I read it to suggest there is a reasonable match between this week and last week.
Why would ICM put out a tweet saying 'Look, were all bouncy, don't trust us!'?
Will ICM not be keen to show a much smaller Con lead so that the New Statesman will take their polling seriously and stop referring to them as "outliers" ?
An interesting choice of words from Martin Boon. I don't think he'd be shouting it from the rooftops if last week's 6% lead had completely disappeared. I suspect it will be somewhere close, probably on the down side, say a Tory lead of 4%ish.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I'm wondering if we may get Lib-Lab coalition minority backed up by SNP voting the Queen's speech through.
If the CONs get 285 and Lib Dems 25 then Con-Lib Dem-DUP isn't viable. (Lab 270, SNP 50)
But a straight SNP-Lab arrangement is itself too slim over the 323 mark to govern (Or not at all)
So do the Lib Dems also support Labour "in the interests of stability". Labour would perhaps welcome the numbers for Lib + Lab to be > Con in England too.
An interesting choice of words from Martin Boon. I don't think he'd be shouting it from the rooftops if last week's 6% lead had completely disappeared. I suspect it will be somewhere close, probably on the down side, say a Tory lead of 4%ish.
The Golden Rule for polling is that the Conservatives' best numbers come from polls conducted by left-wing newspapers.
Mr. Pulpstar, presumably that scenario has Labour behind the Conservatives?
The second and fourth parties in the country combining occasionally with the third to keep the largest party out of power with an unstable coalition would not look good. Might work numerically, though.
Is Keiran Pedley displaying the same wishful thinking as some posters on PB.
Holding out some hope for Shy Tories without any evidence seems like political propaganda.
Main contributors to articles like the above should perhaps be required to declare their political allegiance as a health warning.
Note: Polling companies only claim to assess the way people will vote at the time the poll is done. They do not claim to predict the outcome of the election. So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong.
Wish list of leftie things. Obviously kicking out the royal spongers and re-housing the Romany population at Buck House. Banning the use of the word Sir in any setting.
Obviously not including Mark Thatcher. Anyone who could keep themselves out of Jail like he has deserves his baronetcy.
Mr. Pulpstar, presumably that scenario has Labour behind the Conservatives?
The second and fourth parties in the country combining occasionally with the third to keep the largest party out of power with an unstable coalition would not look good. Might work numerically, though.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
Yes couldn't agree more with that. Similar to the situation Major was in post '92.
Its easy to forget how quickly after pulling off a win the Major government sank. By Christmas 1992 the ERM crash and Hestletine's bungled pit closure announcement had signed the fate of the government electorally.
OT For watchers of GoT - thought you may be interested in know that Thor Bjornnesson who plays Mountain is wiping the floor with almost everyone else in the World's Strongest Man Tournament.
I love this sort of show - anyone remember when Geoff Capes was a contender/IIRC he won the title a long time ago. The performances have moved on a lot in the last 30yrs.
Any other most seats/any other PM / no govt formed within 14(?) days
The 14 day rule doesn't kick in after an election, it only starts after a Vote of No Confidence.
Theoretically we could go five years without any government formed and no time limit would be hit until Parliament expired, unless a vote of no confidence was held.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
That's interesting. I sometimes wonder if this election is being taken seriously by the good old electorate.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I think there is a quite considerable segment of the population who'd want the present government returned, but would definitely not want to see a Con majority. Very difficult for them to determine how to vote - as OGH has said LD-Con coalition is not on the ballot paper.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
This is the fashionable view, but I'm not sure it's entirely true. They are Conservative MPs, after all, and don't *always* rebel. It's safer to rebel when there's a significant parliamentary majority, as the consequences are fewer. There's no doubt that the LDs have pulled the Conservatives to the left on the EU and immigration either.
I expect that with a small Conservative majority they'd rebel less, but threaten to do so more to try and keep Cameron honest to his manifesto.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
That's interesting. I sometimes wonder if this election is being taken seriously by the good old electorate.
Staggering amounts of apathy I reckon. In England at least, Scottish turnout to be way higher (Not just for the Nats, but for everyone) - EVERY SINGLE VOTE in Scotland actually counts mind - well except Dundee East & Western Isles, but that's about it. Even Perth and North Perthshire is a verrrrrrrrrry longshot Tory hope, given the leftward shift of the SNP - true odds must be around a thousand to one though.
Is Keiran Pedley displaying the same wishful thinking as some posters on PB.
Holding out some hope for Shy Tories without any evidence seems like political propaganda.
Main contributors to articles like the above should perhaps be required to declare their political allegiance as a health warning.
Note: Polling companies only claim to assess the way people will vote at the time the poll is done. They do not claim to predict the outcome of the election. So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong.
His argument is considerably more nuanced than your interpretation of it.
Is Keiran Pedley displaying the same wishful thinking as some posters on PB.
Holding out some hope for Shy Tories without any evidence seems like political propaganda.
Main contributors to articles like the above should perhaps be required to declare their political allegiance as a health warning.
Note: Polling companies only claim to assess the way people will vote at the time the poll is done. They do not claim to predict the outcome of the election. So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong.
"So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong."
True, but that rather negates the point of bothering with polls in the first place.
Polls have to mean something useful (however defined) that is reflected in the later election - otherwise they are a waste time and money.
Presumably then you'd get rid of public schools. The greatest scandal in the UK for creating a meritocracy is that almost 20% of the wealthiest buy their children a leg up."
Come the revolution that would be second priority. First would be increasing IHT to 99%. The 1% that remains is so the inheritance less bastards can drown their sorrows.
What do you mean by they are buying a leg up? Are you admitting that public schools are better than state ones?
Roger Wish list of leftie things. Obviously kicking out the royal spongers and re-housing the Romany population at Buck House. Banning the use of the word Sir in any setting.
Nige Doh. Of course public schools are better, much better. That is why the rich pay for them. And that is why there is no quality of opportunity in the UK, and will not be until they are erased to the ground. We need to collectivise education- get all the kids from birth and send them to meritocratic establishments for 15 years or so, and then we might get the best coming through, instead of just the rich ones like we have in the UK at minute.
Since the new EU members in Eastern Europe joined, there are now 200,000 Roma migrants in the UK. I'm not sure they'd all fit in Buckingham Palace.
OT For watchers of GoT - thought you may be interested in know that Thor Bjornnesson who plays Mountain is wiping the floor with almost everyone else in the World's Strongest Man Tournament.
I love this sort of show - anyone remember when Geoff Capes was a contender/IIRC he won the title a long time ago. The performances have moved on a lot in the last 30yrs.
You can see the events on Spike TV.
He won't win, but Graham Hicks is impressive: outside strongmen competitions he's a design engineer for BAE.
There's also an American - Mike Caruso - who's got a science PhD.
Annoyingly, we don't get Spike, so we cannot watch it.
Any other most seats/any other PM / no govt formed within 14(?) days
The 14 day rule doesn't kick in after an election, it only starts after a Vote of No Confidence.
Theoretically we could go five years without any government formed and no time limit would be hit until Parliament expired, unless a vote of no confidence was held.
Thanks, that makes sense.
kindof.
Could anyone link me to a laymans (non-hansard) explanation of exactly what will happen after the election? At what point do we officially have a prime minister?
OT For watchers of GoT - thought you may be interested in know that Thor Bjornnesson who plays Mountain is wiping the floor with almost everyone else in the World's Strongest Man Tournament.
I love this sort of show - anyone remember when Geoff Capes was a contender/IIRC he won the title a long time ago. The performances have moved on a lot in the last 30yrs.
You can see the events on Spike TV.
He won't win, but Graham Hicks is impressive: outside strongmen competitions he's a design engineer for BAE.
There's also an American - Mike Caruso - who's got a science PhD.
Annoyingly, we don't get Spike, so we cannot watch it.
Is Keiran Pedley displaying the same wishful thinking as some posters on PB.
Holding out some hope for Shy Tories without any evidence seems like political propaganda.
Main contributors to articles like the above should perhaps be required to declare their political allegiance as a health warning.
Note: Polling companies only claim to assess the way people will vote at the time the poll is done. They do not claim to predict the outcome of the election. So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong.
"So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong."
True, but that rather negates the point of bothering with polls in the first place.
Polls have to mean something useful (however defined) that is reflected in the later election - otherwise they are a waste time and money.
Yes - perhaps prizes for gold standard could be awarded for not just "best last poll" but "closest to the final result 1 month out" etc..
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
This is the fashionable view, but I'm not sure it's entirely true. They are Conservative MPs, after all, and don't *always* rebel. It's safer to rebel when there's a significant parliamentary majority, as the consequences are fewer. There's no doubt that the LDs have pulled the Conservatives to the left on the EU and immigration either.
I expect that with a small Conservative majority they'd rebel less, but threaten to do so more to try and keep Cameron honest to his manifesto.
Some of these serial Conservative MP rebels are Conservative in name only . A couple even defected to UKIP .
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
That's interesting. I sometimes wonder if this election is being taken seriously by the good old electorate.
I don't think it is. A deep mistrust of feather bedding politicians, and the limited attention spans of the X Factor generation, adds up to a complete indifference amongst many.
I've seen a few Tory placards, a handful of UKIP and not a single LD or Labour one. Nobody cares.
tories currently best priced 1/2 to win most seats. miliband best priced 10/11 to be PM.
but ladbrokes offering 4/1 special on tories most seats and ed pm. this currently seems the most expected outcome so I think i'll have a dabble.
Yes - I was pondering that bet myself. To convince myself the 4/1 is value, i'd need to be able to make a 100% book out of these 5 outcomes;
Lab most seats Ed PM Lab most seats, Dave PM Con most seats, Ed PM Con most seats, Dave PM Any other most seats/any other PM / no govt formed within 14(?) days
I tried it yesterday & fried my brain, so I've passed on the bet.
What %'ages would you give?
ps, welcome to PB
cheers pong. my brain fried too. if only i had tons of cash to play those individual seat arbs.
I think the prob of tory most seats dave pm is the same as simply dave pm. I cant see any chance he become pm with less seats than labour. currently even money shot. simililarly ed pm labour most seats I see as same as labour most seats. can't envisage him not being pm with more seats than tories. that's priced at 7/4. i think lab most seats cameron pm is 100/1 plus. who's going to support him? so my book is:
lab most seats, ed pm - 7/4 con most seats, dave pm - evs cons most seats, ed pm - 4/1 lab most seats, dave pm - 100/1
overround is 107% so perhaps my value was illusionary. or one of other bets are shocking value. havent checked betfair for better prices.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I think there is a quite considerable segment of the population who'd want the present government returned, but would definitely not want to see a Con majority. Very difficult for them to determine how to vote - as OGH has said LD-Con coalition is not on the ballot paper.
The Tory campaign seems to be very focussed on picking up quite a number of Lib Dems. Whilst this makes perfect electoral sense given their polling there is an element of eating your own lunch.
As I said yesterday the key equation for the next government, using the SPIN figures, is does Lib Dem + 19 > the SNP?
If not a continuation of a Conservative government in almost any form seems very unlikely to me. The only way forward for the Tories is to increase that 19 to the high 20s by holding onto more of Labour's Con targets. All their energy should really be focussed on that.
I was just going to post the exact same comment there, but you beat me to it. Nicola Sturgeon acted as if she was Neil Kinnock at that Sheffield rally all over again, only delivering the SNP manifesto. Its left me feeling like I did about two weeks before the Indy Referendum...
I'm wondering if we may get Lib-Lab coalition minority backed up by SNP voting the Queen's speech through.
If the CONs get 285 and Lib Dems 25 then Con-Lib Dem-DUP isn't viable. (Lab 270, SNP 50)
But a straight SNP-Lab arrangement is itself too slim over the 323 mark to govern (Or not at all)
So do the Lib Dems also support Labour "in the interests of stability". Labour would perhaps welcome the numbers for Lib + Lab to be > Con in England too.
Aren't Labour too tribal and emotional to be capable of any sort of coalition? Look at 2010, only Mandelson was serious.
Any other most seats/any other PM / no govt formed within 14(?) days
The 14 day rule doesn't kick in after an election, it only starts after a Vote of No Confidence.
Theoretically we could go five years without any government formed and no time limit would be hit until Parliament expired, unless a vote of no confidence was held.
Thanks, that makes sense.
kindof.
Could anyone link me to a laymans (non-hansard) explanation of exactly what will happen after the election? At what point do we officially have a prime minister?
when the Queen calls for one, until that point, Cameron is still PM. It can only really happen until Cameron resigns, which will happen when he can't command the house. Then and only then the Queen calls the leader of the opposition to form a government.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
This is the fashionable view, but I'm not sure it's entirely true. They are Conservative MPs, after all, and don't *always* rebel. It's safer to rebel when there's a significant parliamentary majority, as the consequences are fewer. There's no doubt that the LDs have pulled the Conservatives to the left on the EU and immigration either.
I expect that with a small Conservative majority they'd rebel less, but threaten to do so more to try and keep Cameron honest to his manifesto.
The experience of 1992-97 shows otherwise.
Ditto Jesse Norman and his ilk buggering up boundary reforms in this parliament.
Brilliant! Higher Min wage as well. ace, I wish i could vote for them...
unless there was a party promising £30bn of course, and a £10 min wage. And a free hour in the sack with a supermodel of my choice.
It is SO DEPRESSING to see basically all parties take us for fools (or be fools themselves) by promising free this that and the other in some some of fantasy wish list willy-waving contest. Pathetic.
I'm wondering if we may get Lib-Lab coalition minority backed up by SNP voting the Queen's speech through.
If the CONs get 285 and Lib Dems 25 then Con-Lib Dem-DUP isn't viable. (Lab 270, SNP 50)
But a straight SNP-Lab arrangement is itself too slim over the 323 mark to govern (Or not at all)
So do the Lib Dems also support Labour "in the interests of stability". Labour would perhaps welcome the numbers for Lib + Lab to be > Con in England too.
Aren't Labour too tribal and emotional to be capable of any sort of coalition? Look at 2010, only Mandelson was serious.
I feel the same way about Labour in a coalition, but I'm not sure 2010 was a good example. They'd just had a walloping, the electoral calculus was against them and, as I think someone said on here, they needed time out to regroup.
If I'd been a Labour MP at the time I'd probably have dismissed it out of hand.
Update from Ealing Central and Acton: last week three mailings in two days from Labour, and a first mailing from the Lib-Dems. It's been at least two weeks since we got anything from the Tories. Lab candidate Rupa Huq doesn't include a picture of Ed M on her election leaflet, but there is a picture of her with her sister, Konnie.
Was very interesting how much Nicola's speech sounded like a Queens Speech.
I doubt that was co-incidental.
Sounded like a Sheffield rally to me.
We're alllll-right.
I suspect Nicola has more sense than Eck and will wait for the actual results before heading to Ed's 2 kitchen house to make her demands rather than summon the chauffeur based on the findings of secret Canadians.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
I'm wondering if we may get Lib-Lab coalition minority backed up by SNP voting the Queen's speech through.
If the CONs get 285 and Lib Dems 25 then Con-Lib Dem-DUP isn't viable. (Lab 270, SNP 50)
But a straight SNP-Lab arrangement is itself too slim over the 323 mark to govern (Or not at all)
So do the Lib Dems also support Labour "in the interests of stability". Labour would perhaps welcome the numbers for Lib + Lab to be > Con in England too.
Aren't Labour too tribal and emotional to be capable of any sort of coalition? Look at 2010, only Mandelson was serious.
I expect they'll be a bit more errm conciliatory this time. Ed Balls is still there mind.
Assuming that the increase in Labour and Green representation has come at the expense of the yellows, you'd have to think Mr George is LD toast.
Polruan is in SE Cornwall though , no? Are you in St Ives in fact?
Good spot. Yeah, I'm right out west of Penzance. Polruan is a childhood holiday loyalty.
I have done the Hall Walk several times - friend of my Dad's is an emmet with a cottage in Bodinnick and we've stayed there several times :-)
Exceptionally lovely part of the world
It gets even better going west, too. I spent yesterday on the beach at Porthcurno, then went to Trengwainton & up Sancreed Beacon later on - all within 10 minutes of home. Sounds cheesy but it really does feel like a privilege to live here.
We're bracing for a new generation of Poldark tourists this summer.
I get down there as often as I can, hopefully six weeks this year, already been twice. My wife's Grandad was Cornish, he worked at Holmans and down South Crofty, when he died they kept his cottage on and renovated it.
My daughter got married at Tregenna Castle two years ago, outside in the most glorious weather imaginable, it was like a fairy tale wedding, one of the best days of my life.
Addictive, isn't it? By the time we moved we'd ended up averaging 6-7 weeks a year here. I think we partly made the decision to relocate so that we would use our holidays to start going overseas again.
That's a great setting for a wedding; 2013 was an amazing summer, particularly May and July.
Haha, I only ever go to France to visit my brother these days, spend the rest of my free time in Cornwall with one break at Center Parcs each year.
I wish I knew how to post a photo, she got married on May 2nd and the weather was fantastic.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
Nothing from any other party spotted and I live nowhere near the strongest UKIP part of town, Harold Hill
Sam, I think you missed it yesterday, I have a friend from UKIP saying they are doing well in Morely and Outwood (Ed Balls' constituency) and taking a lot of votes from traditional Labour areas. Can you shed any light on if this is more than just BS? Tories available at 5.5 on Betfair which is good odds if UKIP are doing well in Labour areas.
With regard to the new electoral roll, who will be affected by individual registration? Not the people who were on the the old roll and who haven't moved home, their details will automatically be carried across. Students in halls is one group who will have had to actually take action that wouldn't previously but who else?
There seems to be only one major difference, each member of a household now has to return a form rather than one doing it for all. However, as Mr. F said below, if a person can't be bothered to sign a form and put it in the post they probably won't bother to vote anyway.
The reduction of the number of the disinterested and feckless on the roll may actually lead to an increase in turn-out as a percentage, even though the government may be elected by an even smaller minority of the adult population.
Miss Plato, I dislike recording stuff. Rubbish at remembering to watch it back, and I watch a bit more TV than I probably should (never intending to watch Eureka, but I really rather like it).
I need to work more, not less. [Got about 4-5 episodes of Battlestar Galactica awaiting viewing].
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
That's interesting. I sometimes wonder if this election is being taken seriously by the good old electorate.
Staggering amounts of apathy I reckon. In England at least, Scottish turnout to be way higher (Not just for the Nats, but for everyone) - EVERY SINGLE VOTE in Scotland actually counts mind - well except Dundee East & Western Isles, but that's about it. Even Perth and North Perthshire is a verrrrrrrrrry longshot Tory hope, given the leftward shift of the SNP - true odds must be around a thousand to one though.
I was out in North Perthshire again on Saturday leafleting but it turned into canvassing because everyone was in their gardens on a truly glorious day. The Tories are doing quite well there, it may well be as close as a 500/1 shot rather than 1,000.
One thing I noticed is that there are very high quality and expensive posters for Wishart all over the place. Unlike 2010 this SNP campaign has money to burn and it is spending it. I saw a double decker bus still decked up for the referendum and an SNP minibus over the weekend as well.
The resources available to the SNP in areas where SLAB have been taking their vote for granted and done very little for a long time must have Labour gasping.
Balls had a notional 10,000 majority on the new boundaries [same as this time], which became 1,000 votes in 2010's election.
UKIP have plenty of potential. I do not think they'll take the seat, but if you're right and they're eating Labour's vote, that's great for the Conservatives [assuming the blues aren't losing even more. If they are, or losing quite a bit, it become s athree-way].
Also critical is the Lib Dem vote. They were in a lonely third, miles off winning but with several thousand votes to shift one way or the other. That could yet rescue Labour.
I was at a party on Saturday night full of South London late 20/30 somethings. All very middle class but all with standard London issues around rents/property.
Pretty much all of them said they were going to vote Tory, and looked aghast at me when i said i was voting Labour.
The most common line was "Can you see Miliband standing up to Putin?".
Quite depressing as a Labour voter on reflection.
shows how stupid and thick they are when they think "I'm behind the sofa" Dave would say boo to Putin never mind stand up to him.
I always find the Yougov polling question about parties being in touch with the concerns of ordinary people interesting. The Tories always poll very low for this and I take from this that a lot people do not think the Tories represent them or their family/friends. Does this mean that they would not vote Tory, of course it does not, because in the polling booth, it is a choice of the party that can run the country the best.
The Tories have tried to bribe the electorate to continue in government and so far we don't know how their promises can be afforded. Osborne appears to believe that the economy will remain strong, even though the world economy is likely to slow down. The IMF does not think the deficit will be eliminated by 2020. Therefore some of the promises made will be very difficult to deliver, without tax increases. Will the electorate believe the promises and be let down again. Remember ahead of the May 2010 election, the Tories promised no VAT increase and no major reforms to the NHS.
In 1992 John Major was quite popular and Neil Kinnock had a terrible run up to election day, with very negative newspaper frontpages. I don't think Cameron is as popular as Major and I think Miliband is now seen as better than Kinnock. I am not sure whether some English voters would vote for a party led by a Welshman or a Scot. There appears to be a preference among English voters to have an English person as a PM candidate. ( I may be wrong, but this is my opinion).
Gut instinct on the election result, is Labour just ahead on seats overall, but in terms of votes Tories slightly ahead. I don't think Labour will lose as many seats to the SNP as currently predicted and I think they will pick up enough seats in England. It will be roughly Lab 280, Con 270, SNP 40, Lib Dem 25, UKIP 5. Government Lab/Lib + SNP support where they agree.
Was very interesting how much Nicola's speech sounded like a Queens Speech.
I doubt that was co-incidental.
Sounded like a Sheffield rally to me.
We're alllll-right.
I suspect Nicola has more sense than Eck and will wait for the actual results before heading to Ed's 2 kitchen house to make her demands rather than summon the chauffeur based on the findings of secret Canadians.
Ed will be expected to come to Bute House. The winner shouldn't be going cap in hand to the loser.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I think there is a quite considerable segment of the population who'd want the present government returned, but would definitely not want to see a Con majority. Very difficult for them to determine how to vote - as OGH has said LD-Con coalition is not on the ballot paper.
The Tory campaign seems to be very focussed on picking up quite a number of Lib Dems. Whilst this makes perfect electoral sense given their polling there is an element of eating your own lunch.
As I said yesterday the key equation for the next government, using the SPIN figures, is does Lib Dem + 19 > the SNP?
If not a continuation of a Conservative government in almost any form seems very unlikely to me. The only way forward for the Tories is to increase that 19 to the high 20s by holding onto more of Labour's Con targets. All their energy should really be focussed on that.
The Comres SW poll showed Con Gain Bath & Yeovil.
If Yeovil is taken in particular, the Tory tail eating the Lib Dem head will be complete. Certainly the SW is looking good for the Tories with Wells, Somerton & Frome, Taunton Deane, Portsmouth South all looking likely gains. Perhaps Torbay and St Ives too as around 50-50 shots with odds against potential in Bath/Yeovil.
Camborne & Redruth, Truro & Falmouth have been good value odds on bets too down there too.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I think there is a quite considerable segment of the population who'd want the present government returned, but would definitely not want to see a Con majority. Very difficult for them to determine how to vote - as OGH has said LD-Con coalition is not on the ballot paper.
Well I'm one. Which makes the LibDem campaigning strategy of presenting themselves as another also-ran opposition party rather than a party of government seem strange to me. The LibDems have at least made a fist of moderating tory policies in government and now seem to want to deny they were ever at the table.
I've experienced a good few elections and each time there has been an overwhelming mood for change, there's been a change of government. When there hasn't, there hasn't.
Am I alone in not sensing an overwhelming mood for change?
Miss Plato, I dislike recording stuff. Rubbish at remembering to watch it back, and I watch a bit more TV than I probably should (never intending to watch Eureka, but I really rather like it).
I need to work more, not less. [Got about 4-5 episodes of Battlestar Galactica awaiting viewing].
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
Nothing from any other party spotted and I live nowhere near the strongest UKIP part of town, Harold Hill
Sam, I think you missed it yesterday, I have a friend from UKIP saying they are doing well in Morely and Outwood (Ed Balls' constituency) and taking a lot of votes from traditional Labour areas. Can you shed any light on if this is more than just BS? Tories available at 5.5 on Betfair which is good odds if UKIP are doing well in Labour areas.
Hi Max
That seat came out as one of the best Ukip bets on my (untried and untested) system
So I think that would indicate it is a three way contest, though not necessarily 33/33/33...and probably backing the 2nd fav or laying the fav if poss is a good tactic
Barking Boston & Skegness Bromsgrove Dag & Rain Dudley North Halesown & Rowley Regis Morley & Outwood Newcastle Under Lyme** Plymouth Moor View S Bas & E Thurrock Staffordshire Moorlands Stoke on Trent South Telford Thanet North Thanet South Thurrock Walsall North Walsall South West Bromwich West Wolverhampton NE
Nicola Sturgeon extends the hand of friendship to the Uk - except the third who vote Conservative who they hate so much they would not ever cooperate with.
Should there be a political hate crime law as with race and religion?
29% Tory is encouraging; you'd think it was 2.9% listening to Christine Blower.
IIRC, that's a big improvement for the Conservatives on the last poll of teachers.
Massive improvement, Gove was absolutely toxic with teachers. I think Labour were on 60 points last time with a gap of around 40 ahead of the Tories. Nicky Morgan has been uncontroversial which the teachers like. She also doesn't bark orders at them like Gove. All in all a good poll for the Tories, could also see a shy factor in it as well given that it is predominantly a public sector profession, the true position could be closer still.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
Nothing from any other party spotted and I live nowhere near the strongest UKIP part of town, Harold Hill
Sam, I think you missed it yesterday, I have a friend from UKIP saying they are doing well in Morely and Outwood (Ed Balls' constituency) and taking a lot of votes from traditional Labour areas. Can you shed any light on if this is more than just BS? Tories available at 5.5 on Betfair which is good odds if UKIP are doing well in Labour areas.
Hi Max
That seat came out as one of the best Ukip bets on my (untried and untested) system
So I think that would indicate it is a three way contest, though not necessarily 33/33/33...and probably backing the 2nd fav or laying the fav if poss is a good tactic
It would almost be worth losing the election to see Balls get beaten.
Nicola Sturgeon extends the hand of friendship to the Uk - except the third who vote Conservative who they hate so much they would not ever cooperate with.
Should there be a political hate crime law as with race and religion?
Balls had a notional 10,000 majority on the new boundaries [same as this time], which became 1,000 votes in 2010's election.
UKIP have plenty of potential. I do not think they'll take the seat, but if you're right and they're eating Labour's vote, that's great for the Conservatives [assuming the blues aren't losing even more. If they are, or losing quite a bit, it become s athree-way].
Also critical is the Lib Dem vote. They were in a lonely third, miles off winning but with several thousand votes to shift one way or the other. That could yet rescue Labour.
Mr D. I believe you are close to or of the parish. My feeling on Balls is, back in 2010 he was seen as being close to Brown in a getridofbrown election where the tories had a good local campaign. This time he is less tainted and, with the national swing, I think he's home and dry.
The other - his wife - is a Labour Party supporter. She asked me how I thought the election would go. When I said I thought Ed Miliband would probably be PM she seemed astonished. She assumed Cameron would get back in.
I have had exactly that reaction from a number of people, of all parties.
Nothing from any other party spotted and I live nowhere near the strongest UKIP part of town, Harold Hill
Sam, I think you missed it yesterday, I have a friend from UKIP saying they are doing well in Morely and Outwood (Ed Balls' constituency) and taking a lot of votes from traditional Labour areas. Can you shed any light on if this is more than just BS? Tories available at 5.5 on Betfair which is good odds if UKIP are doing well in Labour areas.
Hi Max
That seat came out as one of the best Ukip bets on my (untried and untested) system
So I think that would indicate it is a three way contest, though not necessarily 33/33/33...and probably backing the 2nd fav or laying the fav if poss is a good tactic
Barking Boston & Skegness Bromsgrove Dag & Rain Dudley North Halesown & Rowley Regis Morley & Outwood Newcastle Under Lyme** Plymouth Moor View S Bas & E Thurrock Staffordshire Moorlands Stoke on Trent South Telford Thanet North Thanet South Thurrock Walsall North Walsall South West Bromwich West Wolverhampton NE
Or feeding a victimhood cult by blaming their neighbours .
Certainly the main SNP propaganda strategy is to encourage Scots to play with the chips on their shoulders.
And those chips are oriented primarily against "the English", even if In respectable circles terms such as "the London media" and "Westminster". They're just code for "the English".
"Cult" may be putting it too strongly, though. They may be obnoxious, but they're not ISIS. Well OK, some of their supporters do come across like Moonies.
The SNP were able in the indyref to get 45% of people to vote for sunshine - as they get deeper and deeper into debt and nearer the precipice, just like so many other people in Britain. In a contest for who talks about real issues, they'd come far behind UKIP.
The SNP would get hardly any traction or support if the British government and parliament were based in Edinburgh or Glasgow, even if everything else were the same as it is now. They wouldn't be able to complain about being "run from down South". Picture it - all the main British media political desks based in Edinburgh. The British parliament based in Auld Reekie. The SNP would be at a complete loss for what to say.
But why should they be? After all, the issue of independence and the reasons for Scottish national separation and the hope of Scottish national revival would all be the same, right? Wrong. They're just using all that, cynically. They're pork-barrelists first and foremost.
Boring sad bitter Little Englander vomits drivel. Get a life you sad git, visit Scotland and begin to understand reality rather than regurgitating the Daily Heil.
YouGov poll of teachers with comparisons on 2010 LAB 44 +11 CON 29-2 LD 10 -17 UKIP 7 +4 GN 4+2
Down 2% [and NB UKIP +4] after introducing free schools? Just maybe the NUT have been spouting bollocks all this time?
Mind you, moving Gove was still smart politics.
Agreed - but it totally shows how silly was the stuff we had on here about Tory toxicity on teachers - in fact the drop in the LD vote might just suggest that David Laws was the big problem for the Coalition among our educators.
I have the impression (but no more than that) that every time every time the Lib Dems attack the Conservatives, their polling rating goes up. And each time Clegg and his circle talk about entering another coalition, the rating goes down. Just an impression that I have.
I disagree but hope that the LDs take your advice. The LDs have an image with the voters as being untrustworthy and duplicituous. By attacking their partner right from the first few months of 2010 post GE they kept piling up evidence of how they are untrustworthy and duplicituous. Long may they continue doing it.
The untrustworthy and duplicitous are those Conservative MPs who constantly undermined and voted frequently against their own government or even defected to another party . I suspect that your sympathies are more with the Bones and Hollobones and their ilk than the Conservatives and Lib Dems who backed the Coalition Government
I couldn't agree more. I suspect that an overall majority of, say, 10 would be Cameron's worst nightmare. The presence of a cohort of reliable and sane Lib Dems MPs has been critical to making this Coalition work and has kept these nutters at the far fringes where they belong.
I think there is a quite considerable segment of the population who'd want the present government returned, but would definitely not want to see a Con majority. Very difficult for them to determine how to vote - as OGH has said LD-Con coalition is not on the ballot paper.
The Tory campaign seems to be very focussed on picking up quite a number of Lib Dems. Whilst this makes perfect electoral sense given their polling there is an element of eating your own lunch.
As I said yesterday the key equation for the next government, using the SPIN figures, is does Lib Dem + 19 > the SNP?
If not a continuation of a Conservative government in almost any form seems very unlikely to me. The only way forward for the Tories is to increase that 19 to the high 20s by holding onto more of Labour's Con targets. All their energy should really be focussed on that.
The Comres SW poll showed Con Gain Bath & Yeovil.
Not so.
The ComRes polling was LibDem regional and not individual seat specific and accordingly did not have named candidates.
PBers need to be more astute when assessing these polls.
Comments
But could be earlier but maybe later.
If the CONs get 285 and Lib Dems 25 then Con-Lib Dem-DUP isn't viable. (Lab 270, SNP 50)
But a straight SNP-Lab arrangement is itself too slim over the 323 mark to govern (Or not at all)
So do the Lib Dems also support Labour "in the interests of stability". Labour would perhaps welcome the numbers for Lib + Lab to be > Con in England too.
The second and fourth parties in the country combining occasionally with the third to keep the largest party out of power with an unstable coalition would not look good. Might work numerically, though.
Holding out some hope for Shy Tories without any evidence seems like political propaganda.
Main contributors to articles like the above should perhaps be required to declare their political allegiance as a health warning.
Note: Polling companies only claim to assess the way people will vote at the time the poll is done. They do not claim to predict the outcome of the election. So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong.
Wish list of leftie things. Obviously kicking out the royal spongers and re-housing the Romany population at Buck House. Banning the use of the word Sir in any setting.
Obviously not including Mark Thatcher. Anyone who could keep themselves out of Jail like he has deserves his baronetcy.
"I heard on the radio today that up to 7 million people have not registered to vote this time"
"up to" automatically makes the phrase meaningless as that includes zero too. That's why advertisers use it.
MikeK could say that Ukip will get up to 600 MPs and he'd be right.
And Roger could say that up to 100% of the population agree totally with his politics.
Incidentally, I'd guess that Ukip will get 4 MPs but quite a few more seconds/
Its easy to forget how quickly after pulling off a win the Major government sank. By Christmas 1992 the ERM crash and Hestletine's bungled pit closure announcement had signed the fate of the government electorally.
I love this sort of show - anyone remember when Geoff Capes was a contender/IIRC he won the title a long time ago. The performances have moved on a lot in the last 30yrs.
You can see the events on Spike TV.
Theoretically we could go five years without any government formed and no time limit would be hit until Parliament expired, unless a vote of no confidence was held.
Mr. Pulpstar, hmm.
I doubt that was co-incidental.
What channel's Spike on Freeview? I do remember seeing 'the Mountain' broke an ancient lifting record of some variety.
World Record just broken for a dead lift - 420kg!!!a516digital.com/2015/02/faq-spike-tv-uk.html
I expect that with a small Conservative majority they'd rebel less, but threaten to do so more to try and keep Cameron honest to his manifesto.
"So the outcome of the election can not be used to show their earlier pre-election poll was wrong."
True, but that rather negates the point of bothering with polls in the first place.
Polls have to mean something useful (however defined) that is reflected in the later election - otherwise they are a waste time and money.
There's also an American - Mike Caruso - who's got a science PhD.
Annoyingly, we don't get Spike, so we cannot watch it.
kindof.
Could anyone link me to a laymans (non-hansard) explanation of exactly what will happen after the election? At what point do we officially have a prime minister?
If registration is down 20% from 35 million to 28 million but we have 85% turnout = 23.8 million votes cast.
As opposed to 65% turn out on 35 million voters = 23 million votes cast.
The biggest effect may well be for those who have bet on % turnout, not on the total number of votes cast.
Note: all figures are plucked from nowhere and for illustration only
Some very interesting intel came my way including one particularly spicy nugget.
Neighbourhood watch... Hornchurch and Upminster
4 UKIP sIgns outside houses
1 UKIP billboard outside Upminster Bridge Stn
Nothing from any other party spotted and I live nowhere near the strongest UKIP part of town, Harold Hill
I've seen a few Tory placards, a handful of UKIP and not a single LD or Labour one. Nobody cares.
I think the prob of tory most seats dave pm is the same as simply dave pm. I cant see any chance he become pm with less seats than labour. currently even money shot. simililarly ed pm labour most seats I see as same as labour most seats. can't envisage him not being pm with more seats than tories. that's priced at 7/4. i think lab most seats cameron pm is 100/1 plus. who's going to support him? so my book is:
lab most seats, ed pm - 7/4
con most seats, dave pm - evs
cons most seats, ed pm - 4/1
lab most seats, dave pm - 100/1
overround is 107% so perhaps my value was illusionary. or one of other bets are shocking value. havent checked betfair for better prices.
As I said yesterday the key equation for the next government, using the SPIN figures, is does Lib Dem + 19 > the SNP?
If not a continuation of a Conservative government in almost any form seems very unlikely to me. The only way forward for the Tories is to increase that 19 to the high 20s by holding onto more of Labour's Con targets. All their energy should really be focussed on that.
Now's working time [ahem, and posting on pb.com time], so I can't watch it now, but maybe it'll be repeated one evening.
HOw many of those polled are registered to vote?
Ditto Jesse Norman and his ilk buggering up boundary reforms in this parliament.
TES/YouGov poll of teachers finds:
44% Labour
29% Tory
10% LD
7% UKIP
6% Greens
No link yet.
29% Tory is encouraging; you'd think it was 2.9% listening to Christine Blower.
So that takes the book to 106%.
There is however the non Ed, non Dave scenario... which might well be 100-1 so add it back on
Brilliant! Higher Min wage as well. ace, I wish i could vote for them...
unless there was a party promising £30bn of course, and a £10 min wage. And a free hour in the sack with a supermodel of my choice.
It is SO DEPRESSING to see basically all parties take us for fools (or be fools themselves) by promising free this that and the other in some some of fantasy wish list willy-waving contest. Pathetic.
We can;t afford this stuff. End of.
If I'd been a Labour MP at the time I'd probably have dismissed it out of hand.
https://twitter.com/iainmartin1/status/590102766003085312
Assuming that the increase in Labour and Green representation has come at the expense of the yellows, you'd have to think Mr George is LD toast.
Polruan is in SE Cornwall though , no? Are you in St Ives in fact?
Good spot. Yeah, I'm right out west of Penzance. Polruan is a childhood holiday loyalty.
I have done the Hall Walk several times - friend of my Dad's is an emmet with a cottage in Bodinnick and we've stayed there several times :-)
Exceptionally lovely part of the world
It gets even better going west, too. I spent yesterday on the beach at Porthcurno, then went to Trengwainton & up Sancreed Beacon later on - all within 10 minutes of home. Sounds cheesy but it really does feel like a privilege to live here.
We're bracing for a new generation of Poldark tourists this summer.
I get down there as often as I can, hopefully six weeks this year, already been twice. My wife's Grandad was Cornish, he worked at Holmans and down South Crofty, when he died they kept his cottage on and renovated it.
My daughter got married at Tregenna Castle two years ago, outside in the most glorious weather imaginable, it was like a fairy tale wedding, one of the best days of my life.
Addictive, isn't it? By the time we moved we'd ended up averaging 6-7 weeks a year here. I think we partly made the decision to relocate so that we would use our holidays to start going overseas again.
That's a great setting for a wedding; 2013 was an amazing summer, particularly May and July.
Haha, I only ever go to France to visit my brother these days, spend the rest of my free time in Cornwall with one break at Center Parcs each year.
I wish I knew how to post a photo, she got married on May 2nd and the weather was fantastic.
There seems to be only one major difference, each member of a household now has to return a form rather than one doing it for all. However, as Mr. F said below, if a person can't be bothered to sign a form and put it in the post they probably won't bother to vote anyway.
The reduction of the number of the disinterested and feckless on the roll may actually lead to an increase in turn-out as a percentage, even though the government may be elected by an even smaller minority of the adult population.
I need to work more, not less. [Got about 4-5 episodes of Battlestar Galactica awaiting viewing].
Had one leaflet from the tories, and one from UKIP.
One thing I noticed is that there are very high quality and expensive posters for Wishart all over the place. Unlike 2010 this SNP campaign has money to burn and it is spending it. I saw a double decker bus still decked up for the referendum and an SNP minibus over the weekend as well.
The resources available to the SNP in areas where SLAB have been taking their vote for granted and done very little for a long time must have Labour gasping.
Balls had a notional 10,000 majority on the new boundaries [same as this time], which became 1,000 votes in 2010's election.
UKIP have plenty of potential. I do not think they'll take the seat, but if you're right and they're eating Labour's vote, that's great for the Conservatives [assuming the blues aren't losing even more. If they are, or losing quite a bit, it become s athree-way].
Also critical is the Lib Dem vote. They were in a lonely third, miles off winning but with several thousand votes to shift one way or the other. That could yet rescue Labour.
1420 Kempton Loukhaar 125-1 (SJ)
1530 Kempton Softly She Treads 40-1 (generally)
The Tories have tried to bribe the electorate to continue in government and so far we don't know how their promises can be afforded. Osborne appears to believe that the economy will remain strong, even though the world economy is likely to slow down. The IMF does not think the deficit will be eliminated by 2020. Therefore some of the promises made will be very difficult to deliver, without tax increases. Will the electorate believe the promises and be let down again. Remember ahead of the May 2010 election, the Tories promised no VAT increase and no major reforms to the NHS.
In 1992 John Major was quite popular and Neil Kinnock had a terrible run up to election day, with very negative newspaper frontpages. I don't think Cameron is as popular as Major and I think Miliband is now seen as better than Kinnock. I am not sure whether some English voters would vote for a party led by a Welshman or a Scot. There appears to be a preference among English voters to have an English person as a PM candidate. ( I may be wrong, but this is my opinion).
Gut instinct on the election result, is Labour just ahead on seats overall, but in terms of votes Tories slightly ahead. I don't think Labour will lose as many seats to the SNP as currently predicted and I think they will pick up enough seats in England. It will be roughly Lab 280, Con 270, SNP 40, Lib Dem 25, UKIP 5. Government Lab/Lib + SNP support where they agree.
If Yeovil is taken in particular, the Tory tail eating the Lib Dem head will be complete. Certainly the SW is looking good for the Tories with Wells, Somerton & Frome, Taunton Deane, Portsmouth South all looking likely gains. Perhaps Torbay and St Ives too as around 50-50 shots with odds against potential in Bath/Yeovil.
Camborne & Redruth, Truro & Falmouth have been good value odds on bets too down there too.
I've experienced a good few elections and each time there has been an overwhelming mood for change, there's been a change of government. When there hasn't, there hasn't.
Am I alone in not sensing an overwhelming mood for change?
YouGov poll of teachers with comparisons on 2010
LAB 44 +11
CON 29-2
LD 10 -17
UKIP 7 +4
GN 4+2
Down 2% [and NB UKIP +4] after introducing free schools? Just maybe the NUT have been spouting bollocks all this time?
Mind you, moving Gove was still smart politics.
He couldn't look more Walter Softy than there.
That seat came out as one of the best Ukip bets on my (untried and untested) system
So I think that would indicate it is a three way contest, though not necessarily 33/33/33...and probably backing the 2nd fav or laying the fav if poss is a good tactic
Barking
Boston & Skegness
Bromsgrove
Dag & Rain
Dudley North
Halesown & Rowley Regis
Morley & Outwood
Newcastle Under Lyme**
Plymouth Moor View
S Bas & E Thurrock
Staffordshire Moorlands
Stoke on Trent South
Telford
Thanet North
Thanet South
Thurrock
Walsall North
Walsall South
West Bromwich West
Wolverhampton NE
Should there be a political hate crime law as with race and religion?
Do they really need balls? apparently Ms Sturgeon will be writing that first budget.
Is it even possible for a such a magnificent and admired woman to overplay her hand?
WTF? 44% of our teachers are socialists?
The ComRes polling was LibDem regional and not individual seat specific and accordingly did not have named candidates.
PBers need to be more astute when assessing these polls.