Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
Historically, do pollsters tend to converge on the eve of an election? It doesn't seem too fantastical to me- by this point, almost everyone will either not be voting or be certain who they'll vote for, so the issue of reallocating undecideds becomes much less important.
Though it'd be interesting to see if the numbers back up that theory.
It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.
This 'herding' actually concerns me. safety in numbers, not being the one company to, well, call it wrong.
If you're two out from +1 to -1, that looks far worse than from 0 to either +/- 2.
It's seems natural to me for the numbers to converge on the eve of polling as more and more people make up their minds. Of course the only glimmer of light for the Tories is that even today there are hundreds of thousands of people who still don't know who to vote for
But there's (supposedly) a statistical error in there. I guess with more people being polled, this will shrink but its a rather shallow curve - to reduce it from 3% ish to 2%, you have to more than double the sample.
I didn't see the reallocating undecideds at first - yeah, that makes sense.
Is the numbers converging natural - possibly. But there are also strong arguments saying that there should be some variation than none.
We're meant to be listing places we voted in, not train stations we woke up at.
MEMO TO PASSPORT CONTROL: Arrest this naughty green person immediately under the Prevention of Toryism Act.
I'm flying to Germany in a couple of hours and will miss most of the excitement
Is VE day celebrated much there btw?
Victory in Elmbridge? We fervently hope so.
I'm not voting this time (overseas postal vote toom uch hassle). But...I don't think my vote makes an awful lot of difference. If Dominik Raab is not to be my MP then Miliband has a 500 seat majority.
I hate those blue spin ads at the side - everytime I slide onto them it seems to knock me off the page. Aaaaaarrrrrgggghhhh!!!!
Ditto - Firefox also has a problem with SPIN 'plug-ins' - not sure wtf they are, but they give my poor old laptop the coli-wobbles.
I agree. The spin bet adds are horrible. All ads like that which picture fame the content are rubbish. One slight touch when the cursor is over them and wham. Guaranteed to a) not buy the product and b) not visit the page again. Hugely counter productive.
Ref constituencies. Today, when I vote in Wakefield, will be the first GE I've not voted in Shipley (1992-2010), though I did vote in Durham in the 1994 Euros when I was at university there.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
There are few more aggravating experiences than to back a horse that leads everywhere except on the line.
So perhaps we can now see the Cameron tour of LD seats as giving up on e marginals and hoping a LD wipeout will keep him as largest seats perhaps? This is incredibly fascinating, who thought the late push would be for change?!
I've been totting up my record of votes to (winners) as follows:
I've never voted for a winning candidate at local or GE level. (I have voted for a party that won seats in list elections.)
In the past I've voted Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green and spoiled my ballot paper. I have yet to select a winning candidate in a general election.
I voted just after 9 am on a dank day in Merseyside. I peered round before I went in, and although there were a few customers, there was no sign of an elderly woman in kicking boots. Then I remembered that it's only Scots she has an aversion to.
I seemed to be the only one on our street who had voted. My wife will vote later and though she usually votes Labour, she won't do this time because of Ed and the female berserker on the voting form. I suspect the LDs will gain one.
Interesting article here, though its analysis is still very much effectively through the UNS prism and doesn't in my opinion give sufficient weight to the changes since 2010 that the rise of UKIP and the SNP have brought. Still, food for thought.
In my calculations, now largely based on that article, I am counting SNP as equiv to LAB for stats/betting purposes, and re. likelihood of Dave or Ed being PM. That of course disregards minor parties (small beer, I think, on the cosmic scale) and leaves aside entirely the constitutional niceties post GE.
Having said which, I favour a working CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY the more I think about it. Mock if you like.
A propos (as must be obvs) I have abandoned the polls, the final straw being that 34.1 tie (king ridiculous) and the clustering around it. Credibility zero from that point on.
I am also musing that post GE it may be that talk of a new multiparty landscape will evaporate like, erm, Scotch mist. Mass disengagement by a politically hoodwinked, ill-informed, Gramsci-ed electorate, however, will abide.
Prodicus - I won't mock you on a Conservative majority, I think you are right (although I was cowardly on my seat forecast last night saying the Cons will get 315).
Funnily enough, I do not think this will cause a backlash against the pollsters - they will claim that the emergence of the SNP, UKIP etc caused a one-off mistake that will be rectified for 2020.
Go back to your constituencies and prepare for opposition ?
@patrickwintour: Former LD leader Lord Steel in any Libdem vote after election will oppose any further coalition - party should recharge batteries & values.
Yes because the whole point of a political party is to be out of power.
For many members or supporters of the Lib Dems (or former ones), that was precisely the purpose of that party: to be a 'nice' opposition and provide an alternative to the nasty and/or incompetent parties of government. Clearly the flaw in that purpose was that were it electorally successful it would inevitably undermine first the conditions necessary to bring it about (being in opposition) and then the rationale itself. But as long as the self-destruct button could be avoided, they ran with it and left the long term to take care of itself.
What the purpose of the Lib Dems is now, goodness only knows.
Correct. There is none. Others elsewhere suggest changing leaders if there is a hung parliament. I cannot think of anything more stupid. Changing leaders is fraught with danger for any political party. BTW - in 1983 Mrs T had a nice increased majority - but lost votes and vote share (so much for the Falklands Factor). In 2001 Blair lost nearly 3 million votes and some seats. Did either party sack their leader?
It was a safe NOTA vote and hence as you say they could make any kind of bonkers claims knowing they wouldn't be called upon to make good on those claims.
For the soft right or left, however, I think that the automatic balancing function they provide is a valuable one.
Nick (and Sir David) should wake up and smell the coffee and accept this role and make it worthwhile. Of course if they are going back to hard left la-la land then perhaps yes, they should take some time, say 50 years, to contemplate their navels.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
There are few more aggravating experiences than to back a horse that leads everywhere except on the line.
Haha, oh well what will be will be
I'm off to do the lunchtime shift telling in Dagenham and Rainham, shall report back with any mumble later
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
If you win our bets I'll be in touch about settling as soon as I get back to London, may be offline for a few days but I'm not doing a runner!
Some interesting things in the Ashcroft internals.
He gives separate numbers for Tuesday and Wednesday, with UKIP, Lib Dems and Greens all down on Wednesday compared to Tuesday, and Con, Lab and SNP up.
The Greens pick up as many 2010 Conservative voters as 2010 Labour voters.
The SNP are strongest in their voting convictions, less than 9% "might vote differently", compared to nearly twice as many for Tories and Labour.
The Conservatives lead among C1 and C2 voters (34-29 and 32-31).
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
It's all bollocks, isam. The final herding has been achieved and the majority of pollsters, if not all, will be seen for the charlatans they are.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
no chance. look how far ahead they are with panelbase and survation. The fact the libs havent been ahead of ukip in any polls in weeks plus the shy kipper idea should keep them 2 or 3% ahead.
I've been totting up my record of votes to (winners) as follows:
I've never voted for a winning candidate at local or GE level. (I have voted for a party that won seats in list elections.)
In the past I've voted Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green and spoiled my ballot paper. I have yet to select a winning candidate in a general election.
But in the betting markets it's different, thankfully.
Speaking of writing stuff, two short stories out this month [Zodiac Eclipse episode 5, and a corporate fantasy set in 1999 (I decided the category wasn't niche enough, so I made it a comedy as well)].
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
If you win our bets I'll be in touch about settling as soon as I get back to London, may be offline for a few days but I'm not doing a runner!
Not a problem, let's see what happens first! In the balance, exciting..
Ref constituencies. Today, when I vote in Wakefield, will be the first GE I've not voted in Shipley (1992-2010), though I did vote in Durham in the 1994 Euros when I was at university there.
Greetings from one Durham man to another. I was at Castle 1974 - 77 & read Physics.
My first General Election today. Heading down in an hour. That list in full:
2015: Leyton and Wansted
Until today, I'd voted in a national referendum, all sorts of local elections, and European elections.
Hey, you are on my patch, Grandiose!
Greetings from wonderful Wanstead.
Ah yes. The only part of the constituency that will reduce the safety of Labour from "Only a holocaust denier would lose" to "A donkey with a red rosette could win". And Cryer is, I hasten to add, neither of those.
It does at least remove the possibility of any real tactical vote.
I've been totting up my record of votes to (winners) as follows:
I've never voted for a winning candidate at local or GE level. (I have voted for a party that won seats in list elections.)
In the past I've voted Labour, Conservative, Lib Dem, Green and spoiled my ballot paper. I have yet to select a winning candidate in a general election.
My history has been: 97 Darlington 01, 05 Broxtowe 10, 15 Wythenshawe and Sale East. Never voted for a winning candidate (sorry Nick), and it's a record which is very unlikely to change today.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
I'd written off our LDvsKipper bet to be honest - still think I'll be paying out to you with MikeK's money...
If the cons are that far ahead in the midlands and SE & SW, could it be just that labour are hardening/piling up votes in safe northern seats and maybe at lot of LAB>UKIP switchers are coming home in safe labour seats? this certainly does not look like a uniform national swing
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
no chance. look how far ahead they are with panelbase and survation. The fact the libs havent been ahead of ukip in any polls in weeks plus the shy kipper idea should keep them 2 or 3% ahead.
Etiquette question, Should I go for a "cooking" whisky, and plain glasses in case I need to rage at the results, or be stoical with the lead crystal, and a quality single malt?
If the cons are that far ahead in the midlands and SE & SW, could it be just that labour are hardening/piling up votes in safe northern seats and maybe at lot of LAB>UKIP switchers are coming home in safe labour seats? this certainly does not look like a uniform national swing
The SE was a huge win for Tories in 2010..... I'm not sure there are many targets lab could take there? Fascinating!
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
I'd written off our LDvsKipper bet to be honest - still think I'll be paying out to you with MikeK's money...
All to play for
I prob should have had more than £50 at 5/2 to cover all these bets but I like to be a bit Mark Reckless at times!
All we can say at the moment, from my own observation as well as other PBers, is that the numbers voting seem to be larger than 2010, at this moment in time.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
I'd written off our LDvsKipper bet to be honest - still think I'll be paying out to you with MikeK's money...
I hope to be paying out with Mark Senior's and TSE's
So after all that fuss about how horrid SNP influence would be, Ashcroft finds the voters would be substantially more miffed (a 10% gap) at a government relying on the DUP.
Yeah, I noticed that.
Pretty weird result. Do most people even know who the DUP are?
One of the mysteries of this campaign is the Tories re-running the "Are you thinking what we're thinking" campaign albeit from a slightly different angle. "If you dislike the Nats as much as we do don't vote Labour"
It remains to be seen whether it'll work this time but it was certainly an odd decision.
It seems to me this is targeted at possible Ukip voters and is a variance on vote Nigel get Ed. The theory being that if you don't like being run by autocrats and there agendas you will not want to be run from Edinburgh by a party that wants to break up the union.
I have spoken to solid Labour voters who did not seem concerned but I have spoken to left leaning voters who will spoil their ballot as they do not want to signal support of this.
I don't know any Tory voters. Perhaps others could comment on cut through
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
no chance. look how far ahead they are with panelbase and survation. The fact the libs havent been ahead of ukip in any polls in weeks plus the shy kipper idea should keep them 2 or 3% ahead.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
no chance. look how far ahead they are with panelbase and survation. The fact the libs havent been ahead of ukip in any polls in weeks plus the shy kipper idea should keep them 2 or 3% ahead.
Well of course I hope you are right, but this is squeaky bum time!
I feel much more confident of my bets in Thurrock, Thanet and over 2.5 seats than beating the lib dems and getting 10%
ye kipper of little faith! 12 or 13% nailed on. A significant achievement given both the media attacks and sidelining at the expense of the 3 'big parties'. I'm feeling strangely confident about Castle Point, but Thanet is the big one.
All we can say at the moment, from my own observation as well as other PBers, is that the numbers voting seem to be larger than 2010, at this moment in time.
There was a small queue at my polling station in W Oxford this morning at 7.15.
Ref constituencies. Today, when I vote in Wakefield, will be the first GE I've not voted in Shipley (1992-2010), though I did vote in Durham in the 1994 Euros when I was at university there.
Greetings from one Durham man to another. I was at Castle 1974 - 77 & read Physics.
I have a large number of friends in Warrington North and judging by likes on a baby eating Tories will privAtise all the nhs post, then Labour will be doing very well. However the more sensible part of Warrington is Warrington south which I would expect to go labour
"It's also discounting the possibility the polls are wrong, but wrong in labours favour.
Not likely (and rather unintuitive) - but it's probably only a little less likely than the reverse."
Looking at the final GE 2010 polls, if anything I feel you could make a case they very slightly over-estimated the Tory lead. What is the assumption of the underestimation of the Tory lead systematically by the polls and in the academic forecasts based on? Incumbency?
History.
- I can accept that up to a point, that doesn't that ignore the fact that polling methodologies have improved over years to correct for past mistakes understating Tories? Do you believe that all the models are making to little adjustment for the size of Tory lead?
I have a large number of friends in Warrington North and judging by likes on a baby eating Tories will privAtise all the nhs post, then Labour will be doing very well. However the more sensible part of Warrington is Warrington south which I would expect to go labour
Judging by the number of Blue signs in peoples gardens in Warrington South and virtually no labour ones I think David Mowat has a fair chance of holding on in Warrington South
Nah, if the LD's are close, they'll argue the toss and get the vote on the recount.
No chance. Any writing on the ballot and it will automatically be ruled invalid (because it could identify the voter).
All you have to do is put an X in the box, but some bright spark always manages to invalidate their vote with a witty comment. It never ceases to amaze me.
There's a clear mark of intent. I think it's more likely than not that it would be counted.
Surely its a clearly identifiable vote so would be void, plus the language battered wife etc - joking about domestic abuse on a ballot paper is surely like joking about bombs in the airport. Has to be a spoilt ballot surely.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
If the cons are that far ahead in the midlands and SE & SW, could it be just that labour are hardening/piling up votes in safe northern seats and maybe at lot of LAB>UKIP switchers are coming home in safe labour seats? this certainly does not look like a uniform national swing
I commented as much yesterday. If you consider that the Sw Wales figures will have the Labour vote in Wales and then the cities in Sw, then the Tory vote is very strong.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
That's hilarious, would be so bizarre if its not a typo and Farage appears on camera with teeth marks.
All we can say at the moment, from my own observation as well as other PBers, is that the numbers voting seem to be larger than 2010, at this moment in time.
There was a small queue at my polling station in W Oxford this morning at 7.15.
Its just the school run. Some people also still work and that's the best time. Anyone driving into Oxford needs to get started by 7.15 unless they want to get caught up in the usual traffic snarl. Given the massive increase in numbers in work in the last 5 years - is it surprising that more would be wanting to vote early on their way to work??
There's a clear mark of intent. I think it's more likely than not that it would be counted.
Surely its a clearly identifiable vote so would be void, plus the language battered wife etc - joking about domestic abuse on a ballot paper is surely like joking about bombs in the airport. Has to be a spoilt ballot surely.
Shouldn't have been made public, but the intent is clear so it will count.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
I have trouble understanding how meeting 4 people on a train can give you a feel for how the nation is voting
There's a clear mark of intent. I think it's more likely than not that it would be counted.
Surely its a clearly identifiable vote so would be void, plus the language battered wife etc - joking about domestic abuse on a ballot paper is surely like joking about bombs in the airport. Has to be a spoilt ballot surely.
There's no law against jokes in bad taste and as the comment doesn't run against the actual vote then I don't think it should be invalid for uncertainty.
As for being identifiable, it's only if the voter him- or herself is identifiable that would render the ballot invalid, which isn't the case here. That said, if the tweet can be linked to an individual, then there would be a case for ruling it out on that basis.
Of course, the last time the turnout was very high in a close election John Major got the highest number of votes ever and returned with a small majority.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
I have trouble understanding how meeting 4 people on a train can give you a feel for how the nation is voting
There's a clear mark of intent. I think it's more likely than not that it would be counted.
Surely its a clearly identifiable vote so would be void, plus the language battered wife etc - joking about domestic abuse on a ballot paper is surely like joking about bombs in the airport. Has to be a spoilt ballot surely.
There's no law against jokes in bad taste and as the comment doesn't run against the actual vote then I don't think it should be invalid for uncertainty.
As for being identifiable, it's only if the voter him- or herself is identifiable that would render the ballot invalid, which isn't the case here.
I thought the whole purpose of laws against identifiable votes were to prevent corruption - to stop people signing the votes a certain way and then being paid for that vote. If you can sign it with a text, what's to stop people using a certain unique password code and then being paid for that vote?
It may not be the case, but any text other than the vote should be a spoilt ballot. Since there's a significant proportion of spoilt ballots each year, I'd imagine one referencing criminal coercion would be.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
I have trouble understanding how meeting 4 people on a train can give you a feel for how the nation is voting
Sometimes, not often, one can actually smell that a day, or a certain time, means big excitement and change in the air.
Ooer those lib dems look awfully close to Ukip in the last few polls!
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
no chance. look how far ahead they are with panelbase and survation. The fact the libs havent been ahead of ukip in any polls in weeks plus the shy kipper idea should keep them 2 or 3% ahead.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
UKIP surging in East Midlands. Two managers in my office voted kipper this morning, won over by this fellows attitude to people on benefits:
All we can say at the moment, from my own observation as well as other PBers, is that the numbers voting seem to be larger than 2010, at this moment in time.
There was a small queue at my polling station in W Oxford this morning at 7.15.
Its just the school run. Some people also still work and that's the best time. Anyone driving into Oxford needs to get started by 7.15 unless they want to get caught up in the usual traffic snarl. Given the massive increase in numbers in work in the last 5 years - is it surprising that more would be wanting to vote early on their way to work??
Guilty as charged. I took my son with me into the polling station to show him how it all worked. He didn't see my finished ballot papers though.
I'll take a look this evening when I'm going home.
There's a clear mark of intent. I think it's more likely than not that it would be counted.
Surely its a clearly identifiable vote so would be void, plus the language battered wife etc - joking about domestic abuse on a ballot paper is surely like joking about bombs in the airport. Has to be a spoilt ballot surely.
There's no law against jokes in bad taste and as the comment doesn't run against the actual vote then I don't think it should be invalid for uncertainty.
As for being identifiable, it's only if the voter him- or herself is identifiable that would render the ballot invalid, which isn't the case here. That said, if the tweet can be linked to an individual, then there would be a case for ruling it out on that basis.
Out of academic interest I'll ask our returning officer (also Chief Exec) about the rule next week when all this is over.
But if Solihull does remain orange, it's not going to be a terribly good night for us blue lovelies.
Re turnout . as there are fewer postal votes this time , you would correspondingly expect turnout at the polling stations to be higher than in previous elections .
If the Scottish figure is anywhere close to 77%, that must surely augur a truly outstanding result for the SNP .... with comfortably more than 50 seats.
Jon gaunt @jongaunt 4m4 minutes ago Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP@Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
I have trouble understanding how meeting 4 people on a train can give you a feel for how the nation is voting
Sometimes, not often, one can actually smell that a day, or a certain time, means big excitement and change in the air.
Just because there's one time you felt this and it came true doesn't make this a real thing. It's like a horoscope - that one time Spooky Sue was right does not mean Jupiter's presence in Libra actually caused you to meet an old friend.
I have a large number of friends in Warrington North and judging by likes on a baby eating Tories will privAtise all the nhs post, then Labour will be doing very well. However the more sensible part of Warrington is Warrington south which I would expect to go labour
Judging by the number of Blue signs in peoples gardens in Warrington South and virtually no labour ones I think David Mowat has a fair chance of holding on in Warrington South
Cautious about all these comments about large turnout. I remember people saying on here 5 years ago how the turnout was busier than they'd ever seen, but in the end it was only a bit higher than 2005.
Re turnout . as there are fewer postal votes this time , you would correspondingly expect turnout at the polling stations to be higher than in previous elections .
I think that's a Good Thing in and of itself - postal votes on demand is an abomination - but is that as a result of IVR? Do people have to reselect postal votes when they re-register?
Of course, the last time the turnout was very high in a close election John Major got the highest number of votes ever and returned with a small majority.
Just saying.
Did he have an insurgent party polling double figures on his right ?
Cautious about all these comments about large turnout. I remember people saying on here 5 years ago how the turnout was busier than they'd ever seen, but in the end it was only a bit higher than 2005.
Yes, that was definitely the case five years ago: voter appearances can be deceptive.
Comments
I've been totting up my record of votes to (winners) as follows:
1987 LD (Con)
1992 LD (LD)
1997 Lab (Lab - this is the election I don't like to talk about)
2001 LD (Con)
2005 LD (Con)
2010 LD (Con)
2015 LD (?)
Mad sycophants train to tail splitters (8,8,5)
At least if I lose my vote match bets I get to moan that I was clear for 18 months only to fall short in the final furlong... Who doesn't love a good hard luck story?
I didn't see the reallocating undecideds at first - yeah, that makes sense.
Is the numbers converging natural - possibly. But there are also strong arguments saying that there should be some variation than none.
Guaranteed to a) not buy the product and b) not visit the page again. Hugely counter productive.
This is incredibly fascinating, who thought the late push would be for change?!
I seemed to be the only one on our street who had voted. My wife will vote later and though she usually votes Labour, she won't do this time because of Ed and the female berserker on the voting form. I suspect the LDs will gain one.
England only:
Cons: 35
LAB: 33
LD: 10
UKIP: 13
Gn: 7
SE:
Cons: 38
LAB: 30
LD: 11
UKIP: 10
GN: 9
Midlands:
Cons: 38
LAB: 29
LD: 9
UKIP: 14
GN: 8
Wales & SW:
Cons: 34
LAB: 27
LD: 13
UKIP: 12
GN: 7
PC: 6
North:
Cons: 28
LAB: 46
LD: 6
UKIP: 14
GN: 4
Scotland:
Cons: 11
LAB: 24
LD: 6
UKIP: 1
GN: 2
SNP: 54
Funnily enough, I do not think this will cause a backlash against the pollsters - they will claim that the emergence of the SNP, UKIP etc caused a one-off mistake that will be rectified for 2020.
For the soft right or left, however, I think that the automatic balancing function they provide is a valuable one.
Nick (and Sir David) should wake up and smell the coffee and accept this role and make it worthwhile. Of course if they are going back to hard left la-la land then perhaps yes, they should take some time, say 50 years, to contemplate their navels.
I'm off to do the lunchtime shift telling in Dagenham and Rainham, shall report back with any mumble later
Suppose i had better vote too sometime
He gives separate numbers for Tuesday and Wednesday, with UKIP, Lib Dems and Greens all down on Wednesday compared to Tuesday, and Con, Lab and SNP up.
The Greens pick up as many 2010 Conservative voters as 2010 Labour voters.
The SNP are strongest in their voting convictions, less than 9% "might vote differently", compared to nearly twice as many for Tories and Labour.
The Conservatives lead among C1 and C2 voters (34-29 and 32-31).
Speaking of writing stuff, two short stories out this month [Zodiac Eclipse episode 5, and a corporate fantasy set in 1999 (I decided the category wasn't niche enough, so I made it a comedy as well)].
Greetings from one Durham man to another. I was at Castle 1974 - 77 & read Physics.
It does at least remove the possibility of any real tactical vote.
[Dons tin hat, legs it...]
97 Darlington
01, 05 Broxtowe
10, 15 Wythenshawe and Sale East.
Never voted for a winning candidate (sorry Nick), and it's a record which is very unlikely to change today.
'It's incredible that they've almost all converged to a tie in the last 36 hours. That seems fantastical after months of deviation.'
So they are either all right or all wrong so covering themselves,and for sure none of them want the Angus Reid prize.
Well of course I hope you are right, but this is squeaky bum time!
I feel much more confident of my bets in Thurrock, Thanet and over 2.5 seats than beating the lib dems and getting 10%
YUP.
Should I go for a "cooking" whisky, and plain glasses in case I need to rage at the results, or be stoical with the lead crystal, and a quality single malt?
Fascinating!
I prob should have had more than £50 at 5/2 to cover all these bets but I like to be a bit Mark Reckless at times!
Good luck
Collaboration 2-10 Chester, around 5/2 and has a great chance.
Another of interest as hopefully we will all be paying this tomorrow is Profit Commission in the 6-20 at Wincanton, very short price though.
http://imgur.com/VJKtTND
Much obliged.
I have spoken to solid Labour voters who did not seem concerned but I have spoken to left leaning voters who will spoil their ballot as they do not want to signal support of this.
I don't know any Tory voters. Perhaps others could comment on cut through
They won't be close, though.
No they haven't gone soft they just hate Labour more than the LibDems.
10/10 Certain to vote:
England: 66%
Scotland: 77%
Not likely (and rather unintuitive) - but it's probably only a little less likely than the reverse."
Looking at the final GE 2010 polls, if anything I feel you could make a case they very slightly over-estimated the Tory lead. What is the assumption of the underestimation of the Tory lead systematically by the polls and in the academic forecasts based on? Incumbency?
History.
- I can accept that up to a point, that doesn't that ignore the fact that polling methodologies have improved over years to correct for past mistakes understating Tories? Do you believe that all the models are making to little adjustment for the size of Tory lead?
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/ge2015/6444614/Stuff-em-the-vulnerable-members-facing-extinction.html
Getting a feeling many people are biting @UKIP @Nigel_Farage today. Met 4 people on trains who have said that are polls wrong
Trouble with understanding what biting means. LOL
Given the massive increase in numbers in work in the last 5 years - is it surprising that more would be wanting to vote early on their way to work??
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/features/agony-aunt/ask-holly-im-worried-michael-gove-has-a-concealed-weapon-2015050798097
Tomorrow the only novelty will be a slightly different set of annoying grown-ups in suits making the same pointless rules, shouting the same meaningless nonsense on the telly
As for being identifiable, it's only if the voter him- or herself is identifiable that would render the ballot invalid, which isn't the case here. That said, if the tweet can be linked to an individual, then there would be a case for ruling it out on that basis.
Just saying.
It may not be the case, but any text other than the vote should be a spoilt ballot. Since there's a significant proportion of spoilt ballots each year, I'd imagine one referencing criminal coercion would be.
EICIPM or EMWNBPM we will see.
http://m.leicestermercury.co.uk/UKIP-Charnwood-parliamentary-candidate-Lynton/story-25907329-detail/story.html
It looks like HL will be drinking my Scotch shortly!
I'll take a look this evening when I'm going home.
But if Solihull does remain orange, it's not going to be a terribly good night for us blue lovelies.
It is certainly the phone polls are that seem to be moving to come in line with the online rather than the other way line.
I'm probably wrong, but that's how it feels to me.