I've actually found a lot more people discussing the election this time around, although I don't know how much of that might be down to the fact that I have been much more openly nerdy about my interest in it, and either draw the conversation that way or people speak to me about it because they know I am interested in it.
Wearing my orange tinted sun glasses and seven years of spani Sh beer and wine, possibly coupled with too much sun my take on lib dem prospects are
Scotland hold 4/5 there are reasons but no time to post them We will lose Burnley Withington Bradford East May hold berwick but difficult We will also lose Cardiff Cental, BristolWest, Wells, Taunton, Somerton&Frome, the one in Norfolk, Brent Central, possibly Redcar There will be gains, Watford, OXWAB, and possibly two others so net 52/53 gbut that is too silly so I'll settle for 40
You do realise that because of boundary changes between 05 and 10 OXWAB will almost certainly remain a Tory stronghold now, don't you? Add in registration changes and I think Con maj of 6000. Some of my favourite watering holes in that constituency; it couldn't be more Tory in a university town.
The anecdotal evidence and the mood music continues to be much better for the Tories than the polls. In my opinion the 2010 Tory vote is pretty rock solid where it matters with the drift to UKIP only being significant where Labour are not competitive.
In some seats this will not be enough as the red Liberals get Labour over the top. I expect Broxtowe to be one of these but the number is not large. Labour are likely to lose at least 35 seats in Scotland. Will they make that number of gains to get back to their current level? The polls say yes but the anecdotes say not.
It is possible that this is all some Romneyian delusion, that the polls are right and that Labour are going to walk this. It just does not feel like that.
Today, driving home in monsoon conditions from Glasgow I was listening to R5 in Warwickshire. Almost everyone they spoke to was voting tory or UKIP. They eventually found a Labour voter but he was only 95%. The 5% was Miliband, he was just not sure about him.
This is Labour's number 1 target and Ed was there today. Why is he in a target lower than 50? Are their polling figures that bad?
I have been saying for a while now that the Midlands is going to be particularly difficult for Labour, but I can think of a few reasons why Ed might pop into North Warwickshire. It's on the way to a lot of other places, for example; it may have been planned a while ago; he owes someone a favour; and so on. How long was he there?
Can anyone on here clarify UKIP's policy on the EU? I know it's 100% not gonna happen but would they hold a referendum before leaving the EU or just do it?
I've often wondered how it would be done.
I'm naturally apprehensive about the EU and dislike the thought of losing parts of our democracy to unaccountable politicians.
But I wouldn't vote to leave - not under present circumstances anyway - because disentangling ourselves from the EU would be hell of an undertaking. Plus, the unknowns of leaving are so, erm, unknown...
Can anyone on here clarify UKIP's policy on the EU? I know it's 100% not gonna happen but would they hold a referendum before leaving the EU or just do it?
My understanding is they would hold a referendum as it is such an important constitutional issue. The difference being that it would not be on the basis of some false 'renegotiation' but on the basis of the EU as it is now and as they believe it will continue to develop.
The basic position is that if you are in a club you abide by the rules of the club rather than expecting everyone else to abide by the rules whilst trying to get exceptions just for yourself.
So if they lost the referendum - what happens then? All their policies are predicated on them saving billions in EU contributions for spending elsewhere. To be honest I thought they would just pull out without a referendum
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.
Can anyone tell me why this might be the case? Is it because it is more detailed and shows up local variations from the mean that might change things? Or because they are asking more searching questions?
Otherwise I am at a loss to understand why some might believe the situation is more favourable to the Conservatives than the published polling figures might suggest.
Not read anyone say its private polling. Seems to be more like canvass returns.
But why should this be so out of step with the opinion polls?
That's the million dollar question.
Well, it is certainly baffling me. I have voted in every election since 1970 and I have never felt such a disconnect between what the polls are telling me and what I feel will be the result. I've usually been pretty accurate what the election will bring. On the performance of the opposition and the record of the government I would be expecting this time a healthy win by the Conservatives and yet the polls are suggesting it's neck and neck.
On a purely anecdotal level, there is some interest in this GE. The chat in the pub in the lead up was mostly about protest voting and going Kipper but has been increasingly about Scotland dictating terms. It's one pub, interest is reasonable but not feverish and we are in a safe Tory seat. Make of that whatever you'd like.
'I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.'
Difficult with so many unknowns, but if you follow where the party leaders have been in the past few days it may tell you something.
Why is Ed bothering to be in North Warwickshire to-day which requires just 54 votes to be a Labour gain ?
It does send out a less confident message than, say, ordering an 8ft stone slab with your name on it. Maybe it's just a refocus on the 35% strategy, the 50 Tory gains strategy. Rather than spread too thin and slip up in some easier targets, focus on those ones and confirm them, and that will be enough, rather than shooting for the ideal and missing.
The anecdotal evidence and the mood music continues to be much better for the Tories than the polls. In my opinion the 2010 Tory vote is pretty rock solid where it matters with the drift to UKIP only being significant where Labour are not competitive.
In some seats this will not be enough as the red Liberals get Labour over the top. I expect Broxtowe to be one of these but the number is not large. Labour are likely to lose at least 35 seats in Scotland. Will they make that number of gains to get back to their current level? The polls say yes but the anecdotes say not.
It is possible that this is all some Romneyian delusion, that the polls are right and that Labour are going to walk this. It just does not feel like that.
Today, driving home in monsoon conditions from Glasgow I was listening to R5 in Warwickshire. Almost everyone they spoke to was voting tory or UKIP. They eventually found a Labour voter but he was only 95%. The 5% was Miliband, he was just not sure about him.
This is Labour's number 1 target and Ed was there today. Why is he in a target lower than 50? Are their polling figures that bad?
I have been saying for a while now that the Midlands is going to be particularly difficult for Labour, but I can think of a few reasons why Ed might pop into North Warwickshire. It's on the way to a lot of other places, for example; it may have been planned a while ago; he owes someone a favour; and so on. How long was he there?
No idea, its just R5 kept saying he was there and every time they did I laughed. It is not as if marginals are hard to find in that part of the country. Its marginal central.
Vox pop is particularly dangerous but for what its worth they supported your hypothesis. Most of them said that they had done alright over the last 5 years and gave the government some credit for that. Of course these were people in work with a successful company and not on a ZHC but it was a little surprising.
Took a lot of stick when I first suggested that 2015 might be a good election to lose.
2 days out, My views haven't really changed and this is why.
1) Numbers - Unless the polls are drastically wrong the numbers are a complete dogs breakfast. Whoever governs is going to allsorts of problems from being propped up by parties with self interest, questions over legitimacy, problems with rebels within the party, etc,etc.
2) The Economy/Deficit - Whether you believe that the black swan is coming or not (China, Gr-exit, Bond Market Crash or whatever), make no mistake, the GDP figures were not a blip - they are a sign of things to come and if so, all of the parties fancy pledges on spending are going straight to the shredder. Whether Labour or Tory led, the next government is going to need to raise taxes and cut spending quite a bit beyond what most people are even willing to think about, or take the Greek route.
3) The NHS - It's virtually unmanageable and unaffordable. I have no doubt that whichever party gets control of this, will be regretting it during their time in government and they will come out with significantly lower ratings on the NHS than they enter with. This will almost certainly be the last election fought on how much money can be chucked at it. Radical reform will be the platform future elections are fought on.
4) Europe / The rise of UKIP - Suppose Labour win - no referendum - continued Eurozone problems - Suddenly all of UKIPs decent second places in the Midlands and the north will become winnable and where they are not second, they soon will be. Ok, a Tory win - referendum delivered (by no means certain without a majority), narrow YES to stay in on the back of all mainstream parties campaigning for YES. Sizeable NO vote start to drift to UKIP, perhaps not as dramatically as the SNP situation, but that experience is there for all to see, so nothing can be ruled out.
That is why if I was CAM and I got sub 310, I would say no thank you. If I was Ed and was on fewer seats, I would say the same thing.
Really thoughtful post, much appreciated.
You are pessimistic about the economy but even if things work out better than that, 0% inflation cannot be improved upon and at some stage interest rates will have to rise.
It may come down to who wants it more. Miliband, I suspect, really wants to be pm an will do whatever it takes. Cameron, I suspect, would walk away tomorrow. I wouldn' swap jobs with either of them.
From the short time I have been on here, it is clear to see you have a great track record. However, I fear you might be falling into the trap that of thinking that there is only a very small possibility the polls could be wrong as that is the logical approach to take. But the truth is there is a very good chance the polls could have a structural error in them this time around.
The simple reason is UKIP. Look at all the raw polling data that is being published - the unweighted UKIP numbers are largely always in excess of their "weighted" sample, some times substantially so. But what past examples can the pollsters use to justify their downweighting of UKIP and the impact it has on seats? True, they could look to other European countries but none of those countries use the same FPTP/constituency system that we do. The pollsters are flying blind on how to deal with UKIP. Trying to persuade ourselves otherwise is sticking our heads into the sand.
It is not as though we do not have evidence to back this up: yes, some of the by-election polls got UKIP about right or even exaggerated their vote; but the Ashcroft polls in the Labour-held by-elections did not and, in the case of Heyood and Middleton, Farage must be kicking himself every night that he listened to Ashcroft.
For 15 years I have been a financial analyst - my best calls have been to go with the "ground music" when there is a conflict between what that suggests and what past data does; and, conversely, my worst calls have been to ignore the noise and trust in the accepted beliefs. The simple fact here is when you look at the respective parties' actions, where they are targeting, the noises that are coming out of their camps and where they are allocating resources, it all points to Labour being in a lot more trouble than the polls suggest.
I know I am setting myself up for a fall here but so be it.
RT I think UKIP will get 10% and 4 seats including Farage winning Thanet South
Given Cameron will probably need DUP and UKIP support for a majority he will have to stick to a referendum though I agree he would likely end up on the In side
There is no 'likely' about it. He has made it absolutely clear he would never countenance the UK withdrawing from the EU.
I think one of the problems that Conservative Europhiles have is that they talk about UKIP as wanting a referendum. A referendum is not the ultimate goal of UKIP; leaving the EU is the ultimate goal. If Cameron delivers a referendum, and Britain votes to stay in the EU, that will not make Kippers say "Oh! We voted to stay in, well that's OK then...", on the contrary, like Scots nats, they will continue to work towards their aim.
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
The trump card for the Tories in elections is always the over 60s vote. They support the Tories more than any other group and, crucially, their turnout is much higher and reliable. And in a country like the UK they make up about a third of voters.
'I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.'
Difficult with so many unknowns, but if you follow where the party leaders have been in the past few days it may tell you something.
Why is Ed bothering to be in North Warwickshire to-day which requires just 54 votes to be a Labour gain ?
Yes, I see that, but why then are Labour canvassing returns seemingly showing things are more marginal than the polls might suggest?
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Wearing my orange tinted sun glasses and seven years of spani Sh beer and wine, possibly coupled with too much sun my take on lib dem prospects are
Scotland hold 4/5 there are reasons but no time to post them We will lose Burnley Withington Bradford East May hold berwick but difficult We will also lose Cardiff Cental, BristolWest, Wells, Taunton, Somerton&Frome, the one in Norfolk, Brent Central, possibly Redcar There will be gains, Watford, OXWAB, and possibly two others so net 52/53 gbut that is too silly so I'll settle for 40
You do realise that because of boundary changes between 05 and 10 OXWAB will almost certainly remain a Tory stronghold now, don't you? Add in registration changes and I think Con maj of 6000. Some of my favourite watering holes in that constituency; it couldn't be more Tory in a university town.
Can anyone on here clarify UKIP's policy on the EU? I know it's 100% not gonna happen but would they hold a referendum before leaving the EU or just do it?
My understanding is they would hold a referendum as it is such an important constitutional issue. The difference being that it would not be on the basis of some false 'renegotiation' but on the basis of the EU as it is now and as they believe it will continue to develop.
The basic position is that if you are in a club you abide by the rules of the club rather than expecting everyone else to abide by the rules whilst trying to get exceptions just for yourself.
So if they lost the referendum - what happens then? All their policies are predicated on them saving billions in EU contributions for spending elsewhere. To be honest I thought they would just pull out without a referendum
Nope. That has never been their position as I understand it. Certainly it is not a position I would agree with and I am not aware of any senior UKIP people making such a suggestion.
To be honest your whole point is rather a trip down the rabbit hole. I simply could not envisage UKIP winning a majority without the country being overwhelmingly anti EU. So the idea they could win an election but lose a subsequent referendum seems far fetched. Of course the idea they could win a majority anyway is currently very far fetched.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It's a bit worrying that it's a self-selecting sample and drawn from the same panel they used not only for the last GE but also for a mish-mash of other polls such as local and European elections. Not sure it can be trusted to give the right answer.
'I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.'
If the private polling for the Tories was good, it wouldn't be private. it'd be leaked all over twitter and fed to useful idiots (Mr Hodges et al) to create a sense of momentum.
I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.
Can anyone tell me why this might be the case? Is it because it is more detailed and shows up local variations from the mean that might change things? Or because they are asking more searching questions?
Otherwise I am at a loss to understand why some might believe the situation is more favourable to the Conservatives than the published polling figures might suggest.
Not read anyone say its private polling. Seems to be more like canvass returns.
But why should this be so out of step with the opinion polls?
That's the million dollar question.
Well, it is certainly baffling me. I have voted in every election since 1970 and I have never felt such a disconnect between what the polls are telling me and what I feel will be the result. I've usually been pretty accurate what the election will bring. On the performance of the opposition and the record of the government I would be expecting this time a healthy win by the Conservatives and yet the polls are suggesting it's neck and neck.
Some very funny things happening in polling this election, You Gov has the parties tying mostly which would be comfortable Labour most seats. Yet on Sunday Kellner predicts Tories to have 20 ish seat lead. What's he not telling us ? Kellner is president of yougov.
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
The anecdotal evidence and the mood music continues to be much better for the Tories than the polls. In my opinion the 2010 Tory vote is pretty rock solid where it matters with the drift to UKIP only being significant where Labour are not competitive.
In some seats this will not be enough as the red Liberals get Labour over the top. I expect Broxtowe to be one of these but the number is not large. Labour are likely to lose at least 35 seats in Scotland. Will they make that number of gains to get back to their current level? The polls say yes but the anecdotes say not.
It is possible that this is all some Romneyian delusion, that the polls are right and that Labour are going to walk this. It just does not feel like that.
Today, driving home in monsoon conditions from Glasgow I was listening to R5 in Warwickshire. Almost everyone they spoke to was voting tory or UKIP. They eventually found a Labour voter but he was only 95%. The 5% was Miliband, he was just not sure about him.
This is Labour's number 1 target and Ed was there today. Why is he in a target lower than 50? Are their polling figures that bad?
I have been saying for a while now that the Midlands is going to be particularly difficult for Labour, but I can think of a few reasons why Ed might pop into North Warwickshire. It's on the way to a lot of other places, for example; it may have been planned a while ago; he owes someone a favour; and so on. How long was he there?
I can't see Labour making much headway in the West Midlands.
I have spoken to 10 people in my constituency about who they are voting for
UKIP 6 LAB 2 TORY 2
Weighted for certainty to vote and using 2010 VI
LAB 5 TORY 5
LOL - H&U pretty safe Tory, I am guessing.
UKIP decent second.
I remember when I went Labour in 1997 when I was a constituent. Shocking to many!
My first vote was to vote Labour here in 1997..
I made it a decent UKIP chance on 2010 numbers, UKIP+BNP double figures
The only posters and billboards around are UKIP, and the UKIP canvassers are pretty confident... I live in Upminster which is the most Tory part and even here there are Kipper posters up.. Harold Hill in the bag and everyone sayin Emerson Park has gone kipper!
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
Some sort of glossary of terms for this site may help. Bit of an acronym maze at first.
I recommend plain English as a goal.
That just goes against everything I stand for.
Well, that's plain enough.
Curses, you're right. I may need to bust out a 300 word, multiple parentheses, oddly comma'd, and several hyphenated-paragraph in a single sentence to compensate. That's the real me.
All good. I enjoy making a mess of things too, but without acronyms.
On the subject of Ed's visits, we had him pay a flying visit to Bedford today, where Labour do have a good chance I feel.
I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.
Can anyone tell me why this might be the case? Is it because it is more detailed and shows up local variations from the mean that might change things? Or because they are asking more searching questions?
Otherwise I am at a loss to understand why some might believe the situation is more favourable to the Conservatives than the published polling figures might suggest.
Not read anyone say its private polling. Seems to be more like canvass returns.
I've canvassed 5 general and Assembly elections. Unless its a 1997 type landslide no one will have a fecking clue. If they tell you otherwise its just bollocks.
trublue Well as there is zero chance of a UKIP government an EU referendum is the best chance they will get of putting an EU exit on the agenda, just as the 2014 referendum did for Scottish independence
'I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.'
If the private polling for the Tories was good, it wouldn't be private. it'd be leaked all over twitter and fed to useful idiots (Mr Hodges et al) to create a sense of momentum.
It isn't, so draw your own conculsions
Unless:
*) They feel there is an apathy within Labour's ranks, and the polling might activate more Labour supporters to vote; *) The private polling is not all good news; *) They are playing with our MINDS.
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
Can anyone on here clarify UKIP's policy on the EU? I know it's 100% not gonna happen but would they hold a referendum before leaving the EU or just do it?
My understanding is they would hold a referendum as it is such an important constitutional issue. The difference being that it would not be on the basis of some false 'renegotiation' but on the basis of the EU as it is now and as they believe it will continue to develop.
The basic position is that if you are in a club you abide by the rules of the club rather than expecting everyone else to abide by the rules whilst trying to get exceptions just for yourself.
So if they lost the referendum - what happens then? All their policies are predicated on them saving billions in EU contributions for spending elsewhere. To be honest I thought they would just pull out without a referendum
Nope. That has never been their position as I understand it. Certainly it is not a position I would agree with and I am not aware of any senior UKIP people making such a suggestion.
To be honest your whole point is rather a trip down the rabbit hole. I simply could not envisage UKIP winning a majority without the country being overwhelmingly anti EU. So the idea they could win an election but lose a subsequent referendum seems far fetched. Of course the idea they could win a majority anyway is currently very far fetched.
I actually think we're more likely to leave the EU if the EU is broken up by everyone else. I remember Tony Blair promising a referendum on the EU Constitution - which was much criticized by experts - only for him to be saved by the French and someone else voting against it meaning we never got to have a vote on it.
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
'Yes, I see that, but why then are Labour canvassing returns seemingly showing things are more marginal than the polls might suggest?'
Their vote is increasing in safe seats but not much in marginals?
Could be that. Could be the internet polls and Ashcroft marginals are wrong ? phone polls have Tories ahead by anything from 2 to 6 points. Add in a little late swingback and who knows
oxford undergrads perpetually cut their 'radical' teeth by moaning about the price of things such as hugely subsidised rents in college - Oxford would be much richer and could happily thrive as a research university - there are plenty of overseas Masters' students to milk
RT I think UKIP will get 10% and 4 seats including Farage winning Thanet South
Given Cameron will probably need DUP and UKIP support for a majority he will have to stick to a referendum though I agree he would likely end up on the In side
There is no 'likely' about it. He has made it absolutely clear he would never countenance the UK withdrawing from the EU.
I think one of the problems that Conservative Europhiles have is that they talk about UKIP as wanting a referendum. A referendum is not the ultimate goal of UKIP; leaving the EU is the ultimate goal. If Cameron delivers a referendum, and Britain votes to stay in the EU, that will not make Kippers say "Oh! We voted to stay in, well that's OK then...", on the contrary, like Scots nats, they will continue to work towards their aim.
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
If she was with David Lee Roth building a Skyscraper, I'm voting Tory.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
I hope for your sake Ed wins, your head will be a terrible place to inhabit otherwise. You would have to set up a support group with IOS.
RT I think UKIP will get 10% and 4 seats including Farage winning Thanet South
Given Cameron will probably need DUP and UKIP support for a majority he will have to stick to a referendum though I agree he would likely end up on the In side
There is no 'likely' about it. He has made it absolutely clear he would never countenance the UK withdrawing from the EU.
I think one of the problems that Conservative Europhiles have is that they talk about UKIP as wanting a referendum. A referendum is not the ultimate goal of UKIP; leaving the EU is the ultimate goal. If Cameron delivers a referendum, and Britain votes to stay in the EU, that will not make Kippers say "Oh! We voted to stay in, well that's OK then...", on the contrary, like Scots nats, they will continue to work towards their aim.
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
Just on that point of GDP. The Commonwealth GDP is currently 2.6% larger than the Eurozone and according to the IMF the Commonwealth GDP is expected to grow by almost 30% by 2050 whereas the Eurozone GDP is expected to shrink slightly in the same period.
Whilst personally I do not agree with any sort of trade isolation from the EU, the idea that we should remained shackled to a stagnating economic bloc whilst the rest of the world powers ahead seems pretty ludicrous to me. And that is just the economics. Of course the cost to the UK of EU membership is far higher than just pounds and pence.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
I hope for your sake Ed wins, your head will be a terrible place to inhabit otherwise. You would have to set up a support group with IOS.
I am going by the polls mate.
Not on whether Ed went to the loo on Monday and why that means Labour will get a majority.
I'm reading that some posters believe that private polling by Conservatives and Labour may be showing a greater Conservative lead than the polls of which we have visibility.
Can anyone tell me why this might be the case? Is it because it is more detailed and shows up local variations from the mean that might change things? Or because they are asking more searching questions?
Otherwise I am at a loss to understand why some might believe the situation is more favourable to the Conservatives than the published polling figures might suggest.
Not read anyone say its private polling. Seems to be more like canvass returns.
But why should this be so out of step with the opinion polls?
That's the million dollar question.
Well, it is certainly baffling me. I have voted in every election since 1970 and I have never felt such a disconnect between what the polls are telling me and what I feel will be the result. I've usually been pretty accurate what the election will bring. On the performance of the opposition and the record of the government I would be expecting this time a healthy win by the Conservatives and yet the polls are suggesting it's neck and neck.
Some very funny things happening in polling this election, You Gov has the parties tying mostly which would be comfortable Labour most seats. Yet on Sunday Kellner predicts Tories to have 20 ish seat lead. What's he not telling us ? Kellner is president of yougov.
The Kellner vs YouGov distinction is the most puzzling of all the polling questions this GE.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Might want to take a look at the 291 LibLabCon members who have got themselves in trouble:
'Could be that. Could be the internet polls and Ashcroft marginals are wrong ? phone polls have Tories ahead by anything from 2 to 6 points. Add in a little late swingback and who knows'
SNP, UKIP, Greens,Tory tactical voting, Labour anti Lib Dem tactical voting,named / unnamed candidates it's a lottery !
Wearing my orange tinted sun glasses and seven years of spani Sh beer and wine, possibly coupled with too much sun my take on lib dem prospects are
Scotland hold 4/5 there are reasons but no time to post them We will lose Burnley Withington Bradford East May hold berwick but difficult We will also lose Cardiff Cental, BristolWest, Wells, Taunton, Somerton&Frome, the one in Norfolk, Brent Central, possibly Redcar There will be gains, Watford, OXWAB, and possibly two others so net 52/53 gbut that is too silly so I'll settle for 40
You do realise that because of boundary changes between 05 and 10 OXWAB will almost certainly remain a Tory stronghold now, don't you? Add in registration changes and I think Con maj of 6000. Some of my favourite watering holes in that constituency; it couldn't be more Tory in a university town.
What were the changes?
Any recommendations on watering holes?
Lib Dems really need to get real about OXWAB - Nicola Blackwood has proved to be an effective local MP and the moment has passed for them there - Nicola is one of the few tories that colleagues at work seem to think is actually a human being rather than vile tory scum
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
If she was with David Lee Roth building a Skyscraper, I'm voting Tory.
Oh she definitely was Dair, I really think you should.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
I hope for your sake Ed wins, your head will be a terrible place to inhabit otherwise. You would have to set up a support group with IOS.
I am going by the polls mate.
Not on whether Ed went to the loo on Monday and why that means Labour will get a majority.
Good luck, because if Ed doesn't get into number 10, you are going to look a right wally.
I agree with the yougov thing. Why is Keller so adamant the Tories will win most seats when the polls as a whole tell us otherwise? Or is this just an 'unpollable' election. Probably just best waiting for the actual result now, as this election is just bizarre.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
I don't think that is accurate at all. In my experience most UKIP supporters are decent people, who are mainly motivated to vote UKIP by high levels of immigration and disillusionment with the political class. The image of them as some sort of neo-Nazis is simply not one I recognise and I can not believe anyone that has gone out talking to voters genuinely believes such a thing.
I also find this stereotyping highly counter-productive to the Conservative cause. If you tell people they are awful people, it just puts their backs up and gets them to hate the elitist mentality even more. The best way to win back Kippers into the Conservative fold is to do make sure their concerns are addressed, and then present clear evidence of that to them.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
I hope for your sake Ed wins, your head will be a terrible place to inhabit otherwise. You would have to set up a support group with IOS.
I am going by the polls mate.
Not on whether Ed went to the loo on Monday and why that means Labour will get a majority.
Good luck, because if Ed doesn't get into number 10, you are going to look a right wally.
Many of us are, but I don't think it's that much of a worry.
'Could be that. Could be the internet polls and Ashcroft marginals are wrong ? phone polls have Tories ahead by anything from 2 to 6 points. Add in a little late swingback and who knows'
SNP, UKIP, Greens,Tory tactical voting, Labour anti Lib Dem tactical voting,named / unnamed candidates it's a lottery !
I wouldn't go as far as a lottery but the statistical model is built on two and a bit parties model, this is more four parties election with a large bomb in Scotland. Current model probably isn't fit for purpose.
Wearing my orange tinted sun glasses and seven years of spani Sh beer and wine, possibly coupled with too much sun my take on lib dem prospects are
Scotland hold 4/5 there are reasons but no time to post them We will lose Burnley Withington Bradford East May hold berwick but difficult We will also lose Cardiff Cental, BristolWest, Wells, Taunton, Somerton&Frome, the one in Norfolk, Brent Central, possibly Redcar There will be gains, Watford, OXWAB, and possibly two others so net 52/53 gbut that is too silly so I'll settle for 40
You do realise that because of boundary changes between 05 and 10 OXWAB will almost certainly remain a Tory stronghold now, don't you? Add in registration changes and I think Con maj of 6000. Some of my favourite watering holes in that constituency; it couldn't be more Tory in a university town.
What were the changes?
Any recommendations on watering holes?
Lib Dems really need to get real about OXWAB - Nicola Blackwood has proved to be an effective local MP and the moment has passed for them there - Nicola is one of the few tories that colleagues at work seem to think is actually a human being rather than vile tory scum
I totally agree with this - furthermore in the Abingdon part of the constituency the demographics are just getting better for them - safe Tory hold.
Interestingly, I have just completed a VI survey for SurveyMonkey, so I have no idea which pollster it was for (I was completing a completely different survey about local bus services on the bus company website and then pushed through to the political poll afterwards).
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Might want to take a look at the 291 LibLabCon members who have got themselves in trouble:
Chicken feed when compared with the amount of rouge kippers in percentage terms. Face it their kippers are the world centre of excellence where fruit battery is concerned.
Evening all. I see people are making their forecasts; I expect and predict a Labour minority government, and may the good Lord have mercy on our souls. I have to say that this is one prediction where I would be delighted to be wrong.
The anecdotal evidence and the mood music continues to be much better for the Tories than the polls. In my opinion the 2010 Tory vote is pretty rock solid where it matters with the drift to UKIP only being significant where Labour are not competitive.
In some seats this will not be enough as the red Liberals get Labour over the top. I expect Broxtowe to be one of these but the number is not large. Labour are likely to lose at least 35 seats in Scotland. Will they make that number of gains to get back to their current level? The polls say yes but the anecdotes say not.
It is possible that this is all some Romneyian delusion, that the polls are right and that Labour are going to walk this. It just does not feel like that.
Today, driving home in monsoon conditions from Glasgow I was listening to R5 in Warwickshire. Almost everyone they spoke to was voting tory or UKIP. They eventually found a Labour voter but he was only 95%. The 5% was Miliband, he was just not sure about him.
This is Labour's number 1 target and Ed was there today. Why is he in a target lower than 50? Are their polling figures that bad?
I can think of a few reasons why Ed might pop into North Warwickshire. It's on the way to a lot of other places, for example
There was a sign not too far from us which said "welcome to bedfordshire, central to the Oxford-Cambridge arc"
Which is almost unparalleled in its desperate barrel-scraping banality. Somehow I was reminded of this reading your post :-)
I agree with the yougov thing. Why is Keller so adamant the Tories will win most seats when the polls as a whole tell us otherwise? Or is this just an 'unpollable' election. Probably just best waiting for the actual result now, as this election is just bizarre.
If you take the raw yougov number, and assume UNS on E&W, labour should come out ahead. Ashcroft polls suggest UNS is not likely, and may (by not naming candidates) masking an incumbancy effect.
That said, the evidence suggests level pegging nationally, and tories very slightly ahead in E&W. This would suggest (not accounting for incumbancy effect) that labour and the tories will be very close in total seats.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Might want to take a look at the 291 LibLabCon members who have got themselves in trouble:
It is not really about personal candidate trouble, but the unrelenting negative tone of the policies against Europe, foreigners, gays, etc, which makes it very very easy to believe that Ukip is the party of the rhetoric of hate, without much in the way of positive contributions to make.
RT I think UKIP will get 10% and 4 seats including Farage winning Thanet South
Given Cameron will probably need DUP and UKIP support for a majority he will have to stick to a referendum though I agree he would likely end up on the In side
There is no 'likely' about it. He has made it absolutely clear he would never countenance the UK withdrawing from the EU.
I think one of the problems that Conservative Europhiles have is that they talk about UKIP as wanting a referendum. A referendum is not the ultimate goal of UKIP; leaving the EU is the ultimate goal. If Cameron delivers a referendum, and Britain votes to stay in the EU, that will not make Kippers say "Oh! We voted to stay in, well that's OK then...", on the contrary, like Scots nats, they will continue to work towards their aim.
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
Just on that point of GDP. The Commonwealth GDP is currently 2.6% larger than the Eurozone and according to the IMF the Commonwealth GDP is expected to grow by almost 30% by 2050 whereas the Eurozone GDP is expected to shrink slightly in the same period.
Whilst personally I do not agree with any sort of trade isolation from the EU, the idea that we should remained shackled to a stagnating economic bloc whilst the rest of the world powers ahead seems pretty ludicrous to me. And that is just the economics. Of course the cost to the UK of EU membership is far higher than just pounds and pence.
The UK missed its chance with the Commonwealth. Countries aren't going to leave NAFTA, ASEAN, SACU,CARICOM, etc to create a Commonwealth trade bloc. The boat sailed due to the Paternalism of the Westminster Elite.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Can you give the slightest bit of evidence in support of your accusation that many UKIP members are hateful? Of course there'll be a few nutters, as there are in every party.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
I don't think that is accurate at all. In my experience most UKIP supporters are decent people, who are mainly motivated to vote UKIP by high levels of immigration and disillusionment with the political class. The image of them as some sort of neo-Nazis is simply not one I recognise and I can not believe anyone that has gone out talking to voters genuinely believes such a thing.
I also find this stereotyping highly counter-productive to the Conservative cause. If you tell people they are awful people, it just puts their backs up and gets them to hate the elitist mentality even more. The best way to win back Kippers into the Conservative fold is to do make sure their concerns are addressed, and then present clear evidence of that to them.
I'm not a conservative - I don't belong to any political party, although I'm centre-left. And well, I guess that my impression of the UKIP support base is from what they say online - and an awful lot of Ukippers appear to express thoughts along the lines I've outlined.
"Labour still believes it could form a more durable coalition than the Tories even if it comes 20 or 30 seats behind David Cameron’s party and has identified “considerable overlap” in policy with the Lib Dems.
Senior Labour figures believe that it will become obvious quickly on Friday if Mr Cameron “doesn’t have the numbers” at which point Ed Miliband would urge him to quit.
If Mr Cameron clung on and put together a Queen’s Speech with no majority Labour MPs would have no qualms in joining forces with the SNP in voting it down, according to eight party candidates who have spoken to the FT.
Some senior party figures recognise that putting together a rival grouping could prove difficult if the public believe that the Tories “won” the election."
I don't want to get too excited (although it is pretty exciting) but I got an e-mail from SamCam today. She's been out with that other slightly less interesting David don't you know.
If she was with David Lee Roth building a Skyscraper, I'm voting Tory.
Oh she definitely was Dair, I really think you should.
When I see the evidence she has had her name changed to Suzie, I shall vote Conservative.
I agree with the yougov thing. Why is Keller so adamant the Tories will win most seats when the polls as a whole tell us otherwise? Or is this just an 'unpollable' election. Probably just best waiting for the actual result now, as this election is just bizarre.
If you take the raw yougov number, and assume UNS on E&W, labour should come out ahead. Ashcroft polls suggest UNS is not likely, and may (by not naming candidates) masking an incumbancy effect.
That said, the evidence suggests level pegging nationally, and tories very slightly ahead in E&W. This would suggest (not accounting for incumbancy effect) that labour and the tories will be very close in total seats.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Can you give the slightest bit of evidence in support of your accusation that many UKIP members are hateful? Of course there'll be a few nutters, as there are in every party.
All parties have there stupids; this suspended kipper is an ex Tory, so go figure. A kipper was badly beaten up by 5 thugs yesterday. The fact is UKIP is growing and getting stronger and both @TSE and @rcs1000 cannot stand it, hence their bile and a smear whenever they see a chance.
And what bile? The only poster for whom I have bile on this site is @FalseFlag, a man whose sole mission in life is to big up Vladamir Putin.
My ambition - as I've often stated - is a looser relationship with the EU, but one which preserves freedom of labour. (This means EFTA/EEA - and which results in i., no benefits for migrants, ii. no right to remain if without a job, and iii., the ability to kick people out if they commit a crime.) I realise this is less than what UKIP stands for. And I realise there are few people standing up for freedom of people to work where they like, and to hire who they like.
I think the rise of UKIP makes my dream far less likely. Sometimes I wonder if Nigel Farage is in the pay of the EU; essentially creating a caricature of Eurosceptics.
This is naive. UKIP are not creating a caricature of eurosceptics, they are eurosceptics, therefore they are being caricatured.
RT I think UKIP will get 10% and 4 seats including Farage winning Thanet South
Given Cameron will probably need DUP and UKIP support for a majority he will have to stick to a referendum though I agree he would likely end up on the In side
There is no 'likely' about it. He has made it absolutely clear he would never countenance the UK withdrawing from the EU.
I think one of the problems that Conservative Europhiles have is that they talk about UKIP as wanting a referendum. A referendum is not the ultimate goal of UKIP; leaving the EU is the ultimate goal. If Cameron delivers a referendum, and Britain votes to stay in the EU, that will not make Kippers say "Oh! We voted to stay in, well that's OK then...", on the contrary, like Scots nats, they will continue to work towards their aim.
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
Just on that point of GDP. The Commonwealth GDP is currently 2.6% larger than the Eurozone and according to the IMF the Commonwealth GDP is expected to grow by almost 30% by 2050 whereas the Eurozone GDP is expected to shrink slightly in the same period.
Whilst personally I do not agree with any sort of trade isolation from the EU, the idea that we should remained shackled to a stagnating economic bloc whilst the rest of the world powers ahead seems pretty ludicrous to me. And that is just the economics. Of course the cost to the UK of EU membership is far higher than just pounds and pence.
Should have dismantled the Commonwealth a long time ago, a peculiar organisation meant as prop to help a generation long in their graves get over the end of Empire.
That's probably not good for Mr Palmer - she's more awful than Ed!
It's one thing feeling we know politicians well enough to declare them to be awful people - but their inoffensive, largely anonymous spouses? I mean whatever makes you happy but how you can feel you know enough to dismiss her as awful is beyond me.
Calder Valley is an interesting one. I had a few quid on Labour at 9/4 earlier today, following a favorable comment from a well-respected source.
It's at the outer limit of likely Labour gains, but local factors seem to be helping them.
I think the same, a notable omission from Ashcroft's marginal polling.
If Labour gain Calder Valley they should be on 290+ MPs.
Possible but very unlikely IMO and there's much better odds on Lab most seats.
As the Conservatives now seem to think that Halifax is their one remaining chance of a gain from Labour it means someone is reading Calderdale borough all wrong.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
I don't think that is accurate at all. In my experience most UKIP supporters are decent people, who are mainly motivated to vote UKIP by high levels of immigration and disillusionment with the political class. The image of them as some sort of neo-Nazis is simply not one I recognise and I can not believe anyone that has gone out talking to voters genuinely believes such a thing.
I also find this stereotyping highly counter-productive to the Conservative cause. If you tell people they are awful people, it just puts their backs up and gets them to hate the elitist mentality even more. The best way to win back Kippers into the Conservative fold is to do make sure their concerns are addressed, and then present clear evidence of that to them.
I'm not a conservative - I don't belong to any political party, although I'm centre-left. And well, I guess that my impression of the UKIP support base is from what they say online - and an awful lot of Ukippers appear to express thoughts along the lines I've outlined.
That explains it. I do not believe the internet is a good representation of any group. Whether UKIP voters, feminists or animal rights proponents, every group seems like intolerant extremists online if you try to debate them. I guess it is just a small handful that are particularly animated dominating the conversation, because they can do it behind the veil of anonymity.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
Might want to take a look at the 291 LibLabCon members who have got themselves in trouble:
Chicken feed when compared with the amount of rouge kippers in percentage terms. Face it their kippers are the world centre of excellence where fruit battery is concerned.
That's confirmation bias. Partisans of the established parties disregard the miscreants in their own ranks as unrepresentative, while wagging an accusing finger at their challengers.
The trouble with UKIP is that many of their members believe in an ideology of hate; towards ethnic minorities, women, gays, blame foreigners for nearly every problem in the country - there's an awful lot of people they don't like. For that reason, I doubt they'll become a mainstream force. Realistically, someone less extreme - like Carswell - needs to lead that party. But I don't sense Kippers are very keen on him. And looking at the new Mirror comments section, it looks like the Kippers have invaded there, too.
I don't think that is accurate at all. In my experience most UKIP supporters are decent people, who are mainly motivated to vote UKIP by high levels of immigration and disillusionment with the political class. The image of them as some sort of neo-Nazis is simply not one I recognise and I can not believe anyone that has gone out talking to voters genuinely believes such a thing.
I also find this stereotyping highly counter-productive to the Conservative cause. If you tell people they are awful people, it just puts their backs up and gets them to hate the elitist mentality even more. The best way to win back Kippers into the Conservative fold is to do make sure their concerns are addressed, and then present clear evidence of that to them.
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.
Why you say this? Do you have inside info? If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
Does one need inside info to say what`s obvious to most people with half a brain?
I hope for your sake Ed wins, your head will be a terrible place to inhabit otherwise. You would have to set up a support group with IOS.
I am going by the polls mate.
Not on whether Ed went to the loo on Monday and why that means Labour will get a majority.
Good luck, because if Ed doesn't get into number 10, you are going to look a right wally.
Thanks...But I would then be in good company with most academic forecasters and pollsters.
Amazing that we have three polls today, UKIP on 12, 13 & 16%, and people are saying 1-2 seats
How?
People that used to say 6-7% and no seats before Carswell defected, now think that vote share will double with, in effect, no seats gained
Wishful thinking
UKIP will keep Clacton and maybe make a breakthrough or two in Tory seats. However the real potential for UKIP lies in the north with the 'WWC' votes where low turnout and complacency by Labour could see UKIP taking quite a few seats. I'm going with 1-3 Con (2010) gains and 0 Lab ones this time.
Comments
I'm naturally apprehensive about the EU and dislike the thought of losing parts of our democracy to unaccountable politicians.
But I wouldn't vote to leave - not under present circumstances anyway - because disentangling ourselves from the EU would be hell of an undertaking. Plus, the unknowns of leaving are so, erm, unknown...
UKIP 6
LAB 2
TORY 2
Weighted for certainty to vote and using 2010 VI
LAB 5
TORY 5
Do you have inside info?
If not, suggest STFU
In any event, they might all be wrong and the only one that matters is the one with the 40 million people panel taking place on Thursday that is neither an internet nor a phone poll
'It does look like most polls will revert to neck and neck before Thursday.'
None of them want the Angus Reid prize.
24 hours 24 minutes 24 seconds
Make of that whatever you'd like.
1st Dec 2013: 62,870
1st Dec 2014: 51,334
Vox pop is particularly dangerous but for what its worth they supported your hypothesis. Most of them said that they had done alright over the last 5 years and gave the government some credit for that. Of course these were people in work with a successful company and not on a ZHC but it was a little surprising.
You are pessimistic about the economy but even if things work out better than that, 0% inflation cannot be improved upon and at some stage interest rates will have to rise.
It may come down to who wants it more. Miliband, I suspect, really wants to be pm an will do whatever it takes. Cameron, I suspect, would walk away tomorrow. I wouldn' swap jobs with either of them.
'Eve of poll SUPER ARSE with added APLOMB 2015 General Election & "JackW Dozen" Projection Countdown :'
Where do we send the Imodium St Albans or Hambleton Hall ?
From the short time I have been on here, it is clear to see you have a great track record. However, I fear you might be falling into the trap that of thinking that there is only a very small possibility the polls could be wrong as that is the logical approach to take. But the truth is there is a very good chance the polls could have a structural error in them this time around.
The simple reason is UKIP. Look at all the raw polling data that is being published - the unweighted UKIP numbers are largely always in excess of their "weighted" sample, some times substantially so. But what past examples can the pollsters use to justify their downweighting of UKIP and the impact it has on seats? True, they could look to other European countries but none of those countries use the same FPTP/constituency system that we do. The pollsters are flying blind on how to deal with UKIP. Trying to persuade ourselves otherwise is sticking our heads into the sand.
It is not as though we do not have evidence to back this up: yes, some of the by-election polls got UKIP about right or even exaggerated their vote; but the Ashcroft polls in the Labour-held by-elections did not and, in the case of Heyood and Middleton, Farage must be kicking himself every night that he listened to Ashcroft.
For 15 years I have been a financial analyst - my best calls have been to go with the "ground music" when there is a conflict between what that suggests and what past data does; and, conversely, my worst calls have been to ignore the noise and trust in the accepted beliefs. The simple fact here is when you look at the respective parties' actions, where they are targeting, the noises that are coming out of their camps and where they are allocating resources, it all points to Labour being in a lot more trouble than the polls suggest.
I know I am setting myself up for a fall here but so be it.
UKIP decent second.
I remember when I went Labour in 1997 when I was a constituent. Shocking to many!
And I think you're absolutely right that having Cameron as head of a Conservative government leading a referendum makes it very difficult for Out to win. But I also think that the Out side is its own worst enemy. I've made my views very clear, and I think a government committed to EFTA/EEA would win the support of much business, and would win a referendum.
I think an Out campaign run by Farage, and which could be painted as isolationist and backward looking would lose.
(Did anyone read the UKIP paper on leaving the EU? There was a whole chapter on recreating the Commonwealth as a trading block. It was seemingly unaware that the two largest members of the Commonwealth are nuclear weapon wielding enemies who are as likely to get into bed together as TSE and MikeK.)
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CEQpTXUWgAIpwwK.jpg
Any recommendations on watering holes?
To be honest your whole point is rather a trip down the rabbit hole. I simply could not envisage UKIP winning a majority without the country being overwhelmingly anti EU. So the idea they could win an election but lose a subsequent referendum seems far fetched. Of course the idea they could win a majority anyway is currently very far fetched.
It isn't, so draw your own conculsions
I like the guy holding a poster in the back - he looks really intense about it.
I made it a decent UKIP chance on 2010 numbers, UKIP+BNP double figures
The only posters and billboards around are UKIP, and the UKIP canvassers are pretty confident... I live in Upminster which is the most Tory part and even here there are Kipper posters up.. Harold Hill in the bag and everyone sayin Emerson Park has gone kipper!
12/1 I should back it
But cant see it!
On the subject of Ed's visits, we had him pay a flying visit to Bedford today, where Labour do have a good chance I feel.
*) They feel there is an apathy within Labour's ranks, and the polling might activate more Labour supporters to vote;
*) The private polling is not all good news;
*) They are playing with our MINDS.
'Yes, I see that, but why then are Labour canvassing returns seemingly showing things are more marginal than the polls might suggest?'
Their vote is increasing in safe seats but not much in marginals?
Have a look at the breakdown of the Ashcroft regional figures for England & Wales, they are apparently not weighted but may give a clue.
Whilst personally I do not agree with any sort of trade isolation from the EU, the idea that we should remained shackled to a stagnating economic bloc whilst the rest of the world powers ahead seems pretty ludicrous to me. And that is just the economics. Of course the cost to the UK of EU membership is far higher than just pounds and pence.
Birmingham Ladywood CLP election day planning meeting held today
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CEL3O3FWoAAHDRz.jpg
the activists don't look particularly excited...
Not on whether Ed went to the loo on Monday and why that means Labour will get a majority.
http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/28-more-members-of-our-liblabcon-hall.html
'Could be that. Could be the internet polls and Ashcroft marginals are wrong ? phone polls have Tories ahead by anything from 2 to 6 points. Add in a little late swingback and who knows'
SNP, UKIP, Greens,Tory tactical voting, Labour anti Lib Dem tactical voting,named / unnamed candidates it's a lottery !
It's at the outer limit of likely Labour gains, but local factors seem to be helping them.
Ave it announces his final projection for #GE2015!
CON 303
LAB 249
LD 31
SNP 43
PC 4
GRN 1
UKIP 1
DUP 10
SF 5
SDLP 2
NI IND 1
Ave it... Fair, unbiased, the factual one!
#fivemoreyears
#putthestoneinyourkitchensmiliband
#letsignorethesnp
I also find this stereotyping highly counter-productive to the Conservative cause. If you tell people they are awful people, it just puts their backs up and gets them to hate the elitist mentality even more. The best way to win back Kippers into the Conservative fold is to do make sure their concerns are addressed, and then present clear evidence of that to them.
Which is almost unparalleled in its desperate barrel-scraping banality. Somehow I was reminded of this reading your post :-)
That said, the evidence suggests level pegging nationally, and tories very slightly ahead in E&W. This would suggest (not accounting for incumbancy effect) that labour and the tories will be very close in total seats.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/91307514-f335-11e4-a979-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz3Z6B0YJwe
"Labour still believes it could form a more durable coalition than the Tories even if it comes 20 or 30 seats behind David Cameron’s party and has identified “considerable overlap” in policy with the Lib Dems.
Senior Labour figures believe that it will become obvious quickly on Friday if Mr Cameron “doesn’t have the numbers” at which point Ed Miliband would urge him to quit.
If Mr Cameron clung on and put together a Queen’s Speech with no majority Labour MPs would have no qualms in joining forces with the SNP in voting it down, according to eight party candidates who have spoken to the FT.
Some senior party figures recognise that putting together a rival grouping could prove difficult if the public believe that the Tories “won” the election."
My forecast:
Cons: 300
Lab: 255
LD: 25
SNP: 54
PC: 4
GRN: 1
UKIP: 1
SF: 5
SDLP: 1
Other: 10
I think I might be too low on LDs (I like your 31) and too high on SNP (ditto).
Off/on topic - Guardian quite amusing last minute end-of-world-if-Tory-victory stuff:
theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/05/revealed-coalition-plans-to-slash-welfare-for-sick-poor-young-and-disabled
Lab 5.2
There were 137 cases of paedophilia, racism, homophobia, fraud and other controversial behaviour amongst other party councillors and activists in March and April alone: http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/137-liblabcon-paedos-racists-homophobes.html
How?
People that used to say 6-7% and no seats before Carswell defected, now think that vote share will double with, in effect, no seats gained
Wishful thinking
Possible but very unlikely IMO and there's much better odds on Lab most seats.
As the Conservatives now seem to think that Halifax is their one remaining chance of a gain from Labour it means someone is reading Calderdale borough all wrong.