This normal voter happens to be writing articles for the Daily Mail and even had the opportunity to discuss his devious plan with the great man himself, I mean David Cameron not Jim Murphy.
To quote the Tory candidate in Gordon:
"Colin Clark, the Tory candidate in the seat, accused Ms Jardine of "desperation" and said her tactics were motivated by the collapse of her core vote. "Nationally the Liberals are polling at four per cent," he said. "People who are voting tactically for them are under false pretences, their own core vote has disappeared. That's true in Gordon just like it is everywhere else. Tactical voting is the saviour of a party with no policies".
In Stirling, the Tories are almost certainly in second place to the SNP. Nice of their supporters to abandon them for the already finished Anne Mcguire. Should boost the SNP majority a good chunk.
I don't know it you're right, but odds of 20-1 are available on just this proposition...
SNP will win Stirling but the Tories may well come second.
The Tories have a great poker hand but are slow playing it. The SNP have a total bluff but are representing a pair of queens at least. Labour has not looked at its cards yet, the Lib Dems are throwing in a good hand and UKIP has an Ace and a deuce. (This is a dangerous hand which normally goes wrong.)
Libya was embroiled in civil war with Gaddafi bragging about a genocide. The situation there now is terrible. There's no guarantee it wouldn't be as bad if the West hadn't gotten involved [ISIS may have taken over the opposition anyway].
I agree with the basic plan of a processing centre in North Africa. Tunisia/Morocco could work.
Well, Mr. D, is not the point of having armed forces that they be used to defend the nation's vital interests? If so then Cameron's Libyan adventure failed on just about every level.
Ghaddafi no longer funding the IRA - tick Megrahi no longer in Uk jail - tick Disincentives for migrants to try and cross the med - tick
It seems crazy to have a policy of not rescuing migrants from death due to creating a "pull factor" of immigration, while happily providing residency for the ones that manage to successfully cross. We are effectively saying to millions of victims of war "we won't do anything for you, unless you manage to make it through a highly dangerous cross-contient obstacle cross, and then we'll give you a better life than you've ever dreamed of".
But that message isn't getting across because Tory HQ is stupidly obsessed about the SNP and not demolishing UKIP - the only single thing that could still return them to power should they manage to knock them down to single figures.
In my experience the single argument which is most effective in persuading UKIP/Con waverers to return to the Tories is the SNP one. So I think they are doing exactly the right thing in that respect, although it's effective even without the Tories doing anything.
You don't get it.
An anecdotal experience which has no polling evidence is not real. It is merely confirmation bias affecting your judgement.
No, you don't get it. You have partly understood, and grossly over generalised, a point about medical research, and conflated opinion polling with scientific research which it actually isn't.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
Libya was embroiled in civil war with Gaddafi bragging about a genocide. The situation there now is terrible. There's no guarantee it wouldn't be as bad if the West hadn't gotten involved [ISIS may have taken over the opposition anyway].
I agree with the basic plan of a processing centre in North Africa. Tunisia/Morocco could work.
There's a whole swathe of North Africa and the Middle East now, from Libya to Nigeria, to Somalia to South Sudan, to Yemen, to Palestine, to Syria and Iraq, that is practically ungovernable.
Given the differences in ethnicity, history and underlying culture, it's weird that's happened at the same time. Almost like there was some factor they all have in common. All I can think of is lots of sunshine.
On topic: thanks for the article on the previous thread. Very interesting.
Re the SNP. Is there a risk of hubris, particularly among Scottish voters? Is Ms Sturgeon taking Scottish voters for granted? And could there be a swing back to SLAB, as a result? I'd be interested in the views of our Scottish posters.
It took decades of SLAB taking voters for granted before their grip weakened, I suspect the SNP appearing overconfident and a little too expectant that the votes are already theirs will not prove problematic in the short term at the very least. And if they get results? The passion and loyalty of the recently converted can be hard to dent.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
We await the analysis of public/private sector workers
This normal voter happens to be writing articles for the Daily Mail and even had the opportunity to discuss his devious plan with the great man himself, I mean David Cameron not Jim Murphy.
To quote the Tory candidate in Gordon:
"Colin Clark, the Tory candidate in the seat, accused Ms Jardine of "desperation" and said her tactics were motivated by the collapse of her core vote. "Nationally the Liberals are polling at four per cent," he said. "People who are voting tactically for them are under false pretences, their own core vote has disappeared. That's true in Gordon just like it is everywhere else. Tactical voting is the saviour of a party with no policies".
In Stirling, the Tories are almost certainly in second place to the SNP. Nice of their supporters to abandon them for the already finished Anne Mcguire. Should boost the SNP majority a good chunk.
I don't know it you're right, but odds of 20-1 are available on just this proposition...
SNP will win Stirling but the Tories may well come second.
The Tories have a great poker hand but are slow playing it. The SNP have a total bluff but are representing a pair of queens at least. Labour has not looked at its cards yet, the Lib Dems are throwing in a good hand and UKIP has an Ace and a deuce. (This is a dangerous hand which normally goes wrong.)
The Strategic Defence Review of 2010 was devoid of strategy.
Yes, I am afraid that is a fair comment. Liam Fox didn't seem to have done the pre-election preparation that colleagues in other departments did.
I think we will need a second go in the next parliament, assuming of course we have a government capable of doing anything other than give freebies to Nicola.
If Cameron does get back in the 2015 defence review will be conducted on the same basis as the 2010 review. Why would it not be, the same people will be in charge. The defence secretary's role is only to adjudicate on how the Treasury imposed cuts will be divided up between the three services.
Nonsense. The problem in 2010 was that, as Sean F observed, the strategic review didn't really start from the strategy. Luckily Liam Fox is no longer in charge, so there's every reason to be hopeful that a different Defence Secretary could do a better job.
What that would mean for spending is a separate question - clearly, money is going to be tight. But the key thing is to get the strategic part of the review right, and then figure out the most cost-effective way of delivering it.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
Looking at that ICM I would say Cameron's in with a better chance of scraping in than I expected. Labour will drop a point or two on election day and that could just be the difference.
Mr. Sykes, worth noting all polls have a certain fuzziness, and every so often one will just be plain wrong.
Four consecutive Con leads (3, 3, 6, 2), although the direction of travel in the latest is not good for them. As I said below, surprised UKIP rose from 7 to 11.
Edited extra bit: is this the penultimate ICM poll? Presumably they'll have one on the eve of the election.
On topic: thanks for the article on the previous thread. Very interesting.
Re the SNP. Is there a risk of hubris, particularly among Scottish voters? Is Ms Sturgeon taking Scottish voters for granted? And could there be a swing back to SLAB, as a result? I'd be interested in the views of our Scottish posters.
Nothing, but nothing is going to stop the political once in a lifetime tsunami that is enveloping Scotland- apart from the Shetlands and Orkney that hate the Scots more than the English. I've got ginger hair (sort of), does that count as your Scottish rep?
BTW- What do you call a pretty girl in Scotland? A tourist.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
That's four consecutive leads with ICM for the Conservatives. It's far too soon to be throwing in the towel. Would Margaret Thatcher or John Major just be giving up at this point?
UKIP are going to have neither the seats nor the inclination for a coalition. Passive confidence, perhaps.
UKIP would be best off standing to one side (ala Farage at the end of the BBC debate) while the other parties besmirch themselves with the tawdry coalition bun-fight. Look purer than pure, look different, look principled, rise in the polls slowly but surely.
I think today will be as low as the tories get between now and the election. Today will register the last of the negativity from the Challangers Debate and, after today, the hammering home of the Labour/SNP stitch up will start having an effect. Meanwhile, UKIP will steadily dwindle as the fact they are not going to have a breakthrough becomes apparent.
Would expect tories to be averaging 35/36 by 2nd/3rd May and poll 37/38 on the day
Mr. Sykes, worth noting all polls have a certain fuzziness, and every so often one will just be plain wrong.
Four consecutive Con leads (3, 3, 6, 2), although the direction of travel in the latest is not good for them. As I said below, surprised UKIP rose from 7 to 11.
The last one was a clear outlier. This is a decent (but not great) poll for the Conservatives.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
That's four consecutive leads with ICM for the Conservatives. It's far too soon to be throwing in the towel. Would Margaret Thatcher or John Major just be giving up at this point?
I think we can safely conclude that Bob Sykes is no Margaret Thatcher. Perhaps RAB Butler in 1940?
Libya was embroiled in civil war with Gaddafi bragging about a genocide. The situation there now is terrible. There's no guarantee it wouldn't be as bad if the West hadn't gotten involved [ISIS may have taken over the opposition anyway].
I agree with the basic plan of a processing centre in North Africa. Tunisia/Morocco could work.
Well, Mr. D, is not the point of having armed forces that they be used to defend the nation's vital interests? If so then Cameron's Libyan adventure failed on just about every level.
Ghaddafi no longer funding the IRA - tick Megrahi no longer in Uk jail - tick Disincentives for migrants to try and cross the med - tick
It seems crazy to have a policy of not rescuing migrants from death due to creating a "pull factor" of immigration, while happily providing residency for the ones that manage to successfully cross. We are effectively saying to millions of victims of war "we won't do anything for you, unless you manage to make it through a highly dangerous cross-contient obstacle cross, and then we'll give you a better life than you've ever dreamed of".
Well, exactly. The logic of Dan's position is that we should send ferries over to North Africa to pick up would-be migrants.
It might be unpleasant to defend your borders, or to rely on the sea doing that for you, but I think it's pretty clearly what people want.
Obviously - and this should go without saying, but DH has elided his argument to make it necessary that I do - no-one wants anyone to die.
UKIP are going to have neither the seats nor the inclination for a coalition. Passive confidence, perhaps.
UKIP would be best off standing to one side (ala Farage at the end of the BBC debate) while the other parties besmirch themselves with the tawdry coalition bun-fight. Look purer than pure, look different, look principled, rise in the polls slowly but surely.
Absolutely. With new female leadership (cf. Sturgeon) they could do very well in the election of February 2016.
On topic: thanks for the article on the previous thread. Very interesting.
Re the SNP. Is there a risk of hubris, particularly among Scottish voters? Is Ms Sturgeon taking Scottish voters for granted? And could there be a swing back to SLAB, as a result? I'd be interested in the views of our Scottish posters.
It took decades of SLAB taking voters for granted before their grip weakened, I suspect the SNP appearing overconfident and a little too expectant that the votes are already theirs will not prove problematic in the short term at the very least. And if they get results? The passion and loyalty of the recently converted can be hard to dent.
Thank you. To me - but I am in London - they sound a touch hubristic. I wonder, therefore, whether the SLAB wipeout will be as bad as forecast. If a party were so obviously behaving as if they were guaranteed my vote I'd be tempted to give them a bloody nose.
Purely anecdotal but I was talking to a family member who lives in another marginal London constituency and he commented - and he is pretty small "c" conservative and old-fashioned (in the best sense) - that EdM was growing on him (as a person) and he thought the Tory campaign was dire. He's going to some hustings in the constituency later this week.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
That's four consecutive leads with ICM for the Conservatives. It's far too soon to be throwing in the towel. Would Margaret Thatcher or John Major just be giving up at this point?
Libya was embroiled in civil war with Gaddafi bragging about a genocide. The situation there now is terrible. There's no guarantee it wouldn't be as bad if the West hadn't gotten involved [ISIS may have taken over the opposition anyway].
I agree with the basic plan of a processing centre in North Africa. Tunisia/Morocco could work.
There's a whole swathe of North Africa and the Middle East now, from Libya to Nigeria, to Somalia to South Sudan, to Yemen, to Palestine, to Syria and Iraq, that is practically ungovernable.
Given the differences in ethnicity, history and underlying culture, it's weird that's happened at the same time. Almost like there was some factor they all have in common. All I can think of is lots of sunshine.
So last week's was an outlier, but obviously the ICM methodology is still giving the Tories a consistent lead. Only time will tell if the methodology is actually relevant to these times. I suspect them re-assigning UKIP voters back to the Tories, simply because they voted Tory last time, is a wrong assumption. But I fear their downweighting of Labour because of how uncertain they are to vote might be accurate.
Presumably ICM now has corrected their gremlin and now has the Tories at a more plausible level in Scotland, thus bringing their overall poll back into line with everyone else - ie, Dave still losing the election, business as usual?
That's four consecutive leads with ICM for the Conservatives. It's far too soon to be throwing in the towel. Would Margaret Thatcher or John Major just be giving up at this point?
I think we can safely conclude that Bob Sykes is no Margaret Thatcher. Perhaps RAB Butler in 1940?
I think the correct historical analogy for the Conservatives' current position is that of Wellington's forces about half way through the Battle of Waterloo. It could still go in either direction.
Had a very pleasant, amusing and informative chat over breakfast with a senior Conservative source that has previously provided very accurate informative and accurate
The sausages, eggs, bacon and black pudding were splendid.
And now for less important news .....
Here are the summary highlights and I'll leave the "juicy nugget" until the end .... no scrolling down to the end !!
Conservative - The campaign team and fellow travellers essentially fall into three camps - I'm dubbing them the Dad's Army team.
The first are the Private Frazer grouping - "We're all doomed !!" - Their assessment is that the campaign has hitter the buffers, is gaining little traction and they have underestimated Miliband and that the Crosby strategy is failing to deliver. They represent a small but slowly growing group.
The second group, including the PM, are the Sgt Wilson team - nothing much ruffles them, they take events as they see them and are fairly laid back. They believe all will work out in the end. This is the largest group
The last group are the Cpl Jones group. "Don't Panic" - They represent a significant strand that has the will for the fight but gets temporarily flustered when the polls and other events dent the overall plan.
Overall the Blue team feel that they still have an outside shot of a small majority but another Coalition is most likely. Their own internal polling is marginally better than the norm. They believe they are performing better in all areas in England except most of Greater London. They are disappointed that some of their signature policies such as right to buy appear not to have gained much traction.
The PM remains upbeat, energetic and appropriately optimistic of the win. Most of the senior figures in the campaign are genuinely of the same mind.
Con-Lab .. Expecting modest losses and likely one or two gains - one somewhat under the radar. Net approx 20 losses.
Con-LibDem .. Six gains considered "in the bag". Another ten TCTC.
Con-UKIP. Seeing continued seepage back from Kippers. Clacton possibly only UKIP seat. Reckless struggling and Farage no shoe-in. Likely Kippers will rack up a few dozen good second places.
Wales - As you were.
Scotland - Struggling against the SNP tide. Might have zero or two seats. Expecting Labour to lose 45+ seats to SNP.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Mr. Rentool, maintaining the capacity of this country to defend its territories and interests matters far more than throwing money around willy-nilly. Acute aid in response to a specific crisis (disease, famine, etc) is a very good thing. Chronic aid, hooking up nations to a steady drip of money, doesn't bloody work.
If we actually want Africa to get richer we need to reduce trade barriers, encourage business and use growth to lift the poor from their poverty (as has happened in China and India).
Well said Mr Dancer - International aid is basically global welfare, at best it keeps the world's poor, poor and dependent. At worst it keep's the world's dictators and despots in large houses and nice cars.
The single biggest thing we could do to help Africa is to reform the CAP to allow them to sell us their crops. It's the famous difference between giving a man a fish and teaching him how to fish.
The Strategic Defence Review of 2010 was devoid of strategy.
Yes, I am afraid that is a fair comment. Liam Fox didn't seem to have done the pre-election preparation that colleagues in other departments did.
I think we will need a second go in the next parliament, assuming of course we have a government capable of doing anything other than give freebies to Nicola.
If Cameron does get back in the 2015 defence review will be conducted on the same basis as the 2010 review. Why would it not be, the same people will be in charge. The defence secretary's role is only to adjudicate on how the Treasury imposed cuts will be divided up between the three services.
Nonsense. The problem in 2010 was that, as Sean F observed, the strategic review didn't really start from the strategy. Luckily Liam Fox is no longer in charge, so there's every reason to be hopeful that a different Defence Secretary could do a better job.
What that would mean for spending is a separate question - clearly, money is going to be tight. But the key thing is to get the strategic part of the review right, and then figure out the most cost-effective way of delivering it.
Why did the last defence review not start with strategy? Why would the next one if Cameron and Osborn are still in charge?
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Well that would be a surprise. But very interesting indeed. Thank you young man.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
That would be pretty amusing to see. How Cameron would spin such late acceptance I do not know, particularly since it will if the situation 'remains static' as you put it, suggesting if we continue to see no changes the leadership are expecting to lose and to need to change things up.
My guess is that 34/32 would leave the Conservatives on c.290 seats.
That's probably the minimum they need to even make another Con/LD coalition viable (assuming the LibDems would be up for a whole new round of bloodletting).
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Changing tack on the debates would leave Cameron looking ridiculous, IMO.
He's made his choice (not to go head to head) now he has to stick with it.
Hope the black pudding doesn't cause any blockages to Jack's ARSE...
Why did the last defence review not start with strategy? Why would the next one if Cameron and Osborn are still in charge?
Because Cameron's style is very much to delegate. In many cases - welfare, education - that has proven a dramatic success. In a few cases, most notably defence in 2010, the minister given the delegated responsibility didn't do a good job.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
"Including him risks another Cleggasm"
Cannot see that happening. Last time it was because no one wanted Brown, but the Tories were still hated, hence "how about Clegg" suddenly became real.
Ed Miliband is boosted today by an exclusive poll showing Labour ahead of the Conservatives on four of the top six election issues.
In a blow to David Cameron, both Labour and Ukip are ahead of the Conservatives on immigration and asylum — an issue that senior Tories hoped would play to their favour — according to new research by Ipsos MORI.
A league table of public priorities puts the NHS first, followed by the economy, education, immigration, taxation and benefits.
I know they weight, but 42% of workers in the raw sample are public sector workers?
More nit picking because the Tories aren't doing a good enough job at convincing people to vote for them?
You are the one nit picking. How is this sample meant to be representative. I don't know how the election will turn out but the polls seem to be making it up as they go along.
I just think people wading through the sub samples looking for weighting problems to explain why "their" party is where it is looks a bit desperate?
And I used to say the same back around 2008-2010 when Labour supporters would do the same (remember all the criticism we hard from Livingstone about YouGov during the 2008 Mayoral election?)
You don't think that ignoring the facts is just the same as you claim?
""My view on the SNP "threat" is that it resonates well in Surrey Heath but is barely an issue anywhere else. Indeed, the reception Sturgeon is getting is probably undermining every single Sturgeon with Ed in pocket billboard poster appearing in every northern working class Tory held marginal. I mentioned the one on the main st in Colne (Pendle) last week - I think many in Colne are looking at that as a prospectus and thinking "I quite like the sound of that, how do I vote for her?"
That's why the Tory focus on the SNP is going so catastrophically, calamitously wrong.
Why can only a handful of us see this??""
There is a strange love affair between some of the English and the SNP which is hard to fathom. The SNP are highly political and only look after themselves. If you are a Scot who does not agree with them then you are ostracised at every junction. If something goes wrong then it is always the fault of the b...dy English.
What amazes me is that it is only the Tories who have the guts to take them head on whilst Labour seem to think they can be their friends. I had a Scottish Labour leaflet today which attacked the Tories / Coalition in 4 sections while ignored the SNP. The only way that Labour will hold their seat is convincing the 20% who support Lib Dems / Tories to help them. Guess what the result of our seat will be.
The Tory campaign is weak but I see their attack on the SNP as the only area where they actually are showing strength. Much better than trying to bribe the electorate with their own money.
LOL, how can anyone be so out of touch with reality and claim to actually live in Scotland
I think for the final 18 days or whatever it is of the election I shall conduct a form of monitoring entitled SPUDS (Sam's Polling Ups & Downs)
This will focus on the changes from the previous poll , and result in a positive or negative figure at the end of each day, giving a clear indication of the way the wind is blowing on any given day
The first are the Private Frazer grouping - "We're all doomed !!" - Their assessment is that the campaign has hitter the buffers, is gaining little traction and they have underestimated Miliband and that the Crosby strategy is failing to deliver. They represent a small but slowly growing group.
The second group, including the PM, are the Sgt Wilson team - nothing much ruffles them, they take events as they see them and are fairly laid back. They believe all will work out in the end. This is the largest group
The last group are the Cpl Jones group. "Don't Panic" - They represent a significant strand that has the will for the fight but gets temporarily flustered when the polls and other events dent the overall plan.
Overall the Blue team feel that they still have an outside shot of a small majority but another Coalition is most likely. Their own internal polling is marginally better than the norm. They believe they are performing better in all areas in England except most of Greater London. They are disappointed that some of their signature policies such as right to buy appear not to have gained much traction.
The PM remains upbeat, energetic and appropriately optimistic of the win. Most of the senior figures in the campaign are genuinely of the same mind.
Con-Lab .. Expecting modest losses and likely one or two gains - one somewhat under the radar. Net approx 20 losses.
Con-LibDem .. Six gains considered "in the bag". Another ten TCTC.
Con-UKIP. Seeing continued seepage back from Kippers. Clacton possibly only UKIP seat. Reckless struggling and Farage no shoe-in. Likely Kippers will rack up a few dozen good second places.
Wales - As you were.
Scotland - Struggling against the SNP tide. Might have zero or two seats. Expecting Labour to lose 45+ seats to SNP.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Generally looks about right. But even on those optimistic CCO figures that only gets them to about 292-296 seats. Amusing that CCO expect Labour to lose more seats in Scotland than they actually have. Does Murphy count as two?
Love the 'under the radar' gain. Birmingham Northfield, please.
This normal voter happens to be writing articles for the Daily Mail and even had the opportunity to discuss his devious plan with the great man himself, I mean David Cameron not Jim Murphy.
To quote the Tory candidate in Gordon:
"Colin Clark, the Tory candidate in the seat, accused Ms Jardine of "desperation" and said her tactics were motivated by the collapse of her core vote. "Nationally the Liberals are polling at four per cent," he said. "People who are voting tactically for them are under false pretences, their own core vote has disappeared. That's true in Gordon just like it is everywhere else. Tactical voting is the saviour of a party with no policies".
In Stirling, the Tories are almost certainly in second place to the SNP. Nice of their supporters to abandon them for the already finished Anne Mcguire. Should boost the SNP majority a good chunk.
I don't know it you're right, but odds of 20-1 are available on just this proposition...
SNP will win Stirling but the Tories may well come second.
The Tories have a great poker hand but are slow playing it. The SNP have a total bluff but are representing a pair of queens at least. Labour has not looked at its cards yet, the Lib Dems are throwing in a good hand and UKIP has an Ace and a deuce. (This is a dangerous hand which normally goes wrong.)
The post-debate polls show three leads each for the Conservatives and Labour, and one tie.
Conservative 33.9%, Labour 33.7%, UKIP 13.7%.
Yet if you read the thread header you'd think everything was bad for the blues and hunky dory for the reds. I'm surprised the teachers' YG isn't being trumpeted as well.
Dropping four points in a week....this election is getting hard to call.
All we can say now is that ICM are all over the place and probably should be ignored.
YouGov have the experience and have always been close to the actual result. What's more they have done hundreds more polls than anyone else so their cross referencing should be spot on.
Dropping four points in a week....this election is getting hard to call.
All we can say now is that ICM are all over the place and probably should be ignored.
YouGov have the experience and have always been close to the actual result. What's more they have done hundreds more polls than anyone else so their cross referencing should be spot on.
Polls having normal volatility means the polling company is reporting honestly. The ones I distrust are those that never have outliers, because the pollster will likely be selectively holding some back.
Why did the last defence review not start with strategy? Why would the next one if Cameron and Osborn are still in charge?
Because Cameron's style is very much to delegate. In many cases - welfare, education - that has proven a dramatic success. In a few cases, most notably defence in 2010, the minister given the delegated responsibility didn't do a good job.
So cutting defence spending was actually a MoD decision?
On topic: thanks for the article on the previous thread. Very interesting.
Re the SNP. Is there a risk of hubris, particularly among Scottish voters? Is Ms Sturgeon taking Scottish voters for granted? And could there be a swing back to SLAB, as a result? I'd be interested in the views of our Scottish posters.
Not a chance of it , will be few changing their minds if any.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Changing tack on the debates would leave Cameron looking ridiculous, IMO.
He's made his choice (not to go head to head) now he has to stick with it.
Hope the black pudding doesn't cause any blockages to Jack's ARSE...
If the circumstance change and demand it's strange how firm positions become somewhat looser.
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
Changing tack on the debates would leave Cameron looking ridiculous, IMO.
He's made his choice (not to go head to head) now he has to stick with it.
Hope the black pudding doesn't cause any blockages to Jack's ARSE...
If the circumstance change and demand it's strange how firm positions become somewhat looser.
""My view on the SNP "threat" is that it resonates well in Surrey Heath but is barely an issue anywhere else. Indeed, the reception Sturgeon is getting is probably undermining every single Sturgeon with Ed in pocket billboard poster appearing in every northern working class Tory held marginal. I mentioned the one on the main st in Colne (Pendle) last week - I think many in Colne are looking at that as a prospectus and thinking "I quite like the sound of that, how do I vote for her?"
That's why the Tory focus on the SNP is going so catastrophically, calamitously wrong.
Why can only a handful of us see this??""
There is a strange love affair between some of the English and the SNP which is hard to fathom. The SNP are highly political and only look after themselves. If you are a Scot who does not agree with them then you are ostracised at every junction. If something goes wrong then it is always the fault of the b...dy English.
What amazes me is that it is only the Tories who have the guts to take them head on whilst Labour seem to think they can be their friends. I had a Scottish Labour leaflet today which attacked the Tories / Coalition in 4 sections while ignored the SNP. The only way that Labour will hold their seat is convincing the 20% who support Lib Dems / Tories to help them. Guess what the result of our seat will be.
The Tory campaign is weak but I see their attack on the SNP as the only area where they actually are showing strength. Much better than trying to bribe the electorate with their own money.
LOL, how can anyone be so out of touch with reality and claim to actually live in Scotland
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
lol. Some of us have been predicting this for about a year, and didn't need a fry-up with Ossie to discern the irresistible logic. Cameron is the underdog: underdogs need debates.
You've been predicting every possible option every time a new poll springs up. Consistency isn't your strong point.
Have you even read the article, you halfbaked turnip? He's paying you a compliment.
I was merely commenting on him. If you look I did read and comment on the article elsewhere, surprisingly decent for him , not normal and must be down to his excitement at his Auntie meeting Alex and Nicola at the weekend. He is however still a complete tw**.
Why did the last defence review not start with strategy? Why would the next one if Cameron and Osborn are still in charge?
Because Cameron's style is very much to delegate. In many cases - welfare, education - that has proven a dramatic success. In a few cases, most notably defence in 2010, the minister given the delegated responsibility didn't do a good job.
So cutting defence spending was actually a MoD decision?
You seem to have a Gordon-Brown-like view that spending more is by definition a Good Thing. My point - which I'd thought I'd made clearly enough - was to agree with Sean F that the strategic review didn't do a good job in reviewing strategy. That was what was wrong with it, not the spending total per se. I believe that taxpayers' money should be spent to achieve objectives, not the other way round, from which it follows that you need to do a really thorough job in assessing those objectives. That is what I think needs to be revisited next time.
Dropping four points in a week....this election is getting hard to call.
All we can say now is that ICM are all over the place and probably should be ignored.
YouGov have the experience and have always been close to the actual result. What's more they have done hundreds more polls than anyone else so their cross referencing should be spot on.
One should expect to see occasional outliers, and a reasonable amount of movement, if the pollster is doing their job properly.
Well, that's made my day ICM still leading with Tories.
Haha that's because they always give them a good score!
Not always. Labour led in 11 out of 12 ICM polls in 2014, and also led 33/30 in the January ICM.
Even if we assume last week's poll was an outlier, there's been a clear shift to the Conservatives with ICM.
My guess is that on the day the Tories will lead by around 5% (36-31) with the SNP doing exceptionally well. What would be the likley composition of the Commons?
It looks doable but incredibly fragile. Perhaps the debate is worth the risk. I have a gut feeling that the SNP stuff will gain traction; expect a grave and statesmanlike intervention from John Major.
Comments
SNP will win Stirling but the Tories may well come second.
The Tories have a great poker hand but are slow playing it. The SNP have a total bluff but are representing a pair of queens at least. Labour has not looked at its cards yet, the Lib Dems are throwing in a good hand and UKIP has an Ace and a deuce. (This is a dangerous hand which normally goes wrong.)
DUP AND UKIP !
Conservative 33.9%, Labour 33.7%, UKIP 13.7%.
What that would mean for spending is a separate question - clearly, money is going to be tight. But the key thing is to get the strategic part of the review right, and then figure out the most cost-effective way of delivering it.
Four consecutive Con leads (3, 3, 6, 2), although the direction of travel in the latest is not good for them. As I said below, surprised UKIP rose from 7 to 11.
Edited extra bit: is this the penultimate ICM poll? Presumably they'll have one on the eve of the election.
I've got ginger hair (sort of), does that count as your Scottish rep?
BTW- What do you call a pretty girl in Scotland?
A tourist.
Lab lead next week?
Would expect tories to be averaging 35/36 by 2nd/3rd May and poll 37/38 on the day
It might be unpleasant to defend your borders, or to rely on the sea doing that for you, but I think it's pretty clearly what people want.
Obviously - and this should go without saying, but DH has elided his argument to make it necessary that I do - no-one wants anyone to die.
Had you have told PBers, that their party would have led with ICM in every poll in 2015, they'd have snapped your hand off.
Purely anecdotal but I was talking to a family member who lives in another marginal London constituency and he commented - and he is pretty small "c" conservative and old-fashioned (in the best sense) - that EdM was growing on him (as a person) and he thought the Tory campaign was dire. He's going to some hustings in the constituency later this week.
Also shows the only hope Cameron has left is to massively squeeze the Kippers.
Have you read the article, Malcolm? I think you will be pleasantly surprised.
Had a very pleasant, amusing and informative chat over breakfast with a senior Conservative source that has previously provided very accurate informative and accurate
The sausages, eggs, bacon and black pudding were splendid.
And now for less important news .....
Here are the summary highlights and I'll leave the "juicy nugget" until the end .... no scrolling down to the end !!
Conservative - The campaign team and fellow travellers essentially fall into three camps - I'm dubbing them the Dad's Army team.
The first are the Private Frazer grouping - "We're all doomed !!" - Their assessment is that the campaign has hitter the buffers, is gaining little traction and they have underestimated Miliband and that the Crosby strategy is failing to deliver. They represent a small but slowly growing group.
The second group, including the PM, are the Sgt Wilson team - nothing much ruffles them, they take events as they see them and are fairly laid back. They believe all will work out in the end. This is the largest group
The last group are the Cpl Jones group. "Don't Panic" - They represent a significant strand that has the will for the fight but gets temporarily flustered when the polls and other events dent the overall plan.
Overall the Blue team feel that they still have an outside shot of a small majority but another Coalition is most likely. Their own internal polling is marginally better than the norm. They believe they are performing better in all areas in England except most of Greater London. They are disappointed that some of their signature policies such as right to buy appear not to have gained much traction.
The PM remains upbeat, energetic and appropriately optimistic of the win. Most of the senior figures in the campaign are genuinely of the same mind.
Con-Lab .. Expecting modest losses and likely one or two gains - one somewhat under the radar. Net approx 20 losses.
Con-LibDem .. Six gains considered "in the bag". Another ten TCTC.
Con-UKIP. Seeing continued seepage back from Kippers. Clacton possibly only UKIP seat. Reckless struggling and Farage no shoe-in. Likely Kippers will rack up a few dozen good second places.
Wales - As you were.
Scotland - Struggling against the SNP tide. Might have zero or two seats. Expecting Labour to lose 45+ seats to SNP.
............................................................................
And the best till last ....
There is a small but strengthening band of players who, if the situation remain static, believe the PM should accept the Miliband debate gauntlet and turn the QT three way leaders interview into a full scale debate and make it a game changer.
The fly in the ointment is Clegg. Including him risks another Cleggasm, albeit of a more limited nature this time, and excluding him may prove very difficult.
The single biggest thing we could do to help Africa is to reform the CAP to allow them to sell us their crops. It's the famous difference between giving a man a fish and teaching him how to fish.
It must be bad. But it may be worth it given the polls.
"apart from the Shetlands and Orkney that hate the Scots more than the English"
Is that why the SNP topped the List/Party vote in Orkney in Holyrood 2011 and came a close second in Shetland.
Not predicting an SNP gain in Orkney and Shetland, but you never know.
Much obliged for the information.
He's made his choice (not to go head to head) now he has to stick with it.
Hope the black pudding doesn't cause any blockages to Jack's ARSE...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDCYB-sWAAAQpwZ.jpg
Not that I can get on with Stan or James anyway.
Cannot see that happening. Last time it was because no one wanted Brown, but the Tories were still hated, hence "how about Clegg" suddenly became real.
Given the last 5 years, this is not an option.
Shame the £3400 double for a £1 is gone.
This will focus on the changes from the previous poll , and result in a positive or negative figure at the end of each day, giving a clear indication of the way the wind is blowing on any given day
For instance, so far today (2 polls) we have
Con -6
Lab -1
UKIP +5
LD +2
Green -2
Love the 'under the radar' gain. Birmingham Northfield, please.
All we can say now is that ICM are all over the place and probably should be ignored.
YouGov have the experience and have always been close to the actual result. What's more they have done hundreds more polls than anyone else so their cross referencing should be spot on.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/11549731/Quiz-How-logical-are-you.html
Shape of the race is a value punter's wet dream/bookie's nightmare tbh.
Outliers happen, and they will always happen*. Simple mathematics.
[*ok, pendants, there's a vanishingly small chance they will never happen again in our lifetimes]
Bob Sykes becomes my hero.
Even if we assume last week's poll was an outlier, there's been a clear shift to the Conservatives with ICM.
All you need is oddschecker, Betfair, and a brain
And now we wait....
It looks doable but incredibly fragile. Perhaps the debate is worth the risk. I have a gut feeling that the SNP stuff will gain traction; expect a grave and statesmanlike intervention from John Major.