The SNP are (in terms of seats) the only real break with the past, or will be, at the election. That's the game-changer.
There are other factors, but that's the big one.
You are correct and it illustrates why in so many ways Labour have been a total disaster for our country. Never mind half baked devolution leaving them being beholden to a left wing SNP which wants to destroy our country, lets not forget that the Trade Unions are labours biggest paymasters as well. Its hard to conceive of any benefit to anyone (except labour's narrow vested interests) in voting Labour.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
This depends far more than usual on who's going to keep their seat doesn't it?
Like in '97 when Portillo was a favourite to be post-election leader but lost his seat instead, there is a risk of a Portillo moment for many would-be LD favourites.
Maybe it will be one of the new 2015 intake...
If there are any actual LD gains - unlikely to say the least - then whoever manages that should become leader, definitely. If they can go against such massive national swings, they are clearly destined to lead the party back from the darkness. So possibly Dorothy Thornhill or...or...Maajid Nawaz? I cannot recall any other potential gains being mentioned (which is not to say even those two seem likely).
This depends far more than usual on who's going to keep their seat doesn't it?
Like in '97 when Portillo was a favourite to be post-election leader but lost his seat instead, there is a risk of a Portillo moment for many would-be LD favourites.
Maybe it will be one of the new 2015 intake...
Will there be that many LD incomers?
Surely most LD seats will be won on an incumbent personal vote, I can't imagine any gains - and any retirements put the seat far more at risk of a loss. There'll be some retirements kept and many a gain or two, but not that many in total I suspect. Nowhere near as much as normal.
Dorothy Thornhill is the only possible gain. The winning party in Watford could well be on less than 30%, and DT's personal vote is likely to get her close...
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Met Bristol West Labour candidate and team of canvassers, happy confident group leafleting on the fringe of the seat.
Can't say I have seen any Labour canvassers before, result could be closer than they think as Lab have rarely bothered to contest this end of the ward in past local or national elections.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
Do you think Farron is a particularly popular local MP?
Met Bristol West Labour candidate and team of canvassers, happy confident group leafleting on the fringe of the seat.
Can't say I have seen any Labour canvassers before, result could be closer than they think as Lab have rarely bothered to contest this end of the ward in past local or national elections.
Easy Labour gain - at least a 5,000 majority, LibDems third.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
What do you think will be the most likely cause of the apocalypse? Climate change Worldwide revolution Alien invasion Judgement day Nuclear war Zombies Something else Don’t think there will be an apocalypse
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
First time incumbency bonus in 2010?
It's a historically very Conservative seat, which Farron used to work hard before he went on the rubber chicken circuit to drum up his leadership chances. The last person that spent an entire parliament visiting constituency parties... was Lembit Opik.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
Mr. Roger, he isn't rejecting it. He's ruling out things people aren't offering, and saying he'd prefer things he will almost certainly accept if it gets him into Downing Street.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
First time incumbency bonus in 2010?
It's a historically very Conservative seat, which Farron used to work hard before he went on the rubber chicken circuit to drum up his leadership chances. The last person that spent an entire parliament visiting constituency parties... was Lembit Opik.
Farron is a bit of a preening peacock.
Historically Conservative it may be presumably from the days when rural voters backed anyone in a blue rosette. I think the days of the City boys sweeping the board in these kinds of seats are long gone.
Now that both the Tories and Labour have said they'll have nothing to do with the SNP it's a strange irony that after losing the referendum they'll now almost certainly be the single most important player at Westminster.
PS. It's difficult to know why Miliband has made this seemingly suicidal decision
Now that both the Tories and Labour have said they'll have nothing to do with the SNP it's a strange irony that after losing the referendum they'll now almost certainly be the single most important player at Westminster.
PS. It's difficult to know why Miliband has made this seemingly suicidal decision
Miliband hasn't. He did not rule out a deal this morning
@afneil: Ed Miliband on @MarrShow: "not interested" in doing supply & confidence deal with SNP. Fair enough. But not quite same as "I won't do one".
Now that both the Tories and Labour have said they'll have nothing to do with the SNP it's a strange irony that after losing the referendum they'll now almost certainly be the single most important player at Westminster.
PS. It's difficult to know why Miliband has made this seemingly suicidal decision
He knows that all the SNP has to do is vote down the Tories (which they will), and he's PM, without any deal with Labour...
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
Roger forecasting a Lab majority is the best thing that's happened to the Tories in this campaign.
Met Bristol West Labour candidate and team of canvassers, happy confident group leafleting on the fringe of the seat.
Can't say I have seen any Labour canvassers before, result could be closer than they think as Lab have rarely bothered to contest this end of the ward in past local or national elections.
Easy Labour gain - at least a 5,000 majority, LibDems third.
Had already voted, but I'm not sure that Labour are home and dry, but they must think that some voters might drift to them rather than Greens.
Suspect that Con have given up on Bristol W and have focused more on NW, converse might apply to Lib Dems.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
I hope he does play hard ball with them. He can do so with PC and the Greens, they have no means to back up any threats they might not back him up under all circumstances (if they the SNP are on side, they will be too, so its only the SNP he has to worry about), but the SNP are more of a challenge. My hope is they underestimate Ed and he gets a better deal out of it than they expect - if he makes some sort of official concessions without going as far as they would like, as you say are they really going to pull the trigger? They're already in as good a position as they want to be, no need to risk that given they will surely win some concessions at least.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Met Bristol West Labour candidate and team of canvassers, happy confident group leafleting on the fringe of the seat.
Can't say I have seen any Labour canvassers before, result could be closer than they think as Lab have rarely bothered to contest this end of the ward in past local or national elections.
Easy Labour gain - at least a 5,000 majority, LibDems third.
Had already voted, but I'm not sure that Labour are home and dry
It's good if they are not taking it for granted, but it probably isn't necessary of them. The Greens have to come from so far back, and their increase will surely come mostly from former LDs, so really how can either challenge Labour for the seat properly?
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
Roger forecasting a Lab majority is the best thing that's happened to the Tories in this campaign.
Miliband saying he would be happy to oblige the SNP in forming a coalition would be the best thing to happen to the tories. Not that it matters, we all know he would anyway.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
If it is a genuinely social-democratic agenda, then you're right. But I can't see the SNP backing a Labour Austerity Budget; considering they're making "no more cuts" their main plank, the SNP would be killed for reneging on that even more than they would for "letting in the Tories".
Boris really was pony on the Marr show this morning. He's good at Greek and great at Latin, but policy and debate are clearly weak points.
I quite like having Boris as London Mayor but have always felt that the Tories are overrating him if they think he's the leader who will bring them majorities, much as they have underrated Ed Milliband.
A timely reminder - especially in the wake of the disastrous Operation Elveden - of what good journalism can do for us.
It is too much to hope that Milliband will, if he becomes PM, row back from the idiotic Leveson proposals. He has never struck me as someone particularly worried about our civil liberties and freedoms, whether preserving them or extending them, nor about our right to know what's going on in the corridors of power.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
If it is a genuinely social-democratic agenda, then you're right. But I can't see the SNP backing a Labour Austerity Budget; considering they're making "no more cuts" their main plank, the SNP would be killed for reneging on that even more than they would for "letting in the Tories".
I feel confident they can perform some verbal gymnastics as to how it would be ok to back the budget, even if they then promises Labour were not progressive enough to back at other times. Enough people seem to think cuts performed by Labour will somehow be intrinsically be better than cuts performed by Tories after all, or are anti-austerity but still voting Labour, so a leap like that is not even that hard in comparison.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
I think we can safely assume that whatever is said now will be totally ignored, if it suits politicians' interests, after the votes have been counted.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Now that both the Tories and Labour have said they'll have nothing to do with the SNP it's a strange irony that after losing the referendum they'll now almost certainly be the single most important player at Westminster.
PS. It's difficult to know why Miliband has made this seemingly suicidal decision
The SNP don't have much to offer Milliband, given that they've said they'll vote against the Conservatives, regardless.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Up until about 2 months ago I was still predicting a Lab majority (just), so it makes some sense to me, but agreed it does not seem likely.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
If it is a genuinely social-democratic agenda, then you're right. But I can't see the SNP backing a Labour Austerity Budget; considering they're making "no more cuts" their main plank, the SNP would be killed for reneging on that even more than they would for "letting in the Tories".
Why should the SNP from their point of view be afraid of a Tory govt. They are getting more devolution anyway and probably even more form the tories. So they have no problems as long as they think they can run devolved Scotland with a nice little earner for 50 MPs. The SNP are not bothered about the rUK. The best thing of course for the SNP would be to be seen dictating to Labour to their benefit at the expense of England. For the SNP this will encourage anti Scotland sentiment and make a break up of the UK more likely.
Voters have more to think about than usual this election and this probably explains the twists and turns of the polls.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
No 2 - there is no stopping the SNP or this election - they are replacing labour in Scotland and relegating labour to a role similar to the tories for years to come
"Tory candidate refers to Ed Miliband as "The Jew":"
Nice change that it's not a UKIPer
It's quite often not a UKIPer, it's just more likely to be reported when it is. For all the 'man bites dog' theory, the media love nothing more than a story which suits their pre-existing narrative. Like how nobody cares if George Osborne looks like the third member of Srehtorb Esrever Lanoitasnes Eht when he tries to eat a hotdog.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
Mr. Cosmic, you may have the record for longest lurk. Presumably it's this rather close election which has tempted you to cast off the shadows and step forth into the light?
Now that both the Tories and Labour have said they'll have nothing to do with the SNP it's a strange irony that after losing the referendum they'll now almost certainly be the single most important player at Westminster.
PS. It's difficult to know why Miliband has made this seemingly suicidal decision
He was sparing with his words, "there will be no deals " does not to me mean they will not have some sort of agreement.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
Pretty much, yeah. It's not so much the election results that are exciting, but what will happen in terms of forming a government afterwards (assuming a hung parliament).
That said, I need my poll fix like everyone else here. Over-analysing regional subsamples etc. etc.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
Thanks TSE- I have meant to say before that you have been very good at coming back to my queries.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Up until about 2 months ago I was still predicting a Lab majority (just), so it makes some sense to me, but agreed it does not seem likely.
Defer to no-one!
Shy kippers in the marginals not being picked up by the phone pollsters (or possibly even the exit polls)
It's not likely, but that would be the explanation if it did happen IMO.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Carmichael should be fine but I think the vote will be much closer than what the odds might suggest. I'm pretty sure the SNP will GOTV the YES vote putting them in the 35-40% area. It will come down to how strong his personal vote will hold up and whether he benefits from any tactical voting.
One thing which could dent his vote was his failure to respond to Sir Ian Wood's recommendation that the oil industry receive immediate incentives to help weather the fall in oil prices. The delay in announcing any measures until the budget may well have cost jobs, the delay was in part due to the Coalition trying to damage the SNP:
Interestingly this seat has the potential to be UKIP's best performance, they could even sneak into 3rd place. UKIP have a local fisherman standing who got around 7% in 2010.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
Roger forecasting a Lab majority is the best thing that's happened to the Tories in this campaign.
Mr. Cosmic, you may have the record for longest lurk. Presumably it's this rather close election which has tempted you to cast off the shadows and step forth into the light?
Mr Morris- it's that irresistible pull of pbCOM. You get got in the end, and even if you manage to get away, like the Prisoner, there is no real escape.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
I've backed the Tories in Cheltenham, at good odds against, on that basis.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
He'll dare the SNP to turf him out. If he sets out a genuine social democratic agenda are they really going to risk letting the Tories back in?
Are you dreaming , these guys are Tories in sheeps clothing. The SNP will give them a severe pummeling.
It's perfectly legal but is it ethical to publish constituency polls just a few days before the election? You could argue it puts undue pressure on people to vote tactically.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Carmichael should be fine but I think the vote will be much closer than what the odds might suggest. I'm pretty sure the SNP will GOTV the YES vote putting them in the 35-40% area. It will come down to how strong his personal vote will hold up and whether he benefits from any tactical voting.
One thing which could dent his vote was his failure to respond to Sir Ian Wood's recommendation that the oil industry receive immediate incentives to help weather the fall in oil prices. The delay in announcing any measures until the budget may well have cost jobs, the delay was in part due to the Coalition trying to damage the SNP:
Interestingly this seat has the potential to be UKIP's best performance, they could even sneak into 3rd place. UKIP have a local fisherman standing who got around 7% in 2010.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
I've backed the Tories in Cheltenham, at good odds against, on that basis.
What is Ashcroft's Q1 Casino? The normally very reliable TSE appears to have gone on walkabout.
It's perfectly legal but is it ethical to publish constituency polls just a few days before the election? You could argue it puts undue pressure on people to vote tactically.
Under bonkers FPTP, it would be unethical not to publish...
I just saw that on Facebook. I agree. I bow to no-one in my criticism of Cameron, but it came across with all that passion and energy that's so far been missing from his campaign.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
I've backed the Tories in Cheltenham, at good odds against, on that basis.
What is Ashcroft's Q1 Casino? The normally very reliable TSE appears to have gone on walkabout.
Give me five more mins, I'm just putting the finishing touches to your post.
It's perfectly legal but is it ethical to publish constituency polls just a few days before the election? You could argue it puts undue pressure on people to vote tactically.
It's perfectly legal but is it ethical to publish constituency polls just a few days before the election? You could argue it puts undue pressure on people to vote tactically.
Eh? If people wish to vote tactically that is up to them. If it wasn't polls pressuring them to do so it would be the previous election result. Its quite possible that opinion polls could lead to tactical voting unwind rather than ore tactical voting.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Cyclefree, There is no sign of hubris in Scotland. SNP are just very popular and getting more so every day. The constant insults and hysteria in the right wing press just increase this. When you see at weekend , huge crowds out to see Sturgeon and yet Murphy has about a dozen or two at best and Brown is limited to the faithful in the back room of a pub. It really does look like something unusual is happening.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
I've backed the Tories in Cheltenham, at good odds against, on that basis.
What is Ashcroft's Q1 Casino? The normally very reliable TSE appears to have gone on walkabout.
Question 1 is the standard voting intention he asks in each constituency poll. Question 2 is the constituency voting intention question:
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Carmichael should be fine but I think the vote will be much closer than what the odds might suggest. I'm pretty sure the SNP will GOTV the YES vote putting them in the 35-40% area. It will come down to how strong his personal vote will hold up and whether he benefits from any tactical voting.
One thing which could dent his vote was his failure to respond to Sir Ian Wood's recommendation that the oil industry receive immediate incentives to help weather the fall in oil prices. The delay in announcing any measures until the budget may well have cost jobs, the delay was in part due to the Coalition trying to damage the SNP:
Interestingly this seat has the potential to be UKIP's best performance, they could even sneak into 3rd place. UKIP have a local fisherman standing who got around 7% in 2010.
Fancy a bet on SNP under/over 37.5% at evens?
That's a pretty perfect line, no idea what I'd pick.
I would also not be surprised if in the last few days of the election Lord Ashcroft published a final batch of constituency polling. Especially in Hallam and South Thanet
TSE- are Ashcroft constituency polls worth much if he fails to name a candidate? I thought the whole point of providing a constituency poll was to get an depth local input- without naming a candidate Ashcroft's constituency polls are erratic at best, much like his national polls.
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
This close to the election the candidates should be named.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
Thanks TSE- I have meant to say before that you have been very good at coming back to my queries.
But, to ask another one, what is Ashcroft's Q1?
Lord Ashcroft's constituency polling is a two part question. Q2 is the figure he uses as his final figures for his polls.
Q1) If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP, or another party? If ‘another party’: Would that be, the Green Party, the British National Party (BNP), or some other party – or do you not know how you would vote?
Q2) And thinking specifically about your own parliamentary constituency at the next general election and the candidates who are likely to stand for election to Westminster there, which party's candidate do you think you will vote for in your own constituency? [Prompts as at Q1]
Now, in some polls, there's a huge discrepancy between Q1 and Q2, it can't be all down to incumbency and well it could be say, Q2 is making more people to change their voting intention, than they should [Note I'm just a uneducated follower of polls, so I might be talking bollocks]
Have a look at the recent Lord A Con/LD polling, page 3, of this report to see the differences between Q1 and Q2.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Cyclefree, There is no sign of hubris in Scotland. SNP are just very popular and getting more so every day. The constant insults and hysteria in the right wing press just increase this. When you see at weekend , huge crowds out to see Sturgeon and yet Murphy has about a dozen or two at best and Brown is limited to the faithful in the back room of a pub. It really does look like something unusual is happening.
Malcolm: thank you. Ms Sturgeon does seem to be a most impressive politician. If Labour are destroyed it will show the folly of taking your voters for granted. A lesson for all parties there.
Off topic: I hope you enjoyed Sandown yesterday. I had a most profitable afternoon.
As an aside, and I realise this is a contentious claim, I think Farron might suffer an above average swing against him in Westmoreland, and therefore the evens on him looks very skinny.
If Farron is losing his seat, the only other possible hold is Carmichael.
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Farron is completely safe,he is extremely well liked here, the posters are everywhere, and he is very active in the constituency,very safe hold
Carmichael is safe as well even with a tsunami to the SNP in the rest of Scotland. Carmichaels vote has been increasing since he first stood there. If he had stood down then the incumbent Liberal might not have been safe. It wouldn't matter even if the SNP changed its name to the Scottish National Liberal Party. The Northern Isles have been Liberal since 1950. Prior to 1935 it had also been Liberal in one form or another from 35 to 50 it had ben Tory.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Carmichael should be fine but I think the vote will be much closer than what the odds might suggest. I'm pretty sure the SNP will GOTV the YES vote putting them in the 35-40% area. It will come down to how strong his personal vote will hold up and whether he benefits from any tactical voting.
One thing which could dent his vote was his failure to respond to Sir Ian Wood's recommendation that the oil industry receive immediate incentives to help weather the fall in oil prices. The delay in announcing any measures until the budget may well have cost jobs, the delay was in part due to the Coalition trying to damage the SNP:
Interestingly this seat has the potential to be UKIP's best performance, they could even sneak into 3rd place. UKIP have a local fisherman standing who got around 7% in 2010.
Fancy a bet on SNP under/over 37.5% at evens?
That's a pretty perfect line, no idea what I'd pick.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
Cyclefree, There is no sign of hubris in Scotland. SNP are just very popular and getting more so every day. The constant insults and hysteria in the right wing press just increase this. When you see at weekend , huge crowds out to see Sturgeon and yet Murphy has about a dozen or two at best and Brown is limited to the faithful in the back room of a pub. It really does look like something unusual is happening.
Yes, I would agree with this. For the moment, the SNP can do no wrong, Westminster can do no right. There's a sort of un-buyer's remorse about the referendum. It's like making a career choice to stay in your current job, every time you have a crap day you wonder what might have been. What goes up must come down, but it's certainly not going to be before this election.
Ashcroft has done this country a great service. He has slowly started to turn the media around to hard number analysis, the importance of on the ground campaigning and how unimportant almost everything that they think is important - really isn't.
OT. I can't see a downside to Miliband's control of rent for three years. If Cameron can try to bring in legislation to force housing associations to sell such a precious resource as the properties they run then this is a necessary counter measure.
There are nine million private renters and just a million housing association properties. This isn't a legitimate way for Cameron to win an election but a criminal decision to try to win a few votes. There is a housing crisis which he seems to have missed
If this new plan reduces house prices then good. If it removes some of the buy-to-let excesses then even better.
Pickles remarks about bombing cities just shows how out of touch with his own department he is. Just ask Shelter.
Thinking about this apparently odd decision by Miliband to reject the best chance he'll ever have to form a government as PM I wonder whether he knows something we don't.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
Really? Even I had finally let go of that possibility - are you expecting them to do better than most predict in Scotland, or in England, or both?
I have no reason for my suspicion other than:-
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected. 2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon. 3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend. 4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
No 2 - there is no stopping the SNP or this election - they are replacing labour in Scotland and relegating labour to a role similar to the tories for years to come
The antipathy to Labour in Scotland is nowhere near as strong as it is to the Tories. I could easily foresee a Labour revival before too long. On the other hand the Tories remain as toxic as ever to most voters north of the border
Comments
Its hard to conceive of any benefit to anyone (except labour's narrow vested interests) in voting Labour.
Pitt and Fox
Gladstone and Disraeli
Ed and Boris
He looks a good bit safer than Laws at any rate to me (Lib Dems WON in the Euros in Orkney, Westmorland and Gibraltar)
Can't say I have seen any Labour canvassers before, result could be closer than they think as Lab have rarely bothered to contest this end of the ward in past local or national elections.
Like.
Farron is a bit of a preening peacock.
Perhaps he really thinks he is heading for a majority without SNP involvement. Certainly the polls aren't suggesting that but if not it doesn't make sense.
@afneil: Ed Miliband on @MarrShow: "not interested" in doing supply & confidence deal with SNP. Fair enough. But not quite same as "I won't do one".
Ramsay Miliband?
Suspect that Con have given up on Bristol W and have focused more on NW, converse might apply to Lib Dems.
Carmichael is no Liberal at heart though but the folk in the Northern Isles might not pick up on that. He is but a shadow of the great Jo Grimond.
Ironically the Northern Isles was one of those places where UKIP saved its deposit in 2010.
Incidentally - and even though it's from a few threads back - you said that no-one had mentioned the BBC's role in exposing Rahman. Douglas Murray in the Spectator pays tribute to John Ware, who is a very fine journalist. See here - http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/the-fall-of-lutfur-rahman-shows-the-power-of-brave-campaigning-journalism/
A timely reminder - especially in the wake of the disastrous Operation Elveden - of what good journalism can do for us.
It is too much to hope that Milliband will, if he becomes PM, row back from the idiotic Leveson proposals. He has never struck me as someone particularly worried about our civil liberties and freedoms, whether preserving them or extending them, nor about our right to know what's going on in the corridors of power.
Still good on the BBC.
I share your view on Miliband.
Edited extra bit: welcome to pb.com, Mr. Cosmic.
That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/04/26/ed-miliband-gulzabeen-afsar_n_7146376.html?1430063196
The mask slipped and she got caught out. If she had referred to him as "The Zionist" she would have more than likely got away with it.
I would expect her future career opportunities will be slightly more limited now.
"That said, I would not be wholly surprised to find us with a Labour majority government"
I've not heard anyone suggest that as a possibility
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/orkney-and-shetland/winning-party
"Tory candidate refers to Ed Miliband as "The Jew":"
Nice change that it's not a UKIPer
Con 290
Lab 257
SNP 50
PC 3
UKIP 3
Grn 1
LD 28
NI 13 (attending)
LDs decide to abstain, and the SNP vote with Labour and assorted leftists against a Tory QS or VoC.
Miliband then becomes PM despite Labour suffering a net loss of one seat compared to 2010...
Absolute best case scenario is about 310 seats, and even that's like a 10% shot at best relying on a miraculous eleventh-hour recovery in Scotland.
1. The fact that Milliband seems to be performing better than expected.
2. Possible hubris in Scotland by the SNP so that Labour hold onto some seats. I know the polls show different. I just wonder whether some voters will not like being taken for granted, thought it's possible that others may decide to follow the SNP bandwagon.
3. Some in England voting for Labour in order to give them a majority because they don't like the idea of the SNP's involvement. Ironic - if the Tories' message leads to the opposite of what they intend.
4. People feeling that it's not too much of a problem letting Labour back in because the economy seems to be on the mend.
I don't expect a Labour majority. Just saying that I would not be as surprised as all that if it did just happen. This could end up being a 1992-style result but with Labour ending up with a small majority rather than the Tories.
Who knows? I'm guessing. I defer to more experienced posters here: OGH and Antifrank etc.
The Tories now regard all Liverpool seats as safe Tory seats.
Defer to no-one!
The SNP are not bothered about the rUK. The best thing of course for the SNP would be to be seen dictating to Labour to their benefit at the expense of England. For the SNP this will encourage anti Scotland sentiment and make a break up of the UK more likely.
Voters have more to think about than usual this election and this probably explains the twists and turns of the polls.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-funding-crisis-jewish-donors-drop-toxic-ed-miliband-9849299.html
"The Tories now regard all Liverpool seats as safe Tory seats."
Very Liverpudlian humour!
To be honest, I find Ashcroft's self publicising narcissism through bigging up his private polling one of the distractions of the campaign.
That said. I've got a hunch that Lord Ashcroft's Q1 might turn out to be the most accurate poll.
That said, I need my poll fix like everyone else here. Over-analysing regional subsamples etc. etc.
Reeves: Pudsey
Umunna: Bermondsey (addressing a Church)
Thornberry: Hendon
Creasy and Alan Johnson: Milton Keynes
Lammy: Dagenham
Owen Jones: Sheffield Hallam
Tessa Jowell/Tom Watson: Enfield North/Finchley/Hornsey
Bradshaw: Playmouth Moor View
Kerry McCarthy: Bristol West
Bryant: Cardiff Central
Greenwood (Nottingham South MP): Sherwood
Berger: Blackpool North
Timms: East Dunbartonshire
Dulwich PPC: Bermondsey
But, to ask another one, what is Ashcroft's Q1?
It's not likely, but that would be the explanation if it did happen IMO.
One thing which could dent his vote was his failure to respond to Sir Ian Wood's recommendation that the oil industry receive immediate incentives to help weather the fall in oil prices. The delay in announcing any measures until the budget may well have cost jobs, the delay was in part due to the Coalition trying to damage the SNP:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/11349433/Sir-Ian-Wood-urges-George-Osborne-to-cut-oil-tax-by-10pc.html
Interestingly this seat has the potential to be UKIP's best performance, they could even sneak into 3rd place. UKIP have a local fisherman standing who got around 7% in 2010.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/04/camerons-answer-to-the-passion-question/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Even his jokes were funny.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/04/six-more-marginals/#more-11395
For political foot feticists......Miliband's stockings..
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDiEUVeW8AAk3Db.jpg
Q1) If there were a general election tomorrow, which party would you vote for? Would it be Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, UKIP, or another party? If ‘another party’: Would
that be, the Green Party, the British National Party (BNP), or some other party – or do you not know how you would vote?
Q2) And thinking specifically about your own parliamentary constituency at the next general election and the candidates who are likely to stand for election to Westminster there, which party's candidate do you think you will vote for in your own constituency? [Prompts as at Q1]
Now, in some polls, there's a huge discrepancy between Q1 and Q2, it can't be all down to incumbency and well it could be say, Q2 is making more people to change their voting intention, than they should [Note I'm just a uneducated follower of polls, so I might be talking bollocks]
Have a look at the recent Lord A Con/LD polling, page 3, of this report to see the differences between Q1 and Q2.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/LORD-ASHCROFT-POLLS-Competitive-Lib-Dem-seats-March-2015ABXZ.pdf
It fits in with the shellacking for the Lib Dems in the South West that ComRes was finding.
We're going to find out in 12 days times if Lord A is right.
Off topic: I hope you enjoyed Sandown yesterday. I had a most profitable afternoon.
He is hero imo.
Yes. But how many heard him
There are nine million private renters and just a million housing association properties. This isn't a legitimate way for Cameron to win an election but a criminal decision to try to win a few votes. There is a housing crisis which he seems to have missed
If this new plan reduces house prices then good. If it removes some of the buy-to-let excesses then even better.
Pickles remarks about bombing cities just shows how out of touch with his own department he is. Just ask Shelter.