Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A record-breaking 469,047 registered online to vote yesterd
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A record-breaking 469,047 registered online to vote yesterday before the midnight deadline
On top of the online registrations a further 15,965 people registering by post. The total who signed themselves up was the equivalent of well over 750 people for each parliamentary constituency or roughly one percent of the electorate.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
IVR may work out OK for Labour...
Of course the vast majority of those who opted not to register would not have bothered to vote anyway so the effect on the actual result will be much, much smaller but in terms of current voting preference as expressed to pollsters it might make a significant difference given the closeness of the polls.
Of course, whether the other 6.5 million genuinely exist and intended to vote if they did is another matter.
On another matter, is this scale of registration on one day plausible?
Making it easier to register to vote online is a good thing. I moved 5 years ago and the procedure then was a real pain in the backside.
There also seems to be a little confusion in Scotland where we know turnout was 90% in September - is everyone that registered for the referendum automatically registered for the GE or did they need to re-register? This is really important both for turnout bets and any boundary reform next term.
@JamieRoss7: Coburn tells me he thinks he'll get "a very decent majority" in the election. "I can't wait to see the look on Nicola Sturgeon's face."
Leaving aside this late rush, if fewer people are on the register than in previous years, then that will increase the turnout. The sort of people who didn't vote in 2010 are more likely to become the sort of people who aren't even registered this year, so you could have exactly the same number of people voting, but an apparent increase in turnout because registrations are lower.
It would be interesting to see the effect (if it is visible above the noise).
I feel Labour is disadvantaged by the new registration laws, and the registrations yesterday helps redress the balance to some extent.
Must admit the high number does sound a bit odd – I wonder how much was due to panic by existing signees who may not have received their polling cards yet, rather than signing on for the first time.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Council-accused-mixing-Muslim-names-election/story-26362452-detail/story.html
Looks as if they are worried that the registers are not accurate.
Also I dare say there are a fair number of people like me who have just recently moved house. To which, I'm not 100% sure that I have been registered. Stockport council say I have, but not in a way that makes me feel confident - and no polling card received yet.
"In three hours of traipsing around doorsteps of South Thanet, before ending up in the pub, there were no negative reactions to Farage. "
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/the-battle-for-south-thanet-can-nigel-farage-win/
Her first vote was the referendum. I seriously doubt any vote she makes from here on is going to be anything other than an anti-climax. After all, we were assured that it was a once in a generation thing.
I suspect vast majority will, but not all.
16 yr olds of course shouldn't be allowed to vote in this election.
Maria Eagle: Wirral West
Rachel Reeves: Elmet & Rothwell
Twigg: Hove
Watson: Lancaster & Fleetwood
Dugher: Bristol West
I agree that a chunk of that figure will already registered, and just re-registering *to be sure* - the kind of perpetually anxious person who turns the cooker off at the wall before popping out of the house.
Turn up at the polling station, and see if they let you vote.
I've put in all the Ashcroft contituency polls and, for those constituencies, used Ashcroft rather than my mathematical calculations. The Ashcroft polls are likely to pick up local effects whereas my method doesn't.
The result is:
Con 268
Lab 274
LD 28
SNP 57
PC 3
Grn 1
UKIP 2
UKIP seems to harm Lab more than Con in some critical seats.
NB Clegg loses Sheffield Hallam and Farage doesn't win Thanet S according to Ashcroft.
He'll get more publicity, and every time he opens his gob, it pushes people away from UKIP.
Meaningless large number..
Root/Ali/Jordan/Stokes - 4 non specialist bowlers - after a test match where we failed to bowl them out.
Wonder what will happen in Blackburn with the % of postal votes.
Surely Labour must worry about their vote being hit both in numbers as well as efficiency.
If you fancy OGH tip on 70%+ turnout you can get 7/2 on Betfair (~4.5 last time I checked, which was yesterday tbf) on the 70-75% turnout band. Turnout only needs to be 70.1% for it to pay out.
DYOR.
Says it all, someone who wasn't selected by Kent last year is in our test team.
Registration and the voting process should be as complex as possible, keeps the daft and feckless from having an undeserved say. Better yet introduce a literacy test.
"Sir, the Tories have a £15 million advantage over us coming into this election — money they have been pouring into the seats that will decide the result."
Tories seem confident on PBer's Scottish Books too:
With Labour facing wipeout in Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon is already planning how she'll "change the direction" of a weak Miliband government. That would mean chaos for Britain, and we'd all pay for it - SHARE this to get the word out.
But yes, I think OGH's bet on turnout being higher as a result is quite attractive although 70.1% is quite a target.
Also had my longest ever queue to vote last GE... and yet turnout was 59.6% in Sheffield Central ?! Work that one out...
*dons flame-proof suit*