General question-what is the precise process for forming the next Govt?
Does the sitting PM have first crack if no-one has more seats than the Conservatives?
Labour have said that they will not form a coalition with SNP and vice-versa but if the Conservatives are the larger party how does Miliband actually get to make a QS first?
Surely if the Conservatives are the largest party and put forward a QS that the Lib Dems don’t vote down, then hard to see where Labour go next.
The key may not be who lines up WITH Labour but who will line up AGAINST the Conservatives, which is not necersarily the same thing.
The sitting government get first bite at it. If they clearly can't then Cameron resigns and Liz sends for Ed.
It could get messy, like it did last time, but remember Brown was still PM for a while. It'll be the same here.
"Scotland, the NHS, Trident, welfare reform, the economy? I'm bored with all this crap guys. Can I go and meet Russell Brand instead?". 0 retweets 1 favorites
"Tissue Price will probably have another moan, but the TNS percentages to 2 d.p.............."
Ignore the doubting Thomases Sunil.
If they spent as much time campaigning as they do trying to manipulate your poll findings the Tories might well be in an unassailable position by now.
If there were nominations for poster of the year I would nominate you. Your ELBOW has been a revelation and you are clearly a humble seeker after truth.
Rare moment of agreement, Rog.
Sunil's ELBOW has been one of the better innovations of this election. Lucid, unbiased, and better than most of the stuff produced by the pros. His partitioning of YouGov and others has been particularly interesting.
Honorary PB Knighthood for Mister Sunil.
Sir Sunil of Ilford North.....has a certain ring to it.
1983 was a nice election from the statistical point of view. After 11 results the national swing was within 0.5% of the final result and stayed there for the remaining 639 results (or 622 excl. NI).
"Tissue Price will probably have another moan, but the TNS percentages to 2 d.p.............."
Ignore the doubting Thomases Sunil.
If they spent as much time campaigning as they do trying to manipulate your poll findings the Tories might well be in an unassailable position by now.
If there were nominations for poster of the year I would nominate you. Your ELBOW has been a revelation and you are clearly a humble seeker after truth.
Rare moment of agreement, Rog.
Sunil's ELBOW has been one of the better innovations of this election. Lucid, unbiased, and better than most of the stuff produced by the pros. His partitioning of YouGov and others has been particularly interesting.
I've added all the recent five national polls together (Populus, ICM, Ashcroft, YouGov and TNS.) from yesterday and today.
It is a sample size of 5027 with an MOE of just 1.3%. (which is probably higher because of unknown systemic effects of different methodologies but in the absence of information, the best estimate is a weighted average).
The result is:
Con 35.8% Lab 35.8% LD 8.6% UKIP 14.0% Grn 5.8%
You might find that surprising. I think that is because we have been looking at rounded figures that exaggerate the Con lead; we have been counting Con leads versus Lab leads; and there has been one Poll (Ashcroft) with a large Con lead but a very small sample.
It is easy to be misled, particularly if you are emotionally involved (confirmation bias).
I think you're misleading yourself by doing that. The Internet polls are more favourable to Labour [not just these polls, that's become a clear trend] and they also have bigger samples. By adding up samples you bias your estimate towards that methodology.
The question is methodology, not sample size.
But we don't know which methodolgy is the better estimator. So the best estimate is an average.
Probably a better approach is to get the weighted averages of the two methodologies and then take a simple average of the two estimates. (Perhaps this is what Sunil is doing anyway with his ELBOW in which case I won't duplicate his work) So the question is, what is the ELBOW of these recent polls classed by methodology (phone v on-line)?
But by doing an ELBOW and pooling all the polls you are weighting by sample size, and so favouring the online polls over phone polls.
Sunil does also do a Non Yougov ELBOW. There has been statistically significant divergence...
Especially since the "methodology change" in YG.
But weirdly, YG gave lower Lab leads for the overwhelming majority of ELBOWs up until Early April. Then in the last two weeks, the YG tally has given Lab leads, and the Non-YouGov tally has given Tory leads...
"Tissue Price will probably have another moan, but the TNS percentages to 2 d.p.............."
Ignore the doubting Thomases Sunil.
If they spent as much time campaigning as they do trying to manipulate your poll findings the Tories might well be in an unassailable position by now.
If there were nominations for poster of the year I would nominate you. Your ELBOW has been a revelation and you are clearly a humble seeker after truth.
Rare moment of agreement, Rog.
Sunil's ELBOW has been one of the better innovations of this election. Lucid, unbiased, and better than most of the stuff produced by the pros. His partitioning of YouGov and others has been particularly interesting.
Mr. Observer, I'd be very surprised (albeit amused) if Labour had a net loss.
It depends on how many LD seats they gain. If it is at the low end of expectations (6 or so) I can see a decline. To stay level Labour probably has to win 30-35 seats from the Tories. It's doable, but not a gimme by any stretch. I'd say it's more likely that Labour will be ten down than ten up once all the results are in. Right now, I'd give a likely range of 245 to 265. The only thing that could change that is the vanishingly small chance that a few Scottish Labour MPs hold on against the odds.
The key may not be who lines up WITH Labour but who will line up AGAINST the Conservatives, which is not necersarily the same thing.
Exactly so (and vice-versa of course). This point seems to have been missed by many.
What's more, the lining-up has to be simultaneous, i.e. the various parties have all got to feel not only that they don't want Ed/Dave (as the case may be) as PM, but also that now is the best time to bring him down. They will make that calculation entirely on the basis of their own partisan interests (though no doubt dressed up with suitable cant). Almost by definition, their partisan interests are not the same as each other's.
The bottom line is that it could be very unpredictable, with some very odd effects, unless a majority can be formed either by one party, or by two parties.
Mr. Observer, I'd be very surprised (albeit amused) if Labour had a net loss.
It depends on how many LD seats they gain. If it is at the low end of expectations (6 or so) I can see a decline. To stay level Labour probably has to win 30-35 seats from the Tories. It's doable, but not a gimme by any stretch. I'd say it's more likely that Labour will be ten down than ten up once all the results are in. Right now, I'd give a likely range of 245 to 265. The only thing that could change that is the vanishingly small chance that a few Scottish Labour MPs hold on against the odds.
Remember the tories could claim a fair few seats from the lib dems too. Although that doesn't impact upon the labour value.
The key may not be who lines up WITH Labour but who will line up AGAINST the Conservatives, which is not necersarily the same thing.
Exactly so (and vice-versa of course). This point seems to have been missed by many.
What's more, the lining-up has to be simultaneous, i.e. the various parties have all got to feel not only that they don't want Ed/Dave (as the case may be) as PM, but also that now is the best time to bring him down. They will make that calculation entirely on the basis of their own partisan interests (though no doubt dressed up with suitable cant). Almost by definition, their partisan interests are not the same as each other's.
The bottom line is that it could be very unpredicatable, with some very odd effects, unless a majority can be formed either by one party, or by two parties.
An additional thought: the next Parliament for the Tories is about delivering on education and welfare reforms that are already law and about continuing to reduce spending.
How much primary legislation do they actually need to pass?
And if the answer is "not much" does definite control of Parliament matter so long as Miliband can't group enough people to bring the Tories down?
The 11th result was Leigh: the running totals national swing after that result was 4.06% Lab to Con. The final result was a Lab to Con swing of 4.04%. The closest it came to going outside the 0.5% band was after 226 results with Stretford when the national swing was 0.496% lower than the final result.
Doing my seat betting research, I find I agree with Pulpstar, who said that the fate of Pudsey will decide the fate of the nation. Lord A has had it tied twice, the odds are tied, and I get the feeling it's moved into the Tory column this week. Labour will win more difficult targets than Pudsey, but it needs a clean sweep of these easy targets if Ed is to be PM.
What's more, I can see there now just might be a couple of Tory gains from Labour where an incumbent is stepping down. Gulp.
I think if Dave loses Pudsey he is 100% gone.
Nuneaton is the countercase for Ed I reckon.
My latest UK-Elect forecast gives Pudsey as a narrow Conservative hold, but predicts a tie in the overall seat total! April 28 UK-Elect forecast
Looking at the calculations it seems to be taking into account the first-time incumbency factor, as well as the constituency polls and the exact mix of candidates standing. In a seat so close even minor factors (e.g. no BNP candidate standing whereas 1549 votes last time) could make a difference.
An additional thought: the next Parliament for the Tories is about delivering on education and welfare reforms that are already law and about continuing to reduce spending.
How much primary legislation do they actually need to pass?
And if the answer is "not much" does definite control of Parliament matter so long as Miliband can't group enough people to bring the Tories down?
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Mr. Observer, I'd be very surprised (albeit amused) if Labour had a net loss.
It depends on how many LD seats they gain. If it is at the low end of expectations (6 or so) I can see a decline. To stay level Labour probably has to win 30-35 seats from the Tories. It's doable, but not a gimme by any stretch. I'd say it's more likely that Labour will be ten down than ten up once all the results are in. Right now, I'd give a likely range of 245 to 265. The only thing that could change that is the vanishingly small chance that a few Scottish Labour MPs hold on against the odds.
Remember the tories could claim a fair few seats from the lib dems too. Although that doesn't impact upon the labour value.
If the Conservatives take Yeovil (A vague outside chance) they could nobble themselves when they go looking for friends !
In all this discussion re Ed Miliband no one seems to have questioned just how much internal anger there will be in the party if all these Scots labour mps are redundant. Surely there will be civil war going on and how will that be condusive to running a confidence and supply minority goverment.
SPIN stubbornly maintains 285 - 271 difference between Con - Lab. Also , why is SNP still at 46 and not 56 ?
Because if it was put to 56, everyone who has bought in at 20 and above would cash out.
Heck I'd sell at 56. You're getting 2-1 on 50 seats or less. It'd be the value bet of the election. (One could argue you're getting 4-1 given Orkney and Evens 54 seats or less)
I'm guessing SPIN are sitting on heavy losses on that book.
If the SNP were to get 46 seats, how do you think the other 13 would be made up?
Put another way, if you think that we're more likely to see the SNP exceed 47, is Scottish Labour a more attractive sell at 8 than the SNP are a buy at 47?
47 - Hmm DCT and BRS are probably unionist; Orkney is held... Those could be the last 3 to go SNP tbh - particularly BRS and Orkney.
DWF; RHW; Glasgow NE; Edi South;
Then perhaps Swinson hanging on ?
East Renfrewshire; One of the Paisleys; Coatbridge; Dumfries Galloway Next ?
Given the reputed Thurso personal vote I would have thought Caithness, Sutherland et al should be above Swinson?
The issue with CS&R is that - while Thurso will outperform - there was a relatively high "Out" share in the constituency, c. 45% IIRC. This means Thurso will need to either get 90% of the unionist vote, or will need to eat into the "Out"-ers. I suspect it'll be SNP 40, LDs 35.
Oh yes I remember 1992. The Radio Times had a handy guide to interpreting the swings from the early results. 10.50 pm Sunderland. Bang. The RT called the election for Soapbox Guy and my heart sank. The BBC didn't admit what'd happened though, and Peter Snow spent the next four hours tweaking the exit poll until it finally caught up with what Sunderland had told us right at the start.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Same reason Dave did one with Heat presumably and Clegg spent the day with Joey Essex. Their advisers thought there might be some benefit. Can't see it myself.
LOL at the Bomb threat for the advert, an overreaction to say the least. Nonetheless, it'll be something forgotten by tomorrow. As for Third wave feminism, with the likes of Emma Watson and Taylor Swift talking about it/promoting it, I doubt Third wave feminism is 'killing itself'. Your average person probably won't even know about this story.
Mr. Observer, I'd be very surprised (albeit amused) if Labour had a net loss.
It depends on how many LD seats they gain. If it is at the low end of expectations (6 or so) I can see a decline. To stay level Labour probably has to win 30-35 seats from the Tories. It's doable, but not a gimme by any stretch. I'd say it's more likely that Labour will be ten down than ten up once all the results are in. Right now, I'd give a likely range of 245 to 265. The only thing that could change that is the vanishingly small chance that a few Scottish Labour MPs hold on against the odds.
Remember the tories could claim a fair few seats from the lib dems too. Although that doesn't impact upon the labour value.
The likelihood is that Labour gains from the Tories exceed Tory gains from the LibDems. If they don't then Ed will not last until the Saturday.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
That's something that is puzzling me as well. He doesn't seem to have much to gain from it.
Based on my running totals spreadsheets which I've compiled for every election since 1979. I'm in the middle of doing Oct 1974 but had to stop because the BBC weren't flashing every result on the screen like they did from 1979 onwards.
But if you mean what definition am I using, the national swing has to settle down at the particular percentage, meaning that it doesn't deviate away from that level again. I can't remember what the correct mathematical terms are for it — "tending" I think. It doesn't count if it hits that level but then moves away again, since that would mean it was just a fluke that it had reached that level after X results.
OK, not a bad way of doing it. BBC declaration order is of course not necessarily actual declaration order, although from punters' perspective it's what matters, I suppose.
While the numbers are interesting, they are not necessarily that informative. Depends how close a majority or seat level-pegging is indicated.
In 1997 the swing could have remained 2% off for hundreds of results, there was nothing that could alter the overall outcome. In Feb 1974 it wasn't until the last dozen declarations that anyone could be sure who would emerge as largest party, by which time the mathematics of swing were moot.
@Andy_JS Just catching up with your posts on how accurate the swing is after x declarations. Would be good to see these plotted up (I'm a geek, yes), as it'd be fascinating to watch them converge as a function of declaration number.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
The key may not be who lines up WITH Labour but who will line up AGAINST the Conservatives, which is not necersarily the same thing.
Exactly so (and vice-versa of course). This point seems to have been missed by many.
What's more, the lining-up has to be simultaneous, i.e. the various parties have all got to feel not only that they don't want Ed/Dave (as the case may be) as PM, but also that now is the best time to bring him down. They will make that calculation entirely on the basis of their own partisan interests (though no doubt dressed up with suitable cant). Almost by definition, their partisan interests are not the same as each other's.
The bottom line is that it could be very unpredicatable, with some very odd effects, unless a majority can be formed either by one party, or by two parties.
An additional thought: the next Parliament for the Tories is about delivering on education and welfare reforms that are already law and about continuing to reduce spending.
How much primary legislation do they actually need to pass?
And if the answer is "not much" does definite control of Parliament matter so long as Miliband can't group enough people to bring the Tories down?
Conservatives will have a decisive E&W majority as well as an opposition terrified of another election.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Same reason Dave did one with Heat presumably and Clegg spent the day with Joey Essex. Their advisers thought there might be some benefit. Can't see it myself.
Who is advising them this stuff is a good thing? I can understand Clegg/Joey Essex thing as the LDs have literally nothing left to lose, but Cameron with a Heat magazine interview? It's a bit like when Gordon Brown embarrassingly said he listened to the Arctic Monkeys. Politicians really need to stop trying to be cool and relevant.
Indeed that raises an interesting question. How far ahead must the Tories be in seats, for the charge of "illegitimacy" to really work against an anti-Tory alliance of Nats and Lab?
If Cameron is just a handful of seats in front, Miliband will be OK (and will be PM). My guess (as below) is that Cameron really needs to be 15-20 seats ahead to put the willies up his minority opponents. If Tories are 30-40 seats in front then Cameron will be PM, full stop.
Spot on. And the Tories will be that far in front. Labour is very unlikely to exceed its current seat number. In fact, the chances are it will go back.
You and Bob Sykes should star in the inaugural "Pessimist's Cup". At least one of you is going to be [pleasantly] surprised on May 8th.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Surely Brand disciples wont vote - because he's said not to.
On the flip side this is going to turn a few people off Ed.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Yes but are these voters registered. Thought Brand was anti voting
(e.g. no BNP candidate standing whereas 1549 votes last time)
The evaporation of the BNP has not been much discussed, but if you go through the results of many battles in 2010, they trawled more than 1,000. The English democrats also have significant votes to be harvested in some places.
Places such as Ed Miliband's constituency, where the two parties above polled 5,000 votes.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I consider myself a young female leftie (an evil liberal PC femanazi, my existence is enough for this site to explode), and I certainly don't think of Russell Brand in that way at all, although his YouTube channel is a good laugh. I think young female lefties like Charlie Brooker at lot more than they do Russell Brand.
BBC Politics @BBCPolitics 2m2 minutes ago Ed Miliband says he agreed to interview with comedian Russell Brand to liven up #GE2015 race http://bbc.in/1JxQ60S
""Some people were saying the campaign was too boring so I thought it would make it more interesting," he said"
That sounds like some kind of 'crisis'.
"My marriage was too boring, so I thought I'd liven things up with a crack pipe and a couple of hookers"
rcs 1000 : The question last September was "Should Scotland be an independent country?" I never saw anyone say they were inners or outers. Why are you trying to spin this ?
UKIP and Greens on 20% with TNS = c.6 million votes. Likely to win only 2 or 3 seats. What a fantastic system FPTP is.
Quite so, it's discounting the votes of ill-informed supporters of minor parties, just as it's designed to.
Just look at what happened when a minor party finally got enough seats to have an influence - two-thirds of its "supporters" decided they didn't actually support them after all.
(NB tongue slightly in cheek, but not entirely...)
That is special pleading, if ever I've read it.
It's just a feature of the system that it discounts protest votes unless and until they get up a proper head of steam. Which is arguably desirable.
Is it desirable that every Scottish MP (bar one or two) will be a Nationalist, despite half the population voting for Unionists?
It's called FPTP "democracy". The Tories in particular like it. So they can't complain.
"You and Bob Sykes should star in the inaugural "Pessimist's Cup". At least one of you is going to be [pleasantly] surprised on May 8th."
I agree and as they both have the worst record for prediction (with the possible exception of me and Easterross) I can only think they're seriously into S+M.
Maybe they'd have more fun in Soho where I'm sure Time Out can direct them to a place with many more like minded people than they'll find on here
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I consider myself a young female leftie (an evil liberal PC femanazi, my existence is enough for this site to explode), and I certainly don't think of Russell Brand in that way at all, although his YouTube channel is a good laugh. I think young female lefties like Charlie Brooker at lot more than they do Russell Brand.
Oh ok, no young female lefties think of Brand in the way I described then
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I think young female lefties like Charlie Brooker at lot more than they do Russell Brand.
Well, as a middle-aged male rightie, I'd have to agree with them. The Weekly Wipe is excellent satire, and he's a NOT a condescending, pretentious, narcissitic, self-aggrandizing clod with an over-inflated idea of his own intelligence.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
Do you think he's going to want to look like he's been 'told' what to do by the Dork In Chief (DIC)? He's a tad image-conscious, you know.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I think young female lefties like Charlie Brooker at lot more than they do Russell Brand.
Well, as a middle-aged male rightie, I'd have to agree with them. The Weekly Wipe is excellent satire, and he's a NOT a condescending, pretentious, narcissitic, self-aggrandizing clod with an over-inflated idea of his own intelligence.
Thumbs up from me for Weekly Wipe. Under-rated show IMO.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Same reason Dave did one with Heat presumably and Clegg spent the day with Joey Essex. Their advisers thought there might be some benefit. Can't see it myself.
Joey Essex spent time with all 4 of them didn't he?
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
Not sure how many Russell Brand fans are either bothered to vote or even registered to vote.
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
Miliband meeting Brand ,especially going to his house is a misjudgement on Labours part,no matter what they say the aims are. Presumably he didn't expect to get snapped and end up on Guidos web site.
As a woman ,I don't like Brand .He has a foul mouth .I haven't forgotten what he and Ross did to Andrew Sachs and the way they gloried in it. I'm never going to be a Labour voter but I know many people who were sickened by it and maybe this won't garner the votes Ed is hoping for.
My son is a non voter ,though not in the Brand mould,and nothing is going to persuade him,not even me.............
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Same reason Dave did one with Heat presumably and Clegg spent the day with Joey Essex. Their advisers thought there might be some benefit. Can't see it myself.
Joey Essex spent time with all 4 of them didn't he?
More importantly, did any of them actually understand what he was going on about, with his REEMing and YOLOs. They probably needed a slang 101...
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
Ludicrous hyperbole.
You said it yourself, he has 15m followers on youtube, lord knows how many on twitter, and the people that follow him genuinely think he is on to something in terms of politics and class war.. you don't think they do it for his jokes do you?
In the tightest election ever, I don't see how support from the most popular politically minded non politician amongst a huge part of the electorate would fail to push whoever he supported over the line
What happens if no party gets a majority and can't negotiate an agreement with one of the smaller parties...who gets first dibs and how would a second election get triggered?
UKIP and Greens on 20% with TNS = c.6 million votes. Likely to win only 2 or 3 seats. What a fantastic system FPTP is.
Quite so, it's discounting the votes of ill-informed supporters of minor parties, just as it's designed to.
Just look at what happened when a minor party finally got enough seats to have an influence - two-thirds of its "supporters" decided they didn't actually support them after all.
(NB tongue slightly in cheek, but not entirely...)
That is special pleading, if ever I've read it.
It's just a feature of the system that it discounts protest votes unless and until they get up a proper head of steam. Which is arguably desirable.
Is it desirable that every Scottish MP (bar one or two) will be a Nationalist, despite half the population voting for Unionists?
Scotland is irrelevant. It's the constituencies that count, and if they almost all hae a majority what else is there to be said?
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
I consider myself a young female leftie (an evil liberal PC femanazi, my existence is enough for this site to explode), and I certainly don't think of Russell Brand in that way at all, although his YouTube channel is a good laugh. I think young female lefties like Charlie Brooker at lot more than they do Russell Brand.
Oh ok, no young female lefties think of Brand in the way I described then
I admit now looking back on it, it's only one piece of anecdotal evidence from me - but I do know many young lefties, and I've had similar thoughts from them on my twitter timeline. While many young lefties may well like Russell Brand, I doubt that he's their main source of political insight.
@Anorak, agreed I love the Weekly Wipe! I'm looking forward to the Election Special Brooker is doing next Wednesday! Should 'liven up' what has been a dull election campaign.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
I wonder if Kenny Everett ever made a profound change in voting intentions? Showing my age so I am.
What happens if no party gets a majority and can't negotiate an agreement with one of the smaller parties...who gets first dibs and how would a second election get triggered?
If no agreement can be made the largest party would put their programme before Parliament and dare the other parties to vote it down.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
Same reason Dave did one with Heat presumably and Clegg spent the day with Joey Essex. Their advisers thought there might be some benefit. Can't see it myself.
Who is advising them this stuff is a good thing? I can understand Clegg/Joey Essex thing as the LDs have literally nothing left to lose, but Cameron with a Heat magazine interview? It's a bit like when Gordon Brown embarrassingly said he listened to the Arctic Monkeys. Politicians really need to stop trying to be cool and relevant.
I know I am getting old, but there seemed to be a lot more frontline gravitas back in the day. Maybe they just seemed that way because I was younger, but I don't remember it being so studenty as it is now with tedious point scoring, name calling and so on. And it is all so utterly fake. I mean Dave is now "pumping and motivated and letting us know it", coincidentally just a day or so after he was criticised for not being these things. Ed has been taking normal classes. I mean, WTF??
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
I wonder if Kenny Everett ever made a profound change in voting intentions? Showing my age so I am.
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
I wonder if Kenny Everett ever made a profound change in voting intentions? Showing my age so I am.
"Let's bomb Russia! Let's kick Michael Foot's stick away!"
I bow to no one in my dislike of Russell Brand, but amazingly, young female lefties think he is a wise God like creature with devastating insight into the world of politics... I cant see how this is that bad for Miliband unless Brand calls him a rude word of some kind, look at who the undecided voters are
Somehow I don't think the particular demographic of young female lefties is where Ed has the biggest challenge, or for that matter the biggest opportunity.
If Russell Brand said "Vote Labour" it would help them immensely IMO and possibly win the election for them... people are that stupid
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
Ludicrous hyperbole.
You said it yourself, he has 15m followers on youtube, lord knows how many on twitter, and the people that follow him genuinely think he is on to something in terms of politics and class war.. you don't think they do it for his jokes do you?
In the tightest election ever, I don't see how support from the most popular politically minded non politician amongst a huge part of the electorate would fail to push whoever he supported over the line
How many of those followers are over 18 years old, live in the UK and are registered to vote? How many of them live in the key marginal constituencies? How many of them weren't planning to vote Labour already?
Whose Matt Forde and whose Tommy Robinson? Never heard of 'em.
Whats going on in the markets? They've gone stark ravers. Lab majority out to 100 & tories in on 1.27. Is this just trading off last few good tory polls or more rumoured in pipeline?
o/t doesn't 100% follow that Con-Lab will produce largest party. Cons could lose 30 to Lab and still be largest after SLAB & LD wipeouts.
What happens if no party gets a majority and can't negotiate an agreement with one of the smaller parties...who gets first dibs and how would a second election get triggered?
If no agreement can be made the largest party would put their programme before Parliament and dare the other parties to vote it down.
Ok...would that automatically trigger another election or would the second biggest party then try the same? albeit with presumably the same result.
I guess the only certainty in that event would be that, as a result of all that uncertainty, all the economic forecasts go out of the window and the prospects of either more cuts in spending and/or borrowing go up
Why on earth is Miliband doing an interview with Russell Brand? I don't hate Brand, but it's hardly going to be a game-changer. More of a laugh, and something to trend on twitter for a couple of hours or so.
I wonder if Kenny Everett ever made a profound change in voting intentions? Showing my age so I am.
About as much as martin freeman? Derision & desperation seem to be the response to EdM on Brand but we underestimate Miliband at our peril. He's a knifer that one for sure.
Comments
It could get messy, like it did last time, but remember Brown was still PM for a while. It'll be the same here.
"Scotland, the NHS, Trident, welfare reform, the economy? I'm bored with all this crap guys. Can I go and meet Russell Brand instead?".
0 retweets 1 favorites
BTW I'm a "Dr", albeit just a PhD!
But weirdly, YG gave lower Lab leads for the overwhelming majority of ELBOWs up until Early April. Then in the last two weeks, the YG tally has given Lab leads, and the Non-YouGov tally has given Tory leads...
What's more, the lining-up has to be simultaneous, i.e. the various parties have all got to feel not only that they don't want Ed/Dave (as the case may be) as PM, but also that now is the best time to bring him down. They will make that calculation entirely on the basis of their own partisan interests (though no doubt dressed up with suitable cant). Almost by definition, their partisan interests are not the same as each other's.
The bottom line is that it could be very unpredictable, with some very odd effects, unless a majority can be formed either by one party, or by two parties.
How much primary legislation do they actually need to pass?
And if the answer is "not much" does definite control of Parliament matter so long as Miliband can't group enough people to bring the Tories down?
The 11th result was Leigh: the running totals national swing after that result was 4.06% Lab to Con. The final result was a Lab to Con swing of 4.04%. The closest it came to going outside the 0.5% band was after 226 results with Stretford when the national swing was 0.496% lower than the final result.
Looking at the calculations it seems to be taking into account the first-time incumbency factor, as well as the constituency polls and the exact mix of candidates standing. In a seat so close even minor factors (e.g. no BNP candidate standing whereas 1549 votes last time) could make a difference.
Mind you probably Con Maj if Yeovil drops.
While the numbers are interesting, they are not necessarily that informative. Depends how close a majority or seat level-pegging is indicated.
In 1997 the swing could have remained 2% off for hundreds of results, there was nothing that could alter the overall outcome. In Feb 1974 it wasn't until the last dozen declarations that anyone could be sure who would emerge as largest party, by which time the mathematics of swing were moot.
Just catching up with your posts on how accurate the swing is after x declarations. Would be good to see these plotted up (I'm a geek, yes), as it'd be fascinating to watch them converge as a function of declaration number.
You heard it here first.
http://www.electionforecast.co.uk/
SNP to take 58 Seats, Dundee West to be only seat they fail at.
http://www.debretts.com/forms-address/titles/knight
On the flip side this is going to turn a few people off Ed.
The evaporation of the BNP has not been much discussed, but if you go through the results of many battles in 2010, they trawled more than 1,000. The English democrats also have significant votes to be harvested in some places.
Places such as Ed Miliband's constituency, where the two parties above polled 5,000 votes.
Why are you trying to spin this ?
Which is stupid, as it's a title.
"You and Bob Sykes should star in the inaugural "Pessimist's Cup". At least one of you is going to be [pleasantly] surprised on May 8th."
I agree and as they both have the worst record for prediction (with the possible exception of me and Easterross) I can only think they're seriously into S+M.
Maybe they'd have more fun in Soho where I'm sure Time Out can direct them to a place with many more like minded people than they'll find on here
If he became King, he could be Richard IV:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Blackadder_characters#King_Richard_IV_of_England
As long as this meeting didn't end with him calling Ed a nerd or worse, I think it can only do Labour a lot of good unfortunately
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3059183/London-Underground-remove-offensive-slimming-adver-posters-defaced-50-000-people-sign-petition-ban-them.html
The permanently offended will be demanding only whales be used for images trying to convey a healthy lifestyle.
As a woman ,I don't like Brand .He has a foul mouth .I haven't forgotten what he and Ross did to Andrew Sachs and the way they gloried in it. I'm never going to be a Labour voter but I know many people who were sickened by it and maybe this won't garner the votes Ed is hoping for.
My son is a non voter ,though not in the Brand mould,and nothing is going to persuade him,not even me.............
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ympI2mdABUM
In the tightest election ever, I don't see how support from the most popular politically minded non politician amongst a huge part of the electorate would fail to push whoever he supported over the line
While many young lefties may well like Russell Brand, I doubt that he's their main source of political insight.
@Anorak, agreed I love the Weekly Wipe! I'm looking forward to the Election Special Brooker is doing next Wednesday! Should 'liven up' what has been a dull election campaign.
Although, you have to wonder what the Prince of Wales has been arsing about doing, when they are on the country's flag....
Any questions you would like me to ask in the Q&A after?
Mr. Jessop, fine name for a king.
Mr. SE, ahem, that's been mocked up on Twitter already (saw it yesterday, can't find it readily).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsokGIeQFFI
Whats going on in the markets? They've gone stark ravers. Lab majority out to 100 & tories in on 1.27. Is this just trading off last few good tory polls or more rumoured in pipeline?
o/t doesn't 100% follow that Con-Lab will produce largest party. Cons could lose 30 to Lab and still be largest after SLAB & LD wipeouts.
I guess the only certainty in that event would be that, as a result of all that uncertainty, all the economic forecasts go out of the window and the prospects of either more cuts in spending and/or borrowing go up