politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ICM phone poll naming Clegg has him holding Sheffield Hallam thanks to tactical Tory voters
Nick Clegg is on course to be saved from defeat in his Sheffield Hallam constituency by a tide of tactical Tory votes, according to a special Guardian/ICM poll conducted in the deputy prime minister’s constituency.
Farage, Kennedy and Jim Murphy would be three who I could imagine would receive a boost with named polling. Would this boost extend to standard MPs? I'm not sure..I think it'd only apply to candidates where people are tactical voting solely for the candidate themselves.
TSE told this poll that he was going to vote tactically for Clegg but changed his mind on the back of irritating behaviour on the part of the Lib Dems in the last few days with leaks and breaches of confidence. I would be amazed if he was alone.
I was going to vote tactically in Dundee West for a while. It is not easy and some of these tories will change their minds. I think this will be very close but with Nick holding on.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
Mr. Roger, Coogan's a hypocrite. Whined about how stupid Top Gear is, but it didn't stop him being a guest on it. And featuring with [I think] his Ferrari to do a piece with Clarkson.
TSE told this poll that he was going to vote tactically for Clegg but changed his mind on the back of irritating behaviour on the part of the Lib Dems in the last few days with leaks and breaches of confidence. I would be amazed if he was alone.
I was going to vote tactically in Dundee West for a while. It is not easy and some of these tories will change their minds. I think this will be very close but with Nick holding on.
I think it was another poll I took part in, I was polled on Wednesday.
As for the poll - interesting to know whether it will cost the Libs seats the lack of differentiation that Clegg has done presumably to help keep any Tory Tactical voters.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
I wonder if Clegg might be a special case? Very high profile name, with a lot of national attention from both sides, a huge amount of effort going on locally, with a lot of relentless tactical targeting of Tory voters by the LDs. Tory voters who know full well the consequences of letting Labour win instead.
I expect *some* similar effect might be present in most marginals with first-time incumbent MPs. But not to the same extent.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
Counting on a late surge and incumbent bonus to save those seats so they can focus on the potential gains? A bold strategy if that is the case, and bold has not been the hallmark of their campaign from the outside at least.
I'd be disappointed to put it mildly if Clegg held his seat. However I'm a firm advocate of tactical voting so I would hardly begrudge the Tories from doing so. From their perspective it's the smart move. What could Labour do to stop Tory>Lib switching?
I won't be staying up on election night, so I'd be delighted to wake up to the news he's lost but annoyed I'd missed it.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
Counting on a late surge and incumbent bonus to save those seats so they can focus on the potential gains? A bold strategy if that is the case, and bold has not been the hallmark of their campaign from the outside at least.
@patrickwintour: Labour may look for coalition with LDs if it cannot form a majority government on own, says BBC. BBC set to disclose election date next.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
Counting on a late surge and incumbent bonus to save those seats so they can focus on the potential gains? A bold strategy if that is the case, and bold has not been the hallmark of their campaign from the outside at least.
Probably just think the Lib Dem vote is so soft that there are easier pickings in the SW and a better return for their efforts. But with near 100 2010 gains in play I am not sure I agree entirely with their priorities at the moment.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
OK, it seemingly makes a difference when naming the candidates. This might also hold true for other seats. But it makes you wonder about an electorate that cannot remember the names of the candidates. Moreover, in Sheffield Hallam there is another gentleman by the name of Clegg on the ballot paper namely Steve Clegg of the English Democrats. If polling results change substantially if one names "Nick Clegg," how many voters will mark their cross next to the name of "Steve Clegg" of the English Democrats who appears right below Nick Clegg? In view of many voters seemingly changing their preferences once names are brought into play, this seems a valid question to ask.
FPT: The Tories look like they're really going for Bath. A friend of mine just posted a picture from a rally with Cameron there today. A 15-minute rally speech on soundcloud has also just popped up on my Facebook feed.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
There are undoubtedly seats to be won in the south west and the Tories seem very focussed on the 23 more policy.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
I drove home from Devon today. The LibDem/Tory posters and boards turn into Labour/Tory ones around Gloucester, I think. That's about when the UKIP stuff disappears as well.
@patrickwintour: Labour may look for coalition with LDs if it cannot form a majority government on own, says BBC. BBC set to disclose election date next.
Very likely that Labour + lib dems < conservatives.
(And how could Nick Clegg go for Labour when he made such strong arguments for backing the Tories last time - most seats/ most votes?)
OK, it seemingly makes a difference when naming the candidates. This might also hold true for other seats. But it makes you wonder about an electorate that cannot remember the names of the candidates. Moreover, in Sheffield Hallam is that there is another gentleman by the name of Clegg on the ballot paper namely Steve Clegg of the English Democrats. If the result of the poll changes substantially only if name "Nick Clegg," how many voters will mark their cross next to the name of "Steve Clegg" of the English Democrats who appears right below Nick Clegg?
@patrickwintour: Labour may look for coalition with LDs if it cannot form a majority government on own, says BBC. BBC set to disclose election date next.
Mr. Pulpstar, if Labour have something like 290 and the Lib Dems around 30, it works.
If Labour are 260 (and Conservatives around 290) then it's not easy, because of the SNP.
Edited extra bit: sorry, not paying full attention [doing a spot of work]. I know the first sentence reads as "If two parties can make a viable coalition, they will", which is rather a statement of the obvious.
If Nick does hang on by the proverbial hair from a lower part of his anatomy this would be another example (just) of where the Labour vote becomes less efficient. In 2010 they scored really appallingly where they did not win or were at least in contention.
I still think they are going to accrue a lot more wasted votes from red Liberals and previous tactical voters in seats that do them very little good this time. Conversely, the supposed "swing" to Labour in the South referred to at the end of the last thread is evidence that massive Tory majorities might become smaller majorities with the application of UKIP meaning that their vote becomes more efficient.
There have been some indications that the Tories might be doing better in some of the marginals, although not as much as I would like. If so this would suggest my theory has some substance to it.
I think that there will still be a bias in the system in favour of Labour but it will be significantly less than it was in 2005 or 2010.
I reckon we will se a fair bit of Tory tactical voting for LDs on Thursday. It may well save a few of them. Lynn Featherstone in Hornsey could well be a beneficiary. I expect Labour to win less than ten LD seats.
I wonder if at some stage we may see the Democrat bit dropped from the name and a return to it just being the Liberal party.
"Which is more embarrassing? An endorsement from Russell Brand or Alan Partridge?"
More embarrassing Russell Brand though probably more influential. His nine million followers are obviously not the brightest so will probably do what he tells them. Whether they have the grey matter to find their way to the polling station is questionable.
Alan Partridge had an honest tale to tell about his humble beginnings and how Labour saw him and his family through. He didn't think the same of the Tories and didn't believe they shared values of community.
For those to whom it struck a chord it was impressive. Like one of those charity ads or red nose appeals. It had instant impact. His final words 'Do you really want another five years of a Tory Government?' will strike a chord
TSE despite all his humming and arrhing was never going to vote anything other than Conservative . FWIW I think Clegg will win by 10-12 % , anyone who knows the various parts that make up Hallam would see that 30% is around the upper limit for Labour in the constituency
Interesting that Labour are starting to talk about a possible coalition with the LD's. On some projections the Tories will have more seats than Lab/LD combined.
The BBC piece is worded as though the LDs would be privileged to even be asked by Labour and would obviously support the proposal.
As it is the LDs will speak first to the Tories because of the most seats + most votes point, and Clegg has a natural preference to deal with Cameron anyway.
I can't see the Lib Dems going for that if Labour are behind on seats. It'd be the death of the party. Clegg will try and block it anyway.
I think the numbers won't add up for a coalition of Conservatives with Liberal Democrats. The other question is whether the Liberal Democrats will be in the mood for another coalition after the beating they are about to receive at the polls. The Conservatives got much more from this coalition election-wise. I think the Liberal Democrats will end up preferring some other type of arrangement.
The BBC piece is worded as though the LDs would be privileged to even be asked by Labour and would obviously support the proposal.
As it is the LDs will speak first to the Tories because of the most seats + most votes point, and Clegg has a natural preference to deal with Cameron anyway.
What makes you so sure that the Tories will have the highest number of seats ?
Any odds available on the break up of the Liberal Democrats by the end of the year ?
I'm quite surprised we haven't seen defections on any scale to the Liberal Party, who are essentially the Social Liberal Forum but with added Euroscepticism. It may be the Euroscepticism that's stopped it, given how Euroenthusiastic most Lib Dem activists seem to be for some reason.
The BBC piece is worded as though the LDs would be privileged to even be asked by Labour and would obviously support the proposal.
As it is the LDs will speak first to the Tories because of the most seats + most votes point, and Clegg has a natural preference to deal with Cameron anyway.
What makes you so sure that the Tories will have the highest number of seats ?
If you bothered to read it, you would see that it is the premise of the article, a premise floated by a Labour source.
I reckon we will se a fair bit of Tory tactical voting for LDs on Thursday. It may well save a few of them. Lynn Featherstone in Hornsey could well be a beneficiary. I expect Labour to win less than ten LD seats.
I wonder if at some stage we may see the Democrat bit dropped from the name and a return to it just being the Liberal party.
More hassle than its worth I suspect. What reason is there to overcome just simple inertia in order to do that.
TSE despite all his humming and arrhing was never going to vote anything other than Conservative . FWIW I think Clegg will win by 10-12 % , anyone who knows the various parts that make up Hallam would see that 30% is around the upper limit for Labour in the constituency
It really should be. It is not a seat where they have ever been in contention. But there will also be an anti-Clegg vote, possibly amongst some disillusioned Lib Dems for a start. Tactical voting works both ways.
I can't see the Lib Dems going for that if Labour are behind on seats. It'd be the death of the party. Clegg will try and block it anyway.
Would he necessarily have a choice in the matter? As has been pointed out before Cameron will have the first chance to try and form a government that can pass a Queen's Speech. If he can't command a majority then Ed Miliband will be called upon to have a go. Clegg can then decide whether he wants to back Miliband (though abstaining may be enough).
I reckon we will se a fair bit of Tory tactical voting for LDs on Thursday.
Just as interesting might be the possibility tory/kipper tactical, particularly in the North. Labour would have lost H&M if the tory rump had voted tactically.
If Nick does hang on by the proverbial hair from a lower part of his anatomy this would be another example (just) of where the Labour vote becomes less efficient. In 2010 they scored really appallingly where they did not win or were at least in contention.
I still think they are going to accrue a lot more wasted votes from red Liberals and previous tactical voters in seats that do them very little good this time. Conversely, the supposed "swing" to Labour in the South referred to at the end of the last thread is evidence that massive Tory majorities might become smaller majorities with the application of UKIP meaning that their vote becomes more efficient.
There have been some indications that the Tories might be doing better in some of the marginals, although not as much as I would like. If so this would suggest my theory has some substance to it.
I think that there will still be a bias in the system in favour of Labour but it will be significantly less than it was in 2005 or 2010.
I completely agree. I expect the Labour vote to go up pretty significantly in English seats that are already Labour held. I think Labour is really going to struggle taking Tory seats with majorities of 2,000 plus.
So you reckon that Labour will only get 1% more than in 2010, when Labour recorded their second worst result. Labour voters did not go out to vote and this time around they will also get tactical votes from a good portion of the 2010 Lib Dem voters.
My prediction on national shares is.
Con 35.5% Lab 33.5% Lib Dem 13.5% UKIP 10% Greens 4%
Mr. Roger, Coogan's a hypocrite. Whined about how stupid Top Gear is, but it didn't stop him being a guest on it. And featuring with [I think] his Ferrari to do a piece with Clarkson.
I love Coogan's characters and comedy. Sadly for him, I find them far more interesting, real and human than the man himself.
I reckon we will se a fair bit of Tory tactical voting for LDs on Thursday.
Just as interesting might be the possibility tory/kipper tactical, particularly in the North. Labour would have lost H&M if the tory rump had voted tactically.
A GE turnout will see Labour win by around 7,000 in H & M
"Which is more embarrassing? An endorsement from Russell Brand or Alan Partridge?"
More embarrassing Russell Brand though probably more influential. His nine million followers are obviously not the brightest so will probably do what he tells them. Whether they have the grey matter to find their way to the polling station is questionable.
Alan Partridge had an honest tale to tell about his humble beginnings and how Labour saw him and his family through. He didn't think the same of the Tories and didn't believe they shared values of community.
For those to whom it struck a chord it was impressive. Like one of those charity ads or red nose appeals. It had instant impact. His final words 'Do you really want another five years of a Tory Government?' will strike a chord
They strike a chord with you as someone who doesn't like the Tories but then he's not swinging your vote is he. Does it strike a chord with either swing voters or apathetic voters who might not turnout is the question.
This two stage question is utter nonsense. The second question "and now turning to you own constituency" is the equivalent to saying "right lets see how bright or thick you are, do you know what's going on in your own constituency" of course peeps are going to give a different answer they don't want to appear uninformed. And any one who think naming the MP/candidates is anymore accurate is utterly deluded. Virtually no-one knows the name of their MP and the candidates ROFL.
The BBC piece is worded as though the LDs would be privileged to even be asked by Labour and would obviously support the proposal.
As it is the LDs will speak first to the Tories because of the most seats + most votes point, and Clegg has a natural preference to deal with Cameron anyway.
What makes you so sure that the Tories will have the highest number of seats ?
Obviously they might not have, but I sense that the starting point after gains from the LDs / SNP losses is roughly 320 (302+18)/230 (256-35+9). I can see 30 Lab gains and 290-260, but I'm struggling to see the 46 that would bring it to 274-276.
@kiranstacey: This protestor last wk told me he wasn't SNP. This is where I next saw his mask. SNP said someone dropped it round. http://t.co/f18P8wwbLK
Mr. Royale, saw an interesting piece on the TV some time ago. It suggested many comedians have difficult histories or psychological troubles and use comedy as a kind of stress relief/therapy. Comediennes, on the other hand, [it was asserted] tend to be confident and more at ease.
I find it deeply offensive that the plethora of luvvies that Labour are rolling out think that fairness, honesty and decency are the monopoly of the Labour party.
Clegg will be getting some benefit from being deputy PM, and the increased name recognition that brings, though being party leader would have made him fairly high profile anyway.
The other Lib Dem ministers should also be get some increased name recognition from being in office, so any swing against them should be less than for the average Lib Dem MP, which might be enough to save a few seats.
I find it deeply offensive that the plethora of luvvies that Labour are rolling out think that fairness, honesty and decency are the monopoly of the Labour party.
I wonder what these Tory tactical voters will make of Clegg's obvious inability to keep private conversations private? It plays right into the 'you can't trust the LibDems' narrative...
I reckon we will se a fair bit of Tory tactical voting for LDs on Thursday. It may well save a few of them. Lynn Featherstone in Hornsey could well be a beneficiary. I expect Labour to win less than ten LD seats.
I wonder if at some stage we may see the Democrat bit dropped from the name and a return to it just being the Liberal party.
More hassle than its worth I suspect. What reason is there to overcome just simple inertia in order to do that.
I imagine the Democrat bit will really struggle with another coalition with the Tories.
Comments
I was going to vote tactically in Dundee West for a while. It is not easy and some of these tories will change their minds. I think this will be very close but with Nick holding on.
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/watch-steve-coogan-urges-people-9176553
Note: Backing Clegg.
They wouldn't bother if they didn't think it was in play. There's 3/1 still available with 888sport and Unibet. Looks like value to me.
As for the poll - interesting to know whether it will cost the Libs seats the lack of differentiation that Clegg has done presumably to help keep any Tory Tactical voters.
Breitbart has a rehashed version of the 'labour vote in freefall in marginals' story, FWIW.
But there are seats to be lost in the midlands and London and I personally wish the Tories were paying more attention there. Every seat lost to Labour counts double in the largest party game.
I wonder if Clegg might be a special case? Very high profile name, with a lot of national attention from both sides, a huge amount of effort going on locally, with a lot of relentless tactical targeting of Tory voters by the LDs. Tory voters who know full well the consequences of letting Labour win instead.
I expect *some* similar effect might be present in most marginals with first-time incumbent MPs. But not to the same extent.
Russell Brand , Delia Smith so much for tax cuts for millionaires !
Ed has the millionaires market sown up.
The tables look decent for Coppard to me, I doubt Clegg will win by 7%. But I think he'll win.
Shame the same can't be said in Twickenham ;-)
I'm the odd one out.
I won't be staying up on election night, so I'd be delighted to wake up to the news he's lost but annoyed I'd missed it.
I can still change my mind.
(But I won't, if he had been slightly ahead or behind, I might have considered it)
I've been saying for ages he's safe. I'm always right
Also this poll points towards Huppert being very safe indeed.
The move is to counter claims a Labour government would lack legitimacy if it won fewer seats than the Conservatives.
Senior Labour sources say such a coalition would have collectively more seats than the Conservatives.
They hope this might give an Ed Miliband-led administration greater legitimacy in the eyes of voters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32584903
https://www.facebook.com/Steven.Clegg.English.Democrats
(And how could Nick Clegg go for Labour when he made such strong arguments for backing the Tories last time - most seats/ most votes?)
Give him 1% from Clegg for that tbh.
The days Mike has given is when he expects the poll to be first published online.
For example the Guardian ICM poll is going to be in Thursday's edition, but online on Wednesday.
If Labour are 260 (and Conservatives around 290) then it's not easy, because of the SNP.
Edited extra bit: sorry, not paying full attention [doing a spot of work]. I know the first sentence reads as "If two parties can make a viable coalition, they will", which is rather a statement of the obvious.
Con 33.5%
Lab 30.5%
UKIP 14.5%
LD 12.5%
Greens 4%
I still think they are going to accrue a lot more wasted votes from red Liberals and previous tactical voters in seats that do them very little good this time. Conversely, the supposed "swing" to Labour in the South referred to at the end of the last thread is evidence that massive Tory majorities might become smaller majorities with the application of UKIP meaning that their vote becomes more efficient.
There have been some indications that the Tories might be doing better in some of the marginals, although not as much as I would like. If so this would suggest my theory has some substance to it.
I think that there will still be a bias in the system in favour of Labour but it will be significantly less than it was in 2005 or 2010.
I wonder if at some stage we may see the Democrat bit dropped from the name and a return to it just being the Liberal party.
"Which is more embarrassing? An endorsement from Russell Brand or Alan Partridge?"
More embarrassing Russell Brand though probably more influential. His nine million followers are obviously not the brightest so will probably do what he tells them. Whether they have the grey matter to find their way to the polling station is questionable.
Alan Partridge had an honest tale to tell about his humble beginnings and how Labour saw him and his family through. He didn't think the same of the Tories and didn't believe they shared values of community.
For those to whom it struck a chord it was impressive. Like one of those charity ads or red nose appeals. It had instant impact. His final words 'Do you really want another five years of a Tory Government?' will strike a chord
FWIW I think Clegg will win by 10-12 % , anyone who knows the various parts that make up Hallam would see that 30% is around the upper limit for Labour in the constituency
As it is the LDs will speak first to the Tories because of the most seats + most votes point, and Clegg has a natural preference to deal with Cameron anyway.
"I wonder if at some stage we may see the Democrat bit dropped from the name and a return to it just being the Liberal party."
"Blue Liberals" has a ring about it
PS Any more of Nicolas Witchel's grovelling obsequiousness and I think I'm going to be sick
Con 36.5%
Lab 31.5%
UKIP 12.0%
LD 10.5%
Greens 3.5%
Just as interesting might be the possibility tory/kipper tactical, particularly in the North. Labour would have lost H&M if the tory rump had voted tactically.
My prediction on national shares is.
Con 35.5%
Lab 33.5%
Lib Dem 13.5%
UKIP 10%
Greens 4%
Steve Coogan is a deeply conflicted individual.
I'm glad I'm part of the Tory Reform Group (and signed up to the No Turning Back Group)
Hell Yes!!!
Con 34.5%
Lab 33%
UKIP 13.5%
LD 9%
Greens 4%
Labour largest party.
I'd laugh, if it didn't make me so angry.
The other Lib Dem ministers should also be get some increased name recognition from being in office, so any swing against them should be less than for the average Lib Dem MP, which might be enough to save a few seats.
"I'm a decent human being, so I vote X" has the clear implication that political disagreement = being an uncaring swine.