Does anyone agree with me that tomorrow will be bliss as the media frenzy quietens down for at least a few hours which may result in coverage of some genuine non political news stories for a change
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
The BBC’s poundshop Kilroy, Victoria Derbyshire, managed just 39,000 viewers last Thursday, rounded down to zero in the overnight ratings. It has averaged just 73,000 viewers so far.
That Cable has come out so publicly to speak out against a 2017 EU In-Out referendum, is telling - just how many LDs has Clegg agreed his redlines with exactly? He'll need senior colleagues on his side at the very least - and I don't just mean Alexander and Laws, either.
I think it's a dangerous development and illustrates how things could go very wrong very wrong very quickly for the LDs on Friday.
In 2010, there was reticence about going into Coalition with the Conservatives but those who would have preferred to work with Labour had not only a weak hand but were not helped by Labour's antics.
Now, the situation is very different. We've had the Coalition 1.0 Experience and it's not been pleasant though proponents will argue it has enabled some key aspects of LD policy to be successfully enacted even though the flip side has been having to support areas of CON policy with which elements in the party were profoundly uncomfortable.
The Coalition provided stable Government at a much needed time backed by a solid majority. It now seems likely that majority will disappear. Between those eager to "finish the job" and those who say "never again" are the majority who need reassurance that Coalition 2.0 will and would be a better experience for the Party.
Vince is trying to play the anti-Coalition hand in response to Nick's attempts to bounce the Party into Coalition 2.0. It's a worrying sign and I really think the LDs could potentially be in a serious place in the next few weeks.
Interesting. What do you think could unfold in the following weeks?
Does anyone agree with me that tomorrow will be bliss as the media frenzy quietens down for at least a few hours which may result in coverage of some genuine non political news stories for a change
It will probably be the usual.. 'Voting is slow' in the morning. 'Voting is brisk' in the afternoon/early evening. Huge turnout/queues in locations x,y and z in late evening etc.
What is it about the conservatives that makes the racist homophobe Kerry Smith endorse them?
The Enquirer (@Enquirernews) 06/05/2015 15:04 Parliamentary candidate Kerry Smith urges voters to choose Conservatives: theenquirer.co.uk/parliamentary
Does anyone agree with me that tomorrow will be bliss as the media frenzy quietens down for at least a few hours which may result in coverage of some genuine non political news stories for a change
It will probably be the usual.. 'Voting is slow' in the morning. 'Voting is brisk' in the afternoon/early evening. Huge turnout/queues in locations x,y and z in late evening etc.
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
You have to be unshy on first contact - ie when you join the panel.
Perhaps panel members don't admit to being Tory on a first date
Where? Scotland? If so, I disagree. Gains from the Tories? Possible. Gains from both the Tories and Lib Dems combined? If so, bad news for Labour.
Ah. Seen it now. I read that as meaning Labour think they have 25 gains from both the Tories and LDs combined in the bag (prob 17 Tory and 8 LD) and a further 25 TCTC.
That would put their maximum Tory gains around the 42-45 mark.
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
I think online polls if they get it wrong, it seems to not be getting a balanced sample. There's a fair bit of evidence to suggest this could be the case (eg the proportion who claim to have watched the debates) but we'll see soon enough.
If the online pollsters are wrong, I really, really hope its not put down to "shy Tory" rather than simply being "wrong". The first rule of polling is to get a balanced sample, if they've failed to do that it isn't because of shy anything but because self-selecting polling hasn't worked for some reason - and that is what needs to be looked at not blaming it on people giving the wrong answers on an online poll.
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
I think online polls if they get it wrong, it seems to not be getting a balanced sample. There's a fair bit of evidence to suggest this could be the case (eg the proportion who claim to have watched the debates) but we'll see soon enough.
If the online pollsters are wrong, I really, really hope its not put down to "shy Tory" rather than simply being "wrong". The first rule of polling is to get a balanced sample, if they've failed to do that it isn't because of shy anything but because self-selecting polling hasn't worked for some reason - and that is what needs to be looked at not blaming it on people giving the wrong answers on an online poll.
Some online pollsters have admitted that their panels are not balanced of the population as a whole but they are balanced as to those who vote . I have my doubts as to this being correct
What I can't quite get my head around a bit is the why if there is a "shy Tory" factor, why would it be with online polling rather than telephone (which are showing the Tories doing better). Surely if you are a bit ashamed of admitting to wanting to vote Tory it is would be harder to do if somebody rings you up and asks you directly, than clicking a drop down online?
The internet is more left wing. See twitter.
Not sure twitter is representative of internet users and I don't buy this "the old don't use the interweb" either. My folks are glued to their ipads these days.
Perhaps it is a sampling issue i.e actively wanting to sign up to YouGov, or perhaps the phone pollsters are just wrong.
All very interesting, and we will know soon enough.
I was gobsmacked to learn that the lady I was giving evidence against finally exasperated the police that she's been held in custody for 6 weeks for breaching her bail conditions.
I do wonder whether there are new and unexplored difficulties in obtaining a truly representative sample given the fragmentation of the electorate. Is a Tory identifier from the Scottish Highlands equivalent to one from Surrey, for example?
The BBC’s poundshop Kilroy, Victoria Derbyshire, managed just 39,000 viewers last Thursday, rounded down to zero in the overnight ratings. It has averaged just 73,000 viewers so far.
Couldn't happen to a nicer person...
Not seen it - is it one of those terrible BBC voxpop 'debates'?
The one that occupies the hour between Marr and Brillo on Sundays is terrible.
What is it about the conservatives that makes the racist homophobe Kerry Smith endorse them?
The Enquirer (@Enquirernews) 06/05/2015 15:04 Parliamentary candidate Kerry Smith urges voters to choose Conservatives: theenquirer.co.uk/parliamentary
Is that the former UKIP PPC?
Yes shown the door by our no nonsense rules and regs, now a Tory
I suspect that if the polls are very wrong we might see a company try face-to-face polling again. Very expensive, and has its own problems, but would be a interesting third approach.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015, is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015, is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
That TNS turnout prediction seems very high to me.
Ben Page from Mori was tweeting that he thinks turnout might reach 70% this time.
I'm really struggling to see that. I'm finding it hard to find anyone who seems to give two hoots about this election. That's the problem.
Interestingly enough I'm finding quite a lot of fired up Tories wanting to keep Miliband out but the (few) Labour voters I know of don't really care and may not vote this time. It may be differential turnout that gives Con a lead.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Warks North will be a Labour gain, but narrowly - it has enough wards on the outskirts of Nuneaton to tip the balance as opposed to the slightly more rural areas.
I thought the FT article was most interesting for its observation about Labour's hopes in Scotland:
"Despite hopes of pro-union tactical voting in Scotland, Labour strategists believe they will keep fewer than 10 seats there even in a best-case scenario. “We would be delighted with eight,” said one."
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I'm struck by just how often the esteemed members of this website seem to be called to fill in internet polls. It seems wildly disproportionate to the general population.
YouGov pay you for online polling..
I am sure most PB readers are as tight fisted as I am - or worse...
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I was laughing about this yesterday when Ed played a visit. It is difficult to know what to conclude from this but the indication must be that Labour's internal figures are far worse than the polls. Pretty much all of those seats should be in the bag by now with resources going elsewhere.
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
Philip Cowley (@philipjcowley) 06/05/2015 09:26 Wish we could go back to when newspaper election day front pages weren't so biased and partisan. pic.twitter.com/4zyBOVvmuw
That TNS turnout prediction seems very high to me.
Ben Page from Mori was tweeting that he thinks turnout might reach 70% this time.
I'm really struggling to see that. I'm finding it hard to find anyone who seems to give two hoots about this election. That's the problem.
Interestingly enough I'm finding quite a lot of fired up Tories wanting to keep Miliband out but the (few) Labour voters I know of don't really care and may not vote this time. It may be differential turnout that gives Con a lead.
My Facebook sort of kicked off today, broadly a three way split. Those who were right-on and involved at university and still really get involved (there's also a strong north-west element to this) - they're posting Bullingdon club posters etc; those that didn't really care at Uni, vaguely Labour but now they've got responsibilities - so they're posting "this is a tough choice, I really like financial stability but I really don't like the thought of voting for a party that ever voted for XXX, but I also really don't like UKIP". This sets off the first lot. They used to be friends.
Then there's the (typically) mates of mates, from since university. And that's where the fun really begins.
Policy Obelisk got some jokes, but its been fairly quiet.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015, is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I was laughing about this yesterday when Ed played a visit. It is difficult to know what to conclude from this but the indication must be that Labour's internal figures are far worse than the polls. Pretty much all of those seats should be in the bag by now with resources going elsewhere.
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
Something is seriously f*cked up about the polling and the reaction of the parties and of the punters. None of it reconciles. Bloody confusing, annoying, and it's going to result in red faces, tarnished reputations and/or empty wallets come Friday.
@BBCNormanS: Paddy Ashdown says party leaders shd take weekend off after #ge2015 before trying to reach Coalition deal
Ridiculous thing to say. They'll have gamed every outcome by now, and have tentative agreements in place for the most likely. Prolonging the uncertainty is reckless behaviour.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Big UKIP vote to squeeze in North Warks + incumbency might be why Con can hold on. I expect Nuneaton to go.
Since then there's been a 3% swing back to Con in the phones, assuming that incumbency is worth another percent and a half (or the swingback being more prevalent in the Midlands) and it's not hard to see him hanging on. The UKIP squeeze will be interesting.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I was laughing about this yesterday when Ed played a visit. It is difficult to know what to conclude from this but the indication must be that Labour's internal figures are far worse than the polls. Pretty much all of those seats should be in the bag by now with resources going elsewhere.
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
Something is seriously f*cked up about the polling and the reaction of the parties and of the punters. None of it reconciles. Bloody confusing, annoying, and it's going to result in red faces, tarnished reputations and/or empty wallets come Friday.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I was laughing about this yesterday when Ed played a visit. It is difficult to know what to conclude from this but the indication must be that Labour's internal figures are far worse than the polls. Pretty much all of those seats should be in the bag by now with resources going elsewhere.
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
Something is seriously f*cked up about the polling and the reaction of the parties and of the punters. None of it reconciles. Bloody confusing, annoying, and it's going to result in red faces, tarnished reputations and/or empty wallets come Friday.
Probably not for the bookies though!
It rarely ever does
Shadsy must have put a deposit down on a Porsche by now.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
Jim Pickard in FT: "It is now pouring resources into another 20 to 25 “neck and neck” targets. These include Nuneaton, Pudsey, Northampton North, Vale of Glamorgan, Wirral West and Loughborough."
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
I was laughing about this yesterday when Ed played a visit. It is difficult to know what to conclude from this but the indication must be that Labour's internal figures are far worse than the polls. Pretty much all of those seats should be in the bag by now with resources going elsewhere.
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
Something is seriously f*cked up about the polling and the reaction of the parties and of the punters. None of it reconciles. Bloody confusing, annoying, and it's going to result in red faces, tarnished reputations and/or empty wallets come Friday.
How about if the "shy Kippers" were actually taking a bigger chunk of votes from Labour rather than Tory?
Comments
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/594817333664817152
Any know how many actually show up and can't vote typically?
Perhaps panel members don't admit to being Tory on a first date
That would put their maximum Tory gains around the 42-45 mark.
If the online pollsters are wrong, I really, really hope its not put down to "shy Tory" rather than simply being "wrong". The first rule of polling is to get a balanced sample, if they've failed to do that it isn't because of shy anything but because self-selecting polling hasn't worked for some reason - and that is what needs to be looked at not blaming it on people giving the wrong answers on an online poll.
Perhaps it is a sampling issue i.e actively wanting to sign up to YouGov, or perhaps the phone pollsters are just wrong.
All very interesting, and we will know soon enough.
Some people just can't resist having a go.
The one that occupies the hour between Marr and Brillo on Sundays is terrible.
But it pays the bills.
So Warickshire North, a seat that David Cameron had no right to gain in 2010, and is Labour's Number 1 target in 2015 with a notional majority 54 (0.1%), is "neck and neck". Friday morning could be a blood bath for Ed Miliband.
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2015/05/how-scotland-has-put-a-spanner-in-labours-electoral-arithmetic/?Authorised=false
It may be differential turnout that gives Con a lead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj84tfS7ag4
"Despite hopes of pro-union tactical voting in Scotland, Labour strategists believe they will keep fewer than 10 seats there even in a best-case scenario. “We would be delighted with eight,” said one."
@BBCNormanS: Paddy Ashdown says party leaders shd take weekend off after #ge2015 before trying to reach Coalition deal
I am sure most PB readers are as tight fisted as I am - or worse...
At this rate Labour may be seriously struggling to make good the 35 losses in Scotland. If they are sub 260 even the SNP can't get them into government.
06/05/2015 09:26
Wish we could go back to when newspaper election day front pages weren't so biased and partisan. pic.twitter.com/4zyBOVvmuw
We should be told.
Then there's the (typically) mates of mates, from since university. And that's where the fun really begins.
Policy Obelisk got some jokes, but its been fairly quiet.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/03/nuneaton-2/
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2015/01/north-warwickshire/
3 most relevant polls to Warks North.
Big UKIP vote to squeeze in North Warks + incumbency might be why Con can hold on. I expect Nuneaton to go.
but i would love to lose that money....
Either Ashcroft is wrong, or *more likely* in my humble opinion, Labour HQ is getting desperate.
Does Labour know what they are doing or is this another example of them opting out from using grown ups this time around?
The question is whether they can get a further 25 on top of that.
Shadsy must have put a deposit down on a Porsche by now.
However, I am slightly puzzled as to why Labour is providing all this information. It does not make sense for them to do it.