@NCPoliticsUK: Seems there's been a slight methodology change from Populus - they now use a "spiral of silence" adjustment (impact is minor in this poll)
@NCPoliticsUK: Seems there's been a slight methodology change from Populus - they now use a "spiral of silence" adjustment (impact is minor in this poll)
It dresses up the Labour sub in Scotland better than it should be I'm guessing though.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Which means the SNP voting with the Tories to bring down a Labour government. Alternatively, if the SNP abstains, Labour could do a deal with other parties - unless the Tories have a majority if the SNP votes are excluded.
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
I agree. At least for a year or so. If the SNP immediately brings down a Labour government or prevents it from introducing what might be considered "progressive" policies with UK-wide effect, then it is going to create problems for itself in Scotland. Most Scots, even a large number of Yes voters, are not dyed in the wool nationalists who want independence at any price.
One interesting wrinkle might be if the SNP vote to bring down a Tory minority govt Queen's speech which had lots of goodies for Scotland.....that could be hung around their necks for decades......'more interested in Socialism than Scotland'.......
SNP are not as stupid and blinkered as you though
So you think they might vote for a Tory's Queen's Speech stuffed with goodies for Scotland?
Dumb question - but on these "poll of polls" they show on TV do they allow for the issue of frequency when calculating the average? IOW the YG polls that are daily will massively skew the monthly or less frequent polls.
Spreads actually moving now, after a surprisingly static period. Con+LD 313 at spin, 316 at spreadex.
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
Mr. Palmer, do you not think that would have a seriously negative long-term impact against Labour in England? UKIP could clean up your WWC voters, getting many seats themselves and letting the Conservatives in through the middle elsewhere.
If Scotland crushes Labour, and England rejects Labour, and Labour's leader becomes PM, that won't go down well.
Why would white working class Labour voters in England stop voting Labour because the SNP supports certain pieces of legislation put forward by a minority Labour government? Presumably they vote Labour because they want a Labour government.
Because northerners and Taffs and Brummies would see (correctly or not) Scots getting special treatment and more money cause of the Nats "deal" with Labour. And this despite Scots being richer per capita than, say, Geordies.
This would
1. Infuriate the WWC of England (and rightly so) 2. Make the WWC see the benefits of not voting Labour
I disagree that the SNP will only support Labour legislation in return for increased spending in Scotland at England's expense. I do not see what the SNP gains by, say, voting with the Tories to not end the Bedroom tax or to prevent an increase in the top rate of tax etc. And for the reasons you outline I just do not see what Labour gets from a deal with the SNP.
the SNP are not looking for special treatment , rather the correct treatment for Scotland.
What looks like 'correct' treatment in Scotland may easily look like 'special' treatment in England......
SNP cannot be blamed for greed in England
People who feel hard done by will blame the greed of others. Whether it is correct to do so is almost beside the point. Scotland will be where the finger of blame will be pointed.
Thing is, if labour don;t work with the SNP, when are they ever going to form a government again?
Are the people of Britain starting to ask whether, in the final analysis, we even need a labour party? has this party outlived its usefulness? is it, even, an anachronism?
There are plenty of other alternatives on the left now. And then there's UKIP.
Mr. Palmer, do you not think that would have a seriously negative long-term impact against Labour in England? UKIP could clean up your WWC voters, getting many seats themselves and letting the Conservatives in through the middle elsewhere.
If Scotland crushes Labour, and England rejects Labour, and Labour's leader becomes PM, that won't go down well.
Why would white working class Labour voters in England stop voting Labour because the SNP supports certain pieces of legislation put forward by a minority Labour government? Presumably they vote Labour because they want a Labour government.
Because northerners and Taffs and Brummies would see (correctly or not) Scots getting special treatment and more money cause of the Nats "deal" with Labour. And this despite Scots being richer per capita than, say, Geordies.
This would
1. Infuriate the WWC of England (and rightly so) 2. Make the WWC see the benefits of not voting Labour
I disagree that the SNP will only support Labour legislation in return for increased spending in Scotland at England's expense. I do not see what the SNP gains by, say, voting with the Tories to not end the Bedroom tax or to prevent an increase in the top rate of tax etc. And for the reasons you outline I just do not see what Labour gets from a deal with the SNP.
Sean is not too bright, the SNP are not looking for special treatment , rather the correct treatment for Scotland. Much of this would be of benefit to his chosen audience. Lots of blinkered thinking from down south , miss the real point of what the SNP are really about due to being fixated that it is against the English when it patently is not at all.
I said WWC would "see (correctly or not)" favouritism for Scotland. I'm allowing that it's possible Scotland won't get special treatment (tho it's highly likely you will, as Ed needs Nat support, and that'll obviously come with a price). Either way WWC in England will perceive special treatment, for Scots. It's inevitable. And the SNP will encourage this, to sow rancour. And the Tories, UKIP, and tabloids will be all over it, examining every penny that goes North.
A "deal" with the SNP will be a living nightmare for Labour. I do not see what they gain from it, other than power for power's sake, and those powers will be very limited. Moreover it could destroy Labour long term. It's madness.
Mr. Palmer, do you not think that would have a seriously negative long-term impact against Labour in England? UKIP could clean up your WWC voters, getting many seats themselves and letting the Conservatives in through the middle elsewhere.
If Scotland crushes Labour, and England rejects Labour, and Labour's leader becomes PM, that won't go down well.
Why would white working class Labour voters in England stop voting Labour because the SNP supports certain pieces of legislation put forward by a minority Labour government? Presumably they vote Labour because they want a Labour government.
Because northerners and Taffs and Brummies would see (correctly or not) Scots getting special treatment and more money cause of the Nats "deal" with Labour. And this despite Scots being richer per capita than, say, Geordies.
This would
1. Infuriate the WWC of England (and rightly so) 2. Make the WWC see the benefits of not voting Labour
I disagree that the SNP will only support Labour legislation in return for increased spending in Scotland at England's expense. I do not see what the SNP gains by, say, voting with the Tories to not end the Bedroom tax or to prevent an increase in the top rate of tax etc. And for the reasons you outline I just do not see what Labour gets from a deal with the SNP.
Sean is not too bright, the SNP are not looking for special treatment , rather the correct treatment for Scotland. Much of this would be of benefit to his chosen audience. Lots of blinkered thinking from down south , miss the real point of what the SNP are really about due to being fixated that it is against the English when it patently is not at all.
As long as the fixation exists we appear to be taking half-steps towards a Tory majority/workable minority
I don't disagree with that, the establishment like to promote these types of things to suit the occasion and keep the plebs on board..
The best means of telling the direction of the political wind
This week (13 polls from 11 pollsters)
CON +10 Lab -7 UKIP NC LD -2 GREEN +4
All time (30 polls from 11 pollsters)
CON +2 LAB -20 UKIP +8 LD -1 GREEN +5
tirer vos propres conclusions
The Conservatives now lead 34.2% to 32.5% across all pollsters.
If SPUD is useful at all, it would be to check the moves against betting markets.. if you find a market where the Con price is the same as it was on April 20th then its probably value
Same goes for UKIP, and they are drifting in the seats markets which I find inexplicable
@NCPoliticsUK: Seems there's been a slight methodology change from Populus - they now use a "spiral of silence" adjustment (impact is minor in this poll)
The impact is minor, but it takes Labour from a 1% lead to level pegging. I think Sean Fear's assesment of the Tories being 2% is correct at the moment, Dave is out on his arse.
Spreads actually moving now, after a surprisingly static period. Con+LD 314 at spin, 316 at spreadex.
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
Another example of David Cameron's maxim about Twitter being proved right.
He truly is a seer.
Chris Skidmore looks as if he's heading for a comfortable win.
There's something about the South West that makes the Tories really optimistic this year.
Charlotte Leslie, Chris Skidmore, and Jacob Rees-Mogg have all achieved high profiles for the right reasons. In Kingswood, I'm told that new private housing developments are pushing the seat rightwards.
Elsewhere, the Conservatives benefit from the Lib Dems being their chief opponents. The Conservatives can lose substantial numbers of votes to UKIP in the South West, and still achieve a swing from the Lib Dems.
Mr. Palmer, do you not think that would have a seriously negative long-term impact against Labour in England? UKIP could clean up your WWC voters, getting many seats themselves and letting the Conservatives in through the middle elsewhere.
If Scotland crushes Labour, and England rejects Labour, and Labour's leader becomes PM, that won't go down well.
Why would white working class Labour voters in England stop voting Labour because the SNP supports certain pieces of legislation put forward by a minority Labour government? Presumably they vote Labour because they want a Labour government.
Because northerners and Taffs and Brummies would see (correctly or not) Scots getting special treatment and more money cause of the Nats "deal" with Labour. And this despite Scots being richer per capita than, say, Geordies.
This would
1. Infuriate the WWC of England (and rightly so) 2. Make the WWC see the benefits of not voting Labour
I disagree that the SNP will only support Labour legislation in return for increased spending in Scotland at England's expense. I do not see what the SNP gains by, say, voting with the Tories to not end the Bedroom tax or to prevent an increase in the top rate of tax etc. And for the reasons you outline I just do not see what Labour gets from a deal with the SNP.
Sean is not too bright, the SNP are not looking for special treatment , rather the correct treatment for Scotland. Much of this would be of benefit to his chosen audience. Lots of blinkered thinking from down south , miss the real point of what the SNP are really about due to being fixated that it is against the English when it patently is not at all.
I said WWC would "see (correctly or not)" favouritism for Scotland. I'm allowing that it's possible Scotland won't get special treatment (tho it's highly likely you will, as Ed needs Nat support, and that'll obviously come with a price). Either way WWC in England will perceive special treatment, for Scots. It's inevitable. And the SNP will encourage this, to sow rancour. And the Tories, UKIP, and tabloids will be all over it, examining every penny that goes North.
A "deal" with the SNP will be a living nightmare for Labour. I do not see what they gain from it, other than power for power's sake, and those powers will be very limited. Moreover it could destroy Labour long term. It's madness.
Given how crap and policy free they are , what other options do they have.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Which means the SNP voting with the Tories to bring down a Labour government. Alternatively, if the SNP abstains, Labour could do a deal with other parties - unless the Tories have a majority if the SNP votes are excluded.
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
I agree. At least for a year or so. If the SNP immediately brings down a Labour government or prevents it from introducing what might be considered "progressive" policies with UK-wide effect, then it is going to create problems for itself in Scotland. Most Scots, even a large number of Yes voters, are not dyed in the wool nationalists who want independence at any price.
Right, so the obvious outcome is a minority government dance where Labour constantly tries to get a bounce or popularity for some reason then get a new election, while the SNP tries to maintain leverage by keeping issues open where it can bring down the government over something popular and come out ahead.
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't the Queens' speech and the budget are two different things ?
Once Ed is in, the FTPA keeps him in. He'd have to bring himself down by recommending a vote of No Confidence to his own party !
I'm just saying Ed gets there. I make no firm predictions about his miserable life once there.
The Queen's Speech and the Budget are of course different things. However, there is nothing to suggest that the 2011 Act will keep a government in office which would have been obliged to resign before its enactment. It is a cardinal constitutional principle that a government which fails to secure supply to the Crown must resign or take its case to the country. There is nothing in the 2011 Act to suggest this has changed. In any event, the point remains: will the SNP vote for a Queen's Speech of a government committed to "austerity" and the renewal of Trident? It is doubtful to say the least.
If, therefore, the Tories have more seats than Labour and the Liberal Democrats combined, which is perfectly possible, Miliband may find it very difficult to secure the vote on the Loyal Address. I am beginning to worry that the next government is going to be determined on a vote by vote basis by a bunch of Ulster Free Presbyterians.
Spreads actually moving now, after a surprisingly static period. Con+LD 314 at spin, 316 at spreadex.
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
+UKIP + DUP = Cameron home and dry?
Forget ukip lots of pple are ignoring NI. DUP could home and hose the tories in a perfect unionist coalition. But I still think the tories are going to cross the line from here.
Biggest headache would be short by 1. Carswell. Can you imagine?! :-)
Audience share for QT was not especially large, but people do really seem taken with it [largely because the Yorkshire audience treated all the politicians in much the same way Hannibal treated Flaminius and his army] so the impact *might* be a little higher than expected.
Didn't watch it, but from reports I doubt it'll shift things much. However, it is telling that the strongest post-QT line appears to once again be Miliband and the SNP.
@NCPoliticsUK: Seems there's been a slight methodology change from Populus - they now use a "spiral of silence" adjustment (impact is minor in this poll)
The impact is minor, but it takes Labour from a 1% lead to level pegging. I think Sean Fear's assesment of the Tories being 2% is correct at the moment, Dave is out on his arse.
I'm not at all sure about that. On a 1.7% lead, Electoral Calculus gives 310 Labour to 296 Conservatives, but then you have to knock 30-40 off the Labour total to take account of Scotland. Then you have to factor in outperformance from both Lib Dem incumbents, and first time Conservative incumbents.
Audience share for QT was not especially large, but people do really seem taken with it [largely because the Yorkshire audience treated all the politicians in much the same way Hannibal treated Flaminius and his army] so the impact *might* be a little higher than expected.
Didn't watch it, but from reports I doubt it'll shift things much. However, it is telling that the strongest post-QT line appears to once again be Miliband and the SNP.
Its being repeated 6pm BBC1 I think? With the media talking it up its poss more people may tune in.
Well - Ozzy has clearly tried and half succeeded at getting rid of the deficit.
I've been thinking about this "half" that the Coalition campaign on. This is, I think, the cut in the headline budget deficit, from £160bn ish to £80bn ish.**
However, if you accept that the budget deficit can be decomposed into two components, a structural budget deficit and a cyclical budget deficit, then you might expect that the cyclical budget deficit would actually be returning to a surplus around about now, given that we have had two years of solid growth and very large increases in employment.
This would further imply that the structural part of the budget deficit has actually been cut by less than half, which is a pathetic record given the stated aims of the Coalition. And you can't blame the Eurozone crisis for this, because if you accept the concept of a structural budget deficit then the Eurozone crisis would only have affected the cyclical component of the budget deficit.
So somehow the Coalition have delivered less than half of what they promised on deficit reduction, and they aren't being challenged on that half as much as they ought to be during this election campaign.
** The actual figures from the ONS are a peak of £154bn in 2009/10 and a decline to £87bn in 2014/15, which is a cut of 44%, which is four-ninths, rather than one-half.
The "half" the tories are talking about is as a percentage of GDP. As we have now had reasonable growth since 2010 the economy is larger so the deficit is a smaller share.
I don't agree that they have cut the structural deficit by less than half. The Coalition record on spending has been freakishly accurate, we have never had a government that has controlled spending so accurately and carefully. Where things have come adrift is the income side: we are simply not earning enough as a country.
Whether this is structural or current is very hard to say and greatly affects the judgment of how large the structural deficit was. What is crystal clear is that it was substantially greater than the actual deficit because any sane government would have been running significant current surpluses in 2005-7. The starting point is therefore much higher and the reduction going forward much greater depending on whether you conclude that the current depressed earnings are temporary or permanent.
Spreads actually moving now, after a surprisingly static period. Con+LD 314 at spin, 316 at spreadex.
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
+UKIP + DUP = Cameron home and dry?
Forget ukip lots of pple are ignoring NI. DUP could home and hose the tories in a perfect unionist coalition. But I still think the tories are going to cross the line from here.
Biggest headache would be short by 1. Carswell. Can you imagine?! :-)
Are you suggesting that: Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister?
It is great to see the Conservatives have the endorsement of both the Financial Times and the Economist today. The Economist was particularly scathing about Ed Miliband saying his agenda is "statism masquerading as progressivism" and calling him "the most economically radical premier since Thatcher".
Mr. G, how do you see Scotland going? Mostly SNP, obviously, but how many seats d'you think they and the other three parties will get?
MD, I am not a real political nerd so do not spend a lot of time in detail , however it does not look good for Labour or LibDems. I expect a few labour types will be scared back as usual but would expect to see around the 50 mark. Given the hype though it would not be impossible to see it being much higher, people really are fed up with how the Westminster puppets have behaved. Hopefully it will be a wipeout and cleanse the place , make those turkeys think about what they have done ( not done ). They just disappear to London and collect money it is shameful.
@DavidL - Your interesting answer on the deficit and government tax receipts does serve to illustrate the problem with talking about structural deficits, rather than just the deficit as is. Thanks for the clarification about the source of half wrt as a % of GDP.
Any chance of the Conservatives outnumbering [or equalling] the Caledonian panda population?
Edited extra bit: on Labour being 'only' 16% behind, don't forget Brown's Labour polled 19% at one point. Admittedly, that wasn't a week before an election, but it does show parties can bounce back rapidly.
Got to say I'm not sure that'll happen in Scotland, but the possibility ought not be discounted. Complacency is the father of failure.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Which means the SNP voting with the Tories to bring down a Labour government. Alternatively, if the SNP abstains, Labour could do a deal with other parties - unless the Tories have a majority if the SNP votes are excluded.
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
I agree. At least for a year or so. If the SNP immediately brings down a Labour government or prevents it from introducing what might be considered "progressive" policies with UK-wide effect, then it is going to create problems for itself in Scotland. Most Scots, even a large number of Yes voters, are not dyed in the wool nationalists who want independence at any price.
One interesting wrinkle might be if the SNP vote to bring down a Tory minority govt Queen's speech which had lots of goodies for Scotland.....that could be hung around their necks for decades......'more interested in Socialism than Scotland'.......
SNP are not as stupid and blinkered as you though
So you think they might vote for a Tory's Queen's Speech stuffed with goodies for Scotland?
I would hope they would vote for anything that is in Scotland's interests. I would hope they are better than just ideology and would do what was right for Scotland regardless of who was promoting it. Doing what labour do as a matter of course would be a big mistake.
Spreads actually moving now, after a surprisingly static period. Con+LD 314 at spin, 316 at spreadex.
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
+UKIP + DUP = Cameron home and dry?
Forget ukip lots of pple are ignoring NI. DUP could home and hose the tories in a perfect unionist coalition. But I still think the tories are going to cross the line from here.
Biggest headache would be short by 1. Carswell. Can you imagine?! :-)
Are you suggesting that: Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister?
Correct. Labour are finished. Even with SNP they're gonna be short. Based on polling trends & momentum now.
Ipsos Mori Con +7% TNS Con +3%, Populus Con +3%, Ashcroft Con +2%, ICM Con +1%, Panelbase Con +1%, Yougov Con +1% (five poll average) Com Res Lab +4%, Opinium Lab +3%, Survation Lab +1%.
Average shift to Conservatives 1.0%, or a swing of 0.5%.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Which means the SNP voting with the Tories to bring down a Labour government. Alternatively, if the SNP abstains, Labour could do a deal with other parties - unless the Tories have a majority if the SNP votes are excluded.
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
I agree. At least for a year or so. If the SNP immediately brings down a Labour government or prevents it from introducing what might be considered "progressive" policies with UK-wide effect, then it is going to create problems for itself in Scotland. Most Scots, even a large number of Yes voters, are not dyed in the wool nationalists who want independence at any price.
One interesting wrinkle might be if the SNP vote to bring down a Tory minority govt Queen's speech which had lots of goodies for Scotland.....that could be hung around their necks for decades......'more interested in Socialism than Scotland'.......
SNP are not as stupid and blinkered as you though
So you think they might vote for a Tory's Queen's Speech stuffed with goodies for Scotland?
I would hope they would vote for anything that is in Scotland's interests. I would hope they are better than just ideology and would do what was right for Scotland regardless of who was promoting it. Doing what labour do as a matter of course would be a big mistake.
Would that not create a world record in deception ? Sturgeon has said that they will vote down a Tory Queen's speech - with goodies for Scotland or not !
Have to imagine they'd prefer not to need UKIP, imagine votes on Europe.....
Not that DUP wouldn't be a bananaskin waiting to happen also of course :-) Much more likely to have no choice in needing them though.
UKIP are likely to deliver four seats to a majority at a maximum. Even if they got us over the line to a majority, it would be an unworkable majority because of the unreliability of UKIP. It just won't be worth it. The DUP can presumably be bought off for a simple increase in Northern Ireland's budget.
I think the biggest hostage to fortune from last night's QT was Miliband's 'Labour didn't overspend' - the audience reaction, (and the polls) suggest thats not a majority view....
more joy shall be in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth.....
Ipsos Mori Con +7% TNS Con +3%, Populus Con +3%, Ashcroft Con +2%, ICM Con +1%, Panelbase Con +1%, Yougov Con +1% (five poll average) Com Res Lab +4%, Opinium Lab +3%, Survation Lab +1%.
Average shift to Conservatives 1.0%, or a swing of 0.5%.
Online pollsters, particularly YouGov, will have questions to answer if Cameron is waving from the steps of Maggie's Den this time next week...
I doubt any of the pollsters are sleeping easy this week.....
Reverse, of course, applies to the phone pollsters as well if it is Miliband waving.
I still think that LAB most seats is outstanding value. Even if Labour is now behind nationally, I suspect that they will outperform in the marginals for various reasons.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Which means the SNP voting with the Tories to bring down a Labour government. Alternatively, if the SNP abstains, Labour could do a deal with other parties - unless the Tories have a majority if the SNP votes are excluded.
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
I agree. At least for a year or so. If the SNP immediately brings down a Labour government or prevents it from introducing what might be considered "progressive" policies with UK-wide effect, then it is going to create problems for itself in Scotland. Most Scots, even a large number of Yes voters, are not dyed in the wool nationalists who want independence at any price.
One interesting wrinkle might be if the SNP vote to bring down a Tory minority govt Queen's speech which had lots of goodies for Scotland.....that could be hung around their necks for decades......'more interested in Socialism than Scotland'.......
SNP are not as stupid and blinkered as you though
So you think they might vote for a Tory's Queen's Speech stuffed with goodies for Scotland?
I would hope they would vote for anything that is in Scotland's interests. I would hope they are better than just ideology and would do what was right for Scotland regardless of who was promoting it. Doing what labour do as a matter of course would be a big mistake.
I wonder if an Alec Salmond led SNP might not have been quite as unequivocal over TORIES OUT! as Nicola Sturgeon.....who has left zero wriggle room....
It is great to see the Conservatives have the endorsement of both the Financial Times and the Economist today. The Economist was particularly scathing about Ed Miliband saying his agenda is "statism masquerading as progressivism" and calling him "the most economically radical premier since Thatcher".
Morning all (just about).
That's a very strange comment from the Economist - assuming it's intended as a criticism. Given how fantastically the global economy hasn't been going for the best part of a decade, you would think that economic radicalism is needed as much as it was by the end of the 70s. Rather supports the characterisation of Tories as people who would lay down their lives to defend the things they vigorously opposed a generation ago.
Any chance of the Conservatives outnumbering [or equalling] the Caledonian panda population?
Edited extra bit: on Labour being 'only' 16% behind, don't forget Brown's Labour polled 19% at one point. Admittedly, that wasn't a week before an election, but it does show parties can bounce back rapidly.
Got to say I'm not sure that'll happen in Scotland, but the possibility ought not be discounted. Complacency is the father of failure.
Outside chance if their is any tactical voting that Tories may get 1 , 2 would be miracle , beating pandas impossible.
The Scottish sub sample was favourable to Lab. 44% to the SNP and 28% for Lab.
Just savour that observation for a moment...
Labour 16% behind "Good poll for them in Scotland"
Indeed !
We are in new territory here in Scotland and my feeling is that there is a vast amount of undecided voters despite what the polls say. One of the indecisions is if they will vote. The leaflets no longer come through the door and there are no posters at all apart from the massive billboards with Sturgeon and some graffiti on them.
My gut feeling is that Labour are going to hang onto up to 10 seats and the Lib Dems 3 or 4. This will make it very close as to who has the most seats. Voter turnout as I have said before will be lower than the polls. Maybe dramatically lower as we had so many people signed up for the referendum who have never voted before in their life. We have a bloated electoral register so anything over 65% would be impressive.
I've lost my bank card and have no online betting accounts, this could be a good thing
Ukip over 2.5 seats 10/11 Betfred
Insane
UKIP have one guaranteed seat, which is guaranteed because Carswell crossed to them (Carswell would be retaining it if he'd stayed Con).
Other than Carswell which seats do you think are "nailed on" UKIP and which do you think are "probable" or "possible"?
Clacton certain. Thurrock probable. Thanet S and Rochester and Strood possible coin tosses. Others I don't see happening.
2.5 sounds about right. No I don't want another bet, we've already got one ;-)
I'd put Thanet South with the Probables.
Then remind me never to take any notice of you're betting posts.
"Probable"? Lol LMAO. Every poll has it neck & neck with, if anything, tories whisker ahead. In fact if you believe anecdotes from the ground campaign its squeaky time for farage and not looking great.
ps and a lot of labour will vote tory to kick farage.
Audience share for QT was not especially large, but people do really seem taken with it [largely because the Yorkshire audience treated all the politicians in much the same way Hannibal treated Flaminius and his army] so the impact *might* be a little higher than expected.
Didn't watch it, but from reports I doubt it'll shift things much. However, it is telling that the strongest post-QT line appears to once again be Miliband and the SNP.
Its being repeated 6pm BBC1 I think? With the media talking it up its poss more people may tune in.
@NCPoliticsUK: Seems there's been a slight methodology change from Populus - they now use a "spiral of silence" adjustment (impact is minor in this poll)
The impact is minor, but it takes Labour from a 1% lead to level pegging. I think Sean Fear's assesment of the Tories being 2% is correct at the moment, Dave is out on his arse.
I'm not at all sure about that. On a 1.7% lead, Electoral Calculus gives 310 Labour to 296 Conservatives, but then you have to knock 30-40 off the Labour total to take account of Scotland. Then you have to factor in outperformance from both Lib Dem incumbents, and first time Conservative incumbents.
I think you can safely factor in the final element of that with a multiplier of zero. As for LD incumbents, that's got to depend on the individual constituency situation - for example, it seems improbable that it will be a factor where there's unwind of 2010 Labour tactical voting given Clegg's aggressive alignment with the blues (manufactured child benefit spats notwithstanding).
Audience share for QT was not especially large, but people do really seem taken with it [largely because the Yorkshire audience treated all the politicians in much the same way Hannibal treated Flaminius and his army] so the impact *might* be a little higher than expected.
Didn't watch it, but from reports I doubt it'll shift things much. However, it is telling that the strongest post-QT line appears to once again be Miliband and the SNP.
Its being repeated 6pm BBC1 I think? With the media talking it up its poss more people may tune in.
Not if it means the speech failing to get through. Which it probably will, so they won't abstain.
Will the SNP really vote to express confidence in a government intent on pursuing "austerity" and renewing Trident (both which they have been campaigning vociferously against in North Britain)? It must be doubted. The best that can be hoped for Labour is that they will abstain. The Daily Mail report that Ms Sturgeon has said Miliband will not get a budget through the House of Commons unless "he compromises".
Can we really see the SNP taking down a Labour minority government a year before the next Scottish election? Ed Milliband will not do a deal with the SNP as he does not need to do one.
One interesting wrinkle might be if the SNP vote to bring down a Tory minority govt Queen's speech which had lots of goodies for Scotland.....that could be hung around their necks for decades......'more interested in Socialism than Scotland'.......
SNP are not as stupid and blinkered as you though
So you think they might vote for a Tory's Queen's Speech stuffed with goodies for Scotland?
I would hope they would vote for anything that is in Scotland's interests. I would hope they are better than just ideology and would do what was right for Scotland regardless of who was promoting it. Doing what labour do as a matter of course would be a big mistake.
Would that not create a world record in deception ? Sturgeon has said that they will vote down a Tory Queen's speech - with goodies for Scotland or not !
Just my personal opinion , if she is going to just stick with dogma to the detriment of the country then they will be no better than the rubbish they are replacing. It may be a vain hope but I am hoping for better things from them and that they will bite the bullet and put the country first and not go for self interest.
I've lost my bank card and have no online betting accounts, this could be a good thing
Ukip over 2.5 seats 10/11 Betfred
Insane
UKIP have one guaranteed seat, which is guaranteed because Carswell crossed to them (Carswell would be retaining it if he'd stayed Con).
Other than Carswell which seats do you think are "nailed on" UKIP and which do you think are "probable" or "possible"?
Clacton certain. Thurrock probable. Thanet S and Rochester and Strood possible coin tosses. Others I don't see happening.
2.5 sounds about right. No I don't want another bet, we've already got one ;-)
I'd put Thanet South with the Probables.
Then remind me never to take any notice of you're betting posts.
"Probable"? Lol LMAO. Every poll has it neck & neck with, if anything, tories whisker ahead. In fact if you believe anecdotes from the ground campaign its squeaky time for farage and not looking great.
ps and a lot of labour will vote tory to kick farage.
Anecdotes from the ground? Which parallel universe are you referring to? Nigel will win South Thanet easily.
Quite unbelievable excuses from Hodge the Dodge on the radio....it cos I iz an immigrant....I'm just a poor girl from a Jewish family....
Of course the Beeboid too thick to really understand that her excuses didn't add up. Apparently no gain, no tax efficiency, not worth anything...nothing to do with me, it was all my family, because we are Jewish and Hitler and the war...
The Scottish sub sample was favourable to Lab. 44% to the SNP and 28% for Lab.
Just savour that observation for a moment...
Labour 16% behind "Good poll for them in Scotland"
Indeed !
We are in new territory here in Scotland and my feeling is that there is a vast amount of undecided voters despite what the polls say. One of the indecisions is if they will vote. The leaflets no longer come through the door and there are no posters at all apart from the massive billboards with Sturgeon and some graffiti on them.
My gut feeling is that Labour are going to hang onto up to 10 seats and the Lib Dems 3 or 4. This will make it very close as to who has the most seats. Voter turnout as I have said before will be lower than the polls. Maybe dramatically lower as we had so many people signed up for the referendum who have never voted before in their life. We have a bloated electoral register so anything over 65% would be impressive.
How will you be voting in the key constituency of Hamilton & Rutherglen.
According to SPIN, nothing really has changed except perhaps Con Min.
Left: Labour 266+, SNP 49+, Green 1, PC 4, SDLP 3 = 323
Right: Tory 289+, LD* 24+, DUP* 10, UKIP 3 = 326
+ when SNP is 49, which parties constitute the other 10. Could be crucial.
I have indicated many times that LD will not align themselves with CON of all situations in a situation like this.
LD is not Clegg [ at least, I hope not ]. If they do support Conservative, then they could rightly be described as the Tory bitch. Also, Clegg knows that LD will not support if either UKIP or DUP are involved in supporting the Tories.
DUP: OK , no different from SNP. Squeeze as much as they can for NI unionists.
Good fun !
What are the odds that the next GE will not be held under FPTP, a disgraceful electoral system.
It is great to see the Conservatives have the endorsement of both the Financial Times and the Economist today. The Economist was particularly scathing about Ed Miliband saying his agenda is "statism masquerading as progressivism" and calling him "the most economically radical premier since Thatcher".
Morning all (just about).
That's a very strange comment from the Economist - assuming it's intended as a criticism. Given how fantastically the global economy hasn't been going for the best part of a decade, you would think that economic radicalism is needed as much as it was by the end of the 70s. Rather supports the characterisation of Tories as people who would lay down their lives to defend the things they vigorously opposed a generation ago.
Radicalism is only good if you're radically doing the right thing. The Economist explains why Miliband is wanting to radically do the wrong things - and that is worse than doing nothing.
I've lost my bank card and have no online betting accounts, this could be a good thing
Ukip over 2.5 seats 10/11 Betfred
Insane
UKIP have one guaranteed seat, which is guaranteed because Carswell crossed to them (Carswell would be retaining it if he'd stayed Con).
Other than Carswell which seats do you think are "nailed on" UKIP and which do you think are "probable" or "possible"?
Clacton certain. Thurrock probable. Thanet S and Rochester and Strood possible coin tosses. Others I don't see happening.
2.5 sounds about right. No I don't want another bet, we've already got one ;-)
I'd put Thanet South with the Probables.
Then remind me never to take any notice of you're betting posts.
"Probable"? Lol LMAO. Every poll has it neck & neck with, if anything, tories whisker ahead. In fact if you believe anecdotes from the ground campaign its squeaky time for farage and not looking great.
ps and a lot of labour will vote tory to kick farage.
Sorry, if it's not what you wanted to hear.
Named candidate polls give Farage a clear lead here. All polls in this seat show far more Labour switchers to UKIP than to the Conservatives.
I've lost my bank card and have no online betting accounts, this could be a good thing
Ukip over 2.5 seats 10/11 Betfred
Insane
UKIP have one guaranteed seat, which is guaranteed because Carswell crossed to them (Carswell would be retaining it if he'd stayed Con).
Other than Carswell which seats do you think are "nailed on" UKIP and which do you think are "probable" or "possible"?
Clacton certain. Thurrock probable. Thanet S and Rochester and Strood possible coin tosses. Others I don't see happening.
2.5 sounds about right. No I don't want another bet, we've already got one ;-)
I'd put Thanet South with the Probables.
Then remind me never to take any notice of you're betting posts.
"Probable"? Lol LMAO. Every poll has it neck & neck with, if anything, tories whisker ahead. In fact if you believe anecdotes from the ground campaign its squeaky time for farage and not looking great.
ps and a lot of labour will vote tory to kick farage.
Anecdotes from the ground? Which parallel universe are you referring to? Nigel will win South Thanet easily.
Comments
Not going well for Labour when The Indy runs this. Too many over tired twits.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-labours-scottish-leader-predicts-cameron-will-remain-as-pm-as-new-poll-predicts-snp-will-win-all-seats-north-of-the-border-10214211.html
The real questions whether they've got enough momentum to cross the line or will they fall short?
p.s. rubbish audience share for QT. Does that include on Sky?
Reaction to Milliband's SNP no-deal, perhaps anticipating Labour will have all sorts of damaging/unanswerable hypotheticals to answer over the next week?
Thing is, if labour don;t work with the SNP, when are they ever going to form a government again?
Are the people of Britain starting to ask whether, in the final analysis, we even need a labour party? has this party outlived its usefulness? is it, even, an anachronism?
There are plenty of other alternatives on the left now. And then there's UKIP.
“would be too weak to do much harm but not too weak to get discredited”
Same goes for UKIP, and they are drifting in the seats markets which I find inexplicable
Elsewhere, the Conservatives benefit from the Lib Dems being their chief opponents. The Conservatives can lose substantial numbers of votes to UKIP in the South West, and still achieve a swing from the Lib Dems.
Labour: The NHS, food banks, cost of living
Conservatives: The economy, employment, Ed Miliband
UKIP: Immigration, Nigel Farage, UKIP momentum
LibDems: Anything but Nick Clegg
What the headlines are about in the run-up to the GE:
The SNP, who will do deals with whom, chaos.
If, therefore, the Tories have more seats than Labour and the Liberal Democrats combined, which is perfectly possible, Miliband may find it very difficult to secure the vote on the Loyal Address. I am beginning to worry that the next government is going to be determined on a vote by vote basis by a bunch of Ulster Free Presbyterians.
Biggest headache would be short by 1. Carswell. Can you imagine?! :-)
Didn't watch it, but from reports I doubt it'll shift things much. However, it is telling that the strongest post-QT line appears to once again be Miliband and the SNP.
Oh doesn't seem to be. Thought they said it was.
If it was in line with the other polls then Con would probably be ahead before the spiral of silence adjustment.
I don't agree that they have cut the structural deficit by less than half. The Coalition record on spending has been freakishly accurate, we have never had a government that has controlled spending so accurately and carefully. Where things have come adrift is the income side: we are simply not earning enough as a country.
Whether this is structural or current is very hard to say and greatly affects the judgment of how large the structural deficit was. What is crystal clear is that it was substantially greater than the actual deficit because any sane government would have been running significant current surpluses in 2005-7. The starting point is therefore much higher and the reduction going forward much greater depending on whether you conclude that the current depressed earnings are temporary or permanent.
Are you suggesting that: Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister?
Not that DUP wouldn't be a bananaskin waiting to happen also of course :-) Much more likely to have no choice in needing them though.
Indeed !
Other than Carswell which seats do you think are "nailed on" UKIP and which do you think are "probable" or "possible"?
Clacton certain. Thurrock probable. Thanet S and Rochester and Strood possible coin tosses. Others I don't see happening.
2.5 sounds about right. No I don't want another bet, we've already got one ;-)
Any chance of the Conservatives outnumbering [or equalling] the Caledonian panda population?
Edited extra bit: on Labour being 'only' 16% behind, don't forget Brown's Labour polled 19% at one point. Admittedly, that wasn't a week before an election, but it does show parties can bounce back rapidly.
Got to say I'm not sure that'll happen in Scotland, but the possibility ought not be discounted. Complacency is the father of failure.
REJOICE !
The way this is going its either gonna be this
1 Cons & DUP [& or LD]
or
2 Cons maj
The trend in the latest polls this week:-
Ipsos Mori Con +7%
TNS Con +3%,
Populus Con +3%,
Ashcroft Con +2%,
ICM Con +1%,
Panelbase Con +1%,
Yougov Con +1% (five poll average)
Com Res Lab +4%,
Opinium Lab +3%,
Survation Lab +1%.
Average shift to Conservatives 1.0%, or a swing of 0.5%.
I mean why do you think Nick Griffin endorsed Farage last year?
Oh blimey what is our bet?
more joy shall be in Heaven over one sinner that repenteth.....
If we had the same per capita spent on Newcastle as Glasgow what would be unfair about that?
The coin-tosses are Rochester, Boston, and Castle Point.
Only because they've all been cured
Rejoice!! Maajid Nawaz is no longer a jihadi loving islamist radical
Yeah only because he isn't one anymore
I still think that LAB most seats is outstanding value. Even if Labour is now behind nationally, I suspect that they will outperform in the marginals for various reasons.
TORIES OUT! as Nicola Sturgeon.....who has left zero wriggle room....
That is true Mr Pulpstar, but those votes will presumably go somewhere. And in some constituencies those votes are substantial.
For example in Ed Miliband's own constituency, BNP + English democrats was 5,000 votes.
That's a very strange comment from the Economist - assuming it's intended as a criticism. Given how fantastically the global economy hasn't been going for the best part of a decade, you would think that economic radicalism is needed as much as it was by the end of the 70s. Rather supports the characterisation of Tories as people who would lay down their lives to defend the things they vigorously opposed a generation ago.
My gut feeling is that Labour are going to hang onto up to 10 seats and the Lib Dems 3 or 4. This will make it very close as to who has the most seats. Voter turnout as I have said before will be lower than the polls. Maybe dramatically lower as we had so many people signed up for the referendum who have never voted before in their life. We have a bloated electoral register so anything over 65% would be impressive.
"Probable"? Lol LMAO. Every poll has it neck & neck with, if anything, tories whisker ahead. In fact if you believe anecdotes from the ground campaign its squeaky time for farage and not looking great.
ps and a lot of labour will vote tory to kick farage.
Is what gets you membership of the metrosexual Metropolitan liberal elite.
Plus I'm out canvassing for the rest of the day.
Of course the Beeboid too thick to really understand that her excuses didn't add up. Apparently no gain, no tax efficiency, not worth anything...nothing to do with me, it was all my family, because we are Jewish and Hitler and the war...
It is one where Labour has a flicker of hope...
Left: Labour 266+, SNP 49+, Green 1, PC 4, SDLP 3 = 323
Right: Tory 289+, LD* 24+, DUP* 10, UKIP 3 = 326
+ when SNP is 49, which parties constitute the other 10. Could be crucial.
I have indicated many times that LD will not align themselves with CON of all situations in a situation like this.
LD is not Clegg [ at least, I hope not ]. If they do support Conservative, then they could rightly be described as the Tory bitch. Also, Clegg knows that LD will not support if either UKIP or DUP are involved in supporting the Tories.
DUP: OK , no different from SNP. Squeeze as much as they can for NI unionists.
Good fun !
What are the odds that the next GE will not be held under FPTP, a disgraceful electoral system.
Right > Nothing (status quo) > Wrong
Named candidate polls give Farage a clear lead here. All polls in this seat show far more Labour switchers to UKIP than to the Conservatives.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11571744/Nick-Clegg-and-Nigel-Farage-will-lose-in-general-election-new-Lord-Ashcroft-poll-shows.html
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/29/clegg-farage-sheffield-south-thanet-ashcroft-poll
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage/11548397/Nigel-Farage-is-fading-away-without-a-fight.html
Could reel out another dozen but if your an ostrich your an ostrich and I'll be talking to thin air.
He may win but if he does it won't be "easily".