Are we likely to see Ashcroft continuing his constituency polls? A noble try, but not many that hit the mark.
According to 538's post mortem they were reasonably accurate; the mistake 538 made was to use the constituency-prompt figures rather than the ordinary figures. The former were much more unreliable.
As far as Yougov is concerned, many of us started to criticise this poll and started to ignore it. The panel model did work well in the past but it's been damaged by overuse.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
Mr. Mark, all of us use ourselves as the baseline for normality. But when you work with people who (publicly, at least) are entirely aligned to your own views, or use Twitter as a pure echo chamber [I do follow some who hold quite contrary views, one of whom blocked me for no apparent reason...] it's possible to really convince yourself it's true.
Still baffles me why some people don't like classical history, but I can appreciate it's the case. I don't watch Have I Got News For You much anymore, but I did grow tired of the "Gosh aren't UKIP awful?" repetition. Reminded me of Mock the Week's Thatcher/royal-bashing [although the straw that broke the camel's back was Chris Addison making a 'joke' about Thatcher blacking up during a question on Mugabe. Mmm, current events].
Can I just thank a notional 423 LibDems in Morley who voted tactically to kick out Ed Balls.
The giggling fit of his Tory opponent, finding it almost impossible to get her head round she'd been elected this expense, was THE moment of the night.
I did not lose money, because I do not bet, however I resent the abject failure of the pollsters because they rooted a sense of doubt in me for the sanity of the Nation. – I must admit to being mightily relieved that in fact the UK does think, Leadership ratings do matter – the state of economy does matter - and Ed really was crap.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
Can I just thank a notional 423 LibDems in Morley who voted tactically to kick out Ed Balls.
The giggling fit of his Tory opponent, finding it almost impossible to get her head round she'd been elected this expense, was THE moment of the night.
Whatever else you think of Cameron personally - has there ever been an election where three party leaders resign before lunchtime?
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
It is beyond lazy to characterise UKIP voters as Tory protest voters. It simply isn't supported by the available evidence.
Just look at the result in somewhere like Pudsey, or Morley and Outwood.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
As a Conservative, I'm starting to wonder whether it's in our interests to prop them up to replace Labour. Long term, Conservative government alternating with a left-leaning UKIP would be far better than alternating with Labour government.
What I found most interesting yesterday chatting for 10hrs with LD party faithful was how a few kept telling me their opinions and I just went Hmm, well we all have a view.
As a Tory - I'm just used to keeping my opinion to myself unless in joshing company. Being in an echo chamber doesn't help anyone to see another POV.
Mr. Mark, all of us use ourselves as the baseline for normality. But when you work with people who (publicly, at least) are entirely aligned to your own views, or use Twitter as a pure echo chamber [I do follow some who hold quite contrary views, one of whom blocked me for no apparent reason...] it's possible to really convince yourself it's true.
Still baffles me why some people don't like classical history, but I can appreciate it's the case. I don't watch Have I Got News For You much anymore, but I did grow tired of the "Gosh aren't UKIP awful?" repetition. Reminded me of Mock the Week's Thatcher/royal-bashing [although the straw that broke the camel's back was Chris Addison making a 'joke' about Thatcher blacking up during a question on Mugabe. Mmm, current events].
Mr. Urquhart, I think that status was achieved before Brand ever tweeted
Miss C, to be fair, the Coalition lended itself to long-term Cabinet appointments, but we'll see if it's replicated this time around or if he reshuffles more often.
Imperial Rome's fine if we have Trajan or Aurelian in charge
Whatever else you think of Cameron personally - has there ever been an election where three party leaders resign before lunchtime?
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Wondering if whether the polls had been more accurate the results would have been different.
There was certainly a feedback loop in the campaign. The minority SNP-Labour meme benefited from it being a possibility and that damaged Labour. Not least in making the LD switchers go for what they know.
The man on Sky News admitted as much today. The hung parliament discourse was part of Tory campaigning. Eh, thanks for telling us today guys.
A couple of observations from a very happy resident of Morley:
1. I wonder if Labour were a bit too complacent here. A poster on here reported on where Labour's big guns were campaigning in the last few days and Balls always seemed to be campaigning elsewhere. Surely he'd have been here a lot more had he thought it was close. 2. Smart move by the Tories having a lady candidate. If my wife's facebook feed is representative some Morley ladies may have voted against Balls' blokeishness.
Hugely disappointed with the BBC's GE coverage last night for any number of reasons. Most of the interviewees were abysmal, commencing with the dreadful "I'll eat my hat" Pantsdown who from the outset attempted to totally ridicule the stunningly accurate exit poll - what a total prat he must feel today!
Way, way too much attention was given over to the Scottish results (and the rather unpleasant SNP leaders) which make up less than 10% of the seats in the HoC and quite what the fragrant Sophie Raworth was doing with her tiles outside Broadcasting House remains a total mystery.
Dimbleby was irrascible throughout, sometimes very audibly so and is clearly too old for the gig. "Phil Silvers" Robinson was very evidently unwell and shouldn't have appeared.
A total mess really.
Quite agree, I watched on Sky Arts which was the coverage from behind the scenes at Sky News it was a really novel way of presenting it
Felt bad for Nick Robinson and I didn't want to say do but his voice hadn't recovered and was a bit off putting... That said what does that matter in the scheme of things when he has kicked cancer?
Neil was over argumentative I thought and Dimbleby was v off form too
Whatever else you think of Cameron personally - has there ever been an election where three party leaders resign before lunchtime?
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Have you considered that they are either celebrating (and utterly shit-faced), or they are recovering from being so, and as such in no fit state to be on the telly?
Miss Plato, I try not to tweet about politics much, on the basis it's far easier to piss someone off than anything else (and 140 characters isn't enough for proper conversation on knotty issues).
I'm a pretty quiet person in real life anyway, but I do find closed-mindedness from those with the best of intentions disturbing. Had a chat with someone once who reckoned fat people should have their diet dictated by the state for their own good.
Mr. JEO, could be scope for tactical voting in northern England. Labour could bounce back, but if they don't they could get pummelled here as well next time.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
Anyone predicting the collapse of UKIP is deluding themselves. IF Labour are incapable of changing their direction UKIP will continue to eat into their votes.
The next two years will be completely dominated by the EU and if Labour continue to push the benefits of unlimited immigration from the EU and their idea of a rainbow utopia it will continue to damage them. Especially if there is a Grexit and potential contagion within the EU.
I'd just like to repeat my thanks and congratulations to everyone involved with PB. I followed events throughout the night on here and on Sky and the combination was perfect. This is a great site and was both informative and entertaining last night. Well done guys.
If Nuttall becomes UKIP leader he will be very attractive (as a scouser) to voters in the north.
If Tories can learn to vote tactically where UKIP are hitting strong 2nds behind the reds then Labour could have problems in 2020 in the midlands/north.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
I find it unbelievable that even today people are labelling UKIP as a Tory protest party.
Whatever else you think of Cameron personally - has there ever been an election where three party leaders resign before lunchtime?
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Shame we can't say the same about Osborne....
The difference between Blair and Cameron in this regard is that Cameron's chancellor is a loyal plotter.
Osbourne seems to lurk in the shadows. Cameron is the public face and perhaps Theresa May at the Home Office. Even so I think that life is less worrying in Cameron's Cabinet than it was in Blair's or Brown's.
Whatever else you think of Cameron personally - has there ever been an election where three party leaders resign before lunchtime?
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Shame we can't say the same about Osborne....
The difference between Blair and Cameron in this regard is that Cameron's chancellor is a loyal plotter.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
As a Conservative, I'm starting to wonder whether it's in our interests to prop them up to replace Labour. Long term, Conservative government alternating with a left-leaning UKIP would be far better than alternating with Labour government.
It's hard to believe Labour won't be bouncing back sooner or later, with a decent leader and fatigue over a long-term Tory government. Can't imagine there would cease to be a place for the sentiments they represent with a focus on economic issues. But for the LD's it may be another story...
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
Miss C, to be fair, the Coalition lended itself to long-term Cabinet appointments, but we'll see if it's replicated this time around or if he reshuffles more often.
That is a good point Mr Dancer. It will be interesting to watch. I recall just six or seven weeks into the Coalition when the David Laws crisis hit, the Press where amazed that a full reshuffle did not happen. Perhaps the first casualty of this parliament will indicate a trend.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
Anyone predicting the collapse of UKIP is deluding themselves. IF Labour are incapable of changing their direction UKIP will continue to eat into their votes.
The next two years will be completely dominated by the EU and if Labour continue to push the benefits of unlimited immigration from the EU and their idea of a rainbow utopia it will continue to damage them. Especially if there is a Grexit and potential contagion within the EU.
I think a lot of that is correct. My question is: who is going to lead them? Carswell's name is being bandied about.
BUT I think UKIP now realise that the seam of disaffected WWC Labour voters is a much richer vein to mine than the seam of disaffected retired-colonel Tory voters. Carswell is absolutely the wrong person to lead the party in that case. They need someone like Danczuk: regional accent, working class, eloquent, bombshell wife.
UKIP and the Better Off Out wing of the Conservatives are going to have to do some serious thinking and planning if they are to have any chance at all of getting an Out result in the referendum. I rather suspect that the strain will be too much for UKIP - which has morphed into something quite different from simply a 'Leave the EU' party - and that the more reputable BOOers will try to distance themselves from it.
If Labour carry on aping the Tories post 1997 [elect crap leader, pull to one side blah blah] then I can't see them winning in 2020 as it's a huge hill to climb seat wise.
Whomever takes over from Cameron as leader then will be the biggest factor IMO.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
As a Conservative, I'm starting to wonder whether it's in our interests to prop them up to replace Labour. Long term, Conservative government alternating with a left-leaning UKIP would be far better than alternating with Labour government.
It's hard to believe Labour won't be bouncing back sooner or later, with a decent leader and fatigue over a long-term Tory government. Can't imagine there would cease to be a place for the sentiments they represent with a focus on economic issues. But for the LD's it may be another story...
Incidentally, Walking Dead watchers, apparently it's started on Spike TV. Episodes 1 and 2 of series 5 are up on Demand 5. [I've missed the start of about 3-4 series now...]
If Nuttall becomes UKIP leader he will be very attractive (as a scouser) to voters in the north.
Attractive? Nuttall? I saw him on the telly last night. To misquote Arthur Dent - "this is obviously some strange usage of the word attractive that I was not previously aware of"
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
I did not lose money, because I do not bet, however I resent the abject failure of the pollsters because they rooted a sense of doubt in me for the sanity of the Nation. – I must admit to being mightily relieved that in fact the UK does think, Leadership ratings do matter – the state of economy does matter - and Ed really was crap.
You know, as an addict of selected fantasy, one of my favourite books is "The Eye of the World": first book in "The Wheel of Time" series. So I must congratulate JackW for producing the "ARSE of the World" that has beaten professional pollsters by the dozen this GE. He must now make it known that he is ready to appear on TV to replace that upstart Nate Silver.
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
If the Conservatives are detoxed, isn't it funny their voters still won't admit it to pollsters?
I think tactical unwind is a huge part of the story. Lib Dems held on to dozens of small, even three-figure majorities in 2010 by pinning down Labour to levels that simply weren't feasible this time.
So many mean spirited posters here. It's nothing to do with what party anyone supports. If anyone watched the elegance and generosity of politicians of all parties who lost their livelihoods last night and learnt from it they might sound a bit more classy.
I presume you are being tongue-in-cheek? Remember the old Engineering Rule - "If it ain't broke, don't fiddle with it". Cameron has a settled bunch. Leave them where they are and fill up the Lib Dem gaps.
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
If the Conservatives are detoxed, isn't it funny their voters still won't admit it to pollsters?
The Tories I would say are no more toxic than any other party today. It's a level playing field, with each party carrying baggage. Obviously in govt, the Tories have the scope to make new enemies in the years ahead. But for now, it's all much of a muchness on that front.
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
I mean really ?
If the Conservatives think they can keep living on majorities of twelve they're nuts. They got just over one third of the vote. That's 63% of the vote against them numbers like that can't hold.
This is one of those elections where they got lucky under the vagaries of FPTP helped by the SNP and let's face it Camereon like Blair has had more than his fair share of luck.
The Tories need to do what they have needed to do for the last five years and that is broaden their church, then elections become less the nail biters of 2015 and fairly predictable events 12 months out.
Click on 'Tweets and Replies'. He's firing off a shell filled with bile every hour or so.
He rates Liz Kendall. A fresh face (not previous leadership candidate) would be welcome and a woman leader would be less vulnerable to the kind of character assassination Ed endured
I presume you are being tongue-in-cheek? Remember the old Engineering Rule - "If it ain't broke, don't fiddle with it". Cameron has a settled bunch. Leave them where they are and fill up the Lib Dem gaps.
Unforunately not.
Osborne has proved to be a dabbler as a Chancellor and not a reformer. We need a reformer.
If Labour carry on aping the Tories post 1997 [elect crap leader, pull to one side blah blah] then I can't see them winning in 2020 as it's a huge hill to climb seat wise.
Whomever takes over from Cameron as leader then will be the biggest factor IMO.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
As a Conservative, I'm starting to wonder whether it's in our interests to prop them up to replace Labour. Long term, Conservative government alternating with a left-leaning UKIP would be far better than alternating with Labour government.
It's hard to believe Labour won't be bouncing back sooner or later, with a decent leader and fatigue over a long-term Tory government. Can't imagine there would cease to be a place for the sentiments they represent with a focus on economic issues. But for the LD's it may be another story...
Right, if the Tories follow Labour's pattern of replacing a Tony Blair with a Gordon Brown, that would necessarily have a huge impact. But still, unless Scotland leaves the Union, it seems much tougher for the Tories to hang on than it was for Labour up to 2010, which was the last party to command major support throughout the UK.
Many are celebrating UKIP being kept to a single seat even as third-largest vote getters in the UK, but they may be around a very long time continuing to siphon off protest votes mainly from the Tories, harming them indefinitely. A more sure way to kill them off as a serious political force would seem to be sending dozens of them to Westminster and cajoling them into a coalition with the Tories.
Anyone predicting the collapse of UKIP is deluding themselves. IF Labour are incapable of changing their direction UKIP will continue to eat into their votes.
The next two years will be completely dominated by the EU and if Labour continue to push the benefits of unlimited immigration from the EU and their idea of a rainbow utopia it will continue to damage them. Especially if there is a Grexit and potential contagion within the EU.
I think a lot of that is correct. My question is: who is going to lead them? Carswell's name is being bandied about.
BUT I think UKIP now realise that the seam of disaffected WWC Labour voters is a much richer vein to mine than the seam of disaffected retired-colonel Tory voters. Carswell is absolutely the wrong person to lead the party in that case. They need someone like Danczuk: regional accent, working class, eloquent, bombshell wife.
I would like to see either Steven Woolfe (working class, Manchester born, successful) or Paul Nuttall (working class, Liverpool born). Nuttall was previously in favour of privatising the NHS so that will almost certainly be used as a stick to beat him with. Woolfe is not anywhere near as charasmatic as Nuttall but he would appeal to a huge number of people who would be turned off by Farage.
Suzanne Evans is a clear favourite but as a southern former Tory I really don't think she will appeal to the northern constituencies.
I wonder if Carswell may bite off more than he can chew as his majority is not great so he will have to be an excellent constituency MP but also lead the party nationally and campaign for a Brexit.
That's interesting, but it would be better if the colours were fainter where the second place is more distant. Then it picks out where the marginals are, and which parties are involved in them, more clearly.
I'm starting to think that George Osborne is going to be the next leader. He seems to have morphed from a sour faced posh boy who everybody hated to quite a popular jovial type figure.
The post-mortem on the polling will take some time. Was it just shy Tories saying Labour but holding their nose on election day, or was there a genuine change of mind at the last minute?
Remarkable that the Tories can get to 37% with Ukip still on almost 13%.
first off honest congratulations to all the happy Blues, honest commiserations to all the unhappy Reds and Yellows and a sort of strange apathetic feeling of 'hmm' for me. (More of which below)
Secondly I owe someone £100. I know it is one of the Blue Johns but can't work out if it is JohnO or John Zimms. I could go back and try and find out from the previous threads but after staying up all night to watch the election and having to work today I am too knackered to spend all that time hunting so please could you let me know which of you it was? I know we had a discussion about the terms of the bet a few weeks ago and couldn't remember what the terms had been but since Cameron won I would have lost my bet in any of the scenarios we had discussed so I need to pay up.
My thoughts on the results are very mixed and not necessarily logical. They will probably develop further over the next few days. In brief, about that 'hmm'...
I am glad Labour didn't win. I don't think they deserved to after the way they damaged the country last time out. Being rather mean I have to say that I am also glad because for weeks my social media has been filled with Labour, Greens and general lefties going on about how utterly evil the Tories and UKIP are and how they were going to be destroyed in this election and it is rather nice to see all the wailing and gnashing of teeth from them today.
I am also glad the Lib Dems were destroyed (as a party not as individual candidates or suppoerters). I don't necessarily have anything against them personally but find most of their headline policies and their belief in social engineering to be anathema to me.
I have mixed feelings about the Tories getting a majority. Obviously having said what I did about Labour it would be perverse to say the same about the Tories - after all one of them had to form a government. But I still don't trust Cameron and still think this country will suffer because of his Europhilia. But Osborne deserved to be rewarded for the way he has handled the economy and I still hold out some vain hope that the Tories might actually start to look seriously at reducing the size of the State rather than just tinkering around the edges - something that would not have happened under Labour either with a majority or in any viable coalition. In the end there is no successful party that reflects my political and social views at the moment so I am stuck with the best of a bad lot.....
UKIP thoughts to follow because of word length limits
The Survation story is interesting in itself, and because it produced a very different resyult to their previous poll using the same method - confirming that there was a late shift rather than an undetected long-term lead.
Incidentally, I won some money by a long-forgotten bet laying a hung Parliament - though I don't think it was a Tory majority I had in mind! I just thought that the general assumption that we'd hit the hung balance was over-promoted. It'll pay for my Lupus donation for Squareroot's bet.
- They need to understand what liberal and progressive mean, really mean.
Has Labour ever been liberal? It seems their idea of being liberal is limited to asserting additional rights for minority groups. Otherwise they seem a fundamentally illiberal party.
UKIP and the Better Off Out wing of the Conservatives are going to have to do some serious thinking and planning if they are to have any chance at all of getting an Out result in the referendum. I rather suspect that the strain will be too much for UKIP - which has morphed into something quite different from simply a 'Leave the EU' party - and that the more reputable BOOers will try to distance themselves from it.
Not so Richard, UKIP will now regroup and become more professional and savvy, learn lessons of organisation and I hope, move it's main HQ from Devon to a place near or in London. It will now start a recruiting drive and try to get some of their 4 million voters to join the purples, make their political philosophy more coherent, and take a deep breath.
The Tories will find their present victory pyrrhic, and will quickly turn to ashes as the weight and actions of the EU bare down Britain.
The post-mortem on the polling will take some time. Was it just shy Tories saying Labour but holding their nose on election day, or was there a genuine change of mind at the last minute?
Remarkable that the Tories can get to 37% with Ukip still on almost 13%.
Without UKIP this would have been a Con landslide...
If you consider how the south of England is almost entirely held by Conservatives, this map shows how irrelevant Labour are in southern England. South of the Bristol Channel and the Thames, they aren't even second in many places.
Best value constituency bets as as 9pm Thursday Vale of Clwyd (11/1); Gower and Plymouth, Moor View (10/1); Morley and Outwood (8/1); Bolton West and Thurrock (5/1); Colchester and Twickenham (9/2). Best value by party: SNP in Berwickshire and Labour in Cambridge (5/2); Lib Dem in Ceredigion (8/11).
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
I mean really ?
If the Conservatives think they can keep living on majorities of twelve they're nuts. They got just over one third of the vote.
The Tories need to do what they have needed to do for the last five years and that is broaden their church, then elections become less the nail biters of 2015 and fairly predictable events 12 months out.
Agree wholeheartedly.
And their next leader is not Boris. He does not have the ability to do that and will be too old and second-hand by the time the choice has to be made.
The Tories - like all the other parties - need to be thinking about who can lead in the 2020's and beyond. And in what sort of UK/ world they would be doing that leading.
The Survation story is interesting in itself, and because it produced a very different resyult to their previous poll using the same method - confirming that there was a late shift rather than an undetected long-term lead.
Incidentally, I won some money by a long-forgotten bet laying a hung Parliament - though I don't think it was a Tory majority I had in mind! I just thought that the general assumption that we'd hit the hung balance was over-promoted. It'll pay for my Lupus donation for Squareroot's bet.
Commiserations on last night Nick and well done on your efforts, must be exhausting.
I stayed up to watch you on telly. One night of no sleep and I'm knackered. I could never be a politician.
Comments
As far as Yougov is concerned, many of us started to criticise this poll and started to ignore it. The panel model did work well in the past but it's been damaged by overuse.
Still baffles me why some people don't like classical history, but I can appreciate it's the case. I don't watch Have I Got News For You much anymore, but I did grow tired of the "Gosh aren't UKIP awful?" repetition. Reminded me of Mock the Week's Thatcher/royal-bashing [although the straw that broke the camel's back was Chris Addison making a 'joke' about Thatcher blacking up during a question on Mugabe. Mmm, current events].
https://twitter.com/rustyrockets/status/596643848962633728
ComGov
YouRes
Ipsos PANEL
Moribase
TCM
BNS
IMG
Lord Surcroft
Ashvation
Opulus
Popinium
I think Cameron is very underestimated. He does not seem to indulge in the sort of scheming, plotting and "doing-over" of his own side that the Labour "dirty tricks" team used to do. I recall many Labour people being more worried about their own side getting the knife in than attacks from the Libs or Tories.
Cameron has had minimal reshuffles whereas the average lifetime of a Labour Cabinet holder was about 9 months and about 6 months if you were Home Secretary.
Cameron's whole approach is different. He does not dazzle, he does not strike me as brilliant or really clever (actually he comes across as a bit lazy sometimes). Instead he seems to go for a relatively straightforward approach and seems to leave people to get on with it. I think the whole thing is an anathema to both Labour and The Press. It is more "business like" than "Imperial Rome".
Just look at the result in somewhere like Pudsey, or Morley and Outwood.
As a Tory - I'm just used to keeping my opinion to myself unless in joshing company. Being in an echo chamber doesn't help anyone to see another POV.
Miss C, to be fair, the Coalition lended itself to long-term Cabinet appointments, but we'll see if it's replicated this time around or if he reshuffles more often.
Imperial Rome's fine if we have Trajan or Aurelian in charge
1. I wonder if Labour were a bit too complacent here. A poster on here reported on where Labour's big guns were campaigning in the last few days and Balls always seemed to be campaigning elsewhere. Surely he'd have been here a lot more had he thought it was close.
2. Smart move by the Tories having a lady candidate. If my wife's facebook feed is representative some Morley ladies may have voted against Balls' blokeishness.
Felt bad for Nick Robinson and I didn't want to say do but his voice hadn't recovered and was a bit off putting... That said what does that matter in the scheme of things when he has kicked cancer?
Neil was over argumentative I thought and Dimbleby was v off form too
Have you considered that they are either celebrating (and utterly shit-faced), or they are recovering from being so, and as such in no fit state to be on the telly?
I'm a pretty quiet person in real life anyway, but I do find closed-mindedness from those with the best of intentions disturbing. Had a chat with someone once who reckoned fat people should have their diet dictated by the state for their own good.
Mr. JEO, could be scope for tactical voting in northern England. Labour could bounce back, but if they don't they could get pummelled here as well next time.
The next two years will be completely dominated by the EU and if Labour continue to push the benefits of unlimited immigration from the EU and their idea of a rainbow utopia it will continue to damage them. Especially if there is a Grexit and potential contagion within the EU.
The voters went medieval on them.
If Tories can learn to vote tactically where UKIP are hitting strong 2nds behind the reds then Labour could have problems in 2020 in the midlands/north.
Yes. A much more succint way of putting it. Thanks
The Conservatives won because they moved to the centre, and they "stole" right wing Liberal Democrat votes. This wasn't (much) about Red Liberals going home, it was because the rise of UKIP and the coalition with the LibDems detoxified the Conservative brand for a lot of centre right voters.
If the LibDems are to survive - and I think it's too early to tell if they will - then they need either the Conservatives to veer right under Cameron, or the Labour Party to veer left under A N Other. Otherwise, UKIP is right, Conservatives are centre right, Labour is centre left, and the SNP/Greens are left. And centre right is the biggest block, and is owned almost entirely now by the Conservatives.
BUT I think UKIP now realise that the seam of disaffected WWC Labour voters is a much richer vein to mine than the seam of disaffected retired-colonel Tory voters. Carswell is absolutely the wrong person to lead the party in that case. They need someone like Danczuk: regional accent, working class, eloquent, bombshell wife.
Osborne re-appoiunted as Chancellor.
The likes of Osborne come back, they know the job inside out, they have their team, they know which Sir Humphreys to watch out for etc.
Whomever takes over from Cameron as leader then will be the biggest factor IMO.
https://twitter.com/JoeMurphyLondon/status/596670711319658496
https://twitter.com/GOsborneGenius
You know, as an addict of selected fantasy, one of my favourite books is "The Eye of the World": first book in "The Wheel of Time" series. So I must congratulate JackW for producing the "ARSE of the World" that has beaten professional pollsters by the dozen this GE. He must now make it known that he is ready to appear on TV to replace that upstart Nate Silver.
I think tactical unwind is a huge part of the story. Lib Dems held on to dozens of small, even three-figure majorities in 2010 by pinning down Labour to levels that simply weren't feasible this time.
Very magnanimous of him.
Presumably this means we get to see Osborne doing PMQs when Cameron is on hols foreign visits.
If the Conservatives think they can keep living on majorities of twelve they're nuts. They got just over one third of the vote. That's 63% of the vote against them numbers like that can't hold.
This is one of those elections where they got lucky under the vagaries of FPTP helped by the SNP and let's face it Camereon like Blair has had more than his fair share of luck.
The Tories need to do what they have needed to do for the last five years and that is broaden their church, then elections become less the nail biters of 2015 and fairly predictable events 12 months out.
I'm an extremely shy Tory. So painfully shy, in fact, that I found myself physically unable to actually put an X in the Con box on the ballot paper...
Osborne has proved to be a dabbler as a Chancellor and not a reformer. We need a reformer.
Suzanne Evans is a clear favourite but as a southern former Tory I really don't think she will appeal to the northern constituencies.
I wonder if Carswell may bite off more than he can chew as his majority is not great so he will have to be an excellent constituency MP but also lead the party nationally and campaign for a Brexit.
Continuity Cameron.
Very funny stuff!
He is quite popular these days too IIRC.
Remarkable that the Tories can get to 37% with Ukip still on almost 13%.
first off honest congratulations to all the happy Blues, honest commiserations to all the unhappy Reds and Yellows and a sort of strange apathetic feeling of 'hmm' for me. (More of which below)
Secondly I owe someone £100. I know it is one of the Blue Johns but can't work out if it is JohnO or John Zimms. I could go back and try and find out from the previous threads but after staying up all night to watch the election and having to work today I am too knackered to spend all that time hunting so please could you let me know which of you it was? I know we had a discussion about the terms of the bet a few weeks ago and couldn't remember what the terms had been but since Cameron won I would have lost my bet in any of the scenarios we had discussed so I need to pay up.
My thoughts on the results are very mixed and not necessarily logical. They will probably develop further over the next few days. In brief, about that 'hmm'...
I am glad Labour didn't win. I don't think they deserved to after the way they damaged the country last time out. Being rather mean I have to say that I am also glad because for weeks my social media has been filled with Labour, Greens and general lefties going on about how utterly evil the Tories and UKIP are and how they were going to be destroyed in this election and it is rather nice to see all the wailing and gnashing of teeth from them today.
I am also glad the Lib Dems were destroyed (as a party not as individual candidates or suppoerters). I don't necessarily have anything against them personally but find most of their headline policies and their belief in social engineering to be anathema to me.
I have mixed feelings about the Tories getting a majority. Obviously having said what I did about Labour it would be perverse to say the same about the Tories - after all one of them had to form a government. But I still don't trust Cameron and still think this country will suffer because of his Europhilia. But Osborne deserved to be rewarded for the way he has handled the economy and I still hold out some vain hope that the Tories might actually start to look seriously at reducing the size of the State rather than just tinkering around the edges - something that would not have happened under Labour either with a majority or in any viable coalition. In the end there is no successful party that reflects my political and social views at the moment so I am stuck with the best of a bad lot.....
UKIP thoughts to follow because of word length limits
Incidentally, I won some money by a long-forgotten bet laying a hung Parliament - though I don't think it was a Tory majority I had in mind! I just thought that the general assumption that we'd hit the hung balance was over-promoted. It'll pay for my Lupus donation for Squareroot's bet.
The Tories will find their present victory pyrrhic, and will quickly turn to ashes as the weight and actions of the EU bare down Britain.
Vale of Clwyd (11/1); Gower and Plymouth, Moor View (10/1); Morley and Outwood (8/1); Bolton West and Thurrock (5/1); Colchester and Twickenham (9/2).
Best value by party: SNP in Berwickshire and Labour in Cambridge (5/2); Lib Dem in Ceredigion (8/11).
And their next leader is not Boris. He does not have the ability to do that and will be too old and second-hand by the time the choice has to be made.
The Tories - like all the other parties - need to be thinking about who can lead in the 2020's and beyond. And in what sort of UK/ world they would be doing that leading.
I stayed up to watch you on telly. One night of no sleep and I'm knackered. I could never be a politician.