In light of the Sheffield Hallam poll and those showing Labour ahead in the marginals, should we be expecting the Conservatives to be talking up the achievements of the Coalition over the past 5 years in an effort to woo the Lib Dems?
What I find curious is that neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have used the "there's no money left" note left by Liam Byrne...or is that being kept for the last week? If ever there was an example of Labour's economic mis-management then that was it!
So Lab slightly ahead overall by this aggregate poll but of course with Broxtowe landsliding to Labour, the nature of the aggregate beast surely means the Tories must be on track to retain the other 49....
More seriously, this aggregation doesn't tell us if 40 or 10 are going red-blue as those most marginal might be swininging a lot more than those at the less marginal end...
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Because the SNP have said they will back him. He doesn't need a formal deal. Of course he may not have a majority on every issue and there may be some prices even Ed is not willing to pay but his Queens speech will pass.
Re the Hull East mess up with ballot papers mentioned in an earlier thread . The council has announced that replacement ballot papers ( 484 ) are being sent out .
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Hi Olliebear.
Minority Gov't.
The last time I looked a majority government isn't the same as a minority one. It's one of those little details I'm a stickler for.
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Hi Olliebear.
Minority Gov't.
The last time I looked a majority government isn't the same as a minority one. It's one of those little details I'm a stickler for.
"Command a majority" is not the same as "Majority Gov't" it just means he can get into power with a Queen Speech.
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Because the SNP have said they will back him. He doesn't need a formal deal. Of course he may not have a majority on every issue and there may be some prices even Ed is not willing to pay but his Queens speech will pass.
Right - so it's a supply arrangement. That's far from 'commanding a majority'.
What I find curious is that neither the Tories nor the Lib Dems have used the "there's no money left" note left by Liam Byrne...or is that being kept for the last week? If ever there was an example of Labour's economic mis-management then that was it!
It's been used - Danny Alexander wrote a reply to Liam Byrne recently as a media stunt - but it's pretty old news so obviously doesn't get much attention and would be easy for people to miss it.
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Because the SNP have said they will back him. He doesn't need a formal deal. Of course he may not have a majority on every issue and there may be some prices even Ed is not willing to pay but his Queens speech will pass.
Whether it is 40 or 43 is not particularly important. I think Labour will win less than 40 from this selection. However, Labour will pick up a few from beyond the 50 seats, because in some seats the swing will be a lot higher.
In effect, is it giving us a final tally much different from the SPIN central spread which is 285 - 270 ?
I am assuming 54 SNP seats, 4 Labour, 1 LD in Scotland. No Tories.
FPT: Sheffield, Hallam. Who would have thought this was once a Tory seat for many, many years. Am I correct that Labour has never won this seat ?
And, Clegg is still thinking of doing a coalition with the Tories. The man is so out of touch.
It is sad that a party with a radical agenda has come to this. Playing second fiddle to the Tories.
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Because the SNP have said they will back him. He doesn't need a formal deal. Of course he may not have a majority on every issue and there may be some prices even Ed is not willing to pay but his Queens speech will pass.
Right - so it's a supply arrangement. That's far from 'commanding a majority'.
No, its not. It makes him PM and gives him a majority for votes of confidence. And it makes Cameron history.
The tories need a late swing of a couple of percent in England and Wales to prevent this. Its not impossible but the hour is getting late.
A direct swing of 3.5% from Tory to Labour would see the Tories ahead on voteshare on about 33.5% to Labour's 32.5%, if the Tories win more LD seats than Labour do they could still be largest party, especially as there are more Tory-LD marginals than Labour-LD and adding in Labour's Scottish collapse
In order to form a Government, a party must be able to command a majority in the House of Commons on votes of confidence and supply. This majority can include support from other political parties, whether or not there is a formal coalition arrangement.
In a situation of no overall control the Government in power before the General Election gets the first chance at creating a government. If they cannot do so, the Prime Minister will resign.
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
This seems to agree exactly with the swing in South Swindon on the previous thread. As I said there it is now very touch and go who is the largest party but there is little doubt who will be able to command a majority in Parliament: Ed Miliband.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Well no, because he's ruled out a coalition with the SNP. So how can he 'command a majority'? Impossible.
Because the SNP have said they will back him. He doesn't need a formal deal. Of course he may not have a majority on every issue and there may be some prices even Ed is not willing to pay but his Queens speech will pass.
Will the Labour party back him?
Probably. The part of the party who would have fought such an understanding tooth and nail, the SLAB MPs, will barely exist on current polling.
Whether this will be a stable government is of course an entirely different matter.
This kind of polling is useless. I would expect a large swing in the north and next to no swing in south, and that will be aggregated out.
Yes, that suits Ed.
NW swing will be largest.
Hove, Brighton and Hastings are the only "South" marginals, Kingswood is in the golden SW area for the CONs where Labour are fortunate not to have too many realistic CON-LAB marginals.
A very good article - in response to a particularly repellent article written in the Guardian by Francine Prose - and posted here yesterday by SeanT.
The last paragraph nails it -
"Speaking for myself, the idea that one is either ‘for us or against us’ when the subject being discussed is the brutal machine-gunning of innocent journalists seems pretty straightforward. I am for us and against those who are against us. I am for those with the courage to write and draw what they think, no matter the risks. I am for those who make a stand for real liberalism and freedom of expression. I am for the dead.
And I am against Francine Prose and all who think like her. Shame on them. Shame on them all."
A direct swing of 3.5% from Tory to Labour would see the Tories ahead on voteshare on about 33.5% to Labour's 32.5%, if the Tories win more LD seats than Labour do they could still be largest party, especially as there are more Tory-LD marginals than Labour-LD and adding in Labour's Scottish collapse
On these numbers I think they would be the largest party. But Ed would be PM.
Pulpstar Swindon is in the SW and Ashcroft's poll there this morning has the Tories ahead, the London suburbs and Midlands make up the bulk of marginals Labour needs for largest party
In order to form a Government, a party must be able to command a majority in the House of Commons on votes of confidence and supply. This majority can include support from other political parties, whether or not there is a formal coalition arrangement.
In a situation of no overall control the Government in power before the General Election gets the first chance at creating a government. If they cannot do so, the Prime Minister will resign.
Of course we see now why a Con minority Queens speech will have a law for preventing tax rises and other such bear traps.
The axis of marxism (north and south branches) will have to vote that down...
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
Bear in mind the margin of error, even without considering possible systematic biases, it could easily be ten seats either way without the poll being wrong in a meaningful sense, and that would make a lot of difference.
So really this poll is pretty hopeless then as not even a comparable to look at to see any movement, which is what we've been told to look for recently.
Re the Hull East mess up with ballot papers mentioned in an earlier thread . The council has announced that replacement ballot papers ( 484 ) are being sent out .
Its when ballot boxes go missing we start to worry. A ballot paper is no good unless it gets into the box.
Pulpstar Swindon is in the SW and Ashcroft's poll there this morning has the Tories ahead, the London suburbs and Midlands make up the bulk of marginals Labour needs for largest party
My most recent assessment of Labour gains was as follows:
6 London (Hendon, Brentford Isleworth, Enfield North, Ealing Central Acton, Croydon Central) 8 NW (Lancaster, Fleetwood, Chester, Bury North, Wirral West, Morecambe, Warrington South) 3 East (Waveney, Bedford, Ipswich) 2 Yorkshire Humber (Dewsbury, Keighley) 3 West Mids (Wolves SW, North Warks, Nuneaton) 2 SW (Plymouth, Stroud) 2 SE (Hastings, Hove) 6 East Mids (Erewash, Amber Valley, Sherwood, Lincoln, Amber Valley, Broxtowe)
Lib-Lab
Bradford East Brent Central Manchester, Withington Norwich South Redcar Burnley Cardiff Central Hornsey and Wood Green Leeds North West or Hallam or Yardley, one of the three. Bristol West
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
Depressing reading, but no surprise - it confirms what has been obvious for months, that the Tories will lose large numbers of marginal seats to Labour, and Ed will become PM.
And as we know, the reason for this is not a great surge back to Labour. It's UKIP siphoning off the nuttier element of the Tory core. Farage is the man who is screwing the Tories right royally and making it impossible for them to win the GE. As I keep saying.
For me, it's all over - and probably never really got started as a contest. The Tories never really bothered to warn voters of what UKIP will do to the result, other than the "wake up with Ed" comment last autumn which seems to have been ditched even though it was one surefire election-survival weapon Cameron has seemed strangely unwilling to deploy.
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
Bear in mind the margin of error, even without considering possible systematic biases, it could easily be ten seats either way without the poll being wrong in a meaningful sense, and that would make a lot of difference.
People seem to be clutching at margin on error when clear patterns are emerging.
It is very clear that there has been a swing to Con from Labour of about 1% to 1.5% from even, all the polling is demonstrating this in the past week. That gives the Tories a lead of 3% and make Labour 265-270 very likely.
That's enough for EICINPIPM as SNP+PC will be carrying at least 60 seats (probably 63 seats).
If people are still thinking it is unclear how the election numbers are adding up, I am quite surprised (unless they are carrying party bias). For the Tories to block EICIPM they need a 5% lead and they aren't there yet.
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
Whether it is 40 or 43 is not particularly important. I think Labour will win less than 40 from this selection. However, Labour will pick up a few from beyond the 50 seats, because in some seats the swing will be a lot higher.
In effect, is it giving us a final tally much different from the SPIN central spread which is 285 - 270 ?
I am assuming 54 SNP seats, 4 Labour, 1 LD in Scotland. No Tories.
FPT: Sheffield, Hallam. Who would have thought this was once a Tory seat for many, many years. Am I correct that Labour has never won this seat ?
And, Clegg is still thinking of doing a coalition with the Tories. The man is so out of touch.
It is sad that a party with a radical agenda has come to this. Playing second fiddle to the Tories.
I suspect Berwickshire will be won by either Conservatives or the LibDems.
In order to form a Government, a party must be able to command a majority in the House of Commons on votes of confidence and supply. This majority can include support from other political parties, whether or not there is a formal coalition arrangement.
In a situation of no overall control the Government in power before the General Election gets the first chance at creating a government. If they cannot do so, the Prime Minister will resign.
Of course we see now why a Con minority Queens speech will have a law for preventing tax rises and other such bear traps.
The axis of marxism (north and south branches) will have to vote that down...
"The choice facing the nation is between two totally different ways of life. And what a prize we have to fight for: no less than the chance to banish from our land the dark, divisive clouds of Marxist socialism and bring together men and women from all walks of life who share a belief in freedom."
In order to form a Government, a party must be able to command a majority in the House of Commons on votes of confidence and supply. This majority can include support from other political parties, whether or not there is a formal coalition arrangement.
In a situation of no overall control the Government in power before the General Election gets the first chance at creating a government. If they cannot do so, the Prime Minister will resign.
Of course we see now why a Con minority Queens speech will have a law for preventing tax rises and other such bear traps.
The axis of marxism (north and south branches) will have to vote that down...
Because the idea of a law to prevent tax increases is not in the Conservative manifesto, the House of Lords is entitled to vote it down.
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
The Liberals have tried this in the past.
It did not work out well for their long term prospects.
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
Either way, this is broadly in line with what the Ashcroft constituency polls are showing c. 43 Tory seat losses to Labour.
I doubt it'll be 43 losses tbh.
I reckon about 30 +/4 seats. I have Amber Valley, Lincoln, Brighton Kemptown, Nuneaton, Northampton North, Erewash, Croydon Central, Keighley, Stevenage, Pudsey, Halesowen & Rowley Regis, Norwich North, Milton Keynes South, Crewe & Nantwich and Finchley and Golders Green as holds over and above the 43-44 losses Ashcroft/ComRes are showing.
Cameron needs to cling onto Wirral West, Bury North, Cannock Chase, Chester, Hove, Bedford, Dewsbury, Ipswich, Warrington South and Hastings & Rye as well
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
I suggested this on here in the days following the Rose Garden in May 2010.
It would have seen Labour reduced to a rump this time round, but such was the bad feeling that grew between the partners since 2010 that it was always going to look untenable. But most if not all current Coalition MPs would have saved their seats - and many of them are about to be binned.
DavidL Indeed, on present polls looks like Tories largest party, Ed PM thanks to the SNP. Tories need to squeeze UKIP a bit more to get a confidence and supply deal with the DUP and LDs
A direct swing of 3.5% from Tory to Labour would see the Tories ahead on voteshare on about 33.5% to Labour's 32.5%, if the Tories win more LD seats than Labour do they could still be largest party, especially as there are more Tory-LD marginals than Labour-LD and adding in Labour's Scottish collapse
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
Afternoon all.
I don't think an agreement was posible quite honestly.
I was also surprised that there was no formal ending of the coalition prior to the campaign kick-off, as had been widely speculated by many on here. Did I miss the annoucement, or did it just fizzle out?
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
Bear in mind the margin of error, even without considering possible systematic biases, it could easily be ten seats either way without the poll being wrong in a meaningful sense, and that would make a lot of difference.
People seem to be clutching at margin on error when clear patterns are emerging.
It is very clear that there has been a swing to Con from Labour of about 1% to 1.5% from even, all the polling is demonstrating this in the past week. That gives the Tories a lead of 3% and make Labour 265-270 very likely.
That's enough for EICINPIPM as SNP+PC will be carrying at least 60 seats (probably 63 seats).
If people are still thinking it is unclear how the election numbers are adding up, I am quite surprised (unless they are carrying party bias). For the Tories to block EICIPM they need a 5% lead and they aren't there yet.
I think it's on a knife edge. Labour most seats has gone, Labour majority is totally out the window. PM Ed is around 1.9 I reckon.
FWIW, did a very rough calc based on the last 10 listed Lab / Con marginals visited by the leaders according to Channel 4 News Live updates (Enfield N, Vale of Glam, Stockton S, Finchley & GG, Lincoln, Nuneaton, Bedford, Ipswich, Pudsey and Calder Valley). The average of the places being visited gives median 27th Labour target, mean 35.2. Lower quartile Labour target 11, upper quartile Labour target 71. That's based on a pretty small sample and very variable swing in different regions. But the trenches seem to be drawn based on Labour gains from Con in the low to mid 30s.
I see David Cameron was in Birmingham Northfield today. Interesting.
That would be some gain..
General Election 2010: Birmingham, Northfield[13] Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Labour Richard Burden 16,841 40.3 −10.1 Conservative Keely Huxtable 14,059 33.6 +3.2 Liberal Democrat Mike Dixon 6,550 15.7 +3.3 BNP Les Orton 2,290 5.5 +2.2 UKIP John Borthwick 1,363 3.3 +1.0 Green Susan Pearce 406 1.0 N/A Common Good Dick Rodgers 305 0.7 −0.4 Majority 2,782 6.7 Turnout 41,814 58.6 +3.4 Labour hold Swing −6.6
I am not convinced that this is such a great poll for Labour. There is some evidence beginning to accumulate that the polls are moving in a Tory direction. If that happens by even say a couple of points then surely quite a number of these seats will stay blue.
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
Afternoon all.
I don't think an agreement was posible quite honestly.
I was also surprised that there was no formal ending of the coalition prior to the campaign kick-off, as had been widely speculated by many on here. Did I miss the annoucement, or did it just fizzle out?
Well, Lib Dem ministers are still serving in Government so as far as I can tell, the Coalition is still continuing.
LDs badmouthing the Tories doesn't mean it's ended. They've been doing that since Day 1 (and before its birth!)
FWIW, did a very rough calc based on the last 10 listed Lab / Con marginals visited by the leaders according to Channel 4 News Live updates (Enfield N, Vale of Glam, Stockton S, Finchley & GG, Lincoln, Nuneaton, Bedford, Ipswich, Pudsey and Calder Valley). The average of the places being visited gives median 27th Labour target, mean 35.2. Lower quartile Labour target 11, upper quartile Labour target 71. That's based on a pretty small sample and very variable swing in different regions. But the trenches seem to be drawn based on Labour gains from Con in the low to mid 30s.
I see David Cameron was in Birmingham Northfield today. Interesting.
That would be some gain..
General Election 2010: Birmingham, Northfield[13] Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Labour Richard Burden 16,841 40.3 −10.1 Conservative Keely Huxtable 14,059 33.6 +3.2 Liberal Democrat Mike Dixon 6,550 15.7 +3.3 BNP Les Orton 2,290 5.5 +2.2 UKIP John Borthwick 1,363 3.3 +1.0 Green Susan Pearce 406 1.0 N/A Common Good Dick Rodgers 305 0.7 −0.4 Majority 2,782 6.7 Turnout 41,814 58.6 +3.4 Labour hold Swing −6.6
It's the Tories best prospect in Birmingham, far better than Birmingham Edgbaston.
I have been tipping it as an under the radar longshot for almost 6 months.
In retrospect the coalition should have campaigned in this election as a coalition.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
Afternoon all.
I don't think an agreement was posible quite honestly.
I was also surprised that there was no formal ending of the coalition prior to the campaign kick-off, as had been widely speculated by many on here. Did I miss the annoucement, or did it just fizzle out?
The coalition still exists and ministers remain in place. They may also remain in place after the election until a new government is agreed. Even ministers who lose their seat could still be in place after the election until a new government is decided.
"This would be enough, just, for LAB to come out as top party even if they lost every single Scottish seat. That is assuming that LAB and CON perform equally in terms of net seats against UKIP/LDs"
Either way, this is broadly in line with what the Ashcroft constituency polls are showing c. 43 Tory seat losses to Labour.
I doubt it'll be 43 losses tbh.
I reckon about 30 +/4 seats. I have Amber Valley, Lincoln, Brighton Kemptown, Nuneaton, Northampton North, Erewash, Croydon Central, Keighley, Stevenage, Pudsey, Halesowen & Rowley Regis, Norwich North, Milton Keynes South, Crewe & Nantwich and Finchley and Golders Green as holds over and above the 43-44 losses Ashcroft/ComRes are showing.
Cameron needs to cling onto Wirral West, Bury North, Cannock Chase, Chester, Hove, Bedford, Dewsbury, Ipswich, Warrington South and Hastings & Rye as well
Not impossible. But a real tough ask.
Amber Valley looks positive for a hold, Erewash and especially Lincoln less so, Broxtowe is a more likely hold than Erewash or Lincoln simply because of the quality of Conservative candidate. Expect some recounts in the East Midlands, so close again in several seats, Derby North also has that potential.
If EICIPM on those numbers, I wouldn't really want to be prime minister. Will be an absolute nightmare, with labours reputation in England being tested, I think. Also, how would Ed spin the election as a success? He'd have barely moved on 2010 numbers.
P.s. Plato asked about my name- it stems from my nerdy days playing age of empires in the early noughties. For some reason I continue to use it
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
Bear in mind the margin of error, even without considering possible systematic biases, it could easily be ten seats either way without the poll being wrong in a meaningful sense, and that would make a lot of difference.
People seem to be clutching at margin on error when clear patterns are emerging.
It is very clear that there has been a swing to Con from Labour of about 1% to 1.5% from even, all the polling is demonstrating this in the past week. That gives the Tories a lead of 3% and make Labour 265-270 very likely.
That's enough for EICINPIPM as SNP+PC will be carrying at least 60 seats (probably 63 seats).
If people are still thinking it is unclear how the election numbers are adding up, I am quite surprised (unless they are carrying party bias). For the Tories to block EICIPM they need a 5% lead and they aren't there yet.
I think it's on a knife edge. Labour most seats has gone, Labour majority is totally out the window. PM Ed is around 1.9 I reckon.
If EICIPM on those numbers, I wouldn't really want to be prime minister. Will be an absolute nightmare, with labours reputation in England being tested, I think. Also, how would Ed spin the election as a success? He'd have barely moved on 2010 numbers.
Apologies, got most acronyms on here, but EICIPM? Much appreciated if someone could help out a newbie :-)
Byrne: Hallam and Loughborough Cooper: Brentford Tristram: Dudley South and Birmingham Yardley Balls: Hove Reeves: Hove Kane (Wythenshawe & Sale East): Bolton West Bridgent Phillipson (one of the Sunderlands MPs): Redcar Bryant: Lincoln McTaggart (Slough): Milton Keynes South Malhotra (Feltham): Brentford Corbyn: Peterborough Twigg: Bury North Jones (Hyndburn): Rossendale St Helens North candidate: Rossendale Kendall: Redditch
If EICIPM on those numbers, I wouldn't really want to be prime minister. Will be an absolute nightmare, with labours reputation in England being tested, I think. Also, how would Ed spin the election as a success? He'd have barely moved on 2010 numbers.
Apologies, got most acronyms on here, but EICIPM? Much appreciated if someone could help out a newbie :-)
ITV News' latest poll shows Labour are currently leading by three points. Credit: PA
If this was any normal election, Labour would be pretty delighted with our latest poll results.
In the top 50 Conservative held Labour targets seats that we polled, there's a swing of 3.5 % away from the Tories.
That would be enough, if translated into seats, for Labour to take 44 out of the 50 - so that's places like Carlisle, Ipswich and Keighley turning red.
Still seems like Labour did better in the last poll but that sample included 40 seats?
This 3% lead on marginals is just enough to get Miliband over the 265 mark to become PM. But with 7 days left, any further losses to the Tories and he's sunk. That doesn't necessarily give the Tories a working government but he's very close to losing his shot at PM (in Nicola's pocket).
Bear in mind the margin of error, even without considering possible systematic biases, it could easily be ten seats either way without the poll being wrong in a meaningful sense, and that would make a lot of difference.
People seem to be clutching at margin on error when clear patterns are emerging.
It is very clear that there has been a swing to Con from Labour of about 1% to 1.5% from even, all the polling is demonstrating this in the past week. That gives the Tories a lead of 3% and make Labour 265-270 very likely.
That's enough for EICINPIPM as SNP+PC will be carrying at least 60 seats (probably 63 seats).
If people are still thinking it is unclear how the election numbers are adding up, I am quite surprised (unless they are carrying party bias). For the Tories to block EICIPM they need a 5% lead and they aren't there yet.
I think it's on a knife edge. Labour most seats has gone, Labour majority is totally out the window. PM Ed is around 1.9 I reckon.
Channel 4 reported it last week or so that Northfield and Halifax were considered by some "senior Tory" or whatever they were speaking to as the best prospects of Con gains from Labour.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTwOap7ohc4
Kingswood
Pudsey
South Swindon
Brighton Kemptown
Worcester
Loughborough
Warwick and Leamington
Elmet and Rothwell
Pendle
Are all holds in this lot I reckon.
More seriously, this aggregation doesn't tell us if 40 or 10 are going red-blue as those most marginal might be swininging a lot more than those at the less marginal end...
36 gains leaves them with 262 seats. Add SNP 58 to that and parliament is very, very well hung.
Is it?
Lab: 258 - 1 Rspct - 41 SNP - 0 UKIP + 43 Tory + 9 LD = 268
Con: 306 - 3 UKIP - 43 Lab + 12 LD = 272
I find the Tories just ahead.
Either way, this is broadly in line with what the Ashcroft constituency polls are showing c. 43 Tory seat losses to Labour.
If we make the conservative (!) assumption the SNP have 57 seats and that Labour will be supported by the 3 SDLPs then 263 is probably enough for Ed. That means he need 45 gains in England and Wales to offset 41 losses in Scotland and get to the magic number. It is close but very likely he will achieve that.
Minority Gov't.
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-02-13/itv-news-index-poll-reveals-labour-lead-in-crucial-marginal-seats/
But the metholodogy seems to be different. 40 marginal seats not 50.
Just by adding another 10 marginal seats in to the mix...
Hmm.............
In effect, is it giving us a final tally much different from the SPIN central spread which is 285 - 270 ?
I am assuming 54 SNP seats, 4 Labour, 1 LD in Scotland. No Tories.
FPT: Sheffield, Hallam. Who would have thought this was once a Tory seat for many, many years. Am I correct that Labour has never won this seat ?
And, Clegg is still thinking of doing a coalition with the Tories. The man is so out of touch.
It is sad that a party with a radical agenda has come to this. Playing second fiddle to the Tories.
The tories need a late swing of a couple of percent in England and Wales to prevent this. Its not impossible but the hour is getting late.
http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/itv-news-marginal-seats-poll/
These people are going to swing.
Worried about the SNP - UKIP 73% and LD 75%.
In order to form a Government, a party must be able to command a majority in the House of Commons on votes of confidence and supply. This majority can include support from other political parties, whether or not there is a formal coalition arrangement.
In a situation of no overall control the Government in power before the General Election gets the first chance at creating a government. If they cannot do so, the Prime Minister will resign.
Whether this will be a stable government is of course an entirely different matter.
NW swing will be largest.
Hove, Brighton and Hastings are the only "South" marginals, Kingswood is in the golden SW area for the CONs where Labour are fortunate not to have too many realistic CON-LAB marginals.
A very good article - in response to a particularly repellent article written in the Guardian by Francine Prose - and posted here yesterday by SeanT.
The last paragraph nails it -
"Speaking for myself, the idea that one is either ‘for us or against us’ when the subject being discussed is the brutal machine-gunning of innocent journalists seems pretty straightforward. I am for us and against those who are against us. I am for those with the courage to write and draw what they think, no matter the risks. I am for those who make a stand for real liberalism and freedom of expression. I am for the dead.
And I am against Francine Prose and all who think like her. Shame on them. Shame on them all."
Lab 226-250 band is a great bet for Labour having a bad night though.
The axis of marxism (north and south branches) will have to vote that down...
6 London (Hendon, Brentford Isleworth, Enfield North, Ealing Central Acton, Croydon Central)
8 NW (Lancaster, Fleetwood, Chester, Bury North, Wirral West, Morecambe, Warrington South)
3 East (Waveney, Bedford, Ipswich)
2 Yorkshire Humber (Dewsbury, Keighley)
3 West Mids (Wolves SW, North Warks, Nuneaton)
2 SW (Plymouth, Stroud)
2 SE (Hastings, Hove)
6 East Mids (Erewash, Amber Valley, Sherwood, Lincoln, Amber Valley, Broxtowe)
Lib-Lab
Bradford East
Brent Central
Manchester, Withington
Norwich South
Redcar
Burnley
Cardiff Central
Hornsey and Wood Green
Leeds North West or Hallam or Yardley, one of the three.
Bristol West
After the obvious six seats, you get to:
Birmingham Yardley
Brent East
Hornsey & Wood Green
And
Cardiff Central
Of which I reckon at least one (and probably two) will be held.
Then it's Sheffield Hallam, Cambridge and Southwark. And I suspect the LibDems will hold all of these. To get 14, you need all of these, and one more.
And as we know, the reason for this is not a great surge back to Labour. It's UKIP siphoning off the nuttier element of the Tory core. Farage is the man who is screwing the Tories right royally and making it impossible for them to win the GE. As I keep saying.
For me, it's all over - and probably never really got started as a contest. The Tories never really bothered to warn voters of what UKIP will do to the result, other than the "wake up with Ed" comment last autumn which seems to have been ditched even though it was one surefire election-survival weapon Cameron has seemed strangely unwilling to deploy.
Reckon that would be a good way to see how this poll fits in.
It is very clear that there has been a swing to Con from Labour of about 1% to 1.5% from even, all the polling is demonstrating this in the past week. That gives the Tories a lead of 3% and make Labour 265-270 very likely.
That's enough for EICINPIPM as SNP+PC will be carrying at least 60 seats (probably 63 seats).
If people are still thinking it is unclear how the election numbers are adding up, I am quite surprised (unless they are carrying party bias). For the Tories to block EICIPM they need a 5% lead and they aren't there yet.
They should have agreed not to stand a candidate where their coalition partner had an extant MP and to work in the constituency for the election of their partner party.
It did not work out well for their long term prospects.
Cameron needs to cling onto Wirral West, Bury North, Cannock Chase, Chester, Hove, Bedford, Dewsbury, Ipswich, Warrington South and Hastings & Rye as well
Not impossible. But a real tough ask.
He'd have had a chance as the Respect candidate but that Lib Dem bird will be on the ballot paper. Thurso isn't holding either.
There is a limit to a personal vote !
I think you're overly bullish on Lib Dem losses to the CONs and I say this as a man who has backed alot of the blues down there.
It would have seen Labour reduced to a rump this time round, but such was the bad feeling that grew between the partners since 2010 that it was always going to look untenable. But most if not all current Coalition MPs would have saved their seats - and many of them are about to be binned.
I don't think an agreement was posible quite honestly.
I was also surprised that there was no formal ending of the coalition prior to the campaign kick-off, as had been widely speculated by many on here. Did I miss the annoucement, or did it just fizzle out?
Ashcroft had Hemming ahead in Birmingham Yardley, he has to be 50/50 to hold especially if he gets a little bit of Tory tactical voting.
I think the conservative vote in Hornsey & Wood Green will collapse to Lynne Featherstone, although it probably won't be enough.
And I reckon there is a good chance the detestable Mr Ward holds on.
Cardiff is the most likely LibDem loss of my four, but I'd bet even money they'll hold at least one of them.
General Election 2010: Birmingham, Northfield[13]
Party Candidate Votes % ±%
Labour Richard Burden 16,841 40.3 −10.1
Conservative Keely Huxtable 14,059 33.6 +3.2
Liberal Democrat Mike Dixon 6,550 15.7 +3.3
BNP Les Orton 2,290 5.5 +2.2
UKIP John Borthwick 1,363 3.3 +1.0
Green Susan Pearce 406 1.0 N/A
Common Good Dick Rodgers 305 0.7 −0.4
Majority 2,782 6.7
Turnout 41,814 58.6 +3.4
Labour hold Swing −6.6
LDs badmouthing the Tories doesn't mean it's ended. They've been doing that since Day 1 (and before its birth!)
Con 286 + LD 24 = 310
Lab 267 + SNP 46 + PC 3 + SDLP 3 + Green 1 = 320
Still over a week to go - it needs just 5 seats to switch from Lab to Con to give a tie.
I have been tipping it as an under the radar longshot for almost 6 months.
P.s. Plato asked about my name- it stems from my nerdy days playing age of empires in the early noughties. For some reason I continue to use it
http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2015/04/daniel-hannan-mep-why-proportional-representation-is-now-right-for-the-commons.html
Cooper: Brentford
Tristram: Dudley South and Birmingham Yardley
Balls: Hove
Reeves: Hove
Kane (Wythenshawe & Sale East): Bolton West
Bridgent Phillipson (one of the Sunderlands MPs): Redcar
Bryant: Lincoln
McTaggart (Slough): Milton Keynes South
Malhotra (Feltham): Brentford
Corbyn: Peterborough
Twigg: Bury North
Jones (Hyndburn): Rossendale
St Helens North candidate: Rossendale
Kendall: Redditch