Mike Smithson @MSmithsonPB 2 mins2 minutes ago LAB at 2% lead with Panelbase. LAB 34% (NC), CON 32% (+1%), UKIP 17% (NC), LD 8% (+1), GRN 4% (NC)
Steevie @halfbob 50 secs50 seconds ago @MSmithsonPB You mean "No Change" for LAB and "Up One" for CON with Panelbase, surely?
pistols at dawn...?
It's all about the trend which has been the Conservatives best friend (this week). On another note, I find their UKIP and Green numbers more plausible than IsPos Morris.
Both have interestingly got the UKIP vote stable ,just at very different levels.There has been some seepage from UKIP back to the Tories without doubt so where have UKIP been taking it from to remain steady? WWC Labour voters from what I have been seeing on the ground.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
If he's been properly briefed he will know that YG polled Restricting Child Benefit to three children just six weeks ago and it is massively supported by the public at 73-18.
Yes, but the attack will be a general one - not just on that popular specific.
So he has a gamble - he could announce a new policy of restricting it to 3 children - which as you say would be popular.
What he can't allow is for ALL parents to think they might lose cash.
Anyway BBC News report not too bad - only 3 minutes - and framed at least to some extent around the public not trusting what any politician said.
In light of the Scottish Sun's endorsement of SNP, it will be interesting to see how the other Scottish newspapers react. The Daily Record will be the one to watch, particularly as over 60% of it's readership are likely to vote SNP. I wonder whether this will be a Kevin McGuire decision or whether the local Branch manager's call. Given the DR's falling sales, this will be a tricky decision.
Under the "old" L&N model, these numbers would be pointing to a Tory landslide...
Can you explain why? I thought the old L&N model inferred a certain swingback etc far out before the election but with seven days to go until an election why would it be pointing to a landslide?
Just based on the numbers. Yes, L&N built their model around approval data 3 months out, I think because in most cases, going back to 1945, that was all that was available.
They appear to have disregarded their own model, at least for this election.
Nevertheless, it is astonishing that MORI now gives Cameron his highest approval rating since January 2012, and, based on the L&N adjusted approval, the highest since September 2010.
Is something going on? Is it possible the polls are wrong?
I have been analysing when Labour will announce that "we have XX hours to save our NHS"
Will it be:
- 24 - 48 - 72?
I.e. will they come out with this on Wednesday, or Tuesday, or Monday?
I rule out "we have 72 hours to save our NHS" because it's a bank holiday.
24 hours is the kind of West Wing crap Redward might like but it's leaving it a bit late. OTOH, 48 hours gives the message time to play, but only at the cost of also allowing time for the Tories to bring up Mid Staffs and Butcher Burnham.
24 hours I think. It's so facile and dishonest Labour will simply be unable to resist it.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
If he's been properly briefed he will know that YG polled Restricting Child Benefit to three children just six weeks ago and it is massively supported by the public at 73-18.
Assuming it will apply only to future-born children, difficult to see why it is such a big deal with anyone.
Patrick McLoughin has apparently come out and confirmed the next Thames Crossing will be in Thurrock. Must be the end of JDPs chances there surely?
He is not allowed to make such announcements during election campaigns. That breaks all the rules
Well apparently he just did .There were 4 options I believe and he has said it will be one of the 2 Thurrock ones.JDP is not happy as she wanted a Canvey option .
I can only think the Canvey option would be far more expensive as the Thames Estuary is far wider there.
Maybe but poor Thurrock becomes the dumping ground again
And even further off-topic: am I the only to be really pi**ed off with the new tollgateless Dartford Crossing?
You're not the only one. I went thorough it yesterday for first time. Not only did I have to phone up and pay but it is £2.50 FFS. Twice the price, twice the hassle!
FPT - This is the best explanation as to what will actually happen as regards Parliamentary procedure.
'This is different to 2010, because the Coalition Agreement between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats meant that everyone could see that Cameron had the votes. I'm not sure that an informal arrangement has the same credibility.'
Not quite. You will recall that Brown resigned and Cameron was appointed before the Coalition agreement was formally agreed.
The cause of his resignation was therefore not that Cameron had the votes, but that Brown knew he didn't, which was the Constitutionally correct analysis and action, the same as Heath in 1974.
Which again brings us to the 2015 scenario. If Cameron realises, by the actions and noises from other parties, that there is no way he can pass a Queen's Speech, then he ought to go immediately, or at least as soon as that is apparent, and the Queen will send for Miliband.
If there is genuine doubt - which there may be, since he is predicted to be leading the largest party - he may properly hang on to test Parliament's opinion.
If and when Parliament rejects him, his moment of truth will have arrived. He doesn't have the votes, and will resign. The fact that nobody else may have the votes either is not part of his calculations. He is constitutionally obliged to resign, and the Queen is constitutionally obliged to send for Miliband.
Is that definitely the case under the FTPA? Especially if its a tight election result that sees Cameron surviving for months or a year on a tenuous minority.
In 1979 the Vote of No Confidence in Callaghan's government meant that there was an early election, not that Thatcher was sent for. Now under the provisions of the FTPA that would have led to the start of 14 days to find a new government, which wouldn't have been found at that time ... not an immediate election.
In that scenario would the Queen have sent for Thatcher immediately, or would Callaghan have stayed (or Cameron stays now) unless or until another is found.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Dr. X [apologies], not sure they're my cup of tea. I'm likelier to re-read Three Kingdoms and Outlaws of the Marsh [been thinking about Outlaws again recently, it's one of my favourite books].
Dr. Prasannan, why use two different versions of S? I know Greek has various forms for S (and E, I think), just curious.
Dr. X [apologies], not sure they're my cup of tea. I'm likelier to re-read Three Kingdoms and Outlaws of the Marsh [been thinking about Outlaws again recently, it's one of my favourite books].
Dr. Prasannan, why use two different versions of S? I know Greek has various forms for S (and E, I think), just curious.
Mr Dancer, apparently "final sigma" is written differently from sigma in the middle or start of a word.
FPT - This is the best explanation as to what will actually happen as regards Parliamentary procedure.
'This is different to 2010, because the Coalition Agreement between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats meant that everyone could see that Cameron had the votes. I'm not sure that an informal arrangement has the same credibility.'
Not quite. You will recall that Brown resigned and Cameron was appointed before the Coalition agreement was formally agreed.
The cause of his resignation was therefore not that Cameron had the votes, but that Brown knew he didn't, which was the Constitutionally correct analysis and action, the same as Heath in 1974.
Which again brings us to the 2015 scenario. If Cameron realises, by the actions and noises from other parties, that there is no way he can pass a Queen's Speech, then he ought to go immediately, or at least as soon as that is apparent, and the Queen will send for Miliband.
If there is genuine doubt - which there may be, since he is predicted to be leading the largest party - he may properly hang on to test Parliament's opinion.
If and when Parliament rejects him, his moment of truth will have arrived. He doesn't have the votes, and will resign. The fact that nobody else may have the votes either is not part of his calculations. He is constitutionally obliged to resign, and the Queen is constitutionally obliged to send for Miliband.
Is that definitely the case under the FTPA? Especially if its a tight election result that sees Cameron surviving for months or a year on a tenuous minority.
In 1979 the Vote of No Confidence in Callaghan's government meant that there was an early election, not that Thatcher was sent for. Now under the provisions of the FTPA that would have led to the start of 14 days to find a new government, which wouldn't have been found at that time ... not an immediate election.
In that scenario would the Queen have sent for Thatcher immediately, or would Callaghan have stayed (or Cameron stays now) unless or until another is found.
Callaghan could have merely resigned in 1979, and the Queen would automatically have sent for Thatcher. He still (pre FTPA) had the right to ask for (but not demand) a dissolution instead, which he did, it being granted by HMQ.
In light of the Scottish Sun's endorsement of SNP, it will be interesting to see how the other Scottish newspapers react. The Daily Record will be the one to watch, particularly as over 60% of it's readership are likely to vote SNP. I wonder whether this will be a Kevin McGuire decision or whether the local Branch manager's call. Given the DR's falling sales, this will be a tricky decision.
I would like to see Torcuil Crichton's face if they go with the SNP.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
If he's been properly briefed he will know that YG polled Restricting Child Benefit to three children just six weeks ago and it is massively supported by the public at 73-18.
Limiting it to three?? Too generous. Two at most, in my view.
Microeconomically the average person (voter) isn't better off. Wages haven't grown, energy prices have increased, rental prices have shot through the roof....
Interested sted to see some stats, Chris.
I believe all three of those statements are wrong.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Surprised they haven't mentioned GO wanting to cut top rated of tax to 40p and only LD lack of support led to that being 45p. Tories wouldn't increase personal allowance without the top rate reduction.
Dr. X [apologies], not sure they're my cup of tea. I'm likelier to re-read Three Kingdoms and Outlaws of the Marsh [been thinking about Outlaws again recently, it's one of my favourite books].
Dr. Prasannan, why use two different versions of S? I know Greek has various forms for S (and E, I think), just curious.
Oooh I know this one: σ anywhere in the word except final where it is ς. Σ is the capital. There is also something called a lunate sigma, written like c, which it is for some reason fashionable to use in editions of classical texts atm and doesn't vary with position in the word. ps is always ψ though.
I have been analysing when Labour will announce that "we have XX hours to save our NHS"
Will it be:
- 24 - 48 - 72?
I.e. will they come out with this on Wednesday, or Tuesday, or Monday?
I rule out "we have 72 hours to save our NHS" because it's a bank holiday.
24 hours is the kind of West Wing crap Redward might like but it's leaving it a bit late. OTOH, 48 hours gives the message time to play, but only at the cost of also allowing time for the Tories to bring up Mid Staffs and Butcher Burnham.
24 hours I think. It's so facile and dishonest Labour will simply be unable to resist it.
Seven days to save Crossover! [checks this week's ELBOW data]
Oh, dear. Looks like we have (another!) Tory crossover this week...
Callaghan could have merely resigned in 1979, and the Queen would automatically have sent for Thatcher. He still (pre FTPA) had the right to ask for (but not demand) a dissolution instead, which he did, it being granted by HMQ.
The vote of no confidence was on 28 May 1979. The request for the dissolution was granted the following day, and Parliament was dissolved by Royal Proclamation on 7 April. Had those events occurred under the 2011 Act, it is overwhelmingly likely that the government would have remained in office until 11 April, whereupon Her Majesty would have had the power by Royal Proclamation to dissolve Parliament and appoint a new polling day (s. 2(7) of the 2011 Act). It cannot be stressed enough that the 2011 Act governs the dissolution of Parliament and not the commission and determination of governments, which remain prerogative powers governed by constitutional convention.
Callaghan could have merely resigned in 1979, and the Queen would automatically have sent for Thatcher. He still (pre FTPA) had the right to ask for (but not demand) a dissolution instead, which he did, it being granted by HMQ.
The vote of no confidence was on 28 May 1979. The request for the dissolution was granted the following day, and Parliament was dissolved by Royal Proclamation on 7 April. Had those events occurred under the 2011 Act, it is overwhelmingly likely that the government would have remained in office until 11 April, whereupon Her Majesty would have had the power by Royal Proclamation to dissolve Parliament and appoint a new polling day (s. 2(7) of the 2011 Act). It cannot be stressed enough that the 2011 Act governs the dissolution of Parliament and not the commission and determination of governments, which remain prerogative powers governed by constitutional convention.
This is a potentially great spot by Mike Smithson and Ipsos MORI. It ties in with what posters on here have been saying. Someone else in fact wrote yesterday he's finding this very thing on the doorstep.
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Surprised they haven't mentioned GO wanting to cut top rated of tax to 40p and only LD lack of support led to that being 45p. Tories wouldn't increase personal allowance without the top rate reduction.
Welfare cuts are pretty popular eg cutting the total to £23k max and some of the floated 2012 ideas look sensible, like restricting kids allowance to 2. That being said, its a leftie audience on the BBC, so it will be predominantly full of welfare lovers rather than those who pay for it.
Is that definitely the case under the FTPA? Especially if its a tight election result that sees Cameron surviving for months or a year on a tenuous minority.
In 1979 the Vote of No Confidence in Callaghan's government meant that there was an early election, not that Thatcher was sent for. Now under the provisions of the FTPA that would have led to the start of 14 days to find a new government, which wouldn't have been found at that time ... not an immediate election.
In that scenario would the Queen have sent for Thatcher immediately, or would Callaghan have stayed (or Cameron stays now) unless or until another is found.
Callaghan could have merely resigned in 1979, and the Queen would automatically have sent for Thatcher. He still (pre FTPA) had the right to ask for (but not demand) a dissolution instead, which he did, it being granted by HMQ.
Except even after the failure in the No Confidence vote, Parliament wasn't dissolved immediately. 25 "uncontroversial" Parliamentary bills were given Royal Assent during the wash-up period first and then Parliament was dissolved a few days after the No Confidence vote. With Callaghan remaining as PM the entire time until the election.
So if Callaghan can remain PM (pre-FTPA) between losing the No Confidence vote and the election actually being called, while still passing business ... I see no constitutional bar to a PM post-FTPA remaining PM until either the 14 days has lapsed or a new government is found. In a 1979 re-run I'd imagine Callaghan would have stayed for the 14 days (as there's no way Thatcher would have found a majority for government) after which we'd have an election.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Surprised they haven't mentioned GO wanting to cut top rated of tax to 40p and only LD lack of support led to that being 45p. Tories wouldn't increase personal allowance without the top rate reduction.
Welfare cuts are pretty popular eg cutting the total to £23k max and some of the floated 2012 ideas look sensible, like restricting kids allowance to 2. That being said, its a leftie audience on the BBC, so it will be predominantly full of welfare lovers rather than those who pay for it.
Not sure an audience that is 50% coalition supporters plus some UKIPers on top can be called leftie.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Surprised they haven't mentioned GO wanting to cut top rated of tax to 40p and only LD lack of support led to that being 45p. Tories wouldn't increase personal allowance without the top rate reduction.
I'm sure the worm Alexander is working for Cameron. Lure in EM with a series of leaks which DC can simply rule out live on BBC Question time leaving Balls and EM with nowhere to go.
This is a potentially great spot by Mike Smithson and IPSOS-Mori. It ties in with what posters on here have been saying. Someone else in fact wrote yesterday he's finding this very thing on the doorstep.
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
It's worth putting a small bet on a Tory majority at this stage. I doubt it will happen but it may be a value bet.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
If he's been properly briefed he will know that YG polled Restricting Child Benefit to three children just six weeks ago and it is massively supported by the public at 73-18.
Limiting it to three?? Too generous. Two at most, in my view.
The Greens should go for taxes on children, not benefits. After all, they are the worst possible thing you could do to your carbon footprint.....
I think the child benefit story from the lib dems could hurt the tories.,especially with young families.
It's been playing all day on all news,radio/TV news and some of the headlines I've heard would worry me if your not politically minded.
On a broader basis, it does show the whole system in need of reform. Who in their right mind would design a system where you money off people in the form of taxes, wash it through a cost adding government machine, then give it back to them as tax credits.
Just take less tax to start with and get rid of the middleman/system
Small differences in turnout can have a surprisingly large effect on the final votes shares. For example if turnout was just 1% less than expected in Labour seats and 1% higher in Tory ones, that would have quite an impact on the national vote shares in a very close race.
But the interesting thing is that no-one's going to be commenting on it on election night. Dimbleby won't be saying "oh look, the turnout in Sunderland Central was a bit lower than we thought it'd be". Everyone will be concentrating on other things like vote change, majorities, seat gains and losses, etc.
Ps, a strong Cammo showing tonight could seal the momentum for the blues.
But he's not going to be able have a strong showing - because he is going to come under continuous attack re cutting child benefit.
As I posted earlier, I suspect he will have to rule out cutting child benefit.
If he tries just giving a waffly / evasive answer he is guaranteed to get a very hostile audience reaction.
He has to say something definite to diffuse the issue.
Indeed, he may as well rule out cutting child benefit - as he is very unlikely to get a majority so he won't have the opportunity to do it anyway.
You have to admire Danny Alexander's timing, the QT audience will have a field day, as will Miliband and Clegg. I'm sure that Danny has a red box full of tricks which he could leak over the next few days, it will lose him tactical Tories though, but it will no doubt help his English colleagues.
Surprised they haven't mentioned GO wanting to cut top rated of tax to 40p and only LD lack of support led to that being 45p. Tories wouldn't increase personal allowance without the top rate reduction.
Welfare cuts are pretty popular eg cutting the total to £23k max and some of the floated 2012 ideas look sensible, like restricting kids allowance to 2. That being said, its a leftie audience on the BBC, so it will be predominantly full of welfare lovers rather than those who pay for it.
Not sure an audience that is 50% coalition supporters plus some UKIPers on top can be called leftie.
I'm sure the BBC will have insured the Lib Dem's are all of the sandal wearing, left leaning side of the party. Filter question number one "Do you read orange books?"
Re.Mori.UKPR states that the Mori tables state that the poll was conducted over 4 days,hardly a snapshot. That unemployed and part time workers broke in favour of the Tories. That London broke 9 points positive for the Tories. As stated previously,only 63 percent retention of Labour from 2010. Surely even the most biased most concede that these findings are unusual.
Really great news comrades with this LD leak. Reinforces the nasty Tories, scares off the females, and will play for a few days. Well done the LD's- makes me almost like them again.
And best of us with a royal sprog due- Labour can leverage again the meme that the Tories are the child snatching nasties.
"A 45-year-old man has been jailed for 25 years for murdering his five-week-old granddaughter. Prosecutors said Mark Jones killed baby Amelia Jones because he did not like the infant's father - the boyfriend of Jones' daughter. Jones had tricked his daughter Sarah into thinking he was ill for more than a year before attacking the baby at her home in Pontnewydd, South Wales."
Patrick McLoughin has apparently come out and confirmed the next Thames Crossing will be in Thurrock. Must be the end of JDPs chances there surely?
He is not allowed to make such announcements during election campaigns. That breaks all the rules
Well apparently he just did .There were 4 options I believe and he has said it will be one of the 2 Thurrock ones.JDP is not happy as she wanted a Canvey option .
Canvey a straight Ukip-Tory fight, Thurrock is Ukip-labour hmmm
Does that mean the Conservatives have written Thurrock off?
Possibly.. Long time since I spoke to anyone from UKIP in that area but they only ever talked of Labour as the opponent
Christ, the pollsters really are trolling us aren't they. Different in-house methodoligies are one thing, but each different pollster shouldn't be having different directions of travel.
EDIT: Oh, i thought the last Panelbase was a Tory lead. Nevermind then.
Re.Mori.UKPR states that the Mori tables state that the poll was conducted over 4 days,hardly a snapshot. That unemployed and part time workers broke in favour of the Tories. That London broke 9 points positive for the Tories. As stated previously,only 63 percent retention of Labour from 2010. Surely even the most biased most concede that these findings are unusual.
Sub-samples have high margins of error. Never pay much attention to them. MORI are a highly reputable outfit.
This is a potentially great spot by Mike Smithson and Ipsos MORI. It ties in with what posters on here have been saying. Someone else in fact wrote yesterday he's finding this very thing on the doorstep.
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
I think it's clear that the Conservatives will be the largest party in a hung parliament (I'd be pretty shocked if they weren't), but I don't think there's been any real indication they are going to get a majority. I think they'll get 270 - 295 seats. Looking at seat projections, even with a 5% - 6% leads, they still aren't getting a majority. And even then, those percentages are at the top-range of Conservative leads, being produced in samples whose patterns have yet to trend in other polls - for example, the 6% lead shown by Ashcroft also shows UKIP gaining no MPs, which is unlikely. This MORI sample could well be the start of a trend to figure in other polling samples, but I'd be cautious about it, and wait to see if is replicated by other firms.
I also think it'll be difficult for any minority government to work. Cameron will be contending with his own Tory Right, LDs, UKIP, Labour, SNP, Green and Plaid Cymru MPs, and I think it'll be hard for his government in that situation to pass laws.
This is a potentially great spot by Mike Smithson and IPSOS-Mori. It ties in with what posters on here have been saying. Someone else in fact wrote yesterday he's finding this very thing on the doorstep.
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
It's worth putting a small bet on a Tory majority at this stage. I doubt it will happen but it may be a value bet.
I'd call this election for the Tories in terms of vote share. But seats? Who knows?
OT Anyone used walnut oil to cook with? I hear its delicious used with green/fine beans - and flash fried lamb. Any other suggestions? I use a lot of toasted sesame oil and adore it.
Tend just to use walnut oil for salads, not cooking. I use peanut (and where specifically called for sesame) oil for most Asian-style cooking, avocado or grape seed oil for high temperature stuff, olive oil as a default for medium-to-low temperature cooking, and butter for taste and often 50/50 with olive oil.
Re.Mori.UKPR states that the Mori tables state that the poll was conducted over 4 days,hardly a snapshot. That unemployed and part time workers broke in favour of the Tories. That London broke 9 points positive for the Tories. As stated previously,only 63 percent retention of Labour from 2010. Surely even the most biased most concede that these findings are unusual.
I think it's the London one which stands out the most. MORI are highly credible, but there has been no polling so far, that I can recall which shows the Conservatives leading in London.
Patrick McLoughin has apparently come out and confirmed the next Thames Crossing will be in Thurrock. Must be the end of JDPs chances there surely?
He is not allowed to make such announcements during election campaigns. That breaks all the rules
Well apparently he just did .There were 4 options I believe and he has said it will be one of the 2 Thurrock ones.JDP is not happy as she wanted a Canvey option .
Canvey a straight Ukip-Tory fight, Thurrock is Ukip-labour hmmm
Does that mean the Conservatives have written Thurrock off?
Possibly.. Long time since I spoke to anyone from UKIP in that area but they only ever talked of Labour as the opponent
In light of the Scottish Sun's endorsement of SNP, it will be interesting to see how the other Scottish newspapers react. The Daily Record will be the one to watch, particularly as over 60% of it's readership are likely to vote SNP. I wonder whether this will be a Kevin McGuire decision or whether the local Branch manager's call. Given the DR's falling sales, this will be a tricky decision.
I would like to see Torcuil Crichton's face if they go with the SNP.
I think the Daily Record have been softening their coverage of the SNP, at the end of the day they're a business which needs to protect its market. It was odd that Labour wouldn't even give David Clegg the SLAB membership figures, at the end of the day if overall membership is 200,053, they must know the exact figure for SLAB. If they ever get round to releasing the SLAB numbers, it would be interesting to know how many are actually Tory activists who joined to help Jim Murphy's leadership campaign !!
@hopisen: Shortly we're going to see a total turnaround in some people's attitudes to negative stories about politician's dead fathers.
Taking the leaders (which would only be worth tweeting at this stage): Cameron and Miliband's fathers are dead, as is Farage's (I believe). Clegg's is still alive.
But we should not judge children by the sins of the fathers ...
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
Re.Mori.UKPR states that the Mori tables state that the poll was conducted over 4 days,hardly a snapshot. That unemployed and part time workers broke in favour of the Tories. That London broke 9 points positive for the Tories. As stated previously,only 63 percent retention of Labour from 2010. Surely even the most biased most concede that these findings are unusual.
I think it's the London one which stands out the most. MORI are highly credible, but there has been no polling so far, that I can recall which shows the Conservatives leading in London.
Of course the Conservatives don't lead in London. But, you'll find plenty of sub-samples putting them ahead in London.
This is a potentially great spot by Mike Smithson and IPSOS-Mori. It ties in with what posters on here have been saying. Someone else in fact wrote yesterday he's finding this very thing on the doorstep.
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
It's worth putting a small bet on a Tory majority at this stage. I doubt it will happen but it may be a value bet.
I'd call this election for the Tories in terms of vote share. But seats? Who knows?
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
loyalty to the conservatives?
Think you would find that if the coalition was on the ballot paper it would win a majority
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
A sacrifice that may benefit other LD candidates in Tory/LD marginal perhaps? – A rather shoddy exodus imho, but then I’m not typical of the target audience.
Many good men and women gave up their lives for our democracy in the UK. Even if you walk in and draw a massive c()ck on the ballot paper you owe it to them to do it.
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
loyalty to the conservatives?
No,loyalty to the Government he served,how can this man be trusted again if he survives has a MP in another Tory/lib dem coalition,just desperation from the lib dems.
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
loyalty to the conservatives?
No,loyalty to the Government he served,how can this man be trusted again if he survives has a MP in another Tory/lib dem coalition,just desperation from the lib dems.
Watching C4 news on immigration, you cannot help but feel that there is a large slice of poor, alienated whites that are angry, and for good reason. But how many London authorities have dumped their looked after children into Kent's coastal times, mostly white? And moved their DSS families outwards on housing benefit. I can understand why UKIP gets traction- but the debate shouldn't be about immigration. It is about why our Victorian seaside towns are designated for housing immigrants, unemployed families on DSS, and looked after children.
Danny Alexander knows he's lost but it is a surprise that he has risked looking revengeful - it it is so unnecessary as he could have left with a very good reputation for competence and loyallty
Lord Alexander looks like he's taking one for the team - it will certainly loss him and other SLID tactical votes. No doubt the Tories will be considering leaking the Frenchgate report which will point the finger directly at Carmichael. Is this possibly putting O&S in play?
Watching C4 news on immigration, you cannot help but feel that there is a large slice of poor, alienated whites that are angry, and for good reason. But how many London authorities have dumped their looked after children into Kent's coastal times, mostly white? And moved their DSS families outwards on housing benefit. I can understand why UKIP gets traction- but the debate shouldn't be about immigration. It is about why our Victorian seaside towns are designated for housing immigrants, unemployed families on DSS, and looked after children.
During my coastal walk I ended a day in Flint, North Wales. I explored the castle ruins for a while and could see our motorhome in the car park below. Outside the ruins I met a man who saw me and asked: "Are you something to do with the camper down there?" When I said yes, he replied: "I was going to steal it, but I saw the charity sign in the window and decided against it."
My then-girlfriend was in the motorhome at the time.
It was the unremarkable way that he said he was going to steal the van, and yet was put off by a charity sign.
I related this story to someone I met when approaching Liverpool. She told me that Liverpool dropped many of their 'problem' families onto Flint.
Dumping grounds are a cr@p idea. The families need fixing, not moving like a hot potato.
OT Anyone used walnut oil to cook with? I hear its delicious used with green/fine beans - and flash fried lamb. Any other suggestions? I use a lot of toasted sesame oil and adore it.
Tend just to use walnut oil for salads, not cooking. I use peanut (and where specifically called for sesame) oil for most Asian-style cooking, avocado or grape seed oil for high temperature stuff, olive oil as a default for medium-to-low temperature cooking, and butter for taste and often 50/50 with olive oil.
Clegg puts his money where his mouth is: Lib Dem leader bets radio host £50 he will still be Deputy PM after the election
LBC host Nick Ferrari tells Clegg he does not think he will survive election Lib Dem leader has hosted Call Clegg on the station since January 2013 Clegg accepted bet that he would be back, in pounds instead of euros
"Watching C4 news on immigration, you cannot help but feel that there is a large slice of poor, alienated whites that are angry, and for good reason."
Read what happened to them during the Lady Porter/Mrs Thatcher era. They were shipped out of Westminster wholesale to secure a Tory majority. Ask anyone living in Westminster as I was what was going on. From Old Compton St to the Savoy every shop doorway had someone living in a cardboard box.
IOS.. you are soooo transparent.. IPSOS MORI says huge nos of 2010 Labour voters wont Labour so you come out with that claptrap.
In a democracy, you have the right to vote, not vote, vote to keep someone in or vote to keep someone out. What a person does is up to them, the duty stuff is utter nonsense.
Comments
http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/prime-minister/
So he has a gamble - he could announce a new policy of restricting it to 3 children - which as you say would be popular.
What he can't allow is for ALL parents to think they might lose cash.
Anyway BBC News report not too bad - only 3 minutes - and framed at least to some extent around the public not trusting what any politician said.
They appear to have disregarded their own model, at least for this election.
Nevertheless, it is astonishing that MORI now gives Cameron his highest approval rating since January 2012, and, based on the L&N adjusted approval, the highest since September 2010.
Is something going on? Is it possible the polls are wrong?
Will it be:
- 24
- 48
- 72?
I.e. will they come out with this on Wednesday, or Tuesday, or Monday?
I rule out "we have 72 hours to save our NHS" because it's a bank holiday.
24 hours is the kind of West Wing crap Redward might like but it's leaving it a bit late. OTOH, 48 hours gives the message time to play, but only at the cost of also allowing time for the Tories to bring up Mid Staffs and Butcher Burnham.
24 hours I think. It's so facile and dishonest Labour will simply be unable to resist it.
In 1979 the Vote of No Confidence in Callaghan's government meant that there was an early election, not that Thatcher was sent for. Now under the provisions of the FTPA that would have led to the start of 14 days to find a new government, which wouldn't have been found at that time ... not an immediate election.
In that scenario would the Queen have sent for Thatcher immediately, or would Callaghan have stayed (or Cameron stays now) unless or until another is found.
Dr. X, btw.
Dr. Prasannan, why use two different versions of S? I know Greek has various forms for S (and E, I think), just curious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma
[checks this week's ELBOW data]
Oh, dear. Looks like we have (another!) Tory crossover this week...
Ive a big feeling this is going tory. maybe Im jumping the gun but just got big sense on this. The questions whether they've got enough to get to a majority on there own.
It's been playing all day on all news,radio/TV news and some of the headlines I've heard would worry me if your not politically minded.
So if Callaghan can remain PM (pre-FTPA) between losing the No Confidence vote and the election actually being called, while still passing business ... I see no constitutional bar to a PM post-FTPA remaining PM until either the 14 days has lapsed or a new government is found. In a 1979 re-run I'd imagine Callaghan would have stayed for the 14 days (as there's no way Thatcher would have found a majority for government) after which we'd have an election.
http://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/12925410.Thieves_pinch_Vince_Cable_s_bike_as_he_paints_ceramic_plates_with_Nick_Clegg/
Clearly an attempt by Lib Dems to grab some coverage.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/nzx4rlh
POEMWAS. Heart of stone not to laugh.
Brand backs the Greens - kiss of death...
Thats the sort of thing the Lib Dems do nowadays.
Just take less tax to start with and get rid of the middleman/system
Platform 10 @PlatformTen
ALL THAT EFFORT with EdM and Russell Brand says vote Green?! Oh dear... https://twitter.com/TheRedRag/status/593819291625123841 …
But the interesting thing is that no-one's going to be commenting on it on election night. Dimbleby won't be saying "oh look, the turnout in Sunderland Central was a bit lower than we thought it'd be". Everyone will be concentrating on other things like vote change, majorities, seat gains and losses, etc.
As are approval ratings for the government.
That unemployed and part time workers broke in favour of the Tories.
That London broke 9 points positive for the Tories.
As stated previously,only 63 percent retention of Labour from 2010.
Surely even the most biased most concede that these findings are unusual.
And best of us with a royal sprog due- Labour can leverage again the meme that the Tories are the child snatching nasties.
This is one of the most shocking cases I've ever heard about:
http://news.sky.com/story/1475130/serial-liar-murdered-his-baby-granddaughter
"A 45-year-old man has been jailed for 25 years for murdering his five-week-old granddaughter.
Prosecutors said Mark Jones killed baby Amelia Jones because he did not like the infant's father - the boyfriend of Jones' daughter.
Jones had tricked his daughter Sarah into thinking he was ill for more than a year before attacking the baby at her home in Pontnewydd, South Wales."
EDIT: Oh, i thought the last Panelbase was a Tory lead. Nevermind then.
I also think it'll be difficult for any minority government to work. Cameron will be contending with his own Tory Right, LDs, UKIP, Labour, SNP, Green and Plaid Cymru MPs, and I think it'll be hard for his government in that situation to pass laws.
what else is new?
Must be something to do with Tory poll leads - wonder how long Channel 4 had been sitting on the story.
https://twitter.com/davieclegg/status/593813862471880706
But we should not judge children by the sins of the fathers ...
Many good men and women gave up their lives for our democracy in the UK. Even if you walk in and draw a massive c()ck on the ballot paper you owe it to them to do it.
The man's finished ever way.
But how many London authorities have dumped their looked after children into Kent's coastal times, mostly white? And moved their DSS families outwards on housing benefit.
I can understand why UKIP gets traction- but the debate shouldn't be about immigration. It is about why our Victorian seaside towns are designated for housing immigrants, unemployed families on DSS, and looked after children.
My then-girlfriend was in the motorhome at the time.
It was the unremarkable way that he said he was going to steal the van, and yet was put off by a charity sign.
I related this story to someone I met when approaching Liverpool. She told me that Liverpool dropped many of their 'problem' families onto Flint.
Dumping grounds are a cr@p idea. The families need fixing, not moving like a hot potato.
"Watching C4 news on immigration, you cannot help but feel that there is a large slice of poor, alienated whites that are angry, and for good reason."
Read what happened to them during the Lady Porter/Mrs Thatcher era. They were shipped out of Westminster wholesale to secure a Tory majority. Ask anyone living in Westminster as I was what was going on. From Old Compton St to the Savoy every shop doorway had someone living in a cardboard box.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/sleaze-scandal-strips-dame-shirley-porter-of-her-title-94961.html
In a democracy, you have the right to vote, not vote, vote to keep someone in or vote to keep someone out. What a person does is up to them, the duty stuff is utter nonsense.
You are a loon.