After a lovely weekend in the Forest of Dean / Monmouth, just got back to my abode and a Tory canvassser handed me a leaflet. Anyway an interesting 5 minute conversation followed. After being asked whether I was voting Tory this time, I listed all the reasons why I wouldn't be:
1) Foreign policy misadventures in Libya (my sympathies with all those who drowned in the latest tragedy, quite right for Farage to criticise the coalition for that), the braindead sanctions on Russia, and trying to go to war in Syria save around 15 brave Tory rebels
2) Chilcott enquiry delayed after the election - Cameron not standing up to Jeremy Heywood and providing leadership
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
4) Whole stance on man made global warming and energy policy based thereupon.
5) Ongoing trampling of civil liberties and GCHQ in cahoots with the America NSA.
6) Whole stance on the Union and independence referendum
7) Contintual adherence to the bust FPTP / lack of electoral and constitutional reform
I said I'd happily vote as a Libertarian for a Douglas Carswell UKIP leadership - amazingly enough she (Tory canvasser) agreed with a lot of the points I was making. And I didn't get round to discussing the economic reforms I'd like to see, save mentioning that the eradicating the deficit pledge in 2010 had been missed by a country mile. She did say that I should go into politics myself - now there's a thought!
After a lovely weekend in the Forest of Dean / Monmouth, just got back to my abode and a Tory canvassser handed me a leaflet. Anyway an interesting 5 minute conversation followed. After being asked whether I was voting Tory this time, I listed all the reasons why I wouldn't be:
1) Foreign policy misadventures in Libya (my sympathies with all those who drowned in the latest tragedy, quite right for Farage to criticise the coalition for that), the braindead sanctions on Russia, and trying to go to war in Syria save around 15 brave Tory rebels
2) Chilcott enquiry delayed after the election - Cameron not standing up to Jeremy Heywood and providing leadership
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
4) Whole stance on man made global warming and energy policy based thereupon.
5) Ongoing trampling of civil liberties and GCHQ in cahoots with the America NSA.
6) Whole stance on the Union and independence referendum
7) Contintual adherence to the bust FPTP / lack of electoral and constitutional reform
I said I'd happily vote as a Libertarian for a Douglas Carswell UKIP leadership - amazingly enough she (Tory canvasser) agreed with a lot of the points I was making. And I didn't get round to discussing the economic reforms I'd like to see, save mentioning that the eradicating the deficit pledge in 2010 had been missed by a country mile. She did say that I should go into politics myself - now there's a thought!
Something tells me you might not fortuitously bump into the canvasser again to give them the benefit of your worldly wisdom.
Yougov have built in a Labour lead with their revised methodology.
I'd suspect anything below a Labour lead of 3 of actually being a Tory lead
How so?
Well Yougov's panel seems to be selected from those when they had Labour with a 1 point lead - but when other opinion pollsters were beginning to report conservatives leading in the polls.
No doubt they can prove their methodology, but persistently sampling a population who are almost certainly very resistant to change in their voting outlook (the keenest are the ones who have subscribed to yougov) is going to dampen the effect of any change in the voting intention of the population as a whole.
On point 1, are you sure? - as I recall everyone was showing tiny Labour leads or ties, plus or minus MOE.
On point 2, that means that we'd expect any significant shift in YouGov to be more convincingly real than with other pollsters, so must have been impressed both by the 3-point lab lead jump and the 2-point reverse? I don't think so - the pool in January is still large enough to allow for MOE bouncing.
It looks increasinly likely that the Consrvatives may get most votes and seats now if only because of Labour's collapse in Scotland. I find that disappointing given what I think is this government's poor record, but then Labour is still blamed, with some justification, for the economic situation we're in. However here are reasons for liberals and progressives to take heart. Only a third or so of voters seem satisfied with this government, in spite of them being able to put the blame onto Labour quite successfully. The Blairites in the Labour party are a busted flush and I imagine have little hope of being rejeuvenated. I think you can probably say the same aboutt he Cleggites in the Lib Dems too. They must surely have leant heir lesson after 5 years in bed with the Tories. The opportunities for a progressive alliance would seem to be there. Ukip are less of a treat than they seemed 6 months ago and the stupid leadership of late by Farage has probably doen them permanent damage. But the most encouraging thing for me is the Tory campaign. I'm strangely uplifted to see them focussing relentlessly on the SNP and resorting to desperate bribes on right to buy and now Lloyds shares. It's almost as if they've given up trying to sell a Conservative message to the voters? Perhaps they just don't think the public will swallow such a message any more. I hope they are right.
Lloyds isn't a bribe.
A retail offering has been discussed as a possibility for a couple of years, and a 5% discount is about the same as you'd seen in an institutional placing.
If anything it's a matter of policy - trying to recreate a "share-owning democracy". There's no ability to misprice the offering as there is a market price to benchmark off
My mother in law has just had a second letter from the Borough Council encouraging her to get on the electoral register. The only problem is that she has been dead for 19 months. Council have taken her off the council tax and been notified of the correct residents for electoral registration. Can we change her address to that of the cemetery, which is in a marginal constituency and request a proxy vote
Ah I see you are citing the Telegraph. It is evidence of nothing except the blind panic and prejudice of the establishment. I saw the Hosie interview. He said the SNP would vote against Trident renewal. The rest is the invention of this total apology of a newspaper.
For the uninitiated the Telegraph in Scotland does not even make the pretence of being a newspaper. It is edited by the totally ludicorus Cochrane who admitted in his recent appalling book to supressing stories to suit the puposes of the NO campaign.
Having spent a large part of the day in Wirral West, I think McVey is screwed. Even those who think she's a good local MP want her out due to public image and policy decisions.
To put an objective hat on, it may be difficult as a Tory to be a public face of controversial decisions if you're in a marginal (esp in the north) because you have to be a bit obnoxious even when you may have a point. To take welfare as an example, the Tory approach has support on a macro level, but may turn off exactly the individuals they need to vote for them to win.
Which seats has he already polled? I seem to remember Gordon Brown's seat of Kirkcaldy was one. Maybe the reason that he is down in Sheffield is because his knows his old constituency is going to go SNP...
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
"Tactical voters rush to stop SNP Landslide" screams the headline.
More like "Alright non-SNP voters, this is the plan so no complaints, get out there and do it. Now, could Labour supporters look away...are they gone? Ok, everyone else, don't be too tactical, as we don't want to save too many SLAB seats, gotta keep things tight. Keep the faith everyone"
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · now YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a one-point lead: CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Tick...just 17 tocks to go. Or about 3 tocks, if you think the postal vote is likely to swing it.
The news all acoss the media tomorrow and for the rest of the campaign re the SNP will be very toxic for labour and may well be the ' game changer' in this campaign
What went wrong with all the other 'game changers' ?
It only takes one - problems for the SNP in Scotland with large campaign of tactical voting and just watch the media over the next few days go on and on about this issue.
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
Having spent a large part of the day in Wirral West, I think McVey is screwed. Even those who think she's a good local MP want her out due to public image and policy decisions.
To put an objective hat on, it may be difficult as a Tory to be a public face of controversial decisions if you're in a marginal (esp in the north) because you have to be a bit obnoxious even when you may have a point. To take welfare as an example, the Tory approach has support on a macro level, but may turn off exactly the individuals they need to vote for them to win.
But Wirral West is a very middle class and affluent constituency.
And such places tend to have little sympathy for 'welfare layabouts'.
Or at least they do in Yorkshire, it may be different near Liverpool.
It looks increasinly likely that the Consrvatives may get most votes and seats now if only because of Labour's collapse in Scotland. I find that disappointing given what I think is this government's poor record, but then Labour is still blamed, with some justification, for the economic situation we're in. However here are reasons for liberals and progressives to take heart. Only a third or so of voters seem satisfied with this government, in spite of them being able to put the blame onto Labour quite successfully. The Blairites in the Labour party are a busted flush and I imagine have little hope of being rejeuvenated. I think you can probably say the same aboutt he Cleggites in the Lib Dems too. They must surely have leant heir lesson after 5 years in bed with the Tories. The opportunities for a progressive alliance would seem to be there. Ukip are less of a treat than they seemed 6 months ago and the stupid leadership of late by Farage has probably doen them permanent damage. But the most encouraging thing for me is the Tory campaign. I'm strangely uplifted to see them focussing relentlessly on the SNP and resorting to desperate bribes on right to buy and now Lloyds shares. It's almost as if they've given up trying to sell a Conservative message to the voters? Perhaps they just don't think the public will swallow such a message any more. I hope they are right.
Lloyds isn't a bribe.
A retail offering has been discussed as a possibility for a couple of years, and a 5% discount is about the same as you'd seen in an institutional placing.
If anything it's a matter of policy - trying to recreate a "share-owning democracy". There's no ability to misprice the offering as there is a market price to benchmark off
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
But the stupid thing was, in the days of paper records only, to hand it to, of all people, Leon Brittan whose name even then was well known in these matters.
My mother in law has just had a second letter from the Borough Council encouraging her to get on the electoral register. The only problem is that she has been dead for 19 months. Council have taken her off the council tax and been notified of the correct residents for electoral registration. Can we change her address to that of the cemetery, which is in a marginal constituency and request a proxy vote
That will be no problem if you live in Tower Hamlets.
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · now YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a one-point lead: CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Tick...just 17 tocks to go. Or about 3 tocks, if you think the postal vote is likely to swing it.
The news all acoss the media tomorrow and for the rest of the campaign re the SNP will be very toxic for labour and may well be the ' game changer' in this campaign
What went wrong with all the other 'game changers' ?
Good point. Rousing post budget message. Ed is crap message. Long term economic plan message. We'll give away lots of cash message. Now SNP message. I still expect Cameron to win most seats, and my instinct is still close to Jack's ARSE, but the Tory campaign has been truly diabolical. I mean terrible, a car crash. No strategy, no nothing. Lurching haphazardly from one theme to another, undressing, cross dressing, and incoherent.
Surely the Tories should have fought this campaign on a positive message on their record, a popular leader and clarity for the future. No Miliband, no SNP, no negativity, no last ditch giveaways and lurching to the centre.
Having spent a large part of the day in Wirral West, I think McVey is screwed. Even those who think she's a good local MP want her out due to public image and policy decisions.
To put an objective hat on, it may be difficult as a Tory to be a public face of controversial decisions if you're in a marginal (esp in the north) because you have to be a bit obnoxious even when you may have a point. To take welfare as an example, the Tory approach has support on a macro level, but may turn off exactly the individuals they need to vote for them to win.
Agreed, the Wirral has been moving against the Conservatives for a long time. In 1987 they held Wallasey (Linda Chalker) with a knifedge majority, and Wirral West and Wirral South were safe Tory seats. Wirral South obviously had the memorable Ben Chapman by-election in March 1997, weeks before the GE, and has been Labour ever since.
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
Isn't why Cameron gets taken the michael out of him for supporting Villa because his uncle used to own the club?
@Nickpalmer I think most people are drawn to pbCOM because there is genuine political dialogue and it attracts people who want to challenge themselves and others
I come because it's the quickest way to get the news plus various perspectives on it
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · now YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a one-point lead: CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Tick...just 17 tocks to go. Or about 3 tocks, if you think the postal vote is likely to swing it.
The news all acoss the media tomorrow and for the rest of the campaign re the SNP will be very toxic for labour and may well be the ' game changer' in this campaign
What went wrong with all the other 'game changers' ?
Good point. Rousing post budget message. Ed is crap message. Long term economic plan message. We'll give away lots of cash message. Now SNP message. I still expect Cameron to win most seats, and my instinct is still close to Jack's ARSE, but the Tory campaign has been truly diabolical. I mean terrible, a car crash. No strategy, no nothing. Lurching haphazardly from one theme to another, undressing, cross dressing, and incoherent.
Surely the Tories should have fought this campaign on a positive message on their record, a popular leader and clarity for the future. No Miliband, no SNP, no negativity, no last ditch giveaways and lurching to the centre.
It's been an awful campaign - It makes the 2010 Big Society campaign look vintage in comparison.
I don't think Lynton Crosby understands the British electorate at all...
@Nickpalmer I think most people are drawn to pbCOM because there is genuine political dialogue and it attracts people who want to challenge themselves and others
I come because it's the quickest way to get the news plus various perspectives on it
I come because my browser is stuck on the PB home page and I'm too lazy to fix it.
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Good of you to correct hunchman's pathetic smears. I won't blame you if you have not got the time to knock over his other list of magnificent 7 deadly sins.
I reported the L&N model, amongst others, and I don't think it was ever quite that good for the Tories. L&N themselves also forecasted something like 70 seats ahead, as recently as February. Then they changed their model!
I'm sticking to Tories most votes, most seats as I've been saying for 3 years. Majority still possible, although admittedly less likely than it once appeared.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the biggest proponent of 2010 being NOM (which it was) when the polls were showing Tory Maj. Now the polls are all but uniformly NOM you've switched for 2015 to a possible Tory Maj.
What's changed?
I don't think I've ever put the Tory majority this time higher than "possible", while I consistently thought during 2005-2010 that it was all but "impossible". In a nutshell, they started too far behind, and the pro-Labour bias was still strong.
My estimations now are based on the general atrociousness of Miliband and the Labour front bench, the historical tendency for governments to serve more than one term, the likely fall in LibDem seats to the Tories' advantage, Cameron's high PM approval, and the generally sensible and effective government we've experienced since 2010...
Thanks for responding, makes sense. If you don't mind answering what rough chance do you rate the possibility at?
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
Isn't why Cameron gets taken the michael out of him for supporting Villa because his uncle used to own the club?
Only Villa ? If you told me his family owned the West Midlands, I'd probably believe it.
Lib 23 - 25 seats is a sell. 18 , I reckon. I am not even sure about Kingston & Surbiton anymore.
I would agree with that. If they only 8% of the vote, hard to see them getting more than 25 seats around 18 seems reasonable, or even less if the ComRes poll for the SW is to be believed.
@Nickpalmer I think most people are drawn to pbCOM because there is genuine political dialogue and it attracts people who want to challenge themselves and others
I come because it's the quickest way to get the news plus various perspectives on it
Agreed- I think we are saying the same thing. The leads are always relevant and succinctly written, and you get a broad range of views if you go into the comments. Plus, you do not get the Guido stuff or out and out cheerleading from only one camp.
I reported the L&N model, amongst others, and I don't think it was ever quite that good for the Tories. L&N themselves also forecasted something like 70 seats ahead, as recently as February. Then they changed their model!
I'm sticking to Tories most votes, most seats as I've been saying for 3 years. Majority still possible, although admittedly less likely than it once appeared.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the biggest proponent of 2010 being NOM (which it was) when the polls were showing Tory Maj. Now the polls are all but uniformly NOM you've switched for 2015 to a possible Tory Maj.
What's changed?
I don't think I've ever put the Tory majority this time higher than "possible", while I consistently thought during 2005-2010 that it was all but "impossible". In a nutshell, they started too far behind, and the pro-Labour bias was still strong.
My estimations now are based on the general atrociousness of Miliband and the Labour front bench, the historical tendency for governments to serve more than one term, the likely fall in LibDem seats to the Tories' advantage, Cameron's high PM approval, and the generally sensible and effective government we've experienced since 2010...
Thanks for responding, makes sense. If you don't mind answering what rough chance do you rate the possibility at?
Finger in the wind?
20%
In 2014, you had stated that there was a 99% probability of the Tories getting an absolute majority.
Having spent a large part of the day in Wirral West, I think McVey is screwed. Even those who think she's a good local MP want her out due to public image and policy decisions.
To put an objective hat on, it may be difficult as a Tory to be a public face of controversial decisions if you're in a marginal (esp in the north) because you have to be a bit obnoxious even when you may have a point. To take welfare as an example, the Tory approach has support on a macro level, but may turn off exactly the individuals they need to vote for them to win.
Agreed, the Wirral has been moving against the Conservatives for a long time. In 1987 they held Wallasey (Linda Chalker) with a knifedge majority, and Wirral West and Wirral South were safe Tory seats. Wirral South obviously had the memorable Ben Chapman by-election in March 1997, weeks before the GE, and has been Labour ever since.
There was a notable swing against the Tories in both Wirral South and West in 1987 compared to 1983. The seats were still very safe but it was the start of a trend.
Desperate Mail scare story along with all the other desperate anti-SNP stuff on here. The electorate doesn't warm to sore losers, of which there are many in Scotland, not least SLAB.
On the face of it this looks like the SNP desperate to ensure the continuance of a Tory-led government so they can get their beloved second referendum as soon as possible.
In reality, if the situation outlined by the Telegraph comes to past then surely the Tories will vote with Labour
I reported the L&N model, amongst others, and I don't think it was ever quite that good for the Tories. L&N themselves also forecasted something like 70 seats ahead, as recently as February. Then they changed their model!
I'm sticking to Tories most votes, most seats as I've been saying for 3 years. Majority still possible, although admittedly less likely than it once appeared.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the biggest proponent of 2010 being NOM (which it was) when the polls were showing Tory Maj. Now the polls are all but uniformly NOM you've switched for 2015 to a possible Tory Maj.
What's changed?
I don't think I've ever put the Tory majority this time higher than "possible", while I consistently thought during 2005-2010 that it was all but "impossible". In a nutshell, they started too far behind, and the pro-Labour bias was still strong.
My estimations now are based on the general atrociousness of Miliband and the Labour front bench, the historical tendency for governments to serve more than one term, the likely fall in LibDem seats to the Tories' advantage, Cameron's high PM approval, and the generally sensible and effective government we've experienced since 2010...
Thanks for responding, makes sense. If you don't mind answering what rough chance do you rate the possibility at?
Finger in the wind?
20%
In 2014, you had stated that there was a 99% probability of the Tories getting an absolute majority.
I stated that the L&N model said that, without comment, IIRC, in late 2014.
I also reported a weakening in that probability, according to that model into 2015...
Maybe, but who mentioned cutting spending in London? This forum is incredibly London and southern centric isn't it?
SNP will make a lot of friends in the north with this approach, this will lead to many northern Labour MPs not being afraid of working with the SNP.
From what was on Sky earlier they'll call for HS3 and HS2 to be accelerated towards Scotland.
Well go down well up here and leave many left leaning voters quite happy with that kind of influence.
Does Sturgeon own shares in Magic Money Tree plc ?
And whether or not PB is London and southern centric I'm not.
So you'd hear no complaints from if government spending was cut in London and instead spent on northern England transport infrastructure.
Except that isn't going to happen, irrespective of who's in government.
Increased spending on the North West infrastructure has already been announced by Osborne and also on giving more autonomy for the NHS in the northwest. Last time I looked the Liverpool Manchester line was already being upgraded. The Northern Hub has already started construction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26068933 Manchester and Edinburgh have their trams...
Do you ever tire of bleating propaganda ?
Its all 'paid' for by the Magic Money Tree.
And transport infrastructure spending is still far higher in London than elsewhere.
Costs will be higher in London because of property prices, the difficulty of major construction work in a busy city, etc. There will also be maintenance of existing systems which make sense.
I guess you should probably look at "new infrastructure output" (if there is such a measure) vs just looking at cost.
@hunchman is showing us extremely clearly how utterly loony the conspiracy theorists have got. In the course of the last few posts he has:
1) Confused Sir Peter Hayman with Sir Michael Havers (and, even more impressively, linked to a Mail article which clearly shows his confusion)
2) Said that Fiona Wolff is 'closely related' to 'a well known establishment paedophile'. Presumably by the latter he means Leon Brittan. Leaving aside the question of whether the description fits someone who has never been convicted, or indeed charged, with any such offence, I'm amused by the 'closely related' bit, by which I think hunchman must mean 'went to some dinner parties to which he has also invited'.
I reported the L&N model, amongst others, and I don't think it was ever quite that good for the Tories. L&N themselves also forecasted something like 70 seats ahead, as recently as February. Then they changed their model!
I'm sticking to Tories most votes, most seats as I've been saying for 3 years. Majority still possible, although admittedly less likely than it once appeared.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the biggest proponent of 2010 being NOM (which it was) when the polls were showing Tory Maj. Now the polls are all but uniformly NOM you've switched for 2015 to a possible Tory Maj.
What's changed?
I don't think I've ever put the Tory majority this time higher than "possible", while I consistently thought during 2005-2010 that it was all but "impossible". In a nutshell, they started too far behind, and the pro-Labour bias was still strong.
My estimations now are based on the general atrociousness of Miliband and the Labour front bench, the historical tendency for governments to serve more than one term, the likely fall in LibDem seats to the Tories' advantage, Cameron's high PM approval, and the generally sensible and effective government we've experienced since 2010...
Thanks for responding, makes sense. If you don't mind answering what rough chance do you rate the possibility at?
Finger in the wind?
20%
In 2014, you had stated that there was a 99% probability of the Tories getting an absolute majority.
I stated that the L&N model said that, without comment, IIRC, in late 2014.
I also reported a weakening in that probability, according to that model into 2015...
When do you propose to bury the L&N model under several feet of concrete ?
Which seats has he already polled? I seem to remember Gordon Brown's seat of Kirkcaldy was one. Maybe the reason that he is down in Sheffield is because his knows his old constituency is going to go SNP...
Agree that Brown going to Hallam is the best news that Clegg has received in this whole election campaign. Does anyone do better than Gordon at holding on to grudges?!
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · now YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a one-point lead: CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Tick...just 17 tocks to go. Or about 3 tocks, if you think the postal vote is likely to swing it.
The news all acoss the media tomorrow and for the rest of the campaign re the SNP will be very toxic for labour and may well be the ' game changer' in this campaign
What went wrong with all the other 'game changers' ?
Good point. Rousing post budget message. Ed is crap message. Long term economic plan message. We'll give away lots of cash message. Now SNP message. I still expect Cameron to win most seats, and my instinct is still close to Jack's ARSE, but the Tory campaign has been truly diabolical. I mean terrible, a car crash. No strategy, no nothing. Lurching haphazardly from one theme to another, undressing, cross dressing, and incoherent.
Surely the Tories should have fought this campaign on a positive message on their record, a popular leader and clarity for the future. No Miliband, no SNP, no negativity, no last ditch giveaways and lurching to the centre.
It's been an awful campaign - It makes the 2010 Big Society campaign look vintage in comparison.
I don't think Lynton Crosby understands the British electorate at all...
OK the Big Society was utterly tosh. Incomprehensible and thought through by folk who have no idea about how to implement anything. But it was positive and maybe some people (like Plato for instance) bought into the airy fairness of it all. Brown had to fight a negative rearguard campaign because he was the incumbent and under the kosh. It is the utter incoherence of the Tory 2015 campaign that is so perplexing. You never know what's going to come out the next day. It seems like they look at the polls, do some internal polling and then come out with something that is completely disjointed from the day before.
If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
Yougov have built in a Labour lead with their revised methodology.
I'd suspect anything below a Labour lead of 3 of actually being a Tory lead
How so?
Well Yougov's panel seems to be selected from those when they had Labour with a 1 point lead - but when other opinion pollsters were beginning to report conservatives leading in the polls.
No doubt they can prove their methodology, but persistently sampling a population who are almost certainly very resistant to change in their voting outlook (the keenest are the ones who have subscribed to yougov) is going to dampen the effect of any change in the voting intention of the population as a whole.
It is certain that one pollster's methodology will be more accurate than all the others, however it seems rather premature to be picking on yougov for not giving results that match your own political prejudices. ICM might end up being more accurate but there is simply no way to know until May 8th.
By yougov's own admission the current methodology resulted in increased tory numbers in 2010. The resampling approach is designed to better detect movements in public opinion, so even if the panel has some small bias one way or the other the direction of movement should be unaffected. Their run of polls suggests that public opinion is pretty much unchanged since earlier this year, a finding which does seem to be fairly believable. Previous experience would suggest that polling movements during an election campaign have little relevance to the outcome which is often very much in line with the state of play before the start of the final campaign. Maybe there really are more undecided voters this time, though it is very common to hear politicians at this stage of a campaign saying "everything is still to play for" when no such thing is true.
If I had to guess I would say the only change over the campaign would be a decline in UKIP which will probably benefit the tories more than labour but the effect will be small.
I reported the L&N model, amongst others, and I don't think it was ever quite that good for the Tories. L&N themselves also forecasted something like 70 seats ahead, as recently as February. Then they changed their model!
I'm sticking to Tories most votes, most seats as I've been saying for 3 years. Majority still possible, although admittedly less likely than it once appeared.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you the biggest proponent of 2010 being NOM (which it was) when the polls were showing Tory Maj. Now the polls are all but uniformly NOM you've switched for 2015 to a possible Tory Maj.
What's changed?
I don't think I've ever put the Tory majority this time higher than "possible", while I consistently thought during 2005-2010 that it was all but "impossible". In a nutshell, they started too far behind, and the pro-Labour bias was still strong.
My estimations now are based on the general atrociousness of Miliband and the Labour front bench, the historical tendency for governments to serve more than one term, the likely fall in LibDem seats to the Tories' advantage, Cameron's high PM approval, and the generally sensible and effective government we've experienced since 2010...
Thanks for responding, makes sense. If you don't mind answering what rough chance do you rate the possibility at?
Finger in the wind?
20%
In 2014, you had stated that there was a 99% probability of the Tories getting an absolute majority.
I stated that the L&N model said that, without comment, IIRC, in late 2014.
I also reported a weakening in that probability, according to that model into 2015...
When do you propose to bury the L&N model under several feet of concrete ?
Haha, we shall see. I can no longer cite it since the authors themselves have altered it at the last minute in an opaque fashion...
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
I think you are muddling up Sir Peter Hayman (PIE member and accused by Dickens) with Sir Michael Havers.
Just a note that a few quid has been bet on the UUP taking this seat from the DUP.
Paddy Power have a noticeably different view on the UUPs chances over everyone else pricing up this market.
Curious.
I find it best to assume that Northern Irish odds are a mixture of hard demographic facts and utterly unfounded sentiment, with little in between. If Ashcroft were brave, he would poll Belfast South and Upper Bann...
No, just the bits of it that already were are more open about it.
Conspiracies and misuse of power does undoubtedly exist, but the problem is it is a key element of conspiracy theorists to always assume malice rather than incompetence, open collusion rather than confusion and misanalysis, and that even the most tangential of connections is clear proof that individuals numbering from dozens to thousands are willing to knowingly and with discipline directly participate in and cover up the most heinous of crimes. It can happen, but human nature means such omnipresence and effective cooperation is hard to achieve in practice, when small groups taking advantage of blind and incompetent systems can get the job done much easier and with far less risk.
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · now YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour have a one-point lead: CON 34%, LAB 35%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, GRN 5%
Tick...just 17 tocks to go. Or about 3 tocks, if you think the postal vote is likely to swing it.
The news all acoss the media tomorrow and for the rest of the campaign re the SNP will be very toxic for labour and may well be the ' game changer' in this campaign
What went wrong with all the other 'game changers' ?
Good point. Rousing post budget message. Ed is crap message. Long term economic plan message. We'll give away lots of cash message. Now SNP message. I still expect Cameron to win most seats, and my instinct is still close to Jack's ARSE, but the Tory campaign has been truly diabolical. I mean terrible, a car crash. No strategy, no nothing. Lurching haphazardly from one theme to another, undressing, cross dressing, and incoherent.
Surely the Tories should have fought this campaign on a positive message on their record, a popular leader and clarity for the future. No Miliband, no SNP, no negativity, no last ditch giveaways and lurching to the centre.
It's been an awful campaign - It makes the 2010 Big Society campaign look vintage in comparison.
I don't think Lynton Crosby understands the British electorate at all...
OK the Big Society was utterly tosh. Incomprehensible and thought through by folk who have no idea about how to implement anything. But it was positive and maybe some people (like Plato for instance) bought into the airy fairness of it all. Brown had to fight a negative rearguard campaign because he was the incumbent and under the kosh. It is the utter incoherence of the Tory 2015 campaign that is so perplexing. You never know what's going to come out the next day. It seems like they look at the polls, do some internal polling and then come out with something that is completely disjointed from the day before.
Indeed.
As has been noted on here a lot, Cameron has generally been a pretty good Prime Minister but he's an awful politician.
It's interesting that Ed will probably be the reverse. A disaster as PM but a great game player when it comes to politics.
Ideally you want to be both. Those one's who are great PM's and good politicians, like Maggie was until the last couple of years, and Blair, are always the best leaders...
That's, what, 150 per constituency? How much difference will that make?
In Scotland there will be much more (x10) Labour, Tory and LD voters who will switch to SNP to keep put the others out due to entrenched tribal loyalties. I certainly would vote SNP to keep a Tory out, and I am sure the majority of the Tories here would vote SNP to keep Labour out, and the Liberals would vote SNP to keep the Tories or Labour out. SNP are the perfect vessel to attract tactical switchers to ensure the party they most hate doesn't win.
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
He makes the £55 million we spent on Andy Carroll and Stewart Downing look value for money.
I believe Cameron has been a Villa fan since he was 13. Is it true that the nasty lying barsteward swine Campbell (another who will not need to worry about buying a new kilt) was trying to smear him over that as well?
Isn't why Cameron gets taken the michael out of him for supporting Villa because his uncle used to own the club?
He can still support the club. Just like he can be a tennis fan and support Murray at Wimbledon, which makes him more broad minded than me.
the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
Maybe, but who mentioned cutting spending in London? This forum is incredibly London and southern centric isn't it?
SNP will make a lot of friends in the north with this approach, this will lead to many northern Labour MPs not being afraid of working with the SNP.
From what was on Sky earlier they'll call for HS3 and HS2 to be accelerated towards Scotland.
Well go down well up here and leave many left leaning voters quite happy with that kind of influence.
Does Sturgeon own shares in Magic Money Tree plc ?
And whether or not PB is London and southern centric I'm not.
So you'd hear no complaints from if government spending was cut in London and instead spent on northern England transport infrastructure.
Except that isn't going to happen, irrespective of who's in government.
Increased spending on the North West infrastructure has already been announced by Osborne and also on giving more autonomy for the NHS in the northwest. Last time I looked the Liverpool Manchester line was already being upgraded. The Northern Hub has already started construction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26068933 Manchester and Edinburgh have their trams...
Do you ever tire of bleating propaganda ?
Its all 'paid' for by the Magic Money Tree.
And transport infrastructure spending is still far higher in London than elsewhere.
Costs will be higher in London because of property prices, the difficulty of major construction work in a busy city, etc. There will also be maintenance of existing systems which make sense.
I guess you should probably look at "new infrastructure output" (if there is such a measure) vs just looking at cost.
New infrastructure output in my part of the world has been minimal for twenty years and as house construction hasn't a serious imbalance has grown.
I will say though that this government has been better than Labour was at building roads in South Yorkshire. But then Labour always treats its safe areas as shite.
If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
Dunno but 1-3 for Crawley is worth a tickle.
Its UKIP vs Con but Sittingbourne & Sheppey is generally 3-10 too.
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
I think you are muddling up Sir Peter Hayman (PIE member and accused by Dickens) with Sir Michael Havers.
Apologies for mixing them up, this was the article that I meant to link to:
the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
Maybe, but who mentioned cutting spending in London? This forum is incredibly London and southern centric isn't it?
SNP will make a lot of friends in the north with this approach, this will lead to many northern Labour MPs not being afraid of working with the SNP.
From what was on Sky earlier they'll call for HS3 and HS2 to be accelerated towards Scotland.
Well go down well up here and leave many left leaning voters quite happy with that kind of influence.
Does Sturgeon own shares in Magic Money Tree plc ?
And whether or not PB is London and southern centric I'm not.
So you'd hear no complaints from if government spending was cut in London and instead spent on northern England transport infrastructure.
Except that isn't going to happen, irrespective of who's in government.
Increased spending on the North West infrastructure has already been announced by Osborne and also on giving more autonomy for the NHS in the northwest. Last time I looked the Liverpool Manchester line was already being upgraded. The Northern Hub has already started construction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26068933 Manchester and Edinburgh have their trams...
Do you ever tire of bleating propaganda ?
Its all 'paid' for by the Magic Money Tree.
And transport infrastructure spending is still far higher in London than elsewhere.
No acknowledgement of the planned spending being delivered for the north west then? And I'm the propagandist? What a laugh you are. London is the political and financial capital it is by far the most massive and concentrated hub in the country and must be one of the biggest in the world. It is a tourism magnet and a massive tax generator.
We have had decades after decades of regional policy in this country. The regions have not been forgotten.
@hunchman is showing us extremely clearly how utterly loony the conspiracy theorists have got. In the course of the last few posts he has:
1) Confused Sir Peter Hayman with Sir Michael Havers (and, even more impressively, linked to a Mail article which clearly shows his confusion)
2) Said that Fiona Wolff is 'closely related' to 'a well known establishment paedophile'. Presumably by the latter he means Leon Brittan. Leaving aside the question of whether the description fits someone who has never been convicted, or indeed charged, with any such offence, I'm amused by the 'closely related' bit, by which I think hunchman must mean 'went to some dinner parties to which he has also invited'.
The world really has gone mad.
How does the mixing up of a name and/or the hyperbolic use of the phrase 'closely related' to describe a friendship indicate lunacy either on the part of Hunchman or (and this is you really reaching) of the entire species of 'conspiracy theorists'?
I feel you rather let yourself down by using the term 'conspiracy theorists' to describe a group of people at all - it's utterly half-witted. People conspire or they do not. If they do, to theorise that they do is correct. If they don't, to theorise that they do is incorrect. Thereby being a 'conspiracy theorist' deserves no particular censure or praise.
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
@YOkel Re YouGov versus ICM debate- my own view is that Kellner has more to lose, and he strikes me as the kind of person that takes a control oriented approach to his polling- i.e. he is hands on and scrupulous. And the work that they have done on exit polling is outstanding.
It is likely that the YouGOV sample will move to the Tories as the election looms and the vote hardens- reflecting the natural hardening of the British electorate, but whether it is enough.......
In its place, Operation Undecided came into force recently and focuses on two types of voter from post-referendum canvass returns: people who are unsure about their voting intentions; and soft SNP supporters.
The latter group has been identified by Labour activists asking whether voters would prefer a Labour or a Tory Government.
It just beggars belief how ridiculously stupid SLAB are. Expressing a preference for a Labour government in a Forced Choice question makes them "soft" supporters.
the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
I think you are muddling up Sir Peter Hayman (PIE member and accused by Dickens) with Sir Michael Havers.
Apologies for mixing them up, this was the article that I meant to link to:
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines. Next thing on election day Cameron will say there are busloads of Scotts being transported down masquerading as Labour voters. The UK ain't Israel, and this kind of visceral approach to policymaking is bizarre at best here.
In its place, Operation Undecided came into force recently and focuses on two types of voter from post-referendum canvass returns: people who are unsure about their voting intentions; and soft SNP supporters.
The latter group has been identified by Labour activists asking whether voters would prefer a Labour or a Tory Government.
It just beggars belief how ridiculously stupid SLAB are. Expressing a preference for a Labour government in a Forced Choice question makes them "soft" supporters.
Really, Jim? Is that the best you got.
I'm sure the rest of the SLAB MP's will be highly delighted that they're throwing the kitchen sink at saving wee Dougie and Jim himself whilst doing diddly squat for people like Russell Brown and Iain Murray who would arguably be a much better deployment of resources. Can't wait for the Ashcroft polls next week, as I said earlier this week my latest Scotland outlook is 55 SNP seats, with Orkney & Shetland, Dumfries & Galloway, Berwickshire & Roxburgh and Edinburgh South being the only ones that resist the SNP landslide.
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
That in itself would qualify as "something substantial" changing.
Just a note that a few quid has been bet on the UUP taking this seat from the DUP.
Paddy Power have a noticeably different view on the UUPs chances over everyone else pricing up this market.
Curious.
I find it best to assume that Northern Irish odds are a mixture of hard demographic facts and utterly unfounded sentiment, with little in between. If Ashcroft were brave, he would poll Belfast South and Upper Bann...
You need to bear in mind that Upper Bann is pretty much a straight unionist contest. What you refer to as 'demographic facts' by which I assume you mean sectarian headcount, isn't in play.
I have bet on the DUP taking South Belfast. Its a comparative longshot at 3/1 but the appearance of Sinn Fein this time round with what is a very interesting choice of candidate could hurt the SDLP enough.
I also suspect the SDLP could come under severe pressure from Sinn Fein in Foyle and will need more unionist tactical votes than they normally get. At local government level in 2014 Sinn Fein really did put the boot in. Whilst Durkan clearly carries both a personal vote and unionist tactical votes his personal margin has also been under pressure. Any near repeat of the local elections and he's done.
The most interesting contest on paper though is the perennial war by ballot that is Fermanagh South Tyrone. The single Unionist candidate this time is an experienced and well known face, not some sap put up as a unity candidate. In short they are better equipped to make a run at it, but Michelle Gildernew of Sinn Fein is dug in better than a Vietcong machine gunner at Hamburger Hill, and, gun to head, I think will retain it. Its a genuine full on slugfest.
If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
Maybe, but who mentioned cutting spending in London? This forum is incredibly London and southern centric isn't it?
SNP will make a lot of friends in the north with this approach, this will lead to many northern Labour MPs not being afraid of working with the SNP.
From what was on Sky earlier they'll call for HS3 and HS2 to be accelerated towards Scotland.
Well go down well up here and leave many left leaning voters quite happy with that kind of influence.
Does Sturgeon own shares in Magic Money Tree plc ?
And whether or not PB is London and southern centric I'm not.
So you'd hear no complaints from if government spending was cut in London and instead spent on northern England transport infrastructure.
Except that isn't going to happen, irrespective of who's in government.
Increased spending on the North West infrastructure has already been announced by Osborne and also on giving more autonomy for the NHS in the northwest. Last time I looked the Liverpool Manchester line was already being upgraded. The Northern Hub has already started construction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-26068933 Manchester and Edinburgh have their trams...
Do you ever tire of bleating propaganda ?
Its all 'paid' for by the Magic Money Tree.
And transport infrastructure spending is still far higher in London than elsewhere.
No acknowledgement of the planned spending being delivered for the north west then? And I'm the propagandist? What a laugh you are. London is the political and financial capital it is by far the most massive and concentrated hub in the country and must be one of the biggest in the world. It is a tourism magnet and a massive tax generator.
We have had decades after decades of regional policy in this country. The regions have not been forgotten.
Bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat, bleat.
From the man who lied about UK manufacturing output being at record levels.
Repeating government spending promises is worthless when they're 'funded' by the magical money tree. Likewise mindless platitudes such as "The regions have not been forgotten" are meaningless.
The difference between me and you is that I think for myself and say what I feel whereas you just bleat the party line.
And really can't CCHQ find anyone more talented than you ?
Now I have to call it a night but take my advice and try thinking for yourself, it really does expand your life.
It's interesting that mention has been made of a serving Minister. An arrest being made could severely affect the political situation.
Our press may be bad, but they are not irresponsible enough to create a huge political scandal during a campaign. A friend of mine sat on a story in the 1992 campaign that probably would have changed the dynamics of the election- and was known within certain circles. It was so utterly debauched that it was unreportable and if I said it now I think I would never be allowed to post on this site again, or any other for that matter. I'm convinced that there are other stories of this magnitude floating around.
Just a note that a few quid has been bet on the UUP taking this seat from the DUP.
Paddy Power have a noticeably different view on the UUPs chances over everyone else pricing up this market.
Curious.
I find it best to assume that Northern Irish odds are a mixture of hard demographic facts and utterly unfounded sentiment, with little in between. If Ashcroft were brave, he would poll Belfast South and Upper Bann...
You need to bear in mind that Upper Bann is pretty much a straight unionist contest. What you refer to as 'demographic facts' by which I assume you mean sectarian headcount, isn't in play.
I have bet on the DUP taking South Belfast. Its a comparative longshot at 3/1 but the appearance of Sinn Fein this time round with what is a very interesting choice of candidate could hurt the SDLP enough.
I also suspect the SDLP could come under severe pressure from Sinn Fein in Foyle and will need more unionist tactical votes than they normally get. At local government level in 2014 Sinn Fein really did put the boot in. Whilst Durkan clearly carries both a personal vote and unionist tactical votes his personal margin has also been under pressure. Any near repeat of the local elections and he's done.
The most interesting contest on paper though is the perennial war by ballot that is Fermanagh South Tyrone. The single Unionist candidate this time is an experienced and well known face, not some sap put up as a unity candidate. In short they are better equipped to make a run at it, but Michelle Gildernew of Sinn Fein is dug in better than a Vietcong machine gunner at Hamburger Hill, and, gun to head, I think will retain it. Its a genuine full on slugfest.
Like South Antrim, Upper Bann is a unionist, mixed commuter/rural seat where most punters have no clue what is happening on the ground, so I mean it is very firmly in my latter category. And Foyle is the mirror image, but with both the locals and the Assembly election suggesting an extremely tight fight. My money here is locked into the DUP in Belfast North, staked at pre-pact odds, and I have seen nothing to suggest I should close the bet; I'd rather take Sinn Féin in Foyle than here, at the same odds.
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
That in itself would qualify as "something substantial" changing.
Not really, seems like pretty sensible due dilligence.
A report is nothing substantial, any negative actions taken as a result of the report could be.
There is a real tendency on here to see all things through UK political eyes. Therefore, the Finnish election was a remarkable victory for Euroscepticism, and means getting another Greek bailout through the Finnish parliament will be close to impossible.
The truth is that the support of the (now former) PM for NATO membership was probably a bigger issue for that party than the EU and the Euro. And the Eurosceptic Finns went backwards in terms of vote. Yes, they came second (just), and they may end up as part of the governing coalition. But then again, they might not. And while they managed an excellent 17% of the vote, that pales against the 76% of the vote that went to pro-European parties (*).
The idea that the Finnish parliament would be unwilling to support a Greek bailout (should one happen - I'm leaning towards Grexit, myself) is also fanciful. 76% of the votes were cast for pro-European parties, and the Left Alliance would vote to support their socialist allies in Greece, I suspect. Even if The Finns vote against a bailout (and they've actually made a number of comments that make it clear that actually they *might* support another bailout under certain circumstances), it's laughable to think that the Finnish parliament does not have a majority to pass it.
* The Left Alliance got 7% of the vote. Half of the Left Alliance appears to be Eurofanatics and half Eurosceptics.
3) Ongoing child abuse inquiry with the first 2 nominees closely related to well known establishment paedophiles and no reporting before the election - a complete shambles.
If you are referring to Lady Butler Sloss and to Fiona Wolff I think you should clarify that:
(1) Sir Michael Havers (Butler Sloss's brother) has never been (to my knowledge) accused of paedophilia. The issue was that he was Attorney General at the time and was involved in the decision not to pursue the allegations in the 1980s
(2) Leon Brittan has been accused but never convicted.
Obviously as they are both dead there is no legal risk, but it's certainly impolite, at least, to state as fact what either false or unproven
Havers was a member of PIE and Geoffrey Dickens raised the subject of Havers abuse in the Commons, so you're factually incorrect to say that Havers has never been accused of paedophilia.
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
I think you are muddling up Sir Peter Hayman (PIE member and accused by Dickens) with Sir Michael Havers.
Apologies for mixing them up, this was the article that I meant to link to:
It's interesting that mention has been made of a serving Minister. An arrest being made could severely affect the political situation.
FFS, what were these politicians thinking? I don't mean the one's who were abusing underage rentboys - but the ones who stood by and turned a blind eye to it. They clearly regarded these young men as beneath contempt - and then went and projected their perversions onto the next generation through section 28. Disgusting.
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines. Next thing on election day Cameron will say there are busloads of Scotts being transported down masquerading as Labour voters. The UK ain't Israel, and this kind of visceral approach to policymaking is bizarre at best here.
Exactly, and vex any scots who wavered over the indyref. It seems a Scottish vote in a general election is a tad less valid than an English one. Save skin at exspense of union!
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
Nobody will notice this bit then...
David Cameron will announce today that a future Conservative government would conduct an annual review into the activities of the Scottish parliament to see if the rest of Britain had been put at a disadvantage. The move, to be known as the “Carlisle Principle”, is likely to outrage nationalists.
As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines. Next thing on election day Cameron will say there are busloads of Scotts being transported down masquerading as Labour voters. The UK ain't Israel, and this kind of visceral approach to policymaking is bizarre at best here.
Exactly, and vex any scots who wavered over the indyref. It seems a Scottish vote in a general election is a tad less valid than an English one. Save skin at exspense of union!
Of course Scottish votes are less valid. Uneven devolution and the West Lothian Question has made it so. For as long as Westminster controls English laws there will always be two classes of MP.
Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or delusional.
'As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines.'
And how about the mass of English voters that cannot stand the grossly unfair settlement between Scotland & England?
I was true blue until the tories because i value personal responsibility. Then their manifesto wants my taxes to subsidise others getting cheap houses from housing associations and paying for childcare. Now i might be the only voter in the country to switch to libdem.
the SNP was examining whether it could scupper parliamentary authorisation of the annual Ministry of Defence budget
Such a move would put in jeopardy troops’ salaries, the supply of equipment and the financing of ongoing operations and contracts, in addition to spending on Trident.
a Tory whip, hinted yesterday that a future Labour minority government could not rely on Tory backing to stop the move since the party would not want to be seen to endorse Labour cuts to the military.
If someone could explain to me why you can get on Lab Maj at around 49/1 and sometimes more on Betfair, when the Conservatives are on 3/10 to retain Dover, 1/3 to retain Crawley, 1/5 to retain NW Leics, 2/7 to retain Redditich, and 1/3 to retain Filton & Bradley Stoke, I'd be interested to hear the explanation.
i) Maybe Lab majority is too short. (^_-)
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0) CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
I was true blue until the tories because i value personal responsibility. Then their manifesto wants my taxes to subsidise others getting cheap houses from housing associations and paying for childcare. Now i might be the only voter in the country to switch to libdem.
Apologies for the garbage first sentence. Combination of beer and moble phone rather than laptop.
Comments
On point 2, that means that we'd expect any significant shift in YouGov to be more convincingly real than with other pollsters, so must have been impressed both by the 3-point lab lead jump and the 2-point reverse? I don't think so - the pool in January is still large enough to allow for MOE bouncing.
A retail offering has been discussed as a possibility for a couple of years, and a 5% discount is about the same as you'd seen in an institutional placing.
If anything it's a matter of policy - trying to recreate a "share-owning democracy". There's no ability to misprice the offering as there is a market price to benchmark off
Can we change her address to that of the cemetery, which is in a marginal constituency and request a proxy vote
God Bless Corals and Tissue Price
Ah I see you are citing the Telegraph. It is evidence of nothing except the blind panic and prejudice of the establishment. I saw the Hosie interview. He said the SNP would vote against Trident renewal. The rest is the invention of this total apology of a newspaper.
For the uninitiated the Telegraph in Scotland does not even make the pretence of being a newspaper. It is edited by the totally ludicorus Cochrane who admitted in his recent appalling book to supressing stories to suit the puposes of the NO campaign.
To put an objective hat on, it may be difficult as a Tory to be a public face of controversial decisions if you're in a marginal (esp in the north) because you have to be a bit obnoxious even when you may have a point. To take welfare as an example, the Tory approach has support on a macro level, but may turn off exactly the individuals they need to vote for them to win.
I seem to remember Gordon Brown's seat of Kirkcaldy was one. Maybe the reason that he is down in Sheffield is because his knows his old constituency is going to go SNP...
More like "Alright non-SNP voters, this is the plan so no complaints, get out there and do it. Now, could Labour supporters look away...are they gone? Ok, everyone else, don't be too tactical, as we don't want to save too many SLAB seats, gotta keep things tight. Keep the faith everyone"
Perhaps, we should make a request to Mike and TSE to give everyone one last time chance to have a go.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681318/How-Establishment-hid-monster-midst-As-MPs-demand-inquiry-covering-VIP-child-abuse-ring-chilling-proof-depraved-diplomat-protected-good-great.html
As for Leon Brittain, you're right, he's been accused but never convicted. The person I have most sympathy in all of this is Geoffrey Dickens. He'd be turning in his grave to realise that he handed a list of alleged paedophiles in the establishment to someone who is on record as having attended parties at the Elm Guest House along with a lot of other damning evidence against him.
And such places tend to have little sympathy for 'welfare layabouts'.
Or at least they do in Yorkshire, it may be different near Liverpool.
I still expect Cameron to win most seats, and my instinct is still close to Jack's ARSE, but the Tory campaign has been truly diabolical. I mean terrible, a car crash. No strategy, no nothing. Lurching haphazardly from one theme to another, undressing, cross dressing, and incoherent.
Surely the Tories should have fought this campaign on a positive message on their record, a popular leader and clarity for the future. No Miliband, no SNP, no negativity, no last ditch giveaways and lurching to the centre.
I don't think Lynton Crosby understands the British electorate at all...
Someone been on the blower?
20%
Populus
ICM
Lord Ashcroft
YouGov
All eye's will be especially focused on ICM of course...
#megapollingmoday
I also reported a weakening in that probability, according to that model into 2015...
Just a note that a few quid has been bet on the UUP taking this seat from the DUP.
Paddy Power have a noticeably different view on the UUPs chances over everyone else pricing up this market.
Curious.
I guess you should probably look at "new infrastructure output" (if there is such a measure) vs just looking at cost.
1) Confused Sir Peter Hayman with Sir Michael Havers (and, even more impressively, linked to a Mail article which clearly shows his confusion)
2) Said that Fiona Wolff is 'closely related' to 'a well known establishment paedophile'. Presumably by the latter he means Leon Brittan. Leaving aside the question of whether the description fits someone who has never been convicted, or indeed charged, with any such offence, I'm amused by the 'closely related' bit, by which I think hunchman must mean 'went to some dinner parties to which he has also invited'.
The world really has gone mad.
That's, what, 150 per constituency? How much difference will that make?
It is the utter incoherence of the Tory 2015 campaign that is so perplexing. You never know what's going to come out the next day. It seems like they look at the polls, do some internal polling and then come out with something that is completely disjointed from the day before.
By yougov's own admission the current methodology resulted in increased tory numbers in 2010. The resampling approach is designed to better detect movements in public opinion, so even if the panel has some small bias one way or the other the direction of movement should be unaffected. Their run of polls suggests that public opinion is pretty much unchanged since earlier this year, a finding which does seem to be fairly believable. Previous experience would suggest that polling movements during an election campaign have little relevance to the outcome which is often very much in line with the state of play before the start of the final campaign. Maybe there really are more undecided voters this time, though it is very common to hear politicians at this stage of a campaign saying "everything is still to play for" when no such thing is true.
If I had to guess I would say the only change over the campaign would be a decline in UKIP which will probably benefit the tories more than labour but the effect will be small.
Conspiracies and misuse of power does undoubtedly exist, but the problem is it is a key element of conspiracy theorists to always assume malice rather than incompetence, open collusion rather than confusion and misanalysis, and that even the most tangential of connections is clear proof that individuals numbering from dozens to thousands are willing to knowingly and with discipline directly participate in and cover up the most heinous of crimes. It can happen, but human nature means such omnipresence and effective cooperation is hard to achieve in practice, when small groups taking advantage of blind and incompetent systems can get the job done much easier and with far less risk.
Good night all.
As has been noted on here a lot, Cameron has generally been a pretty good Prime Minister but he's an awful politician.
It's interesting that Ed will probably be the reverse. A disaster as PM but a great game player when it comes to politics.
Ideally you want to be both. Those one's who are great PM's and good politicians, like Maggie was until the last couple of years, and Blair, are always the best leaders...
SNP are the perfect vessel to attract tactical switchers to ensure the party they most hate doesn't win.
I will say though that this government has been better than Labour was at building roads in South Yorkshire. But then Labour always treats its safe areas as shite.
Anyway goodnight all.
Its UKIP vs Con but Sittingbourne & Sheppey is generally 3-10 too.
I'm in on both of these.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987
LOL! Nobody is listening to these Lab/SNP scare stories...
What a laugh you are.
London is the political and financial capital it is by far the most massive and concentrated hub in the country and must be one of the biggest in the world. It is a tourism magnet and a massive tax generator.
We have had decades after decades of regional policy in this country. The regions have not been forgotten.
I feel you rather let yourself down by using the term 'conspiracy theorists' to describe a group of people at all - it's utterly half-witted. People conspire or they do not. If they do, to theorise that they do is correct. If they don't, to theorise that they do is incorrect. Thereby being a 'conspiracy theorist' deserves no particular censure or praise.
Erm, yes they are.
Re YouGov versus ICM debate- my own view is that Kellner has more to lose, and he strikes me as the kind of person that takes a control oriented approach to his polling- i.e. he is hands on and scrupulous. And the work that they have done on exit polling is outstanding.
It is likely that the YouGOV sample will move to the Tories as the election looms and the vote hardens- reflecting the natural hardening of the British electorate, but whether it is enough.......
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/scottish-labour-strategy-to-rescue-desperate-campaign-operation-undecided.123575618
In its place, Operation Undecided came into force recently and focuses on two types of voter from post-referendum canvass returns: people who are unsure about their voting intentions; and soft SNP supporters.
The latter group has been identified by Labour activists asking whether voters would prefer a Labour or a Tory Government.
It just beggars belief how ridiculously stupid SLAB are. Expressing a preference for a Labour government in a Forced Choice question makes them "soft" supporters.
Really, Jim? Is that the best you got.
OK they may be listening but they aren't changing their votes in any noticeable way as far as the polls are concerned.
Next thing on election day Cameron will say there are busloads of Scotts being transported down masquerading as Labour voters.
The UK ain't Israel, and this kind of visceral approach to policymaking is bizarre at best here.
Good night all.
I have bet on the DUP taking South Belfast. Its a comparative longshot at 3/1 but the appearance of Sinn Fein this time round with what is a very interesting choice of candidate could hurt the SDLP enough.
I also suspect the SDLP could come under severe pressure from Sinn Fein in Foyle and will need more unionist tactical votes than they normally get. At local government level in 2014 Sinn Fein really did put the boot in. Whilst Durkan clearly carries both a personal vote and unionist tactical votes his personal margin has also been under pressure. Any near repeat of the local elections and he's done.
The most interesting contest on paper though is the perennial war by ballot that is Fermanagh South Tyrone. The single Unionist candidate this time is an experienced and well known face, not some sap put up as a unity candidate. In short they are better equipped to make a run at it, but Michelle Gildernew of Sinn Fein is dug in better than a Vietcong machine gunner at Hamburger Hill, and, gun to head, I think will retain it. Its a genuine full on slugfest.
@RapSheet: The #Eagles are signing Tim Tebow tomorrow, source confirms (as @JayGlazer reported). Perhaps his final chance.
FFS. Not sure I can take much more of this...
ii) In any case the seat odds are broadly consistent with national level-pegging in the polls, given the likely variation in swing.
iii) Maybe some favourite-longshot bias. Cons should perhaps be a bit shorter.
From the man who lied about UK manufacturing output being at record levels.
Repeating government spending promises is worthless when they're 'funded' by the magical money tree. Likewise mindless platitudes such as "The regions have not been forgotten" are meaningless.
The difference between me and you is that I think for myself and say what I feel whereas you just bleat the party line.
And really can't CCHQ find anyone more talented than you ?
Now I have to call it a night but take my advice and try thinking for yourself, it really does expand your life.
Apologies for mixing them up, this was the article that I meant to link to:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987
It's interesting that mention has been made of a serving Minister. An arrest being made could severely affect the political situation.
Our press may be bad, but they are not irresponsible enough to create a huge political scandal during a campaign. A friend of mine sat on a story in the 1992 campaign that probably would have changed the dynamics of the election- and was known within certain circles. It was so utterly debauched that it was unreportable and if I said it now I think I would never be allowed to post on this site again, or any other for that matter.
I'm convinced that there are other stories of this magnitude floating around.
Not really, seems like pretty sensible due dilligence.
A report is nothing substantial, any negative actions taken as a result of the report could be.
There is a real tendency on here to see all things through UK political eyes. Therefore, the Finnish election was a remarkable victory for Euroscepticism, and means getting another Greek bailout through the Finnish parliament will be close to impossible.
The truth is that the support of the (now former) PM for NATO membership was probably a bigger issue for that party than the EU and the Euro. And the Eurosceptic Finns went backwards in terms of vote. Yes, they came second (just), and they may end up as part of the governing coalition. But then again, they might not. And while they managed an excellent 17% of the vote, that pales against the 76% of the vote that went to pro-European parties (*).
The idea that the Finnish parliament would be unwilling to support a Greek bailout (should one happen - I'm leaning towards Grexit, myself) is also fanciful. 76% of the votes were cast for pro-European parties, and the Left Alliance would vote to support their socialist allies in Greece, I suspect. Even if The Finns vote against a bailout (and they've actually made a number of comments that make it clear that actually they *might* support another bailout under certain circumstances), it's laughable to think that the Finnish parliament does not have a majority to pass it.
* The Left Alliance got 7% of the vote. Half of the Left Alliance appears to be Eurofanatics and half Eurosceptics.
Next thing on election day Cameron will say there are busloads of Scotts being transported down masquerading as Labour voters.
The UK ain't Israel, and this kind of visceral approach to policymaking is bizarre at best here.
Exactly, and vex any scots who wavered over the indyref. It seems a Scottish vote in a general election is a tad less valid than an English one. Save skin at exspense of union!
'Apologies for mixing them up, this was the article that I meant to link to:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tory-child-abuse-whistleblower-i-3848987
Why wait 30 years to come up with these allegations ?
Of course Scottish votes are less valid. Uneven devolution and the West Lothian Question has made it so. For as long as Westminster controls English laws there will always be two classes of MP.
Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or delusional.
'As well as alienate English voters who cannot stand this lurching, blatant, politicking. It seems like we have the worst of Gordon Brown back- someone always looking for cheap Daily Mail headlines.'
And how about the mass of English voters that cannot stand the grossly unfair settlement between Scotland & England?
There is far too many of them to keep track of.
1 - NORMDIST( (LABNLEAD+0.073)/2, CONSMAJ/2, 0.037, 1 )
for the Tories' chance of holding the seat, where:-
LABNLEAD is the national Labour % lead (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)
CONSMAJ is the Tory % lead in the seat in question (expressed as a percentage/decimal < 1.0)