No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters.
No, they are not.
The Tories are attacking Miliband, as they always have. He is weak, and his prospectus is ruinous. That has been their campaign strategy all along.
The only difference now is the rise of the SNP amplifies both of those factors. He is too weak to win alone, he would need the SNP to prop him up. And the SNP prospectus is even more ruinous than Labour alone.
As for wounds healing, people in Scotland who hate the Tories have done so since at least 1979. None of this is going to change any of that.
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
Ok: the SNP & Labour will cause chaos.
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
For the first time in this campaign it feels like the Tories are on top
Too soon to say. They've come back into the game, at any rate.
They were never out of it. But it is beyond me how Cameron and the Tories successfully heal their relationship with Scotland should they retain power. They have effectively decided the only way to win is to insult 75% of the electorate up there. Why they bothered to fight so hard for a No vote is a mystery.
Heavily criticising the SNP, its policies and potential chaotic effect on the UK government does not equal insulting Scots.
Except to our Nat posters, who believe the two are one and the same.
75% of Scottish votes - or thereabouts - will go to Labour and the SNP. The Tories are attacking both remember and saying both are planning an alliance that will wreak havoc across the country. As I say, politics is a dirty game and the Tories will do what it takes to win, but why didn't they just sit out the referendum last year instead of fighting so hard to hold together a Union they clearly feel is not really that important?
The SNP is not a party that favours the continuing maintenance of the Union. The Conservatives are. Attacking their separatist influence seems within a hung parliament entirely consistent to me. The majority of Scots will still be voting for unionist parties.
Makes me think of the Labour manifesto talking about how in the IndyRef people voted 'overwhelmingly for change'. Now while I know all sides were promising further powers (even if the extent of the 'vow' was immediately exaggerated and immediately claimed as broken) in the event of a No, but that struck me as an odd way to describe the result. I feel like there was a greater change on the ballot people could have voted for if they had wanted (at the time, they appear to want it now, whether they accept that is what the SNP landslide will mean or not)
The debt has been built up over a period where Scotland has been in absolute Fiscal Surplus and would have a substantial Sovereign Wealth fund. It is not Scotland's debt to repay as Scotland had no need and no wish to incur it.
That's the nature of a Union. A reason to end it, perhaps, but you can't wish away the obligations you accrue as a result of its current existence.
Not really, it is in the interests of Westminster to come to a suitable long term agreement on the English subsidy and ideally one that it can depend upon post-Independence when England is effectively a client-State of a wealthy Scotland.
If it does insist on such a usurious settlement, which will, remember, be based on a voluntary remittance from Scotland, it is easy to see it being cancelled at any time by the first party to gain a popular mandate based on such an economic policy.
What does England do then. Invade? Lol.
Our economic system is based on contract law. It's true that states are sovereign and can override contracts, but generally speaking they pay a penalty by doing so by way of loss of reputation. That's why so much money is flowing into London right now as it's seen as a safe place that respects contracts.
I really don't think it would be in Scotland's interests to demonstrate its unwillingness to honour its end of a contract. It certainly wouldn't be allowed to do so as part of Full Fiscal Autonomy, when the Scottish Parliament would be subordinate to Westminster.
For the first time in this campaign it feels like the Tories are on top
Too soon to say. They've come back into the game, at any rate.
They were never out of it. But it is beyond me how Cameron and the Tories successfully heal their relationship with Scotland should they retain power. They have effectively decided the only way to win is to insult 75% of the electorate up there. Why they bothered to fight so hard for a No vote is a mystery.
Heavily criticising the SNP, its policies and potential chaotic effect on the UK government does not equal insulting Scots.
Except to our Nat posters, who believe the two are one and the same.
75% of Scottish votes - or thereabouts - will go to Labour and the SNP. The Tories are attacking both remember and saying both are planning an alliance that will wreak havoc across the country. As I say, politics is a dirty game and the Tories will do what it takes to win, but why didn't they just sit out the referendum last year instead of fighting so hard to hold together a Union they clearly feel is not really that important?
The SNP is not a party that favours the continuing maintenance of the Union. The Conservatives are. Attacking their separatist influence seems within a hung parliament entirely consistent to me. The majority of Scots will still be voting for unionist parties.
You are correct and SO is just talking jaberwoky rubbish. Its certainly not the tories fault that Labours Frankenstein monster has gone on the rampage.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott On train I heard a bunch of strangers talking about election. The theme was how they wish they could vote for Sturgeon. We were near Reading.
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
Ok: the SNP & Labour will cause chaos.
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
We are not talking about you either, Charles. If you think that there will be no bad feeling caused in Scotland by the Tory strategy and that everyone will just shrug their shoulders and say that's politics, I fear you are utterly misreading things. That does not mean that the Tories should not be doing it - I am all for parties doing what it takes - I just wonder what they will do post-election to heal the wounds if they do still believe in the Union. If they don't, it doesn't matter.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
The trend of the falling gap between Labour and Con has stopped! A 50 gap is a big call considering the polls and the markets.
Anyway, think your Croydon Central prediction is way off. It will almost certainly be a Labour gain. Spoke with a few canvassers from there and it looks good for Labour.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I’m very much a supporter of the Union, but it is hardly unreasonable to point out that if Labour can only make some of the major changes to the English health service and education system by relying on the votes of MPs from outside England, that is more likely to bring the Union into contempt than any rhetoric from the Tories. They can mess with our health and educational system but we can’t mess with theirs. Why would the English be expected to think that is fair.
I just wonder what they will do post-election to heal the wounds if they do still believe in the Union. If they don't, it doesn't matter.
Your entire premise that highlighting the dangers to the Union of a Labour SNP pact are somehow anti-union is bogus
The SNP are not interested in meaningful coalition for the good of the Union. They are interested in inflicting maximum damage on the Union, at any cost.
"A senior Labour figure has distanced himself from a UKIP candidate after appearing to have endorsed his campaign.
Keith Vaz features on an election leaflet for Mark Reckless. Mr Vaz is quoted as saying "Mark is one of my closest friends in parliament. You are lucky to have him." Endorsing a candidate from a rival party is a breach of Labour Party rules."
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
For the first time in this campaign it feels like the Tories are on top
Too soon to say. They've come back into the game, at any rate.
They were never out of it. But it is beyond me how Cameron and the Tories successfully heal their relationship with Scotland should they retain power. They have effectively decided the only way to win is to insult 75% of the electorate up there. Why they bothered to fight so hard for a No vote is a mystery.
They're not insulting them.
They are simply saying: we understand that you are voting for a party that will fight for the sole interests of the Scottish component of the UK. That's not in the interests of the rest of the UK.
Saying that Scots are voting for two parties that will deliver chaos, leave the UK defenceless and inflict huge suffering on the population may be seen in Scotland to be pretty insulting. That's fine: that's politics and sometimes you have to get down and dirty to win. But I just don't get why the Tories put so much on the line for the Union last year when they are clearly not that interested in maintaining it.
So in 2010, say, the Tories should not have campaigned against Labour because Scotland, which then voted predominantly Labour, would have felt all hurt and unloved?
Of course the Tories should attack Labour in every way they can in order to win. My point is that centring your strategy on a message that says the Scots are about to inflict chaos on the UK is not necessarily the way to show to Scots that you are committed to the Union. I just wonder how the Tories will rebuild bridges after the election, or if they interested in doing so. If they are writing Scotland off forever, why did they invest so much in a No vote last year?
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
No ... its the SNP who are making the demands. The Labour leadership are the ones deciding how high they need to jump.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
The trend of the falling gap between Labour and Con has stopped! A 50 gap is a big call considering the polls and the markets.
Anyway, think your Croydon Central prediction is way off. It will almost certainly be a Labour gain. Spoke with a few canvassers from there and it looks good for Labour.
If canvassers were a good guide to voting intentions then Rik Willis, Marcus Wood and Nick Palmer would be defending MPs with sizeable majorities and malcomg would still be drunk from YES winning the Scottish Indy Referendum.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
I'm considering Jack's forecast as a potential minimum for the SNP and maximum for the Tories & Lib Dems. The Labour score, I really don't know.
Ipswich and Bury North are 'bold' predictions imo. Certainly the Con majority in each one if there is one is sub 2500 votes.
One odd thing about the thread header, is that UKIP seems to be strongest in Labour marginals. I would have expected safe Con seats to be their strongest group.
Perhaps these are the seats where Labour's support fell away during the New Labour re-alignment?
The UKIP support is remarkeably evenly spread, with little sign of tactical voting for anyone. It would seem that they will not lose many deposits, but will struggle to break 20% in more than a dozen or so seats. I think their net effect on the election is going to be nearly negligible.
I think there are ~40 seats where UKIP 'won' the local elections in 2013 or 2014.
But their biggest effect will hopefully be in reducing the number of safe seats.
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
Ok: the SNP & Labour will cause chaos.
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
We are not talking about you either, Charles. If you think that there will be no bad feeling caused in Scotland by the Tory strategy and that everyone will just shrug their shoulders and say that's politics, I fear you are utterly misreading things. That does not mean that the Tories should not be doing it - I am all for parties doing what it takes - I just wonder what they will do post-election to heal the wounds if they do still believe in the Union. If they don't, it doesn't matter.
I know you need to find a way to justify your surprising decision to vote Labour, despite all of your public misgivings.
One odd thing about the thread header, is that UKIP seems to be strongest in Labour marginals. I would have expected safe Con seats to be their strongest group.
Perhaps these are the seats where Labour's support fell away during the New Labour re-alignment?
(this is a sample of 64 UKIP voters though!)
I received a UKIP leaflet in the post yesterday. In this safe Tory seat the candidate's 'front page' message is not exactly right wing. He wants to:
Abolish the bedroom tax Bring hospitals back under state ownership - end PFI Stop the further cuts proposed by the county council Abolish IHT.
Since IHT is not a particularly good tax - it's too easily avoided - this comes across as a moderate, sensible set of policies which might appeal fairly well in Labour seats too.
fpt, @Tissue_Price "I think the LD's are actually best placed to receive tactical votes as Con <--> Lab is just too much of a jump for many people."
yup. Tactical voting, Edinburgh South.
Ashcroft shows the SNP coming to the lead from nowhere to lead the SLAB incumbent Ian Murray by a short head. The LDs who came second last time have dropped right back. The Conservatives remain third with roughly the same percentage as 2010.
I'm a Conservative unionist, so should I hold my nose and vote "tactically"? I have concluded not, because from my perspective there's really not much difference between SNP and SLAB: if Labour does get into office they will dance to the SNP tune anyway. So to give heart to the Cons in the next election I shall eschew tactics and vote according to my true preferences.
However if Murray wins the seat I'll be pleased that he has saved Roger's bacon.
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
Nick Palmer has repeatedly tipped Cambridge as easy Labour gain.
So, if Nick Palmer wishes to post “the clock goes bong”, then it is at least more accurate for betting purposes.
Going by number or garden signs on show - NP is utterly wrong.
Some big odds now available on the Labour retread candidate - the Cambridge one not the Broxtowe one.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
One odd thing about the thread header, is that UKIP seems to be strongest in Labour marginals. I would have expected safe Con seats to be their strongest group.
Perhaps these are the seats where Labour's support fell away during the New Labour re-alignment?
(this is a sample of 64 UKIP voters though!)
I received a UKIP leaflet in the post yesterday. In this safe Tory seat the candidate's 'front page' message is not exactly right wing. He wants to:
Abolish the bedroom tax Bring hospitals back under state ownership - end PFI Stop the further cuts proposed by the county council Abolish IHT.
Since IHT is not a particularly good tax - it's too easily avoided - this comes across as a moderate, sensible set of policies which might appeal fairly well in Labour seats too.
The Telegraph have produced a nice video summary of the UKIP manifesto (I assume they've done this for other parties too?)
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
I agree with all those except Enfield North which I think is TCTC.
It is very odd that we agree on these "13 seats that will shape the General Election result " yet we differ greatly on the overall result. I have :
fpt, @Tissue_Price "I think the LD's are actually best placed to receive tactical votes as Con <--> Lab is just too much of a jump for many people."
yup. Tactical voting, Edinburgh South.
Ashcroft shows the SNP coming to the lead from nowhere to lead the SLAB incumbent Ian Murray by a short head. The LDs who came second last time have dropped right back. The Conservatives remain third with roughly the same percentage as 2010.
I'm a Conservative unionist, so should I hold my nose and vote "tactically"? I have concluded not, because from my perspective there's really not much difference between SNP and SLAB: if Labour does get into office they will dance to the SNP tune anyway. So to give heart to the Cons in the next election I shall eschew tactics and vote according to my true preferences.
However if Murray wins the seat I'll be pleased that he has saved Roger's bacon.
Those of us with 25/1 bets on the SNP in Edinburgh South encourage you to share your thought processes with your neighbours.
@JamesClayton5: SNP's Angus Robertson tells #Newsnight that negotiation with Labour will be possible because of previous cooperation over issues like Syria
@JamesClayton5: Angus Robertson also told #newsnight that Ed Miliband has personally 'picked up the phone' to him on Syria.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
I agree with all those except Enfield North which I think is TCTC.
It is very odd that we agree on these "13 seats that will shape the General Election result " yet we differ greatly on the overall result. I have :
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
Above 50 implies that Lab/Con/LibDem split at most 8 seats between them.
The debt has been built up over a period where Scotland has been in absolute Fiscal Surplus and would have a substantial Sovereign Wealth fund. It is not Scotland's debt to repay as Scotland had no need and no wish to incur it.
That's the nature of a Union. A reason to end it, perhaps, but you can't wish away the obligations you accrue as a result of its current existence.
Not really, it is in the interests of Westminster to come to a suitable long term agreement on the English subsidy and ideally one that it can depend upon post-Independence when England is effectively a client-State of a wealthy Scotland.
If it does insist on such a usurious settlement, which will, remember, be based on a voluntary remittance from Scotland, it is easy to see it being cancelled at any time by the first party to gain a popular mandate based on such an economic policy.
What does England do then. Invade? Lol.
There is no English subsidy. When oil prices are high, Scotland pays slightly more tax than England per person. When oil prices are low, Scotland pays slightly less tax than England per person. And Scotland spends a lot more per person.
SNP politics is based on fantasy economics. Nicola Sturgeon said the other day that Wales should get higher spending, but Scotland should not pay for it because "Scotland was not subsidised". So presumably London should not pay for it either on the same basis, as London is not subsidised?
Why they bothered to fight so hard for a No vote is a mystery.
They kept their Generals hidden away from 'ordinary Scots', protected their own small division and let SLab clear the minefields on foot. I wouldn't say they fought particularly hard.
Not sure about that. They signed up to the Vow and it emerged after the vote that Cameron would have resigned if it had gone the other way. They clearly wanted the Union to stay in place. I just don't get why.
They fought hard to avoid being remembered as the party that lost the Union, not the same thing as a deep, gut commitment to the Union.
One odd thing about the thread header, is that UKIP seems to be strongest in Labour marginals. I would have expected safe Con seats to be their strongest group.
Perhaps these are the seats where Labour's support fell away during the New Labour re-alignment?
(this is a sample of 64 UKIP voters though!)
I received a UKIP leaflet in the post yesterday. In this safe Tory seat the candidate's 'front page' message is not exactly right wing. He wants to:
Abolish the bedroom tax Bring hospitals back under state ownership - end PFI Stop the further cuts proposed by the county council Abolish IHT.
Since IHT is not a particularly good tax - it's too easily avoided - this comes across as a moderate, sensible set of policies which might appeal fairly well in Labour seats too.
The Telegraph have produced a nice video summary of the UKIP manifesto (I assume they've done this for other parties too?)
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
Above 50 implies that Lab/Con/LibDem split at most 8 seats between them.
This is IMO most unlikely.
@JackW Whilst I always listen to your fine ARSE it did forecast 10 seats whilst @Antifrank was ploughing into long odds Scottish bets. Like I said I'm regarding it as a worst case scenario for the SNP.
The financial cost of FFA is about 7bn even with geographical allocation of oil. This is more than 10% of total expenditure. The Scots could borrow some of this initially but would the UK government support this as you may get a Greece type problem. The last time the Scots were net contributors to the UK was back in 2011/2012. The problem is not just falling oil prices but falling oil production and the decimation of the Scottish banking sector.
It is strange irony that the time that the Scots get serious about independence is the time when it does not make sense financially.
Not paying for Trident would save the Scots around 200m a year not the 100bn that a SNP supporter told me yesterday when I pointed out the numbers.
Your problem is a complete lack of understanding of the fiscal position of the UK.
Currently total subsidies paid by Scotland to England average at around £10bn per annum. The goal of the SNP is to engineer a situation where FFA can be implemented with those subsidies being minimised, stopping Scotland having to bail out predominantly the London budget year after year.
It is working very well. We are damn close to that position now.
All the SNP has to do is position the UK so that they get the best deal, FFA without paying subsidies to Westminster and Independence will be inevitable as soon as the relative wealth flushes out. With the additional tax revenues (probably heightened by specific tax cuts) this will be an exponential growth.
Subsidies? Isn't that paying for common UK things like defence?
Not the way it is set up. It is over-paying through a broken system of cost application. The most glaringly obvious being Debt Interest for Westminster's enormous debt pile which Scotland never needed or wanted and the classification of "UK Infrastructure Spending" which makes most English road projects and most London infrastructure "UK Wide" and bills Scotland for things of no benefit to her.
On here they think that England pays for everything , why exactly do they think these turkeys are desperately clinging on to us , I hardly think it is to give us all that free money these idiots think we get. As we see they are foaming at the mouth down south at the thought of us actually having an influence , shit**** themselves that the real numbers will come out some day.
What a prat you are to make such an empty-minded response.
Morris Dancer responded with a reasonable point:
"..one suspects those people who see anti-SNP attacks as anti-Scottish would vigorously deny anti-Conservative attacks as being anti-English. "
Indeed they would, but my comment was primarily about PERCEPTION. Anti-SNP and Anti-Conservative may well for most people not be anti-Scottish or anti-English, but the perception they are may well be growing.
I see you've responded with personal abuse. I call out rubbish when I read it. You said that some of the attacks by the Conservatives on the SNP influence in a hung parliament could easily qualify as racist.
That is utter rubbish, and I stand by it. Accusations of racism should never be thrown around lightly.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), I know there's been discussion of that, but any new reason you think we'll get a Greek exit from the eurozone in the near future?
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
How so? In his confidence he will win, or Labour will win?
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
I agree with all those except Enfield North which I think is TCTC.
It is very odd that we agree on these "13 seats that will shape the General Election result " yet we differ greatly on the overall result. I have :
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
And counterproductive. I used to root for him on the grounds that PBdom transcends party divides, but some levels of complacency just ask for a comeuppance.
The point about the SNP of course is not simply that they are seeking to prise concessions for Scotland out of English Labour, it is that their influence on crypto marxist Miliband is even more left wing. The SNP have surged all right and in doing so have surged far left in Michael Foot type and unilateralist proportions. Everyone is walking a tightrope in this election, except the SNP which has just fired a blunderbuss. If Labour volubly resist the SNPs demands they will lose all their seats in Scotland and thus have to go begging to them - but might preserve their English vote . If the Tories are hugely successful in attacking the SNP then they may actually persuade labour voters to stick with SLAB - but they may persuade wavering voters in England to vote tory. Ultimately the English voters will have to look down the barrel of the SNP '45' and decide if they can rely on being lucky or need to don the Tory body armour.
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
How so? In his confidence he will win, or Labour will win?
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
Time is on Labour's side while the polls stand as they are. It isn't a neutral consideration. The closer we get to polling day without the Conservatives surging ahead, the less time they have to turn it around.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), I know there's been discussion of that, but any new reason you think we'll get a Greek exit from the eurozone in the near future?
"Greece issued a decree on Monday (20 April) to force public bodies to provide funds to the central bank, as the government is desperate to find cash to pay pensions and public salaries next week. "Central government entities are obliged to deposit their cash reserves and transfer their term deposit funds to their accounts at the Bank of Greece," the decree published in the Government Gazette said.
Greece's Central bank is expected to raise €1.2 billion from the move. (Photo: Stanjourdan) Bodies like local governments, hospitals or some state-owned firms are affected, but not pension funds. They are expected to pump about €1.2 billion in Bank of Greece coffers.
"The regulation is submitted due to extremely urgent and unforeseen needs," said the decree"
The financial cost of FFA is about 7bn even with geographical allocation of oil. This is more than 10% of total expenditure. The Scots could borrow some of this initially but would the UK government support this as you may get a Greece type problem. The last time the Scots were net contributors to the UK was back in 2011/2012. The problem is not just falling oil prices but falling oil production and the decimation of the Scottish banking sector.
It is strange irony that the time that the Scots get serious about independence is the time when it does not make sense financially.
Not paying for Trident would save the Scots around 200m a year not the 100bn that a SNP supporter told me yesterday when I pointed out the numbers.
Your problem is a complete lack of understanding of the fiscal position of the UK.
Currently total subsidies paid by Scotland to England average at around £10bn per annum. The goal of the SNP is to engineer a situation where FFA can be implemented with those subsidies being minimised, stopping Scotland having to bail out predominantly the London budget year after year.
It is working very well. We are damn close to that position now.
All the SNP has to do is position the UK so that they get the best deal, FFA without paying subsidies to Westminster and Independence will be inevitable as soon as the relative wealth flushes out. With the additional tax revenues (probably heightened by specific tax cuts) this will be an exponential growth.
Subsidies? Isn't that paying for common UK things like defence?
Not the way it is set up. It is over-paying through a broken system of cost application. The most glaringly obvious being Debt Interest for Westminster's enormous debt pile which Scotland never needed or wanted and the classification of "UK Infrastructure Spending" which makes most English road projects and most London infrastructure "UK Wide" and bills Scotland for things of no benefit to her.
On here they think that England pays for everything , why exactly do they think these turkeys are desperately clinging on to us , I hardly think it is to give us all that free money these idiots think we get. As we see they are foaming at the mouth down south at the thought of us actually having an influence , shit**** themselves that the real numbers will come out some day.
You had your say and voted to stay in the Union.
Nobody asked the Welsh, Irish or English if they agreed.
Responding to a reasoned argument with the comment "utter rubbish" is to start the abuse-which YOU did.
Some of the rhetoric from down south has been racist, though in spite of your comments I did not mention the Conservatives as being racist. Incidentally, it may not qualify as racist, but Boris comments about King Herod etc was buffoonish in the extreme.
Perhaps you should try reading without your prejudices being quite so much to the fore.
"Heavily criticising the SNP, its policies and potential chaotic effect on the UK government does not equal insulting Scots.
Except to our Nat posters, who believe the two are one and the same. "
I think you will find that a lot of people in Scotland are beginning to see many of the attacks on the SNP as indeed anti-Scottish (some of the attacks could easily qualify as racist) rather in the same way that attacks on Gordon Brown by the British press in 2010 came across to many as anti-Scottish.
Hence a boost for Brown and Labour in Scotland in 2010 and for the SNP in 2015.
Utter rubbish.
Not at all , just look at the front pages and read the bull**** on here on a daily basis, never mind th ecrap sites.
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
Ok: the SNP & Labour will cause chaos.
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
We are not talking about you either, Charles. If you think that there will be no bad feeling caused in Scotland by the Tory strategy and that everyone will just shrug their shoulders and say that's politics, I fear you are utterly misreading things. That does not mean that the Tories should not be doing it - I am all for parties doing what it takes - I just wonder what they will do post-election to heal the wounds if they do still believe in the Union. If they don't, it doesn't matter.
I don't see why the Tories should do anything. The SNP are a party that don't believe in the Union and are fair game for any Unionist party to attack. The fact that this also helps the Tory cause makes it entirely logical from a democratic perspective for the Tories to attack.
One actually has to wonder in fact why the Labour party aren't attacking them more. I'm not sure this "roll over and play dead" strategy from Labour towards the SNP is helping either their own cause or the Unionist cause. Giving a free pass on the SNP is only going to help the cause of independence that they support.
How many UKIP seats do you now forecast Mike? I forecast 2.
I'd be surprised if they get less than 5.
I wouldn't.
The drop in UKIP support has been exaggerated. IIRC their highest ever polling average on UKPR was 16%. They're now on 14%. That's not a big decline by any standards.
Enfield North TCTC and Con 252 is completely irreconcilable, I'll agree on that one. Of course it might turn out that way but it simply can't be a midpoint forecast.
Honestly I'd love to see what else Labour is gaining even if some of those are places I simply must have backed the Tories in at odds on.
The financial cost of FFA is about 7bn even with geographical allocation of oil. This is more than 10% of total expenditure. The Scots could borrow some of this initially but would the UK government support this as you may get a Greece type problem. The last time the Scots were net contributors to the UK was back in 2011/2012. The problem is not just falling oil prices but falling oil production and the decimation of the Scottish banking sector.
It is strange irony that the time that the Scots get serious about independence is the time when it does not make sense financially.
Not paying for Trident would save the Scots around 200m a year not the 100bn that a SNP supporter told me yesterday when I pointed out the numbers.
Your problem is a complete lack of understanding of the fiscal position of the UK.
Currently total subsidies paid by Scotland to England average at around £10bn per annum. The goal of the SNP is to engineer a situation where FFA can be implemented with those subsidies being minimised, stopping Scotland having to bail out predominantly the London budget year after year.
It is working very well. We are damn close to that position now.
All the SNP has to do is position the UK so that they get the best deal, FFA without paying subsidies to Westminster and Independence will be inevitable as soon as the relative wealth flushes out. With the additional tax revenues (probably heightened by specific tax cuts) this will be an exponential growth.
Subsidies? Isn't that paying for common UK things like defence?
Not the way it is set up. It is over-paying through a broken system of cost application. The most glaringly obvious being Debt Interest for Westminster's enormous debt pile which Scotland never needed or wanted and the classification of "UK Infrastructure Spending" which makes most English road projects and most London infrastructure "UK Wide" and bills Scotland for things of no benefit to her.
On here they think that England pays for everything , why exactly do they think these turkeys are desperately clinging on to us , I hardly think it is to give us all that free money these idiots think we get. As we see they are foaming at the mouth down south at the thought of us actually having an influence , shit**** themselves that the real numbers will come out some day.
You had your say and voted to stay in the Union.
Nobody asked the Welsh, Irish or English if they agreed.
So now stop whining like a spoilt brat.
Plenty of English and Irish, and a few Welsh, actually voted in the referendum and lots of Scots didn't. It was residentially based, remember.
The financial cost of FFA is about 7bn even with geographical allocation of oil. This is more than 10% of total expenditure. The Scots could borrow some of this initially but would the UKg sector.
It is strange irony that the time that the Scots get serious about independence is the time when it does not make sense financially.
Not paying for Trident would save the Scots around 200m a year not the 100bn that a SNP supporter told me yesterday when I pointed out the numbers.
Your problem is a complete lack of understanding of the fiscal position of the UK.
Currently t defence?
Not the way it to her.
On here they think that England pays for everything , why exactly do they think these turkeys are desperately clinging on to us , I hardly think it is to give us all that free money these idiots think we get. As we see they are foaming at the mouth down south at the thought of us actually having an influence , shit**** themselves that the real numbers will come out some day.
I see you're deciding to take the most extreme positions of any of your opponents and pretend they are the norm, so you can shoot it down in as entertainingly vulgar a way as you can, without the need to be more serious (if you pretend your opponents are all frothing at the mouth crazy, then you don't need to respond with anything but mockery!). Par for the course in political campaigning, but it is false no matter who does it.
The SNP having loads of influence is perfectly legitimate, but Scots will have as much influence as they had before unless you are claiming the number of MPs is changing, it's just that SLAB were ineffective with that influence and the SNP are likely to be more effective. There is also nothing wrong with other people not liking the SNP winning loads of seats - you don't like the Tories winning loads of seats I take it, but they do in other places, and you are free to do so - or decrying their influence; not because it is illegitimate (people peddling that line are just plain wrong), but because they don't like what the SNP will do with that influence.
What a strange world it would be if we had to like what our political opponents would do with their influence. But no, it's all about the insults and the frothing mouths and bitterness, sure. There's nothing reasonable in disagreeing with political opponents and thinking their plans are for the worse, no sir.
I'm off for work shortly so if you wish to insult me, and mock how you can dish it out and take it, best do so quickly, but I think I can fill in the blanks.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
Above 50 implies that Lab/Con/LibDem split at most 8 seats between them.
This is IMO most unlikely.
@JackW Whilst I always listen to your fine ARSE it did forecast 10 seats whilst @Antifrank was ploughing into long odds Scottish bets. Like I said I'm regarding it as a worst case scenario for the SNP.
Back in July 2013 when my ARSE forecast 13 seats for the SNP many on PB thought I was deluded !!
The Indy referendum changed the landscape considerably as has the polling and accordingly the projection has moved substantially.
Of course the Tories should attack Labour in every way they can in order to win. My point is that centring your strategy on a message that says the Scots are about to inflict chaos on the UK is not necessarily the way to show to Scots that you are committed to the Union. I just wonder how the Tories will rebuild bridges after the election, or if they interested in doing so. If they are writing Scotland off forever, why did they invest so much in a No vote last year?
Tough.
The Tories aren't attacking Scots, a steady fraction of whom still vote Tory despite all this so-called negative campaigning. They're attacking the SNP and Labour. Suggesting you can't attack your political opponents is a funny way to run a democracy.
Yet on here on a daily basis if we attack Westminster it is portrayed as anti-English. You cannot have it both ways.
I wouldn't be surprised if they could get a seat not mentioned by anyone rather than ones targeted. Some moribund CLP in a "safe" seat that still believe than campaigning means having a stall in the market square on the 4 Saturdays before polling week and getting the vote out is shouting "vote Labour" from a megaphone up and down the main street. And nothing else. So somebody totally caught off guard. The thing is if UKIP would spot it in time.
@AndyJS I do have some long odds UKIP shots, Rochford & Southend East, Rother Valley, G Grimsby etc but I think these are unlikely to come in now on the UKIP side.
They are saying the *SNP* will inflict chaos, not the Scots.
There's a difference, you do understand that, right?
No, they are saying the SNP and Labour - that's 75% of Scottish voters. It's not me the Tories have to convince, Charles, it's the Scots. I am not sure they will see things in the same way as you.
Ok: the SNP & Labour will cause chaos.
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
How many UKIP seats do you now forecast Mike? I forecast 2.
I'd be surprised if they get less than 5.
I wouldn't.
The drop in UKIP support has been exaggerated. IIRC their highest ever polling average on UKPR was 16%. They're now on 14%. That's not a big decline by any standards.
This time last year Ukip were averaging around 13%. People on here were saying that was inflated because of the upcoming euro elections and that they would dramatically fall back afterwards
A year later and Ukip are polling higher... There are two weeks to go and the same faces are still saying 'I expect them to fall back to...'
How many UKIP seats do you now forecast Mike? I forecast 2.
I'd be surprised if they get less than 5.
I wouldn't.
The drop in UKIP support has been exaggerated. IIRC their highest ever polling average on UKPR was 16%. They're now on 14%. That's not a big decline by any standards.
From what I'm aware Thurrock is very likely to be going purple (not as sure with regards South Thanet). I saw someone earlier saying UKIP won't top 20% in more than a dozen seats, well if they're polling 14% in England & Wales then I'd be pretty certain they'll top 20% in 30 or 40 seats. Big question being how many seats will they top 30% in, and that's almost impossible to say.
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
Above 50 implies that Lab/Con/LibDem split at most 8 seats between them.
This is IMO most unlikely.
@JackW Whilst I always listen to your fine ARSE it did forecast 10 seats whilst @Antifrank was ploughing into long odds Scottish bets. Like I said I'm regarding it as a worst case scenario for the SNP.
Back in July 2013 when my ARSE forecast 13 seats for the SNP many on PB thought I was deluded !!
The Indy referendum changed the landscape considerably as has the polling and accordingly the projection has moved substantially.
How much % do you give back to an incumbent from a constituency poll, or does it depend - 3, 4% something like that ?
South : C 38 L 31 UK 13 LD 10 (swing Con-Lab 7%) Mids : C 39 L 31 UK 16 LD 8 (swing Con-Lab 2%) North: L 44 C 30 UK 14 LD 7 (swing Con - Lab 3%) Scot: SNP 48 L 21 C 18 LD 6 (swing Lab-SNP 24.5% / Lab -Con 11%)
I see that the SNP have now hit 40 with JackW. That still looks quite a bit on the low side to me, I have to say. There's no sign of any kind of reduction in SNP support (if anything, the reverse) and only the Edinburgh South poll gave any kind of hint of tactical voting.
Please recall my ARSE is not a nowcast but a forecast for 7th May.
I appreciate that, but with less than three weeks to go, swingback away from the SNP is going to need to start to materialise soon for 40 to be the right number. Right now the par to me looks somewhere above 50.
Above 50 implies that Lab/Con/LibDem split at most 8 seats between them.
This is IMO most unlikely.
@JackW Whilst I always listen to your fine ARSE it did forecast 10 seats whilst @Antifrank was ploughing into long odds Scottish bets. Like I said I'm regarding it as a worst case scenario for the SNP.
Back in July 2013 when my ARSE forecast 13 seats for the SNP many on PB thought I was deluded !!
The Indy referendum changed the landscape considerably as has the polling and accordingly the projection has moved substantially.
How much % do you give back to an incumbent from a constituency poll, or does it depend - 3, 4% something like that ?
It varies considerably depending on a number on economic, social and demographic factors and also political party, and there are variables there too.
South : C 38 L 31 UK 13 LD 10 (swing Con-Lab 7%) Mids : C 39 L 31 UK 16 LD 8 (swing Con-Lab 2%) North: L 44 C 30 UK 14 LD 7 (swing Con - Lab 3%) Scot: SNP 48 L 21 C 18 LD 6 (swing Lab-SNP 24.5% / Lab -Con 11%)
UK: C 34.5 L 33 UK 13 LD 8 (swing Con-Lab 2.9%)
South and North are quite broad - the SW is certainly looking happier for the Tories than London.
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
How so? In his confidence he will win, or Labour will win?
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
He's counting down the weeks until he understands how pensions work for 'normal' people, rather than over privileged MPs.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
I agree with all those except Enfield North which I think is TCTC.
It is very odd that we agree on these "13 seats that will shape the General Election result " yet we differ greatly on the overall result. I have :
My shares are very close to the latest ELBOW and the prediction is a "nowcast".
Strange that we agree on these 13. We must disagree on a lot of others.
Bloody Hell - Can you list your full lot of Con losses ?
There are the first 20 of 60 Con losses to Lab in E&W (including Enfield N)
Amber Bedford Blackpo N Brentfo Brighto Kemp Broxto Bury No Cannoc Cardiff North Carlisle Carmart Chester Cleetho Colne V Corby Croydo Central Dewsbu Dover Dudley S Ealing C
I can't seem to post the full 60.
These are based on my best estimates of switching behaviour by party and type of seat, and is consistent with the latest ELBOW vote shares.
Do any look obviously wrong? If so I'll go back and see why they've come out that way. This is a mathematical exercise on switching benahiour and uses no local knowledge.
Responding to a reasoned argument with the comment "utter rubbish" is to start the abuse-which YOU did.
Some of the rhetoric from down south has been racist, though in spite of your comments I did not mention the Conservatives as being racist. Incidentally, it may not qualify as racist, but Boris comments about King Herod etc was buffoonish in the extreme.
Perhaps you should try reading without your prejudices being quite so much to the fore.
You responded to my point on the Conservatives campaign strategy mentioning that very point. I note you can't cite any critique of the SNP by them or their politicians that easily qualifies as racist.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott On train I heard a bunch of strangers talking about election. The theme was how they wish they could vote for Sturgeon. We were near Reading.
Well, the SNP are offering goodies that appeal to disgruntled Labour voters. The former would hoover up left leaning seats south of the border if they went for it.
Greece should have declared bankruptcy years ago, the Greek political class sacrificed their own people to save the financial institutions that made the bad loans.
In regard to the current Tory strategy, they seem more interested in creating fear about the prospect of Labour being backed by the SNP. Before the election it was going to be about the choice between Cameron and Miliband. Do the Tories now believe that Miliband is now more popular with the electorate and it would do them no good to continue attacking him ?
If you are CCHQ and you are getting reports back from constituencies across the country along the lines of "Christ on a bike! This SNP stuff is KILLING Labour on the doorsteps!", do you
1) stick with a plan that you were getting stick about because it wasn't working or
2) run with "the SNP will kill your first-born" thing that is the first idea in the entire campaign - from either the Tory or Labour side - that has got traction?
It's above my pay-grade, but I'd hazard a guess.....
Quite clearly, Labour have picked up that this is starting to hurt them on the doorstep. If they hadn't they wouldn't be attacking it in such shrill and strident terms.
They'd either ignore it, or smile and shrug it off otherwise.
Cue Nick "tis merely a flesh wound" Palmer in 5, 4, 3.....
His constant 'tick' and 'tock' posts are extremely irritating!
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
How so? In his confidence he will win, or Labour will win?
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
Time is on Labour's side while the polls stand as they are. It isn't a neutral consideration. The closer we get to polling day without the Conservatives surging ahead, the less time they have to turn it around.
Perhaps. It just royally winds me up the way he keeps daily pointing it out!
But perhaps other posters below are correct: I should relax and enjoy the potential hubris.
Of course the Tories should attack Labour in every way they can in order to win. My point is that centring your strategy on a message that says the Scots are about to inflict chaos on the UK is not necessarily the way to show to Scots that you are committed to the Union. I just wonder how the Tories will rebuild bridges after the election, or if they interested in doing so. If they are writing Scotland off forever, why did they invest so much in a No vote last year?
Tough.
The Tories aren't attacking Scots, a steady fraction of whom still vote Tory despite all this so-called negative campaigning. They're attacking the SNP and Labour. Suggesting you can't attack your political opponents is a funny way to run a democracy.
Yet on here on a daily basis if we attack Westminster it is portrayed as anti-English. You cannot have it both ways.
Westminster isn't an opposing party, the Tories, Labour, Lib Dems etc are - you're attacking an institution not a party. The equivalent would be people attacking Holyrood not the SNP. I think you've attacked the Tories quite often without it being portrayed as anti-English.
Of course its possible to be anti-Scottish while attacking the SNP, or anti-English while attacking the Tories - but merely attacking a political party is not the same as attacking a nation.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott On train I heard a bunch of strangers talking about election. The theme was how they wish they could vote for Sturgeon. We were near Reading.
Well, the SNP are offering goodies that appeal to disgruntled Labour voters. The former would hoover up left leaning seats south of the border if they went for it.
SNP are the only party left calling out in public for benefit handouts for the feckless - of course they will have a section of support elsewhere.
Elmet a Enfield North Erewash Glouces Great Y Haleso Harrow East Hasting Hendon High Pe Hove Ipswich Keighle Kingsw Lancast Lincoln Loughb Milton S Moreca Norwic Nuneat Pendle Plymou Pudsey Rossen Sherwo Stevena Stockto Stroud Swindo S Thurroc Vale of Glamorgan Warring Warwic N Warwick & Leamington Waven Weaver Wirral W Wolver Worces
I like the "tick tock" posts. They are posts which have relevance for political betting.
How so? In his confidence he will win, or Labour will win?
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
Pleased to see JackW's swing! I do expect to win by a reasonable margin, and there are signs that the Tories have stopped bothering seriously - AS is skipping the next two hustings events, Tory canvass groups are typically 3-5 people, and total Tory poster count has staggered up to 3 (one of the Conservative clubs finally put one up) to Labour's 800.
The tick-tock posts are of course mainly a tease, and I've teased enough: now that the postal votes are here. I'll give them a rest. The underlying observation that Labour will form the next government if the Conservatives don't break through soon does however remain valid.
On Cambridge, I think i've said before that I have no personal knowledge. It simply strikes me as the sort of seat where there will be maximium Red Liberal presence, unlike some of the LibDem seats in the west country where LibDem votes are not that political. But Ashcroft's poll in the seat suggests otherwise, so punters shouldn't attach special importance to my thoughts on that.
The majority of Scots will still be voting for unionist parties.
Are you sure about that? Last three Scottish polls:
Yougov - SNP 49% LabLibCon 47%
Yougov - SNPGreen 50% LabLibConUKIP 49%
TNS - SNPGreen 55% LabLibConUKIP 43.5%
By my reckoning the monthly Survation/DR poll for Scotland is now overdue. As Survation picked up the SNP surge 6 months before the other pollsters caught up, it will be very interesting to see whether the increasing surge picked up by Lord A is being repeated at a national level. My gut feeling is that the SNP will break through 50% and SLAB are heading closer to 20% than 30%, with the Tories starting to nip at SLAB's heels.
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to the JNN the contents of the latest ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election and "JackW Dozen" Projections. (Changes From 18th April Projection) :
Con 303 (+1) .. Lab 253 (-2) .. LibDem 29 (+1) .. SNP 40 (NC) .. PC 2 .. NI 18 .. UKIP 2 .. Respect 1 .. Green 1 .. Ind 0 .. Speaker 1
"JackW Dozen" - 13 seats that will shape the General Election result :
Bury North - Con Hold Pudsey - Likely Con Hold Broxtowe - Likely Lab Gain from TCTC Warwickshire North - TCTC Cambridge - LibDem Hold Ipswich - Con Hold Watford - TCTC Croydon Central - Con Hold Enfield North - Likely Lab Gain Cornwall North - TCTC Great Yarmouth - Con Hold Vale of Glamorgan - Con Hold Ochil and South Perthshire - SNP Gain
Changes From 18 Apr - Broxtowe moves from TCTC to Likely Lab Gain
TCTC - Too Close To Call - Less than 500 votes Likely Hold/Gain - 500 - 2500 votes Gain/Hold - Over 2500 .......................................................................................
ARSE is sponsored by Auchentennach Fine Pies (Est 1745)
WIND - Whimsical Independent News Division JNN - Jacobite News Network ARSE - Anonymous Random Selection of Electors APLOMB - Auchentennach Pies Leading Outsales Mainland Britain
Interesting Jack has changed his Broxtowe prediction, as the information I have heard is the Conservatives are very confident they can hold, even more so in Amber Valley. Both I predict will be mighty close again.
Comments
The Tories are attacking Miliband, as they always have. He is weak, and his prospectus is ruinous. That has been their campaign strategy all along.
The only difference now is the rise of the SNP amplifies both of those factors. He is too weak to win alone, he would need the SNP to prop him up. And the SNP prospectus is even more ruinous than Labour alone.
As for wounds healing, people in Scotland who hate the Tories have done so since at least 1979. None of this is going to change any of that.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/abhishek-bachchan-leaves-leicester-star-struck/364355
And presumably wheeling them out is not a good idea in England either, though for other reasons?
Therefore vote Tory.
It's really not insulting: it's a political party arguing for people to vote for them. Perhaps for negative reasons, but really, it's not an insult.
If anything Labour is insulting my intelligence, by pretending that they are serious about reducing the deficit.
I really don't think it would be in Scotland's interests to demonstrate its unwillingness to honour its end of a contract. It certainly wouldn't be allowed to do so as part of Full Fiscal Autonomy, when the Scottish Parliament would be subordinate to Westminster.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott
On train I heard a bunch of strangers talking about election. The theme was how they wish they could vote for Sturgeon. We were near Reading.
Anyway, think your Croydon Central prediction is way off. It will almost certainly be a Labour gain. Spoke with a few canvassers from there and it looks good for Labour.
The SNP are not interested in meaningful coalition for the good of the Union. They are interested in inflicting maximum damage on the Union, at any cost.
It is not anti-union to try and prevent that
"A senior Labour figure has distanced himself from a UKIP candidate after appearing to have endorsed his campaign.
Keith Vaz features on an election leaflet for Mark Reckless. Mr Vaz is quoted as saying "Mark is one of my closest friends in parliament. You are lucky to have him." Endorsing a candidate from a rival party is a breach of Labour Party rules."
Of course if he has underestimated them then you can knock Labour down to 240 ish..
The Japanese are pressing ahead with new MagLev systems while we procrastinate despite the technology having been developed in the UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/21/japans-maglev-train-notches-up-new-world-speed-record-in-test-run
Ipswich and Bury North are 'bold' predictions imo. Certainly the Con majority in each one if there is one is sub 2500 votes.
But their biggest effect will hopefully be in reducing the number of safe seats.
But you really are flogging a dead horse here.
Abolish the bedroom tax
Bring hospitals back under state ownership - end PFI
Stop the further cuts proposed by the county council
Abolish IHT.
Since IHT is not a particularly good tax - it's too easily avoided - this comes across as a moderate, sensible set of policies which might appeal fairly well in Labour seats too.
yup.
Tactical voting, Edinburgh South.
Ashcroft shows the SNP coming to the lead from nowhere to lead the SLAB incumbent Ian Murray by a short head. The LDs who came second last time have dropped right back. The Conservatives remain third with roughly the same percentage as 2010.
I'm a Conservative unionist, so should I hold my nose and vote "tactically"? I have concluded not, because from my perspective there's really not much difference between SNP and SLAB: if Labour does get into office they will dance to the SNP tune anyway. So to give heart to the Cons in the next election I shall eschew tactics and vote according to my true preferences.
However if Murray wins the seat I'll be pleased that he has saved Roger's bacon.
Some big odds now available on the Labour retread candidate - the Cambridge one not the Broxtowe one.
I see many on here are forecasting Ukip will get 2 seats
If anyone wants to split the over round and have a straight even money bet, I will take 3 or more
Best odds available in the world... Even money Ukip under 2.5
Your size is my size
Roll up roll up
https://youtu.be/dquwQhUEvk0
https://twitter.com/laurapitel/status/590429652046503936
It is very odd that we agree on these "13 seats that will shape the General Election result " yet we differ greatly on the overall result. I have :
... share ... seats
Con ... 33.8% ... 252
Lab ... 34.0% ... 285
LD ... 8.3% ... 30
SNP ... 4.3% ...59
UKIP ...13.8% ...2
Grn ... 5.2% ...1
My shares are very close to the latest ELBOW and the prediction is a "nowcast".
Strange that we agree on these 13. We must disagree on a lot of others.
I reckon only Carswell will win.
@JamesClayton5: SNP's Angus Robertson tells #Newsnight that negotiation with Labour will be possible because of previous cooperation over issues like Syria
@JamesClayton5: Angus Robertson also told #newsnight that Ed Miliband has personally 'picked up the phone' to him on Syria.
This is IMO most unlikely.
SNP politics is based on fantasy economics. Nicola Sturgeon said the other day that Wales should get higher spending, but Scotland should not pay for it because "Scotland was not subsidised". So presumably London should not pay for it either on the same basis, as London is not subsidised?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/money/ukip-manifesto-11-sensible-policies-5528804
That is utter rubbish, and I stand by it. Accusations of racism should never be thrown around lightly.
I don't feel any of us on here need a day to day countdown to the General Election. We all know when it is.
2. Your complete SNP sweep of Scotland will not occur.
3. It is almost impossible to reconcile your agreement on the Con Holds in my ARSE with the Cons down at 252.
Everyone is walking a tightrope in this election, except the SNP which has just fired a blunderbuss.
If Labour volubly resist the SNPs demands they will lose all their seats in Scotland and thus have to go begging to them - but might preserve their English vote .
If the Tories are hugely successful in attacking the SNP then they may actually persuade labour voters to stick with SLAB - but they may persuade wavering voters in England to vote tory.
Ultimately the English voters will have to look down the barrel of the SNP '45' and decide if they can rely on being lucky or need to don the Tory body armour.
I'd be surprised if they get less than 5.
I wouldn't.
https://euobserver.com/economic/128390
"Greece issued a decree on Monday (20 April) to force public bodies to provide funds to the central bank, as the government is desperate to find cash to pay pensions and public salaries next week.
"Central government entities are obliged to deposit their cash reserves and transfer their term deposit funds to their accounts at the Bank of Greece," the decree published in the Government Gazette said.
Greece's Central bank is expected to raise €1.2 billion from the move. (Photo: Stanjourdan)
Bodies like local governments, hospitals or some state-owned firms are affected, but not pension funds. They are expected to pump about €1.2 billion in Bank of Greece coffers.
"The regulation is submitted due to extremely urgent and unforeseen needs," said the decree"
Nobody asked the Welsh, Irish or English if they agreed.
So now stop whining like a spoilt brat.
Responding to a reasoned argument with the comment "utter rubbish" is to start the abuse-which YOU did.
Some of the rhetoric from down south has been racist, though in spite of your comments I did not mention the Conservatives as being racist. Incidentally, it may not qualify as racist, but Boris comments about King Herod etc was buffoonish in the extreme.
Perhaps you should try reading without your prejudices being quite so much to the fore.
One actually has to wonder in fact why the Labour party aren't attacking them more. I'm not sure this "roll over and play dead" strategy from Labour towards the SNP is helping either their own cause or the Unionist cause. Giving a free pass on the SNP is only going to help the cause of independence that they support.
Yougov - SNP 49% LabLibCon 47%
Yougov - SNPGreen 50% LabLibConUKIP 49%
TNS - SNPGreen 55% LabLibConUKIP 43.5%
The drop in UKIP support has been exaggerated. IIRC their highest ever polling average on UKPR was 16%. They're now on 14%. That's not a big decline by any standards.
Enfield North TCTC and Con 252 is completely irreconcilable, I'll agree on that one. Of course it might turn out that way but it simply can't be a midpoint forecast.
Honestly I'd love to see what else Labour is gaining even if some of those are places I simply must have backed the Tories in at odds on.
Mr. Flashman (deceased), cheers for that answer. Isn't 11-12 May when the deal may fail if funds aren't forthcoming? Or could it be even earlier?
The Indy referendum changed the landscape considerably as has the polling and accordingly the projection has moved substantially.
I wouldn't be surprised if they could get a seat not mentioned by anyone rather than ones targeted. Some moribund CLP in a "safe" seat that still believe than campaigning means having a stall in the market square on the 4 Saturdays before polling week and getting the vote out is shouting "vote Labour" from a megaphone up and down the main street. And nothing else.
So somebody totally caught off guard. The thing is if UKIP would spot it in time.
This time last year Ukip were averaging around 13%. People on here were saying that was inflated because of the upcoming euro elections and that they would dramatically fall back afterwards
A year later and Ukip are polling higher... There are two weeks to go and the same faces are still saying 'I expect them to fall back to...'
Incredible mindset, quite thought provoking
From what I'm aware Thurrock is very likely to be going purple (not as sure with regards South Thanet). I saw someone earlier saying UKIP won't top 20% in more than a dozen seats, well if they're polling 14% in England & Wales then I'd be pretty certain they'll top 20% in 30 or 40 seats. Big question being how many seats will they top 30% in, and that's almost impossible to say.
http://www.westerneye.net/news/2015/04/natalie-bennett-calls-for-no-more-shouting-and-chicken-noises-in-uk-politics/
Ed PM after GE dropping below 1.9.
Some of this is the latter market waking up, but the gap looks a bit overdone now.
South : C 38 L 31 UK 13 LD 10 (swing Con-Lab 7%)
Mids : C 39 L 31 UK 16 LD 8 (swing Con-Lab 2%)
North: L 44 C 30 UK 14 LD 7 (swing Con - Lab 3%)
Scot: SNP 48 L 21 C 18 LD 6 (swing Lab-SNP 24.5% / Lab -Con 11%)
UK: C 34.5 L 33 UK 13 LD 8 (swing Con-Lab 2.9%)
Each seat is accorded a specific ARSE filter.
Amber
Bedford
Blackpo N
Brentfo
Brighto Kemp
Broxto
Bury No
Cannoc
Cardiff North
Carlisle
Carmart
Chester
Cleetho
Colne V
Corby
Croydo Central
Dewsbu
Dover
Dudley S
Ealing C
I can't seem to post the full 60.
These are based on my best estimates of switching behaviour by party and type of seat, and is consistent with the latest ELBOW vote shares.
Do any look obviously wrong? If so I'll go back and see why they've come out that way. This is a mathematical exercise on switching benahiour and uses no local knowledge.
Thank you.
Bennett claims she can shear sheep.
That is a straw man attack as I did not claim the Conservatives were racist.
But perhaps other posters below are correct: I should relax and enjoy the potential hubris.
Of course its possible to be anti-Scottish while attacking the SNP, or anti-English while attacking the Tories - but merely attacking a political party is not the same as attacking a nation.
I'm told that a lot of money is being placed on an independent , Richard Scott, who has now moved in to 7/1 with some bookies.
He has made a call to other candidates to stand aside so it would be a straight fight between him and the new Tory - Rishi Sunak.
http://www.darlingtonandstocktontimes.co.uk/news/12885227.UPDATED__Richmond_General_Election_candidates_reject__step_aside__request_from_independent/
Surely there's no way that Sunak can be beaten but something might be going on.
Elmet a
Enfield North
Erewash
Glouces
Great Y
Haleso
Harrow East
Hasting
Hendon
High Pe
Hove
Ipswich
Keighle
Kingsw
Lancast
Lincoln
Loughb
Milton S
Moreca
Norwic
Nuneat
Pendle
Plymou
Pudsey
Rossen
Sherwo
Stevena
Stockto
Stroud
Swindo S
Thurroc
Vale of Glamorgan
Warring
Warwic N
Warwick & Leamington
Waven
Weaver
Wirral W
Wolver
Worces
The tick-tock posts are of course mainly a tease, and I've teased enough: now that the postal votes are here. I'll give them a rest. The underlying observation that Labour will form the next government if the Conservatives don't break through soon does however remain valid.
On Cambridge, I think i've said before that I have no personal knowledge. It simply strikes me as the sort of seat where there will be maximium Red Liberal presence, unlike some of the LibDem seats in the west country where LibDem votes are not that political. But Ashcroft's poll in the seat suggests otherwise, so punters shouldn't attach special importance to my thoughts on that.
No.