.0 WM Halesowen 2.0 NW Pendle 1.5 YH Pudsey 1.0 SE Dover 0.5 EE Harlow 0.5 EM Loughborough 0.5 NW Blackpool North 0.5 SW Gloucester 0.5 SW Worcester -2.0 SW Kingswood -3.5 SW NE Somerset
As in the previous round, Labour seem to be having the better of the ground war in all ten of these seats. Between 55% and 78% had had literature, letters, visits, phone calls or emails from Labour; between 34% and 62% said they heard from the Tories.
I honestly don't know what the Tories are playing at with their ground game. This used to be a strength of theirs.
But, then again, they've lost an awful lot of members under Cameron.
I still come back to how important is the ground game ?
Do you read election literature ? Nobody in my house does. Canvassers get quickly dispatched. Postal voting is sort of making GOTV a bit irrelevant.
The ground game isn't significant in any one election. But, if one party works a seat significantly harder than another for several years, and builds up solid canvassing data, it will give them an edge.
That I can get, but some of our posters here talk as if it's all on the last 4-6 weeks. Personally I'm increasingly skeptical the campaign has that much of an effect, most of the work needs to have been done at least 12 months prior to the GE.
I'm in F & GG and I think I was canvassed by UKIP the other day. I'm not sure as I didn't answer the door, but when I checked outside a few minutes later, there was a strong lingering smell of wee and an angry atmosphere.
Meanwhile Labour's leaflets fail to mention the mansion tax, Ed Miliband or indeed any tax rises at all!
Re. Finchley & Golders Green: London appears to be the only place where we can be fairly sure that Labour will improve significantly on their 2010 showing. Recently, I have been wondering about Putney, where Labour were 20/1 the last time I looked. Yes, Justine Greening has a very big majority, but Labour have a decent candidate and they did hold the seat from 1997-2005. A long-shot indeed but it does seem to be within the bounds of possibility?
Putney/Battersea has become far more 'yuppified' than areas like Finchley, which is more traditional wealth and champagne socialism, which I'd suggest make them a lot less likely to fall to LAB .
Yes, I'm not making any claim beyond the fact that there are less likely 20/1 shots. I would say, however, that socio-economic profile appears to be much less of a determiner of the outcome of London seats than elsewhere.
Everything is pointing to a very strong performance for Labour in London, and a dismal performance for Labour in Kent, Herts., and Essex.
Agreed. The Dover poll strikes me as particularly dire for Labour.
Not surprised at Dover. Kent is going to remain a Labour free zone.
The trick when the swing is against you nationally is to work hard and get yourself a decent profile - Halfon, Mogg and Elphicke all seem to prove this rule.
Today might be the most important day of the campaign. If today's manifesto is poorly received, or does not shoot some of Labour's foxes, then the Conservatives are in even more trouble.
Sadly, I won't be able to watch the launch as I'll be at baby sensory. The babies will probably make more sense than the politicians. ;-)
SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon is taking listener calls on 5 Live.
Asked about worries that fiscal autonomy would leave Scotland worse off and without a welfare safety net, Ms Sturgeon says the policy "would be implemented over a period of years".
So she wanted separation next year, but wants FFA 'when the oil price goes back up'
If the Government puts FFA in the Queen's Speech starting next year, will the SNP vote against?
EDIT: @schofieldkevin: Nicola Sturgeon sats full fiscal autonomy "would take several years to fully implement". But setting up a new state would take 18 months?
8.5 NW City of Chester 7.5 NW Crewe and Nantwich 7.0 GL Finchley and Golders Green 6.0 EM Milton Keynes South 5.5 GL Harrow East 5.5 NW Wirral west 5.0 EM Nuneaton 5.0 GL Croydon Central 5.0 SE Hove 5.0 NW Rossendale and Darwen 5.0 NW South Ribble 4.0 NW Morecambe and Lunesdale 4.0 SW South Swindon 3.5 SE Southampton Itchen 3.5 YH Cleethorpes 3.0 NE Stockton South 3.0 WM Dudley South 3.0 WM Halesowen 2.0 NW Pendle 1.5 YH Pudsey 1.0 SE Dover 0.5 EE Harlow 0.5 EM Loughborough 0.5 NW Blackpool North 0.5 SW Gloucester 0.5 SW Worcester -2.0 SW Kingswood -3.5 SW NE Somerset
It would be interesting to see this list done ion date order, and then with the change (if any) in the swing since the date they were polled.
Have to admit, living in North London in the heart of champagne socialism, I am sceptical of this view that Labour is going to do extremely well in London. A lot of Labour-supporting friends are just not enthused: they do not think Ed is the right candidate.
The other thing I would say is that the Mansion Tax issue may be more of an issue than people are prepared to admit. Quite a few of the wealthier Labour supporters we know bring it up - they know it is not the right thing to admit that is why they are having doubts but it is a factor (and the Conservatives have been playing the theme of a "double whammy" of council tax rebanding and a Mansion Tax).
Think, on the night, Labour might be disappointed with its London performance given the hype.
Lots of those are very close, and could easily go either way.
Maybe the Conservatives should clone Mogg.
Yes, he comes across as authentic and independent-minded, whether you agree or don't with what he says. These days that in itself is enough to win the respect of many voters.
I think it's also why Simon Hughes will possibly buck the pro-Labour trend in London and hold on in Bermondsey. Going to be very close though.
Also, of course, Simon Hughes is the straight choice for Bermondsey.
Saw more Tory posters than LAB ones on what would normally be a strong LAB estate.
I think Lee Rowley has done more footwork than any previous candidate in NE Derbyshire.
Engels hold though
Matthew Parris in his Times column keeps bigging up NE Derbys for the Tories, where he has personally been out canvassing. That said, I give Parris little credibility. He seems to live in a parallel universe where the Tories are going to win the election, he seems utterly convinced of that.
JackW - can't you give your ARSE a rest until after the election? It's serious business this, I can't see what you're trying to achieve with your silly "breaking wind" and "Tories on 300+ seats" nonsense. Nothing else, save perhaps ICM's obviously flawed poll yesterday, comes close to supporting you.
Have to admit, living in North London in the heart of champagne socialism, I am sceptical of this view that Labour is going to do extremely well in London. A lot of Labour-supporting friends are just not enthused: they do not think Ed is the right candidate.
The other thing I would say is that the Mansion Tax issue may be more of an issue than people are prepared to admit. Quite a few of the wealthier Labour supporters we know bring it up - they know it is not the right thing to admit that is why they are having doubts but it is a factor (and the Conservatives have been playing the theme of a "double whammy" of council tax rebanding and a Mansion Tax).
Think, on the night, Labour might be disappointed with its London performance given the hype.
I also live in London (west rather than north). But I prefer to take my evidence from the polling rather than from what my friends and family might be saying.
Not sure you are quite correct about not comparing seats, look at Finchley & Harlow which are not far from each other with an almost identical result last time out. These figures very much confirm the subjective feelings that Labour is doing well (very well?) in London but not so well at all in the surrounding areas especially to the east.
I thought Labour might be doing a bit better in Dudley but the other places seem to be broadly in line with general expectations.
Agree with the last point. My comment on comparing seats is just statistical - if you compare any two, one will have a bigger swing, and it's risky to draw any conclusions from that, unless it's reproduced. You might be right about London/home counties.
Is there still a proposal for a Broxtowe PB get-together pre-ecletion? If so could you post details?
Cheers
Hasn't been any response that I've seen, though Peter the Punter and tyson are both kindly coming up to help. If you're in the area, do drop me a note and we'll have a drink with them anyway!
Sounds like an excellent turnout Nick. Would I be right in saying Beeston is the wealthiest part of the constituency? Also Off topic but is the Crown Inn still going in Beeston? Used to be a decent pub when i visited that part of the world
Beeston is the largest town and mostly well off, though the wealthiest area is probably nearby Bramcote. As Ashcroft's last polls here show, there is a direct correlation between high income and Labour voting here - that's partly due to types of occupation (lots of lecturers and teachers and doctors) and partly a personal vote (my polite but wordy approach goes down better with this group than AS's punchy slogan-led style). AS has already tweeted plaintively that the hustings questions weren't what she'd have liked.
Not surprised at Dover. Kent is going to remain a Labour free zone.
The trick when the swing is against you nationally is to work hard and get yourself a decent profile - Halfon, Mogg and Elphicke all seem to prove this rule.
There was a Kent poll last week that had Con 39%, UKIP 24%, Lab 22% across the County.
Can anyone explain how right to buy proposal will protect number of houses available to rent.
Can anyone explain how the housing stock is reduced by right to buy. The fundemental remains, there are too few houses. If a renter becomes an owner it makes no difference.
If the capital is reinvested in additional social housing on a 1:1 basis, then the social housing stock should remain at least as numerous, but the demand for rented accommodation is reduced by 1 family for each house sold. If repacement is at 1.5:1, then social housing stock increases.
In theory it could create additional stock, but there is the 'if' of reinvesting the money.
Has anyone told the Tories that they will not be able to implement their policy of selling housing association housing at discount prices.Housing associations are non-profit making charities bound by the rules of the charity commission and are required to gain the full market value for their housing stock.Has anyone told the Tory policymakers about this or are they merely posturing? Another potential joke policy for the Tories.
Is there still a proposal for a Broxtowe PB get-together pre-ecletion? If so could you post details?
Cheers
Hasn't been any response that I've seen, though Peter the Punter and tyson are both kindly coming up to help. If you're in the area, do drop me a note and we'll have a drink with them anyway!
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 11th April Projection) :
Con 305 (-3) .. Lab 252 (+2) .. LibDem 30 (+2) .. SNP 38 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 (-1) .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 21 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 Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 11 Apr - No Changes
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
This will please the faithful here!
As far as I'm concerned, the direction of travel with these ARSE's is decent. Croydon Central - Con Hold; this seems very unlikely...
Lots of those are very close, and could easily go either way.
Maybe the Conservatives should clone Mogg.
Yes, he comes across as authentic and independent-minded, whether you agree or don't with what he says. These days that in itself is enough to win the respect of many voters.
I think it's also why Simon Hughes will possibly buck the pro-Labour trend in London and hold on in Bermondsey. Going to be very close though.
Also, of course, Simon Hughes is the straight choice for Bermondsey.
I believe he apologised (rightly) to Peter Tatchell for that a long time ago.
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
As I suspected, moving votes between the minor parties changes their share of the vote but has zero effect on number of seats.
What's scary about your (entirely plausible) outcome is that it is likely the government will be formed by the 2nd and the 6th party in terms of vote share.
Today might be the most important day of the campaign. If today's manifesto is poorly received, or does not shoot some of Labour's foxes, then the Conservatives are in even more trouble.
Sadly, I won't be able to watch the launch as I'll be at baby sensory. The babies will probably make more sense than the politicians. ;-)
The fact all the noise this morning - meaning the thing the Tories have chosen to put in the shop window - is about forcing housing associations to sell their properties to their social housing tenants at a discount, a policy which will excite no-one, suggests deep trouble may be the favourite...
Saw more Tory posters than LAB ones on what would normally be a strong LAB estate.
I think Lee Rowley has done more footwork than any previous candidate in NE Derbyshire.
Engels hold though
JackW - can't you give your ARSE a rest until after the election? It's serious business this, I can't see what you're trying to achieve with your silly "breaking wind" and "Tories on 300+ seats" nonsense. Nothing else, save perhaps ICM's obviously flawed poll yesterday, comes close to supporting you.
Thank you.
However your Rogerdamus-lite comments need to be given their due weight and then contemptuously tossed in the bin marked "ARSE DENIER"
Labour's success in the NW is very striking. I'm not sure what's behind it.
The London scores are less surprising. They're going to do very well in the Capital, but there aren't that many seats in play so it's less important for the overall result.
Has anyone told the Tories that they will not be able to implement their policy of selling housing association housing at discount prices.Housing associations are non-profit making charities bound by the rules of the charity commission and are required to gain the full market value for their housing stock.Has anyone told the Tory policymakers about this or are they merely posturing? Another potential joke policy for the Tories.
What an odd comment If you wre a Council tenant and your house was transferred to a HA (as hundreds of thousands have) then you will retain the RTB. Hence a HA will currently be selling houses at below market value.
@SkyNewsBreak: Update - Consumer Price #Inflation measured to two decimal places fell to -0.01% meaning UK entered negative inflation by a narrow margin
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 11th April Projection) :
Con 305 (-3) .. Lab 252 (+2) .. LibDem 30 (+2) .. SNP 38 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 (-1) .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
Conservatives 21 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 Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 11 Apr - No Changes
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
This will please the faithful here!
As far as I'm concerned, the direction of travel with these ARSE's is decent. Croydon Central - Con Hold; this seems very unlikely...
It's the faithless you have to feel sad for - poor sods.
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
As I suspected, moving votes between the minor parties changes their share of the vote but has zero effect on number of seats.
What's scary about your (entirely plausible) outcome is that it is likely the government will be formed by the 2nd and the 6th party in terms of vote share.
If I had to call the election right now (and I'd rather not) I too would come up with something like Barnesian's figures.
I too would also find it scary that the next Government would be formed by the 2nd and 6th most popular Parties, although in my case there would be an element of Schadenfreude, because I've always hated FPTP, and this kind of possible outcome is one reason why.
Can anyone explain how right to buy proposal will protect number of houses available to rent.
I think there is an official line about brownfield sites blah blah
But this smacks of a bad policy to me, unless done very carefully. So a bad policy then...
Nat housing association director article from feb is being retweeted a lot, he says that it's "the stupidest idea ever" or something. Bit strong, but the unintended consequences of the original right to buy were at the very least such that it was not a universally welcomed policy.
Tories do seem desperate to keep house prices up, which is IMHO a bad thing long term. Not advocating a crash but we surely need to build more houses. A lot more. There isn't enough in this announcement to reassure me on that.
1. The Labour advantage in the ground war does seem to be having an effect in these seats. On the second question the Conservatives do 0.2% better on average, Labour do 1.5% better on average (i.e an additional swing of 0.65% to Labour). Labour do better on the local question in every seat too. Normally this would not matter hugely - and shows the limits of a strong ground game. But it could make a difference in maybe 5 - 10 close seats.
2. While the Lab / Con battle is relatively consistent there is still a lot of variation - especially in the last couple of batches. Ashcroft's method means that he is picking up Conservatives surprises - seats that the Conservatives would lose on UNS, but he has ahead. But he may be missing Labour surprises which show the opposite (like C&N and F&GG in this poll).
Talking of Crewe and Nantwich and By-Election unwind... Chloe in Norwich North - tick tock
Interesting results from the polling Lord, does look like the SW and SE are just not interested in Labour, the NW for some reason loves Ed (not Blackpool though it would appear) and Scotland is a bloodbath. All about the midlands marginals! I've still got the Tories 5 to 10 ahead, but that's including what I expect on the day - a couple percent swing from pencil hoverers to the Govt. I also have the greens on 2, UKIP on 2
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
As I suspected, moving votes between the minor parties changes their share of the vote but has zero effect on number of seats.
What's scary about your (entirely plausible) outcome is that it is likely the government will be formed by the 2nd and the 6th party in terms of vote share.
If I had to call the election right now (and I'd rather not) I too would come up with something like Barnesian's figures.
I too would also find it scary that the next Government would be formed by the 2nd and 6th most popular Parties, although in my case there would be an element of Schadenfreude, because I've always hated FPTP, and this kind of possible outcome is one reason why.
Would this be the outcome to finally convert mainstream tories to the cause of PR?
I'm in F & GG and I think I was canvassed by UKIP the other day. I'm not sure as I didn't answer the door, but when I checked outside a few minutes later, there was a strong lingering smell of wee and an angry atmosphere.
Meanwhile Labour's leaflets fail to mention the mansion tax, Ed Miliband or indeed any tax rises at all!
Very unlikely that UKIP would have canvass teams in that seat. It's a very weak seat for them (as the poll shows). If the Tories lose this very wealthy seat, it will be all their own fault.
Today might be the most important day of the campaign. If today's manifesto is poorly received, or does not shoot some of Labour's foxes, then the Conservatives are in even more trouble.
Sadly, I won't be able to watch the launch as I'll be at baby sensory. The babies will probably make more sense than the politicians. ;-)
The fact all the noise this morning - meaning the thing the Tories have chosen to put in the shop window - is about forcing housing associations to sell their properties to their social housing tenants at a discount, a policy which will excite no-one, suggests deep trouble may be the favourite...
Presumably it might excite those people in the properties who could have the chance to own their own home?
Has anyone told the Tories that they will not be able to implement their policy of selling housing association housing at discount prices.Housing associations are non-profit making charities bound by the rules of the charity commission and are required to gain the full market value for their housing stock.Has anyone told the Tory policymakers about this or are they merely posturing? Another potential joke policy for the Tories.
That's an interesting caveat.
I'm sure the Tories have done their homework on that. Surely?
Finchley looks like a classic example of UKIP voting against an EU referendum and for a Labour government.
I hope these pr>cks are proud of themselves.
Insult the people you need to come back to the fold, excellent strategy that has worked brilliantly thus far.
I don't want ghastly toxic racist loonies back in the fold. I actually want all UKIPpers to just leave the country they utterly hate, like they are constantly threatening to do in the Telegraph comments.
There is something profoundly unBritish about UKIP.
Labour shouldn't fall into the elephant trap RTB is laying. It's bloody obvious the Tories want to paint you as keeping people poor and unaspiring. D'uh!
I'm in F & GG and I think I was canvassed by UKIP the other day. I'm not sure as I didn't answer the door, but when I checked outside a few minutes later, there was a strong lingering smell of wee and an angry atmosphere.
Meanwhile Labour's leaflets fail to mention the mansion tax, Ed Miliband or indeed any tax rises at all!
Very unlikely that UKIP would have canvass teams in that seat. It's a very weak seat for them (as the poll shows). If the Tories lose this very wealthy seat, it will be all their own fault.
UKIP not losing their deposit in Finchley shows up their problems with vote efficiency to my mind.
Compare to the Lib Dems losing over half their deposits in these seats.
Has anyone told the Tories that they will not be able to implement their policy of selling housing association housing at discount prices.Housing associations are non-profit making charities bound by the rules of the charity commission and are required to gain the full market value for their housing stock.Has anyone told the Tory policymakers about this or are they merely posturing? Another potential joke policy for the Tories.
That was a party election post by the Labour Parteh.
I have now compared the ten Ashcroft marginals with my switching model.
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
As I suspected, moving votes between the minor parties changes their share of the vote but has zero effect on number of seats.
What's scary about your (entirely plausible) outcome is that it is likely the government will be formed by the 2nd and the 6th party in terms of vote share.
If I had to call the election right now (and I'd rather not) I too would come up with something like Barnesian's figures.
I too would also find it scary that the next Government would be formed by the 2nd and 6th most popular Parties, although in my case there would be an element of Schadenfreude, because I've always hated FPTP, and this kind of possible outcome is one reason why.
Would this be the outcome to finally convert mainstream tories to the cause of PR?
Who knows?
Do they have a sense of irony? They would be holding on to power if they had supported AV instead of torpedoing it, but I suspect they still dream of Overall Majorities of the size once delivered to them by the Great She PM.
Lots of those are very close, and could easily go either way.
Maybe the Conservatives should clone Mogg.
Yes, he comes across as authentic and independent-minded, whether you agree or don't with what he says. These days that in itself is enough to win the respect of many voters.
I think it's also why Simon Hughes will possibly buck the pro-Labour trend in London and hold on in Bermondsey. Going to be very close though.
Also, of course, Simon Hughes is the straight choice for Bermondsey.
I believe he apologised (rightly) to Peter Tatchell for that a long time ago.
Comments
Do you read election literature ? Nobody in my house does.
Canvassers get quickly dispatched.
Postal voting is sort of making GOTV a bit irrelevant.
Without ICM LAB circa 300 CON LT 270.
I see ARSE has upped LAB by 10 in 10 days
http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/if-yolk-sticks.html
'Today's "slapdown" by Labour's shadow business spokesman, Chuka Ummuna, and Ed Balls, undermines just about everything that Jim Murphy has been agitating so antically to promote: Labour as an anti austerity alternative, his own office as robust, independent, "patriotic", in charge of the Scottish contingent in Westminster, paying the piper and calling the tune. But Chuka was having none of that [...]
This doesn't even leave Mr Murphy the wriggle room to be a critical friend of the UK leadership, pursuing different priorities from within the UK Labour Party. If you want to give the Labour party the heart and stomach to pursue different priorities -- there is clearly no point backing Jim. Even his own senior colleagues apparently see him as an irrelevance, and do not have the good grace to conceal their indifference to his opinion from the public.'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/constituency-polls/
Seven are in line. Three are not. These are:
Dover - where Lab is 7% less than my model and UKIP is 5% more. Con is in line. My interpretation is that UKIP is hitting Lab particularly hard in Dover.
Harlow - where Lab is 4% less than my model and Con is 3% higher. No obvious reason. I assume a particularly good Con candidate or campaign.
NE Somerset - where Lab is 11% less than my model and Con is 6% higher (and LD is 6% higher). This must be the Mogg effect and an ineffective LD squeeze. A Boris type situation??
Excluding NE Somerset, the average Con vote and Lab vote is within 1% of my model, The average LD vote is 3% higher than my model, UKIP 2% lower and Green 1% lower.
I'll now fine-tune my model, particularly my assumptions about LD switchers to UKIP and Green in non-LD marginals and see what the overall effect is. I suspect not a lot.
Saw more Tory posters than LAB ones on what would normally be a strong LAB estate.
I think Lee Rowley has done more footwork than any previous candidate in NE Derbyshire.
Engels hold though
My current predictions are:
... vote share ...seats
Con .. 34.6% ... 255
Lab .. 34.3% ... 284
LD .. 10.7% ... 33
UKIP ... 11.8% ...2
Grn .. 4.2% ... 1
SNP .. 3.8% ...54
However, it may be of course that a number of them are disgruntled Labour voters, so it would be unwise to assume that the Conservatives would benefit.
Green said he would remove social inequality and when pressed implied that all should have more equal wages. When asked if he would be in favour of reducing MPs pay to nearer that of the average wage - just got lots on mumbling and mutters of must go on now.
The LD candidate, being in a farming area, said that they would ensure that farmers would receive an economic price for their milk. (recently they have had price reductions as supermarkets are using milk as a loss leader and milk production is becoming uneconomic). However he did not know about the EU removing milk quotas and could not respond to the scenario of a E European country upping their production to sell to the UK at a lower price due to their lower cost structure.
8.5 NW City of Chester
7.5 NW Crewe and Nantwich
7.0 GL Finchley and Golders Green
6.0 EM Milton Keynes South
5.5 GL Harrow East
5.5 NW Wirral west
5.0 EM Nuneaton
5.0 GL Croydon Central
5.0 SE Hove
5.0 NW Rossendale and Darwen
5.0 NW South Ribble
4.0 NW Morecambe and Lunesdale
4.0 SW South Swindon
3.5 SE Southampton Itchen
3.5 YH Cleethorpes
3.0 NE Stockton South
3.0 WM Dudley South
3.0 WM Halesowen
2.0 NW Pendle
1.5 YH Pudsey
1.0 SE Dover
0.5 EE Harlow
0.5 EM Loughborough
0.5 NW Blackpool North
0.5 SW Gloucester
0.5 SW Worcester
-2.0 SW Kingswood
-3.5 SW NE Somerset
It would be nice if we could have a Broxtowe poll.
Jacob Rees-Mogg has been one of the big successes of the new MPs, Edward Timpson would be no less in Crewe considering the way he's gone missing as Childrens Minister regarding Rotherham and Oxfordshire.
canvassing is to identify support to be targeted (or omitted) for squeeze messages and gotv
the other thing you have to remember is the massive pool of dnv and to a lesser extent undecideds in most constituencies - probably less than half the electorate have fixed affiliations and therefore in a marginal even a small percentage can make a difference
in theory
But plenty of England flags out !
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-32249315
Public sector fatcattery means never having to face the consequences of your actions and always being able to get your snout deeper in the trough.
I hope these pr>cks are proud of themselves.
Anyway have a good day everyone with the conflicting emotions as each new poll is received.
Meanwhile Labour's leaflets fail to mention the mansion tax, Ed Miliband or indeed any tax rises at all!
The trick when the swing is against you nationally is to work hard and get yourself a decent profile - Halfon, Mogg and Elphicke all seem to prove this rule.
UKIP trebling their vote and getting nowhere near.
Sadly, I won't be able to watch the launch as I'll be at baby sensory. The babies will probably make more sense than the politicians. ;-)
So she wanted separation next year, but wants FFA 'when the oil price goes back up'
If the Government puts FFA in the Queen's Speech starting next year, will the SNP vote against?
EDIT: @schofieldkevin: Nicola Sturgeon sats full fiscal autonomy "would take several years to fully implement". But setting up a new state would take 18 months?
The other thing I would say is that the Mansion Tax issue may be more of an issue than people are prepared to admit. Quite a few of the wealthier Labour supporters we know bring it up - they know it is not the right thing to admit that is why they are having doubts but it is a factor (and the Conservatives have been playing the theme of a "double whammy" of council tax rebanding and a Mansion Tax).
Think, on the night, Labour might be disappointed with its London performance given the hype.
JackW - can't you give your ARSE a rest until after the election? It's serious business this, I can't see what you're trying to achieve with your silly "breaking wind" and "Tories on 300+ seats" nonsense. Nothing else, save perhaps ICM's obviously flawed poll yesterday, comes close to supporting you.
The Crown is doing fine! Come again. https://www.facebook.com/crowninnbeeston
If the capital is reinvested in additional social housing on a 1:1 basis, then the social housing stock should remain at least as numerous, but the demand for rented accommodation is reduced by 1 family for each house sold. If repacement is at 1.5:1, then social housing stock increases.
In theory it could create additional stock, but there is the 'if' of reinvesting the money.
Local HA will have a big wad of cash to build 1 or 2 new houses on brownfield sites.
More houses.
This will please the faithful here!
As far as I'm concerned, the direction of travel with these ARSE's is decent. Croydon Central - Con Hold; this seems very unlikely...
These are the actual swings at the elections compared to his final published polls.
Clacton:......... 2.7% swing Lab-Con
Heywood:......... 1.2% swing Lab-Con
Newark:......... 2.7% swing Lab-Con
Rochester:......... 1.5% swing Lab-Con
Wythenshawe:.... 3.1% swing Lab-Con
It doesn't. Have a look at the Conservative promise on "right to buy", and their promise of one new home being built for every one sold.
@JBeattieMirror
tweets:
Tories promised one-for-one replacement for each council house sold under right to buy. Since 2012: 17,205 sold, 820 built. #GE2015"
However your Rogerdamus-lite comments need to be given their due weight and then contemptuously tossed in the bin marked "ARSE DENIER"
That's a very useful summary. Thank you.
Labour's success in the NW is very striking. I'm not sure what's behind it.
The London scores are less surprising. They're going to do very well in the Capital, but there aren't that many seats in play so it's less important for the overall result.
If you wre a Council tenant and your house was transferred to a HA (as hundreds of thousands have) then you will retain the RTB. Hence a HA will currently be selling houses at below market value.
Sounds like a fantastic investment
I too would also find it scary that the next Government would be formed by the 2nd and 6th most popular Parties, although in my case there would be an element of Schadenfreude, because I've always hated FPTP, and this kind of possible outcome is one reason why.
You could try to find out? Or you could wait for the housing statistics that are due fairly soon?
Doesn't bother me either way to be honest.
But this smacks of a bad policy to me, unless done very carefully. So a bad policy then...
Nat housing association director article from feb is being retweeted a lot, he says that it's "the stupidest idea ever" or something. Bit strong, but the unintended consequences of the original right to buy were at the very least such that it was not a universally welcomed policy.
Tories do seem desperate to keep house prices up, which is IMHO a bad thing long term. Not advocating a crash but we surely need to build more houses. A lot more. There isn't enough in this announcement to reassure me on that.
1. The Labour advantage in the ground war does seem to be having an effect in these seats. On the second question the Conservatives do 0.2% better on average, Labour do 1.5% better on average (i.e an additional swing of 0.65% to Labour). Labour do better on the local question in every seat too. Normally this would not matter hugely - and shows the limits of a strong ground game. But it could make a difference in maybe 5 - 10 close seats.
2. While the Lab / Con battle is relatively consistent there is still a lot of variation - especially in the last couple of batches. Ashcroft's method means that he is picking up Conservatives surprises - seats that the Conservatives would lose on UNS, but he has ahead. But he may be missing Labour surprises which show the opposite (like C&N and F&GG in this poll).
Chloe in Norwich North - tick tock
Interesting results from the polling Lord, does look like the SW and SE are just not interested in Labour, the NW for some reason loves Ed (not Blackpool though it would appear) and Scotland is a bloodbath. All about the midlands marginals!
I've still got the Tories 5 to 10 ahead, but that's including what I expect on the day - a couple percent swing from pencil hoverers to the Govt. I also have the greens on 2, UKIP on 2
Someone gets 30% proceeds to build a new house.
What am i missing.
Heard May say housing association paid by LA being forced to sell more council stock how does that fit in.
She is either a poor explainer or the policy won't work (apart from as an election bribe) which i guess is most important TBF
I'm sure the Tories have done their homework on that. Surely?
There is something profoundly unBritish about UKIP.
Bingo - you've got it. Great isn't it ?
Compare to the Lib Dems losing over half their deposits in these seats.
Lab 282, Con 271
Housing is an investment, not a necessity?
Talking of which, anybody know when the the first Mori poll will be out this week?
Do they have a sense of irony? They would be holding on to power if they had supported AV instead of torpedoing it, but I suspect they still dream of Overall Majorities of the size once delivered to them by the Great She PM.
One more home owner breaks free of the state as their landlord - a wonderful outcome.