My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
Get Real. FPTP positively encourages people to LIE when they vote. Look up Duverger's Law.
If you support such a morally bankrupt system, don't be surprised if people smarter than you find ways to manipulate it in ways you never thought of...
Duverger's Law - at least where I've seen it summarised - misses a key aspect. Although FPTP might encourage a two-party system, it also incentivises those parties to aim for a wide appeal. Whereas the current Conservatives might be the union of at least two, maybe three, parties in a PR system they are a broad church at the moment. Thus the voter is not necessarily incentivised to "lie" or misrepresent one's own preference, but rather to alter the party of one's choosing from within.
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency. My family family were born and grew up in Twickenham and I feel a close affinity. My vote swap is with former neighbours and long standing friends.
If you have FPTP then it is inevitable that people will seek to find a way of making their vote count.
Mike- you do not have to justify yourself. My vote Swop is with a Green I have never met who will vote in a Labour marginal I would hardly know existed. Every vote counts comrade.
@tnewtondunn: EXCL: David Cameron and Boris Johnson warn Britain will face "constitutional crisis” if Labour take power with SNP http://t.co/9kGYshKHu5
@Pong I think that at 9/4 the LDs are good value in Montgomery. From what I can gather they've got about a 45% chance. Organisation is very strong and their candidate has been able to say that she is not Lembit Opik.
But didn't the Conservatives gain the equivalent Welsh Assembly seat in 2011 ?
Now perhaps the legacy of Lembit was still working then and has now dissipated.
I wouldn't expect a LibDems gain there but then I wouldn't be surprised if the LibDems did make a solitary gain somewhere as their history tends to be one of surprise gains.
Bosworth is a possibility for a longshot LD gain.
The LDs are in a strong second place; Hinckley council is well run, there is some kipper element splitting here and the Tory incumbent is a barking mad Old Etonian who believes Astrology is the answer to the NHS crisis. I kid you not:
Labour is now the only genuine unionist party,north and south of the border.Tories of moderate unionist opinion must switch to Labour,as Lord Tebbit advices. Alex Massie seems to agree.It's an odd world when at least 2 Spectator writers are advocating Labour.He sounds as if he is joining Rod Liddle in doing so. yes-of-course-an-snp-backed-labour-government-is-perfectly-legitimate
It's Mike Smithson's vote and he should be allowed to do what he likes with it.
So he should be allowed to contract to sell it to the highest bidder? That's certainly a view, albeit an extreme one, but if contracting to sell your vote for one form of consideration is prohibited, it is difficult why it should not be prohibited for all forms of consideration.
My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.
So far on the BBC News at 10 we have: Tesco, immigration crisis, the PM playing with 3 year olds, Ed is sexy, Clegg promising pay rises, the vault robbery, a murder, the flash crash, social care, manchester taxi driver.
The SNP mentioned only once within the PM & Boris playing with 3 year olds report.
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.
My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
Yeah, I can't think of a more egregious subversion of democracy than somebody deciding how to cast their own vote based on criteria they choose. Only votes carefully calculated from the Official List Of Valid Reasons To Vote are okay, everything else is morally reprehensible.
It's a subversion of the principle that we have a system based on local constituencies.
The right of the people of Twickenham to select their representative is paramount.
The LibDems advocated a change in the rules and the people rejected it. So they should abide by that decision not circumnavigate it.
The right of the people of Twickenham who aren't Mike, you mean? Because you seem to think it's paramount that he DOESN'T get the right to choose his representative. Or at least doesn't get to choose them by means you don't approve of.
If I roll a die to choose who I vote for, does that also undermine the rights of my neighbours? What if I vote tactically? What if I try to vote for who I want but I just don't pay quite as much attention to the parties' campaigns as I should?
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
Indeed so .... but that is unquestionably Mike's right, albeit it undermines by one single vote the inevitable fact that :
@Pong I think that at 9/4 the LDs are good value in Montgomery. From what I can gather they've got about a 45% chance. Organisation is very strong and their candidate has been able to say that she is not Lembit Opik.
But didn't the Conservatives gain the equivalent Welsh Assembly seat in 2011 ?
Now perhaps the legacy of Lembit was still working then and has now dissipated.
I wouldn't expect a LibDems gain there but then I wouldn't be surprised if the LibDems did make a solitary gain somewhere as their history tends to be one of surprise gains.
Correct, there was a huge swing against the LibDems in Montgomeryshire in the Assembly elections.
The former LibDem AM (Mick Bates) had been convicted of common assault.
The Tory candidate is a former member of Plaid Cymru, a Welsh speaking farmer.
So I think (unusually) the Tories have been quite savvy and have found someone who can appeal to both the Welsh-speaking west of the constituency and the farming vote. I don’t see Glyn Davies losing.
The LibDems have a reasonable chance of retaining Ceredigion and B&R, though.
Dear me so the people of Montgomery(shire) were represented by a pair of LibDem nutters.
Always an increased risk with it being a 'one party state' for so long.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.
I give it six months before OGH is very bitter about what Ed and Nicola have done to his savings...
Nothing worse than getting into other inter-web folks' arguments: If the target cannot defend themself no further participant should intervene. Given that; One wonders from where and whence Auntie Hortence will be released...?
Thanks to those who replied to my previous post btw. Most intriguing. I do get the sense that if Farage loses though it will feel like a disappointment.
If he doesn't get in I think it is quite sad that a man who has campaigned for so long, achieved so much and also had a huge impact on the establishment political parties and their attitudes to issues such as the EU and immigration, will never get to sit on the green benches.
Personally I think a new leader will be quite refreshing as there are a number of very strong candidates. The same cannot be said about some of the other parties.
St George's day tomorrow - last one before our new Scotch overlords write our budgets.
Are Glenmorangie about to run the country ?
Glenmorangie were taken over by Hennessey as was Glen Moray and Ardbeg. May I suggest Hazelburn, that is like drinking raw peat water. Which is probably what you will fell like when Salmond writes that first budget
Labour is now the only genuine unionist party,north and south of the border.Tories of moderate unionist opinion must switch to Labour,as Lord Tebbit advices. Alex Massie seems to agree.It's an odd world when at least 2 Spectator writers are advocating Labour.He sounds as if he is joining Rod Liddle in doing so. yes-of-course-an-snp-backed-labour-government-is-perfectly-legitimate
Think that North of the Border bit may be optimistic and current predictions
It's Mike Smithson's vote and he should be allowed to do what he likes with it.
So he should be allowed to contract to sell it to the highest bidder? That's certainly a view, albeit an extreme one, but if contracting to sell your vote for one form of consideration is prohibited, it is difficult why it should not be prohibited for all forms of consideration.
Sophistry. He's not selling it to anyone.
It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.
Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...
My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.
Vote swapping may well be legal, but that doesn't necessarily make it reasonable or justifiable. If I promise to vote a certain way or refrain from voting because a friend will do me a favour, most would agree my action to be reprehensible. It makes no difference whether the nature of that favour is paying me £5, exercising his right to vote in a certain way, or buying a third party lunch. In any event, the Electoral Commission (thankfully) has no jurisdiction to determine what is or what is not a corrupt practice. That jurisdiction belongs to the courts, and there is no authority on the matter.
My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
But , of course , it is quite ok for people with a 2nd home in Cornwall and live there 2 or 3 weeks a year to use their vote to subvert the local constituents' wishes
Do they own property there .....tick Do they own land there ... Tick Do they pay local taxes there ....tick
Labour is now the only genuine unionist party,north and south of the border.
How so? I've yet to hear how the Tories attacking the SNP shows they are not unionist. From what I can gather it's because by attacking a SNP-Lab pact of some kind so much, it undermines the union, but the fact is the SNP winning a landslide does that on its own, and how does the Tories attacking a SNP-Lab pack make it worse? The only thing that would the union stronger, in theory, is Labour not losing dozens of seats to the SNP, but that's not the Tories fault, and given the spread of Tories in Scotland, tactical voting won't save many Lab MPs if SLAB cannot save themselves. Moreover, how could parties seeking to win majorities openly advocate tactical voting to save their chief opponents in another party of the country?
Sun Politics @SunPolitics · 38 secs38 seconds ago YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
zzzzzzzzzzz - how on earth do you raise some enthusiasm with such banality zzzzzzzz
Joint lowest Tory/ Labour combined vote since April 1st. Joint highest vote share for UKIP. All within MOE - so I'll go off to sleep (or play online bridge)
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.
I give it six months before OGH is very bitter about what Ed and Nicola have done to his savings...
Just wait until those two miserable puritans pile up taxes on gambling...
My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
Yeah, I can't think of a more egregious subversion of democracy than somebody deciding how to cast their own vote based on criteria they choose. Only votes carefully calculated from the Official List Of Valid Reasons To Vote are okay, everything else is morally reprehensible.
It's a subversion of the principle that we have a system based on local constituencies.
The right of the people of Twickenham to select their representative is paramount.
The LibDems advocated a change in the rules and the people rejected it. So they should abide by that decision not circumnavigate it.
The right of the people of Twickenham who aren't Mike, you mean? Because you seem to think it's paramount that he DOESN'T get the right to choose his representative. Or at least doesn't get to choose them by means you don't approve of.
If I roll a die to choose who I vote for, does that also undermine the rights of my neighbours? What if I vote tactically? What if I try to vote for who I want but I just don't pay quite as much attention to the parties' campaigns as I should?
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
As I understand it, Mike has voted in Bedford and his friend has voted in Twickenham - both in their own constituencies. I cannot see how the law was broken. I am not aware that you have to vote for the party you support.
But isn't tactical voting exactly that ? Vote not for the party you support.
Labour is now the only genuine unionist party,north and south of the border.
How so? I've yet to hear how the Tories attacking the SNP shows they are not unionist. From what I can gather it's because by attacking a SNP-Lab pact of some kind so much, it undermines the union, but the fact is the SNP winning a landslide does that on its own, and how does the Tories attacking a SNP-Lab pack make it worse? The only thing that would the union stronger, in theory, is Labour not losing dozens of seats to the SNP, but that's not the Tories fault, and given the spread of Tories in Scotland, tactical voting won't save many Lab MPs if SLAB cannot save themselves. Moreover, how could parties seeking to win majorities openly advocate tactical voting to save their chief opponents in another party of the country?
What is the national share of votes being cast by post? We haven't got the final figures yet in my patch, but estimate that it's around 25%.
So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.
As I understand it, Mike has voted in Bedford and his friend has voted in Twickenham - both in their own constituencies. I cannot see how the law was broken. I am not aware that you have to vote for the party you support.
But isn't tactical voting exactly that ? Vote not for the party you support.
Yeah but when you tactically vote in agreement with somebody else rather than on your own, quantum action-at-a-distance effects are induced which TAKE AWAY THE RIGHTS OF THE GOOD MEN AND PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN GODDAMN REPRESENTATIVES.
It's all pretty complex physics, you probably wouldn't understand.
roadto326 @roadto326 6m6 minutes ago @StephenDFisher has consistently forecast the Tories to do better than any other model I've seen. Will deserve a lot of credit if correct
My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.
Vote swapping may well be legal, but that doesn't necessarily make it reasonable or justifiable. If I promise to vote a certain way or refrain from voting because a friend will do me a favour, most would agree my action to be reprehensible. It makes no difference whether the nature of that favour is paying me £5, exercising his right to vote in a certain way, or buying a third party lunch. In any event, the Electoral Commission (thankfully) has no jurisdiction to determine what is or what is not a corrupt practice. That jurisdiction belongs to the courts, and there is no authority on the matter.
Hopefully they will settle the matter, as the problem seems to me that some are characterising it as the exchange of favours equivalent to accepting money, whereas to my mind it is nothing more than the person in the other constituency, from all the factors that could influence their vote, deciding the opinion of person X in the other constituency to be the biggest factor. I think that is the wrong factor to hinge their decision upon on, but it's not a real favour as neither is actually getting the ability to vote in the other constituency, they are not receiving anything at all.
Nevertheless, until such time as it is determined to be illegal or a corrupt practice, I think while it can be criticised the level of criticism from some has been unfair, treating the matter as if it were obviously corrupt when apparently that has not been settled yet and so it is not so obvious after all.
My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
Yeah, I can't think of a more egregious subversion of democracy than somebody deciding how to cast their own vote based on criteria they choose. Only votes carefully calculated from the Official List Of Valid Reasons To Vote are okay, everything else is morally reprehensible.
It's a subversion of the principle that we have a system based on local constituencies.
The right of the people of Twickenham to select their representative is paramount.
The LibDems advocated a change in the rules and the people rejected it. So they should abide by that decision not circumnavigate it.
The right of the people of Twickenham who aren't Mike, you mean? Because you seem to think it's paramount that he DOESN'T get the right to choose his representative. Or at least doesn't get to choose them by means you don't approve of.
If I roll a die to choose who I vote for, does that also undermine the rights of my neighbours? What if I vote tactically? What if I try to vote for who I want but I just don't pay quite as much attention to the parties' campaigns as I should?
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
I am not aware that you have to vote for the party you support.
But isn't tactical voting exactly that ? Vote not for the party you support.
It is, in fact, a natural consequence of bankrupt FPTP, for those with more than one brain cell...
it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories
Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?
Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.
We hate SNP! Watch out! SNP's about! There's a SNP everywhere you go (in Scotland!) You take the high road and I take the low road and we shall see some SNP together!
The Tory SNP thing has been running hard for 72 hours now.
If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.
End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.
It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.
Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...
Persuasion does not involve making promises to the private benefit of an individual voter. That is a species of corruption.
How is someone personally benefiting from a vote in another constituency which they have not themselves cast, out of interest? Genuine question - I can see how, if it helps return an MP they would prefer win they would like that, but as they don't live in that constituency, how would they 'personally' benefit?
it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories
Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?
Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.
My understanding is that vote swapping has been looked at by the electoral commission after some of the vote swapping sites that appeared in 2010 and has been deemed legal.
Vote swapping may well be legal, but that doesn't necessarily make it reasonable or justifiable. If I promise to vote a certain way or refrain from voting because a friend will do me a favour, most would agree my action to be reprehensible. It makes no difference whether the nature of that favour is paying me £5, exercising his right to vote in a certain way, or buying a third party lunch. In any event, the Electoral Commission (thankfully) has no jurisdiction to determine what is or what is not a corrupt practice. That jurisdiction belongs to the courts, and there is no authority on the matter.
Hopefully they will settle the matter, as the problem seems to me that some are characterising it as the exchange of favours equivalent to accepting money, whereas to my mind it is nothing more than the person in the other constituency, from all the factors that could influence their vote, deciding the opinion of person X in the other constituency to be the biggest factor. I think that is the wrong factor to hinge their decision upon on, but it's not a real favour as neither is actually getting the ability to vote in the other constituency, they are not receiving anything at all.
Nevertheless, until such time as it is determined to be illegal or a corrupt practice, I think while it can be criticised the level of criticism from some has been unfair, treating the matter as if it were obviously corrupt when apparently that has not been settled yet and so it is not so obvious after all.
I actually had a friend once, who said "tactical voting should be banned."
Tories crying wolf again about yet another crisis that will follow if people don't happen to vote for them.
Shock Horror! Politician states that voting for opponent will ruin the country!
And now to our ursine reporter in the woods...
Quite. Why people pretend parties don't do such a thing all the bloody time I do not know, even the most partisan of supporters would surely have to acknowledge their side do the same.
It is, in fact, a natural consequence of bankrupt FPTP, for those with more than one brain cell...
Only if you are stupid enough to think we are voting for parties rather than individual constituency representatives.You must have given your one brain cell to someone else.
What is the national share of votes being cast by post? We haven't got the final figures yet in my patch, but estimate that it's around 25%.
So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.
Possibly. It is quite possible that those with postal votes are more rigid in their voting habits, so they may well be much less inclined to waver. I think your sums are only true if postal voters behave in the same way as non postal.
This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
It is, in fact, a natural consequence of bankrupt FPTP, for those with more than one brain cell...
Only if you are stupid enough to think we are voting for parties rather than individual constituency representatives.You must have given your one brain cell to someone else.
Unfortunately the whipping system ensures that by and large we are all voting for generic party.
Sun Politics retweeted Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 13m13 minutes ago For those enjoying @MarinaHyde's column tonight, worth knowing, for balance, #Labour have excluded The Sun from Miliband events for a month.
You seem to have gone mad. I followed your own Google search link (you know, the one you said I should 'apologise' for), and what do I find? On the first page, this is Theresa May 'saying nothing' and 'doing nothing' as you put it:
This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
I don't think even the Tories are thinking it will alter the outcome from a hung parliament, just that it might change the balance of that hung parliament. No sign of that happening yet, but it's filled plenty of airtime away from potentially more troublesome topics for a bit.
I'm increasingly convinced that nothing short of an armed invasion will shift the polls significantly, and even then that would probably only be for a day or two.
@SunPolitics: YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
What's the change from two days ago ?
Nothing of consequence. YouGov is the polling equivalent of Dave, it just shows repeats.
Well we have learnt that Tom Newton Dunn is a bit of a nob - that is if people didn't already know that.
We need an anti-TND twitter bot which automatically tweets something like "My, my, my, what a terribly interesting Yougov today!" if he hasn't tweeted about it by 10
What is the national share of votes being cast by post? We haven't got the final figures yet in my patch, but estimate that it's around 25%.
So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.
Wouldn't the people most likely to vote immediately by postal vote be the people who always vote one particular way ?
it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories
Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?
Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.
.. which I modestly think is the most articulate demolition of New Labour ever written, ever, by anyone, in the universe.
Instead they've been mincing around going on about stuff I can't even remember.
The only meme to hit home is this Scottish angle. Presumably their focus groups are confirming this, so they are now dutifully repeating it.
I totally agree that New Labour was the worst government this country ever had. But Ed Miliband has killed it, it's Old Labour now, the only thing left from New Labour is Umunna.
This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
The Cleggasm did effect the polls, just not the actual election.
The Lab/SNP business is not even noticeably affecting the polls. It could be insignificant; or it could be the inverse Cleggasm afecting votes but not polls.
This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
No, it's alot deeper than the Cleggasm tbh - there might be a frothy 4% on top at the moment, so they'll end up with 45, not 49% perhaps. Plaid seems to be experiencing a CLeggasm type surge tbh at the moment which is why I wouldn't go too mad on Yns Mons or Ceredignon.
This whole SNP stuff feels a bit like the Cleggasm. Flavour of the month; everyone gets v excited and thinks this will be a game-changer etc etc.
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
The Cleggasm did effect the polls, just not the actual election.
The Lab/SNP business is not even noticeably affecting the polls. It could be insignificant; or it could be the inverse Cleggasm afecting votes but not polls.
Just like somebody saying that somebody else said that Cameron maybe kinda wants to stand down at some point a few years after the election.
I'm 100% confident that that's actually shifted the votes to a 10-point Labour majority, it's just that the polls haven't picked it up yet.
The Tory SNP thing has been running hard for 72 hours now.
If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.
End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.
The Tory base is Tories plus most-of-UKIP. If the Tories can win back maybe 1/3 or 1/2 of the UKIP vote by the GE, by scaring them about Salmond, then the Tories will be the biggest party with most seats and most votes and will very likely form the next government.
Cameron is not going to win an overall maj. We all know that. But this Scottish stuff *could* just squeeze enough kippers back into the fold, to maintain him in Number 10.
By contrast, I fail to see any Labour policies/attack lines that might further squeeze any one. They are simply intent on retaining their core vote, keeping their LD switchers, while resigning themselves to Hoots Apocalypse in Scotland.
In short, the only major party with a potential upside is the Tories. People should bet accordingly (tho I stand by my prediction of a small Miliband plurality).
If you have noticed nobody is actually putting the SNP as a priority. This is the No.1 story these days on TV and the most read on the BBC:
It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.
Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...
Persuasion does not involve making promises to the private benefit of an individual voter. That is a species of corruption.
Well, we better ban politicians altogether then. They're the ones usually making the (false) promises...
What exactly is the "private benefit" btw? It to far too remote and nebulous, for any court to take an interest. It would only be tangible in any event if the majority in the constituency was exactly 1 (or a tie). Last happened in 1910 (or 1886).
My votes have been cast so for me the election is over.
Not for the poor people of Twickenham, who's right to choose their local representative has been sadly diminished by the self-importance of one individual.
Apols but what does this refer to?
OGH has decided that his desire to have more LibDem MPs in Parliament is more important than the rights of residents to choose their own MPs
He has therefore swapped his vote in Bedford with someone (who I assume is a Labour supporter) and, in return, that individual will vote LibDem in Twickenham.
I think it is outrageous, and a subversion of the principle of MPs representing their local constituents
But , of course , it is quite ok for people with a 2nd home in Cornwall and live there 2 or 3 weeks a year to use their vote to subvert the local constituents' wishes
Do they own property there .....tick Do they own land there ... Tick Do they pay local taxes there ....tick
You seem to have gone mad. I followed your own Google search link (you know, the one you said I should 'apologise' for), and what do I find? On the first page, this is Theresa May 'saying nothing' and 'doing nothing' as you put it:
Since it seems you can't read even the results of your own searches, I'm not sure what more can be done for you.
Please show me some evidence of Theresa May taking action after Parliament was told by a Home Office researcher that two South Yorkshire police officers threatened her on behalf of the child abusers.
We really need some more telephone polls. It is quite clear that the change in Yougov's methodology (using January as a base and trying to measure change from there) simply has not worked. It was a perfectly sound idea but the nature of their panel seems to mean they have far fewer undecided and uncommitted than the average.
It may be the case that simply nothing is happening but I would like to see some telephone polls before I take it as gospel.
it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories
Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?
Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.
.. which I modestly think is the most articulate demolition of New Labour ever written, ever, by anyone, in the universe.
Instead they've been mincing around going on about stuff I can't even remember.
The only meme to hit home is this Scottish angle. Presumably their focus groups are confirming this, so they are now dutifully repeating it.
I totally agree that New Labour was the worst government this country ever had. But Ed Miliband has killed it, it's Old Labour now, the only thing left from New Labour is Umunna.
Worse than that. Ed Milliband has preserved the worst bits of New Labour: its authoritarianism, its dismal embrace of identity politics and its contempt for civil liberties and free speech.
It is, in fact, a natural consequence of bankrupt FPTP, for those with more than one brain cell...
Only if you are stupid enough to think we are voting for parties rather than individual constituency representatives.You must have given your one brain cell to someone else.
Only 20% can name their MP. Numerous surveys over the years reveal most voters believe they are voting for the PM/party of their choice, and their vote directly influences this, which of course it doesn't...
We really need some more telephone polls. It is quite clear that the change in Yougov's methodology (using January as a base and trying to measure change from there) simply has not worked. It was a perfectly sound idea but the nature of their panel seems to mean they have far fewer undecided and uncommitted than the average.
It may be the case that simply nothing is happening but I would like to see some telephone polls before I take it as gospel.
If it 'may be the case that simply nothing is happening' then how can it be 'quite clear the change [in methodology] simply has not worked'? It there's the possibility it is right, and it's just very boring, then it cannot be certain it hasn't worked, surely.
The polls are only ever moving about within the confines of margin of error. Until a few days ago, I was trading profitable ticks on most seats markets based on times I knew various opinion polls would be announced. Even that is almost impossible now to turn a profit, everything that is being announced is anticipated in advance.
NOM is virtually certain. Tories Most Seats is confidently anticipated. Ed Miliband prime minister after election growing confidence by the day.
Personally I think Tories most seats is too short. Move to Ed PM not surprising having been overpriced for weeks.
The comeback from Labour surely is that a vote for Cameron after hammering at this meme is effectively a vote for ending the UK - and the chaos that would ensue, especially with the EU referendum to contend with and a narrow majority reliant on the bar steward wing of the Tory party. I can't stand the SNP and their fantasies, but after effectively disenfranchising Scottish voters and insulting those they have voted for as 'pickpockets' the answer from Scotland is likely to be that we'll see youse later then. If the Tory party is perceived to have won the election by demonising the Scots it's 300 years up in smoke because people didn't hate Ed Miliband as much as they were supposed to and got bored of hearing nonsensical catch phrases droned on about.
It also helps things turn round the other way and expose the farcical nature of the Tory argument - which is that no government is likely to provide rock solid stability and strong handed government because the country is to divided and the result will be inconclusive. Even a fairly large swing to the Tories from now will result in Cameron holding the kind of majority which ruined Major.
it's fecking clear that the Miliband=Sturgeon meme is working for Tories
Is it? Christ, how far behind would they be if they didnt have this to rely on?
Oh, I entirely agree. I think the Tory campaign has been bloody dismal. It should have been far more aggressive and ferocious on the last Labour government's terrible, terrible failures (on all fronts). They could, for instance, have used my Telegraph blog to that point.
.. which I modestly think is the most articulate demolition of New Labour ever written, ever, by anyone, in the universe.
Instead they've been mincing around going on about stuff I can't even remember.
The only meme to hit home is this Scottish angle. Presumably their focus groups are confirming this, so they are now dutifully repeating it.
I totally agree that New Labour was the worst government this country ever had. But Ed Miliband has killed it, it's Old Labour now, the only thing left from New Labour is Umunna.
So are we to assume that as Blair was ousted in 2007 we had a 'proper' Labour government until 2010?
The whole Rotherham scandal has shown the inadequacy of the official regulatory agencies.
It was not the public services who uncovered the scandal or the official regulatory bodies which uncovered the misconduct of the public services but outsiders.
First Norfolk, then Jay and finally Casey.
But their investigations were focused on Rotherham council and have led to the government finally taking some action there - credit to Eric Pickles.
While Norfolk, Jay and Casey have all alluded to misconduct in the South Yorkshire Police there has been no outside investigation into them.
An IPCC investigation into the SYP is likely to be as worthless as all the HMIC reports there or the OFSTED reports into Rotherham council. Or indeed the IPCC investigation into the Rochdale police which took four years and concluded that nothing needed to be done.
The IPCC is part of the system - a system which has repeatedly and massively failed.
THE SOUTH YORKSHIRE POLICE NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED BY AN OUTSIDER
And that is what either Home Secretary Theresa May or Policing Minister Mike Penning should have organised.
We really need some more telephone polls. It is quite clear that the change in Yougov's methodology (using January as a base and trying to measure change from there) simply has not worked. It was a perfectly sound idea but the nature of their panel seems to mean they have far fewer undecided and uncommitted than the average.
It may be the case that simply nothing is happening but I would like to see some telephone polls before I take it as gospel.
If it 'may be the case that simply nothing is happening' then how can it be 'quite clear the change [in methodology] simply has not worked'? It there's the possibility it is right, and it's just very boring, then it cannot be certain it hasn't worked, surely.
Maybe I have not expressed that well. It just seems to me that since they brought in the change Yougov have been unnaturally moribund with nothing outside the MoE. The other polls have had more of the natural variation one might expect.
As you say they may be right and the other pollsters wrong but it seems just too flat to me.
The Tory SNP thing has been running hard for 72 hours now.
If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.
End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.
The Tory base is Tories plus most-of-UKIP. If the Tories can win back maybe 1/3 or 1/2 of the UKIP vote by the GE, by scaring them about Salmond, then the Tories will be the biggest party with most seats and most votes and will very likely form the next government.
Cameron is not going to win an overall maj. We all know that. But this Scottish stuff *could* just squeeze enough kippers back into the fold, to maintain him in Number 10.
By contrast, I fail to see any Labour policies/attack lines that might further squeeze any one. They are simply intent on retaining their core vote, keeping their LD switchers, while resigning themselves to Hoots Apocalypse in Scotland.
In short, the only major party with a potential upside is the Tories. People should bet accordingly (tho I stand by my prediction of a small Miliband plurality).
All very true, except its not being reflected in the polling. If it was going to move votes, you'd expect to see an impact by now. If we don't see a big move by the weekend we can safely conclude it's failed.
Comments
Thursday's Daily Mail front page:
Voters tell Cameron to act on migration
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
My family family were born and grew up in Twickenham and I feel a close affinity. My vote swap is with former neighbours and long standing friends.
If you have FPTP then it is inevitable that people will seek to find a way of making their vote count.
Mike- you do not have to justify yourself. My vote Swop is with a Green I have never met who will vote in a Labour marginal I would hardly know existed.
Every vote counts comrade.
The LDs are in a strong second place; Hinckley council is well run, there is some kipper element splitting here and the Tory incumbent is a barking mad Old Etonian who believes Astrology is the answer to the NHS crisis. I kid you not:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11432344/Astrology-could-solve-crisis-in-the-NHS-says-Tory-MP.html
But with the national polls as they are, I cannot see it.
Alex Massie seems to agree.It's an odd world when at least 2 Spectator writers are advocating Labour.He sounds as if he is joining Rod Liddle in doing so.
yes-of-course-an-snp-backed-labour-government-is-perfectly-legitimate
The SNP mentioned only once within the PM & Boris playing with 3 year olds report.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
Mike doesn't live in Twickenham and has no right to choose the representative for that constituency.
Mike hasn't voted in Twickenham.
No, he's voted Labour in Bedford. Thus doing his level best to ensure the election of Labour, and Ed Miliband as Prime Minister.
Mike used to be a member of the Labour party, so it doesn't surprise me. In his heart he probably feels like he has finally come home, back to the fold.
not.
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
EICIPM
YouGov/Sun poll tonight - Labour lead by one: CON 33%, LAB 34%, LD 7%, UKIP 14%, GRN 5%
15 days to go.
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister
Always an increased risk with it being a 'one party state' for so long.
Hmm,
Nothing worse than getting into other inter-web folks' arguments: If the target cannot defend themself no further participant should intervene. Given that; One wonders from where and whence Auntie Hortence will be released...?
:defend-yourself-and-your-views-only:
Personally I think a new leader will be quite refreshing as there are a number of very strong candidates. The same cannot be said about some of the other parties.
Tom Newton Dunn Easter is it ?
It is the right of everyone, within reason, to persuade another elector to change their vote.
Two people can therefore persuade each other that it is in their collective best interest to vote for each other's party...
Funny that The Sun and Newton Dunn don't give their polls as much build up when Labour are ahead.
Tory SNP strategy working according to TND but only for 24hrs apparently
Do they own land there ... Tick
Do they pay local taxes there ....tick
Don't get your point.
Joint lowest Tory/ Labour combined vote since April 1st. Joint highest vote share for UKIP. All within MOE - so I'll go off to sleep (or play online bridge)
So we should have one now, just so we know what one is.
But isn't tactical voting exactly that ? Vote not for the party you support.
Tonignt EICIPM
7th May EICIPM
You mean, like, "100 days to save the NHS"?
So a non-partisan point reinforcing what David says: if that's typical, and if that 25% are reepresentative, then it becomes one third harder to change the picture after the next day or two (most PVs are returned at once or not at all), especially as postal voters are more liable to vote. So if X needs, say, a 5% swing to capture a seat, and X is currently only on, say, 1%, then X is going to need a swing of about 7% in the remaining votes cast by polling day. Major changes from the current position (either way) should therefore be taken with a degree of caution, if they were to happen.
It's all pretty complex physics, you probably wouldn't understand.
And now to our ursine reporter in the woods...
@StephenDFisher has consistently forecast the Tories to do better than any other model I've seen. Will deserve a lot of credit if correct
And yet has EICIPM at greater than 50%
Nevertheless, until such time as it is determined to be illegal or a corrupt practice, I think while it can be criticised the level of criticism from some has been unfair, treating the matter as if it were obviously corrupt when apparently that has not been settled yet and so it is not so obvious after all.
But doesn't Osborne walk on water ?
We hate SNP!
Watch out! SNP's about!
There's a SNP everywhere you go (in Scotland!)
You take the high road and I take the low road and we shall see some SNP together!
If it had legs I'd expect to see it being reflected in polling numbers by now. The yougov suggests otherwise. It probably plays well with the base but not much beyond.
End clearly isn't aiming for Worcester Woman, a Blairite landslide isn't on the agenda, its a 35% strategy. Looks like working 2 weeks out.
With the exception of education there's been little difference between the last Labour government and this one.
Eejit...
And yet when the results are in we will probably find that, other than in Scotland, it won't have made a damn difference, that for all the frothing by some, we end up with some sort of hung Parliament, which has been on the cards for ages and ages.
Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn 13m13 minutes ago
For those enjoying @MarinaHyde's column tonight, worth knowing, for balance, #Labour have excluded The Sun from Miliband events for a month.
Today The Sun tomorrow Putin taken on!!
You seem to have gone mad. I followed your own Google search link (you know, the one you said I should 'apologise' for), and what do I find? On the first page, this is Theresa May 'saying nothing' and 'doing nothing' as you put it:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/theresa-heaps-pressure-south-yorkshire-7681189
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/rotherham-abuse-theresa-may-pleased-after-south-yorkshire-police-commissioner-resigns-9735794.html
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/27/rotherham-children-abuse-labour-calls-crime-commissioner-resign
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/02/theresa-may-political-correctness-rotherham-abuse
http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/story/2014-11-18/south-yorkshire-police-officers-to-be-investigated-by-ipcc/?page=14
Since it seems you can't read even the results of your own searches, I'm not sure what more can be done for you.
I'm increasingly convinced that nothing short of an armed invasion will shift the polls significantly, and even then that would probably only be for a day or two.
But Ed Miliband has killed it, it's Old Labour now, the only thing left from New Labour is Umunna.
The Lab/SNP business is not even noticeably affecting the polls. It could be insignificant; or it could be the inverse Cleggasm afecting votes but not polls.
As for the so-called "PB Polling Average", remember - there is only one genuine ELBOW; beware imitations!
I'm 100% confident that that's actually shifted the votes to a 10-point Labour majority, it's just that the polls haven't picked it up yet.
This is the No.1 story these days on TV and the most read on the BBC:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-32420900
"Mediterranean migrants crisis: Italy 'at war' with people smugglers"
Do you really think UKIP voters or Tory voters leaning UKIP, will ignore that story in favour of the SNP ones?
What exactly is the "private benefit" btw? It to far too remote and nebulous, for any court to take an interest. It would only be tangible in any event if the majority in the constituency was exactly 1 (or a tie). Last happened in 1910 (or 1886).
Sean Ts mum is a Sun reader?
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/09/researcher-rotherham-abuse-feared-for-life-police-visit
Posting links to May jumping on the bandwagon of calls for Sean Wright to step down isn't taking action.
That you continue to make excuses for Theresa May's inaction I'm not sure what more can be done for you.
It may be the case that simply nothing is happening but I would like to see some telephone polls before I take it as gospel.
Boost for the Lib Dems in tommorow's poll.
NOM is virtually certain.
Tories Most Seats is confidently anticipated.
Ed Miliband prime minister after election growing confidence by the day.
Personally I think Tories most seats is too short. Move to Ed PM not surprising having been overpriced for weeks.
It also helps things turn round the other way and expose the farcical nature of the Tory argument - which is that no government is likely to provide rock solid stability and strong handed government because the country is to divided and the result will be inconclusive. Even a fairly large swing to the Tories from now will result in Cameron holding the kind of majority which ruined Major.
That went well.
It was not the public services who uncovered the scandal or the official regulatory bodies which uncovered the misconduct of the public services but outsiders.
First Norfolk, then Jay and finally Casey.
But their investigations were focused on Rotherham council and have led to the government finally taking some action there - credit to Eric Pickles.
While Norfolk, Jay and Casey have all alluded to misconduct in the South Yorkshire Police there has been no outside investigation into them.
An IPCC investigation into the SYP is likely to be as worthless as all the HMIC reports there or the OFSTED reports into Rotherham council. Or indeed the IPCC investigation into the Rochdale police which took four years and concluded that nothing needed to be done.
The IPCC is part of the system - a system which has repeatedly and massively failed.
THE SOUTH YORKSHIRE POLICE NEED TO BE INVESTIGATED BY AN OUTSIDER
And that is what either Home Secretary Theresa May or Policing Minister Mike Penning should have organised.
As you say they may be right and the other pollsters wrong but it seems just too flat to me.
You get the feeling yougov is asking the same committed people the same questions and getting the same answers.