Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Our GE15 prediction competition: results + chart showing CO

1246710

Comments

  • MonikerDiCanioMonikerDiCanio Posts: 5,792
    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    With Mr Cooper as Labour candidate for Doncaster North.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2015
    Plato: I think Gower was Liberal before 1906. Not sure if it's ever been Tory.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,870

    MikeK said:

    justin124 said:

    The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
    Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.

    However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.

    "Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."

    I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.

    Actually, I think those defections, especially Reckless', hindered UKIPs advance rather than helped. After the Euphoria of those defections, UKIP percentages started to go down. This was not one of Nigel's better ideas.
    Realistically UKIP were always going to get squeezed in a general election, short of Farage unleashing his version of Cleggasm in the debates.

    PS I do wonder if Carswell will re-rat, though. What if Cameron offers him recall powers with teeth, for example? He can afford to be generous to Carswell after squishing Reckless like a bug.
    A Farage-ism was never going to happen, he's one of the best known politicans out there. Clegg was new and shiney and the public hadn't really seen him before/
    Hmm, I'm not sure. I think he had a big chance to legitimise UKIP - only Sturgeon on that stage had a 10th of Farage's debating ability. Instead they made a tactical decision to be outrageous. I could have come to my office (I share it with two others) the morning after and heard a few reluctant plaudits, instead obviously people had their prejudices confirmed.

  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929

    justin124 said:

    We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.

    The only by-election I am hoping for is one in Buckingham. NB resignation, not death, as you seem to be hoping for.
    I don't see how Bercow can be got rid of. An attempt by Cameron will surely be opposed by all the opposition and enough Tory backbenchers.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    With Mr Cooper as Labour candidate for Doncaster North.
    Cameron will find something suitable for Clegg, he owes him.
  • DanielDaniel Posts: 160
    I'm guessing Clegg is waiting around for a top EU job - maybe Cameron will assist as a 'thank you'. But, to be honest, LD's would probably lose the by-election.

    Ed to stick around until the end of this Parliament.
  • Steven_WhaleySteven_Whaley Posts: 313



    Tory MPs don't tend to die as much as labour ones...

    I think it's close on 9 years since a sitting Conservative MP has died. Was the last one Eric Forth in 2006?

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    I think Clegg only won Sheffield Hallam because of Tory switchers backing him.

    If there were a by-election there surely all three parties would have to put a massive push on it. Would be an interesting three-way marginal, though I suspect Labour would win just because they're the opposition party which always does better in by-elections.

    Even if Clegg stays until 2020 and steps down then (like Brown last Parliament), I don't think the Lib Dems will hold the seat.
  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243

    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.
    They missed out with Alan Johnson.

    Even I like Alan Johnson
    If he'd ever shown any indication that he wanted the job, he'd have been a shoo-in.
    The guy I was speaking with this morning was a junior minister in Johnson's office and he said pretty much the same thing, in addition he had a personal issue too.

    He would have been good for Labour though.
    Agreed. A younger version with his kind of back story and human touch would be ideal. But there isn't one.
    But Johnson in govt flunked everything he had to do.

    Conservative ministers need to stay sane. They need to govern on the basis of what needs to be done and worry about the politics later.

    Assuming SF do not vote on anything is the majority actually something like 18?
    If other minor parties tend to abstain or actually support, is the real majority nearer 25?
    I'm only asking. Someone will have a better idea. Tory MPs even this far after 2010 are probably still youngish.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,968
    Mr. Sulphate, quite. I appreciate the Lib Dem perspective on the Snooper's Charter, but their anti-democratic manoeuvrings on an EU vote are not honourable.
  • BaskervilleBaskerville Posts: 391
    MP_SE said:

    MP_SE said:

    Would anyone care to speculate on what Cameron is going to ask for in terms of a renegotiation with the EU.

    There are an awful lot of unnamed EU bureaucrats being quoted saying that they intend to not offer anything worthwhile to DC and expect him to campaign for an IN vote regardless.

    One day into the new parliament and already you are underestimating Cameron. You seem to have all the qualities as leader of the Labour Party!
    Could you point out where in my post I underestimated Cameron? I believe I only mentioned EU beaurocrats being under the impression they can offer him nothing and expect him to campaign to stay in.
    The FCO's negotiators will love this... diplomacy as war by other means.
    Their personal views are irrelevant; they will adore the challenge of putting one over on Brussels.
    And with George (probably) as their political figurehead and hitman, Juncker and Co may be in for a big surprise.
    Cameron will come back with something concrete... it may not be enough for some, but it will be real.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    DavidL said:

    There is little doubt that the Pollsters converged consciously. Even ICM unfortunately lost their nerve which is a pity because their 6% lead poll 2 weeks ago was probably spot on.

    The truth is that they know their models don't work and the data they are operating off is unrepresentative and inconsistent. So they make adjustments to their figures to try and bring them nearer to reality than their raw data is. Unfortunately it appears that the relationships between their raw data and reality is inconsistent and variable. They know this and get nervous when they are too far from the crowd.

    As for Lord Ashcroft, well his constituency polling was even less accurate than the national polls. Everyone knew that weighting constituency polling is extremely difficult and unreliable. But the sheer quantity of the data made most want to overlook the quality. I hope not too many PBers lost money as a result.

    Except in Scotland where it was all bang on.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    justin124 said:

    We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.

    Younger politicians plus longer life expectancy means that by-elections are and should be incredibly rare now.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,870
    To follow on, I think UKIP should have taken a leaf from the Lib Dem guerilla warfare playbook - Local Lib Dems go huge on campaigning against (or for) bypasses, flyovers, housing estates, even EU regulations, but it bears no relation to their national stance. People in Kent and places badly affected by immigration would still have voted for UKIP with local campaigning on the issue, and the national campaign to be focussing elsewhere.

    But that's with hindsight.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    edited May 2015
    Reflecting on how another government has formed as a majority with a sub-40% voting share, it seems that the harm the Lib Dems have done is not confined to their party - it is serious harm to the entire United KIngdom.

    By ignoring PR option, inexplicably accepting the Tory offer of only AV and only via a Referendum, they have set back the movement for voting reform by a decade. Every time it is mentioned, the Tories stock response "we just had a referendum that put the case for PR to bed".

    It doesn't matter that it's a lie. People generally don't understand AV, they don't know that it's not PR. As a response, the Tory reply is Sound Bite Ready, its short concise and sounds compelling. But as Owen Jones shows, saying something pleasing to the audience doesn't change the fundamental lie and deception behind the superficial appeal.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    Clegg would be deeply irresponsible to do that, it would just hand the seat back to the Tories or Labour at a time when it is more needed than ever.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2015
    Plato said:

    Stoke Safe isTristram's?

    AndyJS said:

    Labour majorities in the Stoke-on-Trent seats:

    Central: 5,179 (previously 5,566)
    North: 4,836 (8,235)
    South: 2,539 (4,130)

    Tristram is MP for Stoke Central. His very low vote of 12,605 in 2010 fell even further to 12,220 this time. Turnout was pretty awful again, less than 50%.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000972
  • CopperSulphateCopperSulphate Posts: 1,119

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
    I mean properly liberal, remove planning restrictions for building new homes, legalise drugs (the war on drugs is a complete failure), removing all the snooping the government does etc.

    All their solutions seem to just be even more government on top of what we've already got.
  • SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.
    They missed out with Alan Johnson.

    Even I like Alan Johnson
    Too lazy
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,929
    Dair - on this we probably agree. I'm afraid it may turn out to be Clegg's worst legacy in government - which is saying something.
  • CopperSulphateCopperSulphate Posts: 1,119

    Mr. Sulphate, quite. I appreciate the Lib Dem perspective on the Snooper's Charter, but their anti-democratic manoeuvrings on an EU vote are not honourable.

    Who can forget the three line whip to abstain on EU Treaty.

    How can a party called the Liberal Democrats vote against having a referendum?
  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243

    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    I think Clegg only won Sheffield Hallam because of Tory switchers backing him.

    If there were a by-election there surely all three parties would have to put a massive push on it. Would be an interesting three-way marginal, though I suspect Labour would win just because they're the opposition party which always does better in by-elections.

    Even if Clegg stays until 2020 and steps down then (like Brown last Parliament), I don't think the Lib Dems will hold the seat.
    Then the LDs are then reduced to 7MPs?
    Why should Clegg not remain as an MP? Ditto Miliband. The harsh issue now facing Labour - who at least have the ambition to be in government - is another hard grind of 5 years in opposition.
    The whole purpose of the LDs, now revealed by them, is to be in opposition. Life is now easy for them. They do not really need a leader.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    Plato said:

    Check out the Local Elections - Tories UP TWENTY EIGHT councils and still more to declare.

    bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councils

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?

    Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.

    Blimey.

    felix said:

    Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:

    1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
    2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
    3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.

    Someone pointed out on the last thread that the Tories only lost eight seats in total, astonishing.
    LibDems down another 324 councillors too. Looking like an extinction event. Huge cut in short money, no money donated by all these lost councillors. And which donor in their right mind is going to pump money into them?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited May 2015
    One thing we should be extra wary of the "what is important" and "is this a good / bad policy" questions in the polls...it was thought lots of things the Tories were doing / saying weren't important and Ed was scoring great on policy ideas like energy freeze etc.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Thanks for the repost - I didn't see it. The Curse Of The New Thread catches us all from time to time.

    Mr Osborne came from a military family who post-service set up a successful high-end business selling wallpaper. They sent him to the same school as Harriet Harman who is the daughter of gentry.

    What makes him uniquely more inhuman that her? She was my MP when I was at art school in Peckham in 1986. She hasn't grown up a month since.

    I find the notion that ANY politician is in it for malign ends weird. Some get seduced by it all along the way or have a large genetic propensity for narcissism and turn into Tony Blair post 2001. Or Mrs T post 1990.

    I know dozens and dozens of politically inclined types and some just can't accept that Kippers aren't MAD, Tories aren't EVIL or Labourites aren't all NAIVE. Oh and LDs aren't WET AND NAIVE.

    All in all, time spent on PB after an election will tell you more about political honesty than anything else. Those who were shy before will point it out, those who were ramping will probably confess it and the tribalism fades quickly away.

    Do stick around and I guarantee you will know more about the national scene than anyone else you know. And be much wiser about the games/not hood-winked by them.

    Welcome aboard - you'll have a great deal of fun.

    Plato said:

    The Tories will surely just drink their blood instead to kill them off?

    Well, that's what Miss A appears to think.

    Plato :(

    I replied to you in the other thread. Here it is, if you haven't see it:

    First off Plato, I'd like to thank you for engaging with me (and not being a bit rude!)

    I don't think Osborne is a baby eater, but he seems to be someone completely consumed by short-term political strategy more than anything else. I don't sense that he grew up, wanting to go in politics to made the world better, but more for the power of it. For the record, I don't think this is the case for other Tories, namely Theresa May, who I thought was quite a good Home Secretary.

    I don't view 11m, as cold-hearted, evil people or anything like that. And equally, given what many on here think about lefties, while this total wasn't enough to win the election 9m voted Labour, 1m voted SNP, and 2m voted LD. 12m people aren't all insane, deluded lefties. LIfe is more nuanced than that, and people come in all shapes and sizes with different views and opinions. I think 11m voted Conservative because they didn't like Ed Miliband, didn't have much trust in Labour, and trusted the Tories economically.

    Snipped for space
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    They backed horribly illiberal policies. The European arrest warrant being a good example. They were neither liberal nor democratic.

    As I have repeatedly said (and I have yet to be proven right on UKIP I will freely admit) the mushy middle is not where you want to be. The Lib Dems explicitly marketed themselves as a middle ground of two things that people didn't particular like anyway. They have been squashed accordingly.
    I wonder if there isn't an opportunity here for a reformed classic liberal, even libertarian party to emerge from the ashes? Especially if UKIP go after the WWC voters deserted by Labour in the North.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Ishmael_X said:

    EPG said:


    What we are finding out about the pollsters shows how powerful peer pressure can be, even in a supposedly professional/scientific environment.

    The problems with the "consensus" about AGW come to mind as well.

    Not sure what the answers are though.

    The AGW consensus is among scientists who research it using everything from evidence to computer models, not people being polled.
    What a very curious claim. Do you think pollsters do not use computer models? Do you not think they put evidence into those models?
    But once they've applied the fear factor and the hypnosis haze, the models evidently collapse..
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,596

    justin124 said:

    We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.

    Younger politicians plus longer life expectancy means that by-elections are and should be incredibly rare now.
    I remember Nick Palmer explaining this - up to John Major's government, MPs had a really, really bad pension scheme, which meant that many could not afford to retire. So they worked on and on until they dropped dead.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 651
    I think it would be a bit cr*p of him, if Carswell sidled back to the Tories.
    When he defected, he forced a by-election so that no-one could argue "we never voted for a Ukip MP". He would look pretty un-principled to me if he decided the by-election business was no longer necessary following a change of heart.
    That said, I can't especially see why he would want to re-join the Tories. He strikes me as an independent-minded guy - being the single Ukip MP means he can vote as he sees fit and avoid the aggro from Whips. Or am I just naiive?
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
    I mean properly liberal, remove planning restrictions for building new homes, legalise drugs (the war on drugs is a complete failure), removing all the snooping the government does etc.

    All their solutions seem to just be even more government on top of what we've already got.
    One step at a time. Drugs policy definitely needs to change.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,803
    AndyJS said:

    Just seen a result I had to look twice at to make sure I wasn't seeing things: the LDs polling 6.3% in Surrey SW. A couple of elections ago they almost won the seat when Virginia Bottomley was the MP.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000953

    The further LibDem disintegration in Harrogate, York Outer, Richmond Park, Cambourne and other Conservatives gains of 2010 was also impressive.

    I wonder if we'll see a similar secondary collapse in the constituencies they lost this year.

    If so the LibDems have a very bleak future.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,870
    LucyJones said:

    I think it would be a bit cr*p of him, if Carswell sidled back to the Tories.
    When he defected, he forced a by-election so that no-one could argue "we never voted for a Ukip MP". He would look pretty un-principled to me if he decided the by-election business was no longer necessary following a change of heart.
    That said, I can't especially see why he would want to re-join the Tories. He strikes me as an independent-minded guy - being the single Ukip MP means he can vote as he sees fit and avoid the aggro from Whips. Or am I just naiive?

    Exactly. He is his own whip and parliamentary party leader isn't he? I wonder if he'll ever rebel against himself.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited May 2015
    Re: pollsters (FPT)
    It was revealed on the news channels yesterday that

    1) Survation had the Tories on 37% in a poll on Wednesday and they shredded it, because they didn't believe it

    2) The phone pollsters didn't believe the Tories were 3% ahead, so they changed some parts of their model in the final week in order to converge with the online pollsters i.e neck and neck.
    Frankly, whilst 1) is bad luck, if 2) is true then it is frankly IMO outrageous, and should permanently discredit any pollster that did it. On what basis could they "not believe" what their polls were producing? What is the point of a poll if the producers of it can arbitrarily alter it on the basis of a belief that it isn't showing the right answer? Publish and be damned, or don't publish, but to publish the wrong figures based on 'belief'. Why bother doing the poll at all, just make up the numbers! And this is supposedly a reputable industry!
  • BaskervilleBaskerville Posts: 391

    Plato said:

    Check out the Local Elections - Tories UP TWENTY EIGHT councils and still more to declare.

    bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councils

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?

    Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.

    Blimey.

    felix said:

    Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:

    1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
    2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
    3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.

    Someone pointed out on the last thread that the Tories only lost eight seats in total, astonishing.
    LibDems down another 324 councillors too. Looking like an extinction event. Huge cut in short money, no money donated by all these lost councillors. And which donor in their right mind is going to pump money into them?
    10% more Tory Councillors and 8% fewer Labour... 07.05.15... what a great day that was!
    Whoever takes over from Miliband will have their job cut out to stop the bleeding.
  • Dair said:

    kle4 said:


    Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.

    Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).

    And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.

    Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.

    It's not absurd to think that Majority Government on 37% of the vote is a mandate for the manifesto of that party. It's a blatant example of an utterly broken voting system and only once before has a party won a majority with less than 40% of the vote - 2005 Blair and we all know how well that went.

    Legitimacy should be the focus of all media analysis of this debacle. It's not. And that's because the elite and the Tory Party (and to an extent senior Labour Party now it's been taken over by the Primrose HIll Set) are THE SAME ENTITY.

    Of course I doubt that's what the New Statesman blogger meant. But to me it is a fundamental problem with where Britain is today.

    We have an illigitimate government, with no mandate, not supported by the popular vote and about to impose policies on the a country which never voted for them.

    That should be the front page of every newspaper, the lead story on every TV Station. That it is not is part of the problem.
    One assumes you are equally as uncomfortable with the SNP taking 56 seats with 4.7% of the vote.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,803
    LucyJones said:

    I think it would be a bit cr*p of him, if Carswell sidled back to the Tories.
    When he defected, he forced a by-election so that no-one could argue "we never voted for a Ukip MP". He would look pretty un-principled to me if he decided the by-election business was no longer necessary following a change of heart.
    That said, I can't especially see why he would want to re-join the Tories. He strikes me as an independent-minded guy - being the single Ukip MP means he can vote as he sees fit and avoid the aggro from Whips. Or am I just naiive?

    No.

    Its clearly in Carswell's interest to remain in UKIP.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I do hope not for your sake. He's the sterotypical champagne socialist =

    - parachuted into a safe seat
    - media head
    - went to a school you won't be able to under his policies
    - part of the Liberal Elite
    - He has a TITLE as the son of a Baron

    He's just URGH. If someone suggested him as Next Tory Leader I'd pick almost anyone else.

    He's a Wedgie Benn retread.
    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    I have this image of the two of them whiling away five years by going off for day trips in a battered Morris Minor soft-top, flask and sandwiches packed, checking out the National Trust properties in Kent and Surrey.....

    Perhaps the BBC could film it?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,533
    edited May 2015

    One thing we should be extra wary of the "what is important" and "is this a good / bad policy" questions in the polls...it was thought lots of things the Tories were doing / saying weren't important and Ed was scoring great on policy ideas like energy freeze etc.

    It makes sense now why Tories approach really didn't spend any time explaining particular policies and instead was "economic plan economic plan economic plan" (for months), "Labour / SNP", etc...

    Contrast Labour /Ed approach I have this very specific policy on energy prices and another on rent controls....each day a new specific policy targeted at a different group.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    I had this same thought in 2010, and I think it is becoming even more acute now

    Tom Doran
    @portraitinflesh

    "Most people didn't vote Tory" is seamlessly becoming "most people are anti-Tory" in the left's collective mind. Disastrous. #GE2015
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Well they deserve immense scorn for complacency if nothing else.

    I'm expecting a balls out negotiation from Cameron given he's got the mandate mandate manifesto for it.

    I'm on the cusp re BOO or BOI - I saw a YouGov the other day saying we're now more BOI than for a decade.
    MP_SE said:

    Would anyone care to speculate on what Cameron is going to ask for in terms of a renegotiation with the EU.

    There are an awful lot of unnamed EU bureaucrats being quoted saying that they intend to not offer anything worthwhile to DC and expect him to campaign for an IN vote regardless.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036
    Omnium said:

    Lammy's hat in the ring according to BBC

    justin124 said:

    The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
    Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.

    However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.
    I imagine most of the stuff that's contentious outside the party will be dealt with quickly, the EU referendum will occupy most minds in 2017 and after that they can work with a cross party consensus on things like the constitutional settlement.

    I can't see any MPs being quite so Reckless as to defect, when it's quite clear what will happen as a result.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited May 2015
    MD As I said last night Umunna as Leader, Jarvis as Deputy would be Labour's dream ticket in my view
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108


    One assumes you are equally as uncomfortable with the SNP taking 56 seats with 4.7% of the vote.

    Of course. That's just as broken.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    justin124 said:

    felix said:

    justin124 said:

    The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
    Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.

    Also, Justin, I trust you have noted that the 37-30 victory for the Tories is actually only 6.5% when you look at 1 decimal place (36.9-30.4). Could be important, that.
    Roflmfao.
    I think you will find that those are UK rather than GB figures.
    justin124 said:

    We are a bit overdue for a string of by-elections in Tory-held seats so it’s not that unlikely that by mid 2017 Cameron’s majority will be well down into single figures – say 6 or even 4.

    When you post the same thing twice it just gets more desperate - you sound like a latter day grave -robber. You lost. Get over it and jog on.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039

    AndyJS said:

    Just seen a result I had to look twice at to make sure I wasn't seeing things: the LDs polling 6.3% in Surrey SW. A couple of elections ago they almost won the seat when Virginia Bottomley was the MP.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000953

    The further LibDem disintegration in Harrogate, York Outer, Richmond Park, Cambourne and other Conservatives gains of 2010 was also impressive.

    I wonder if we'll see a similar secondary collapse in the constituencies they lost this year.

    If so the LibDems have a very bleak future.
    They do. antifrank may be right about merging with the Greens.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    After The Lord Mayors show

    UKIP (@UKIP)
    09/05/2015 14:55
    Thanet District Council has #GonePurple. First Authority in the United Kingdom to have a #UKIP majority!

    Charlotte Rose (@CharlotteGRose)
    08/05/2015 07:14
    That means the real winners in #Thurrock council elections are UKIP who've gained 7 new cllrs, Lab lost 4 and Con lost 1 #EssexElects
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,234
    Will Labour’s choice of leader influence who the Tories pick to replace Cam? Will they deliberately go for someone from a different background or gender so as to avoid the 'They're all the same' charge?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    AJ? Really?

    He didn't know the difference between debt and deficit, nor the rate of VAT when SCoE. He really didn't care. And that was before he discovered the liaison dangereuous between his wife and his security officer.

    He was my boss at DoH and a nice chappy. That doesn't qualify him for leadership of anything. Including the UK.

    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.
    They missed out with Alan Johnson.

    Even I like Alan Johnson
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,395
    felix said:


    I think there's a deep mutual dislike between Cameron and Salmond. But I don't think the same of Cameron and Sturgeon. I imagine things will be quite cordial, and they will tend to sort things out leader to leader. And I think the influx of SNP MP's to Wesminster, (bar the odd couple of unexpectedly elected half-wits who want a re-run of Bannockburn and refuse to sit next to Tories in the Westminster canteen) will do a great deal to improve mutual understanding between Scottish and RUK politicians.

    Certainly not if the French ambassador is to be believed.

    felix said:


    I think there's a deep mutual dislike between Cameron and Salmond. But I don't think the same of Cameron and Sturgeon. I imagine things will be quite cordial, and they will tend to sort things out leader to leader. And I think the influx of SNP MP's to Wesminster, (bar the odd couple of unexpectedly elected half-wits who want a re-run of Bannockburn and refuse to sit next to Tories in the Westminster canteen) will do a great deal to improve mutual understanding between Scottish and RUK politicians.

    Certainly not if the French ambassador is to be believed.
    Exactly. And I think looking back, that conversation (which I personally believe happened, though we have no verification) was quite true. It is a far better result for the SNP that Cameron won and that they get to be in opposition.
    There is IIRC no doubt that the conversation happened - just what was said (and that memo did express disbelief in itself). However, this reminds me that the result of the inquiry on the leak from the Scotland Office was never published. Wonder if it will be now?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,870

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
    I mean properly liberal, remove planning restrictions for building new homes, legalise drugs (the war on drugs is a complete failure), removing all the snooping the government does etc.

    All their solutions seem to just be even more government on top of what we've already got.
    One step at a time. Drugs policy definitely needs to change.
    Extreme social liberalism is a bit of a red herring imo. People aren't very free when they're in a drug induced stupor - in fact they're enslaved.

    Civil liberties I totally agree with.

    But why not go further - there's only 8 of them, why not be completely liberal, and NEVER whip, freedom of conscience on every vote for every MP, all the time. THAT is something I would get on board with. Liberal Democracy in action, and it would mean all that dishonest campaigning on local issues I alluded to earlier would actually be true, because they could vote that way if they so desired, totally differently from their colleagues. A leader might try to persuade, but never unduly influence.

    There you go I've saved the Lib Dems. Invoice in the post.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036
    Plato said:

    I thought he did well post-riots but came across like a bit of brain donor yesterday.

    For a supposedly clever chap he hides it rather too well.

    Lammy for Labour leader?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/32671418

    If it's true that half of Labour's members come from London, it may happen. For that matter, they could do worse though he's still very lightweight.

    Lammy for Leader....now it really is getting bonkers....Putting aside his infamous mastermind performance, he was useless minister, so many cock-ups when he was at Department for Business, Innovation & Skills.
    What did he say yesterday?
    I remember him from the riots coverage, seemed like a good egg who understands the people.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Yvette The Ice Pixie?

    I'd prefer her Twitter spoof to be in charge.

    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Seriously?
    I'm loath to comment as a Tory partisan, but would Labour really pick an Old Etonian called Tristram? Cue the Pavlovian reaction of UKIP in all those second places to Labour.
    Plus he is an idiot.
    When Yvette is the likely choice you know Labour are in trouble.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952

    AndyJS said:

    Just seen a result I had to look twice at to make sure I wasn't seeing things: the LDs polling 6.3% in Surrey SW. A couple of elections ago they almost won the seat when Virginia Bottomley was the MP.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000953

    The further LibDem disintegration in Harrogate, York Outer, Richmond Park, Cambourne and other Conservatives gains of 2010 was also impressive.

    I wonder if we'll see a similar secondary collapse in the constituencies they lost this year.

    If so the LibDems have a very bleak future.
    Here in Totnes the LibDems dropped 25.7% and went from second to fifth. Remarkable.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,596
    Plato said:

    That list really sums up their dismal performance.

    I'm still rubbing my eyes at Gower. Tories haven't had that since what? 1906?

    EPG said:

    AndyJS said:

    Hendon should have been one of the easiest Labour gains in the country, especially being in London. Instead the Tory majority went from 106 to 3,724.

    EPG said:

    Sean_F said:

    EPG said:

    felix said:

    Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:

    1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
    2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
    3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.

    The proposal to introduce a crime of aggravated assault against Muslims just didn't get that much traction outside the usual anti-Islam circles, who don't vote Labour anyway.
    Look at the way the Conservative vote rose in the two most Jewish seats in the UK, Hendon and Finchley & Golders Green. Look at the way it rose in the two most Hindu seats in the UK, Harrow East and West. I think that the interview with Muslim News did Labour absolutely no favours at all with those communities.
    Labour gained more votes than the Conservatives in Finchley and Golders Green. So this is normal variance.
    But as discussed, they didn't do especially well in London. They only gained a handful of seats.
    London was Labour's best region:

    London +7
    NW +4
    East +2
    NE +1
    Yorkshire +1
    West Midlands +1
    SE --
    SW --
    East Midlands -1
    Wales -2
    Scotland -40

    Against Conservatives:

    London +4
    NW +2
    NE --
    SE --
    East --
    Yorkshire --
    West Midlands --
    Scotland --
    SW -1
    East Midlands -1
    Wales -3


    I suspect that the Welsh Tories will be among the biggest critics of the proposed boundary changes.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Same pattern in the seats where they challenged Lab in 2010

    Sheffield Central 9.7% (4th place)
    Hull North 9% (4th place)
    Oldham East 12.9% (4th place)
    Swansea West 9% (4th)
    Newport East 6.4% (4th)
    City of Durham 11.3 (4th)
    Streatham 9 (third)
    Pontrypridd 12.8 (4th)
    Islington South 10.9 (third)
    Oxford East 10.8 (4th)

    and in the 2 2010 losses

    Rochdale 10.3 (4th)
    Chesterfield 13.8 (4th)

    AndyJS said:

    Just seen a result I had to look twice at to make sure I wasn't seeing things: the LDs polling 6.3% in Surrey SW. A couple of elections ago they almost won the seat when Virginia Bottomley was the MP.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000953

    The further LibDem disintegration in Harrogate, York Outer, Richmond Park, Cambourne and other Conservatives gains of 2010 was also impressive.

    I wonder if we'll see a similar secondary collapse in the constituencies they lost this year.

    If so the LibDems have a very bleak future.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,036

    justin124 said:

    The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
    Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.

    However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.

    "Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."

    I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.

    Carswell has done Cameron a massive favour by setting the by-election precedent. Post-referendum defeat for Brexit (and I say that as a genuinely undecided voter) Christ knows what will happen.
    Yes, quite. Carswell for all his faults is his own man, I wonder how he is feeling today now that he has no party around him on the Green Benches. Cameron's probably happier to have him sitting opposite rather than behind, but I imagine he'll be good to help the govt, or at least abstain when convenient.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Dair said:


    One assumes you are equally as uncomfortable with the SNP taking 56 seats with 4.7% of the vote.

    Of course. That's just as broken.
    And the SNP have electoral reform for PR in their manifesto.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited May 2015
    They've been seduced by the Britain's Got Talent hypnosis dog?

    AndyJS said:

    The election was a victory for provincial England and Wales. They didn’t accept the metropolitan view of Ed Miliband. Labour’s vote went up in trendy areas like Hackney and Islington. They tanked in the small to medium sized towns of England and Wales.

    And it was the small and medium English towns where most of the marginals were.

    I think that the YouGov daily poll has an almost hypnotic effect and pollsters are fearful or producing something that is much different.


    Do hypnosis and fear affect pollsters' methodology?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited May 2015
    It's impossible to overstate how right the polls got Scotland.

    The final poll of polls was almost spot on

    http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/05/poll-of-polls-westminster-vote-intentions-6-may-final/
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,234
    Plato said:

    Yvette The Ice Pixie?

    I'd prefer her Twitter spoof to be in charge.

    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Seriously?
    I'm loath to comment as a Tory partisan, but would Labour really pick an Old Etonian called Tristram? Cue the Pavlovian reaction of UKIP in all those second places to Labour.
    Plus he is an idiot.
    When Yvette is the likely choice you know Labour are in trouble.
    Yvette would campaign to reinstate her Home buyers Information Packs - the pinnacle of her ministerial career.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,721

    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    I have this image of the two of them whiling away five years by going off for day trips in a battered Morris Minor soft-top, flask and sandwiches packed, checking out the National Trust properties in Kent and Surrey.....

    Perhaps the BBC could film it?
    It'll have to be a while before there's by-election in Hallam.I fear thosd forecasting doom for the LD's might be right.
    However, there might be a beneficial spin-off from participation in a successful IN campaign!
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264

    SMukesh said:

    I am guessing there is no alternative but a centrist for Labour leader.Labour won`t choose a leftie for the next 10 years.If Labour want to win in the English marginals,my pick would be Tristam Hunt.

    Tristam Hunt? They need Dan Jarvis.
    They missed out with Alan Johnson.

    Even I like Alan Johnson
    If he'd ever shown any indication that he wanted the job, he'd have been a shoo-in.
    The guy I was speaking with this morning was a junior minister in Johnson's office and he said pretty much the same thing, in addition he had a personal issue too.

    He would have been good for Labour though.
    Agreed. A younger version with his kind of back story and human touch would be ideal. But there isn't one.
    But Johnson in govt flunked everything he had to do.

    Conservative ministers need to stay sane. They need to govern on the basis of what needs to be done and worry about the politics later.

    Assuming SF do not vote on anything is the majority actually something like 18?
    If other minor parties tend to abstain or actually support, is the real majority nearer 25?
    I'm only asking. Someone will have a better idea. Tory MPs even this far after 2010 are probably still youngish.
    Speaker and SF bring total voting seats down to 645. I'm also pretty sure that the UUP will as good as take the whip. That is 332 of 645, so an effective majority of 19. Then you'll see the DUP & UKIP voting with the Tories most of the time as well as the occasional Lady Hermon or LD vote. Their majority should last the course.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Somerton & Frome. Used to be LD, now has a Tory majority of more than 20,000:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000932
  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    alex. said:

    Re: pollsters (FPT)

    It was revealed on the news channels yesterday that

    1) Survation had the Tories on 37% in a poll on Wednesday and they shredded it, because they didn't believe it

    2) The phone pollsters didn't believe the Tories were 3% ahead, so they changed some parts of their model in the final week in order to converge with the online pollsters i.e neck and neck.
    Frankly, whilst 1) is bad luck, if 2) is true then it is frankly IMO outrageous, and should permanently discredit any pollster that did it. On what basis could they "not believe" what their polls were producing? What is the point of a poll if the producers of it can arbitrarily alter it on the basis of a belief that it isn't showing the right answer? Publish and be damned, or don't publish, but to publish the wrong figures based on 'belief'. Why bother doing the poll at all, just make up the numbers! And this is supposedly a reputable industry!

    It's fair enough to cross-check your own output, but what were they checking against? The answer must be YouGov, because that's the only metric which wasn't saying: ed is crap.

    So the "Baxter YouGov, and EICIPM" approach expressly espoused by BJO also took in - by their own admission - OGH, Nick Palmer, Polly Toynbee, the polling industry and, as far as I can see, the Labour Party. And that's why ed stayed in place. Cameron should really make an 8 foot limestone statue of Peter Kellner, inscribed "it was the Sun wot won it", to put in the Downing Street garden.
  • FlightpathlFlightpathl Posts: 1,243

    Nevermind those not registered, roughly 25% of those who are backed Cameron. 75% didn't. We've hear a lot about 'the 45%' in Scotland. We need to start hearing rather more about the 75% from Labour. Learn from Obama and try to create a new majority - and by that I don't mean 326 seats, I mean people. A party concerned with fairness, aspiration and not privileging one group over another. Blairites who want to target a handful of Tories in the marginals or those who think it's all about buttering up the unions or sections of the press or particular identities need to take a long walk off a short plank.

    Fascinating stuff. I can see you are really tuned in to what is happening in the world.
    Can you expand?
    How many voted against Labour
    How many voted against LDs
    How many voted against Green
    How many voted against UKIP
    indeed, how many voted against SNP
    ??

  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 4,264

    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

    With Mr Cooper as Labour candidate for Doncaster North.
    That's not a bad call. Really wouldn't be surprised.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited May 2015
    Perhaps we should form a self-help group? Which stage of grief are you in? I'm still in Denial.

    RIP Dave Can't Win Here

    At the risk of being banned, I have to confess that after 2 days I am suffering withdrawal problems from having no articles on here on why the Conservatives will find it impossible/difficult to win a General Election. Are there any other members of the PB community suffering similar problems? Let us all be open and admit to our problem.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Sandpit said:

    justin124 said:

    The Tory majority of 12 is substantially smaller than the 21 achieved by Major in 1992 yet even the latter lost his majority by the end of 1996.Major’s majority did not reach 12 until Feb 1995. Only six by-election reverses needed to take us back to a hung parliament.
    Paradoxically, even as things stand , whipping is going to be much tighter than in the last Parliament given that the Coalition enjoyed a majority of circa 70 at its outset. By-elections will become very important – though the commentariat has so far failed to latch on to this.

    However the life expectancy of your average Tory MP in 2015 is considerably better than their 1992 equivalent. Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry.

    "Defections to UKIP will be the bigger worry."

    I'm not sure anyone will be that reckless this time. Certainly not before the 2017 referendum.

    Carswell has done Cameron a massive favour by setting the by-election precedent. Post-referendum defeat for Brexit (and I say that as a genuinely undecided voter) Christ knows what will happen.
    Yes, quite. Carswell for all his faults is his own man, I wonder how he is feeling today now that he has no party around him on the Green Benches. Cameron's probably happier to have him sitting opposite rather than behind, but I imagine he'll be good to help the govt, or at least abstain when convenient.
    Probably not much different than he did when was the only ukip mp before?
  • CopperSulphateCopperSulphate Posts: 1,119

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
    I mean properly liberal, remove planning restrictions for building new homes, legalise drugs (the war on drugs is a complete failure), removing all the snooping the government does etc.

    All their solutions seem to just be even more government on top of what we've already got.
    One step at a time. Drugs policy definitely needs to change.
    Extreme social liberalism is a bit of a red herring imo. People aren't very free when they're in a drug induced stupor - in fact they're enslaved.

    Civil liberties I totally agree with.

    But why not go further - there's only 8 of them, why not be completely liberal, and NEVER whip, freedom of conscience on every vote for every MP, all the time. THAT is something I would get on board with. Liberal Democracy in action, and it would mean all that dishonest campaigning on local issues I alluded to earlier would actually be true, because they could vote that way if they so desired, totally differently from their colleagues. A leader might try to persuade, but never unduly influence.

    There you go I've saved the Lib Dems. Invoice in the post.

    Legalising drugs doesn't seem to increase their use, quite the opposite in fact.

    I quite like the idea of them being allowed free votes on anything and it would allow them future influence in hung parliaments without having to be part of a coalition.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    Alistair said:

    It's impossible to overstate how right the polls got Scotland.

    Even the Ashcroft Polling in Scotland got it right, first to predict the "Better than UNS" vote distribution for the SNP.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,803
    AndyJS said:

    The same thing happened in 1992, although the local elections were held a month after the general election in that case.

    Plato said:

    Check out the Local Elections - Tories UP TWENTY EIGHT councils and still more to declare.

    bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results/councils

    Sandpit said:

    Plato said:

    Labour only got FOUR London gains from the Tories?

    Hell's Teeth. I've been so overwhelmed by the total result and the SW that I hadn't noticed.

    Blimey.

    felix said:

    Some thoughts on the London regional polling. I was harangued on here by either speedy or lucky guy for suggesting that Labour would not get up to 10 London gains from the Tories alone. They actually got 4 - all north of the river and in many other seats the swing went to the Tories. I suspect 3 reasons:

    1. Measuring London is very difficult unless you very carefully wight re age, class, registration, etc.
    2. There can be enormous variations withing London - Battersea , eg is very different form Hampstead.
    3. I suspect Labour missed up to 3 N. London possibilities because of the absurd anti-islamophobia proposal. You target one religious group for support and risk offending others just a few streets away.

    Someone pointed out on the last thread that the Tories only lost eight seats in total, astonishing.
    The impressive thing is that the Conservatives have made gains on this set of local elections in 1999, 2003, 2007, 2011 and now 2015.

    Do you know how many councillors the LibDems are down from their peak ? I'd guess at about 3000 now.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 651
    kle4 said:

    I had this same thought in 2010, and I think it is becoming even more acute now

    Tom Doran
    @portraitinflesh

    "Most people didn't vote Tory" is seamlessly becoming "most people are anti-Tory" in the left's collective mind. Disastrous. #GE2015

    And even more people didn't vote Labour, didn't vote SNP, etc, etc. Ipso facto most people are anti-Labour, anti-SNP, etc.

  • BaskervilleBaskerville Posts: 391
    What's going to be in Queen's Speech?

    1. EU Referendum Bill
    2. Smith Report Bill for Scotland
    2a. EVEL Bill
    2b. Royal Commission on Devolution
    3. Housing Association Right to Buy Bill
    4. Enactment of 600 Seat Revised Boundaries Bill

    Rest of manifesto commitments can be done under existing legislation or in the Budget.

    Anyone offering a market on the Queen's Speech?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,987
    edited May 2015
    Sandpit If, as I expect, the EU referendum is something like 51-49% In then UKIP will get as big a boost across the UK as the SNP did in Scotland. Certainly they could pick up a few more eurosceptic Tories if a Cameroon leads the Tories in 2020, which is why the Tories will probably pick a rightwinger after Cameron, albeit offering up a chance for Labour and the LDs to win back centrist voters in the suburbs
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    isam said:

    After The Lord Mayors show

    UKIP (@UKIP)
    09/05/2015 14:55
    Thanet District Council has #GonePurple. First Authority in the United Kingdom to have a #UKIP majority!

    Charlotte Rose (@CharlotteGRose)
    08/05/2015 07:14
    That means the real winners in #Thurrock council elections are UKIP who've gained 7 new cllrs, Lab lost 4 and Con lost 1 #EssexElects

    I wonder if they will follow the precedent of the Lefty councils of the 80's and proclaim themselves "AN IMMIGRANT FREE ZONE"?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,721
    edited May 2015

    Dair said:

    kle4 said:


    Now you're being absurd - I don't like FPTP but it is the system we have and we have accepted in the past governments with massive majorities on far less than 50% of the vote.

    Penny is simultaneously saying Cameron got a mandate and that the nasty elites are to blame. It cannot be both; a mandate says he won the support of the people, so you cannot them act like elites stole the result from the people (which blaming them is doing).

    And if we are to blame our voting system for Cameron being able to govern with a slim majority on 37% of the vote, that is still the voters' fault, as they rejected an alternative and didn't support any party that wants to change it. this time.

    Either way, blaming the elites is ridiculous when the votes went Cameron's way.

    It's not absurd to think that Majority Government on 37% of the vote is a mandate for the manifesto of that party. It's a blatant example of an utterly broken voting system and only once before has a party won a majority with less than 40% of the vote - 2005 Blair and we all know how well that went.

    Legitimacy should be the focus of all media analysis of this debacle. It's not. And that's because the elite and the Tory Party (and to an extent senior Labour Party now it's been taken over by the Primrose HIll Set) are THE SAME ENTITY.

    Of course I doubt that's what the New Statesman blogger meant. But to me it is a fundamental problem with where Britain is today.

    We have an illigitimate government, with no mandate, not supported by the popular vote and about to impose policies on the a country which never voted for them.

    That should be the front page of every newspaper, the lead story on every TV Station. That it is not is part of the problem.
    One assumes you are equally as uncomfortable with the SNP taking 56 seats with 4.7% of the vote.
    Don't know about the original poster, but I ceertainly agree. They only just got 50% of the vote in Scotland!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @MSmithsonPB: Could be the weren't wrong & there was big late swing. See fieldwork dates of unpublished Survation poll http://t.co/crjw2hMGZt

    Sadly, that won't fly.

    I don't know if IOS is ever coming back here, but he deserves at least some sympathy. Labour HQ shafted him and his colleagues something rotten.

    They said

    1. The Labour ground game is better and the Tories don't have one. Not true.

    2. The ground war is more important than the air war. Not true.

    3. The polls are in our favour. Not true...
    Just over a week from polling day, the first signs that their campaign was on course for failure started to emerge, but the tight circle around Ed Miliband decided to keep them secret.

    Labour’s final internal poll, conducted shortly before the final debate, suggested they could expect just a one point swing in their favour — a shockingly poor result. Rather than making gains, this suggested they would be heading backwards from 258 in 2010 to around 250 seats.

    Team Miliband considered — and rejected — changing strategy, and decided instead to keep the poll findings quiet from colleagues. This means that the bullish briefings, followed by tears and bitter disappointment on polling night in Labour HQ among staff not invited to Mr Miliband’s home in Doncaster, were all too real.
    @SamCoatesTimes: Exclusive - the bad poll that Lucy Powell suppressed - to the fury of Iain McNicol. An obituary of Ed Miliband... http://t.co/ceR3eCQqsB

  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584
    Alistair said:

    It's impossible to overstate how right the polls got Scotland.


    It's easier when there is a landslide and a clear-cut result.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit If, as I expect, the EU referendum is something like 51-49% In then UKIP will get as big a boost across the UK as the SNP did in Scotland. Certainly they could pick up a few more eurosceptic Tories if a Cameroon leads the Tories in 2020, which is why the Tories will probably pick a rightwinger after Cameron, albeit offering up a chance for Labour and the LDs to win back centrist voters in the suburbs

    If it was 51/49 then that would mean a Conservative party split.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    In terms of winning the election, there were about 10 people Labour could have chosen above Ed Miliband IMO. David Miliband, Yvette Cooper, Alan Johnson, Andy Burnham, Jon Cruddas, Caroline Flint, Chris Leslie, etc.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I know Henry Smith got back in at Crawley. When I worked there in the late 80s it was famous for having ZERO unemployment. I was in recruitment back then and the dullards who got jobs was quite an eye-opener of market demands accepting anything with a pulse and a substantial criminal record.

    AndyJS said:

    I said the same thing myself a couple of weeks ago, and requested a thread on the subject like we had just before the 2010 election.

    Plato said:

    IIRC we spent A LOT of time talking about English Market Towns pre-2010 and didn't do so much pre-2015.

    Is that false recall from me?

    AndyJS said:

    The election was a victory for provincial England and Wales. They didn’t accept the metropolitan view of Ed Miliband. Labour’s vote went up in trendy areas like Hackney and Islington. They tanked in the small to medium sized towns of England and Wales.

    And it was the small and medium English towns where most of the marginals were.

    I think that the YouGov daily poll has an almost hypnotic effect and pollsters are fearful or producing something that is much different.


    I read somewhere that Tamworth was the constituency in the UK that had seen the biggest increase in employment during the coalition years.
    I suggest this goes some way to explain the Tories' good results in the not-too-faraway North Warwickshire and Nuneaton.
  • Now you mention it they may actually have trouble on their EHRA thing, as it sounds like what they'll end up passing is going to be deeply ridiculous. They may even get opposition from the right for not doing what they made it sound like they'd be doing.

    The Conservatives' policy in this area is utterly incoherent. The opposition to it is going to be led by Dominic Grieve, with the support of Ken Clarke and Jesse Norman (Lord Bingham of Cornhill's son-in-law), i.e. some of their most heavyweight backbenchers. Although they will probably get the DUP and the UUP to support the disapplication of article 8 in deportation and removal cases, Labour, the SNP and LibDems will all be opposed to any proposal for reform. It is in fact a great shame, since the result of this election represents a once in a generation opportunity to repeal altogether one of the Blair Government's terrible legacies.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,234

    felix said:

    Re the not so strange death of Liberalism, what has struck me about their policies is the way they have become more statist over time - I guess the Orange bookers didn't like it but that was pretty much the Clegg way - influenced much , I suspect by his pro-EUism.

    I think you're spot on.

    They have gone from a party based on liberalism to a big state, nanny knows best, spendy Labour-lite party. What exactly is liberal about them?

    If they were socially liberal and fiscally conservative then I'd vote for them in a flash.
    Well that space has been claimed by Cameron. Who is famously "not very good at politics".
    I mean properly liberal, remove planning restrictions for building new homes, legalise drugs (the war on drugs is a complete failure), removing all the snooping the government does etc.

    All their solutions seem to just be even more government on top of what we've already got.
    One step at a time. Drugs policy definitely needs to change.
    Extreme social liberalism is a bit of a red herring imo. People aren't very free when they're in a drug induced stupor - in fact they're enslaved.

    Civil liberties I totally agree with.

    But why not go further - there's only 8 of them, why not be completely liberal, and NEVER whip, freedom of conscience on every vote for every MP, all the time. THAT is something I would get on board with. Liberal Democracy in action, and it would mean all that dishonest campaigning on local issues I alluded to earlier would actually be true, because they could vote that way if they so desired, totally differently from their colleagues. A leader might try to persuade, but never unduly influence.

    There you go I've saved the Lib Dems. Invoice in the post.

    Legalising drugs doesn't seem to increase their use, quite the opposite in fact.

    I quite like the idea of them being allowed free votes on anything and it would allow them future influence in hung parliaments without having to be part of a coalition.
    Surely they couldn't have free votes on Red Line issues from their manifesto? Otherwise wwhat's the point of calling them members of a party?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    On Scotland, FPT, there was some discussion whether putting on 20,000 extra votes was good or bad for the Tories given the increase in turnout, but that ignores tactical voting.

    The usual turnips will dismiss this, but I have been informed that the Tory canvas returns for Edinburgh South showed nearly 1 in 2 registered Tories planning to vote against the SNP bampot.

    The actual result would seem to validate that
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    LucyJones said:

    kle4 said:

    I had this same thought in 2010, and I think it is becoming even more acute now

    Tom Doran
    @portraitinflesh

    "Most people didn't vote Tory" is seamlessly becoming "most people are anti-Tory" in the left's collective mind. Disastrous. #GE2015

    And even more people didn't vote Labour, didn't vote SNP, etc, etc. Ipso facto most people are anti-Labour, anti-SNP, etc.

    Quite. As someone who voted LD in 2010 but who had, as this time (eventually) wanted a Lib-Con coalition, I took offense at that type of comment, because it presumed that everyone who doesn't vote for the Tories must automatically therefore support a 'progressive majority' against them, but the idea that all those who didn't vote Labour must therefore support an 'anti-progressive majority' was never considered. I think both are ridiculous - the anti-Torie alliance is larger, but it cannot be assumed everyone not a Tory is on board with some anti-Tory majority alliance.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,952
    edited May 2015
    One thing to bear in mind for the next election. Labour now have to choose their leader first. The Tories have the luxury of seeing who it is, how they are working out - and choosing the leader best placed to defeat them....
  • Just heard the BBC's Christian Fraser describe Andy Burnham as a strong contender because "he's popular with the unions". I'm Labour and my heart sinks. Popular with the unions….the Tories couldn't wish for more from the leader of the opposition. Extraordinary that two defeats on, so many of my colleagues in the Labour party continue to get these things backwards. How about being popular with the voters?
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    Villa 1 up in the Cameron derby.
  • LucyJonesLucyJones Posts: 651

    isam said:

    After The Lord Mayors show

    UKIP (@UKIP)
    09/05/2015 14:55
    Thanet District Council has #GonePurple. First Authority in the United Kingdom to have a #UKIP majority!

    Charlotte Rose (@CharlotteGRose)
    08/05/2015 07:14
    That means the real winners in #Thurrock council elections are UKIP who've gained 7 new cllrs, Lab lost 4 and Con lost 1 #EssexElects

    I wonder if they will follow the precedent of the Lefty councils of the 80's and proclaim themselves "AN IMMIGRANT FREE ZONE"?
    Obviously not, since Ukip want only to limit immigration system, not halt it altogether.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,968
    Miss Plato, I somewhat disagree on Cooper.

    Consider the alternatives. Umunna is as metropolitan as Miliband, less Communist but greasier and more aloof. Burnham's constantly appearing as if he's on the verge of tears. Jarvis could be good [he'd be the other one I'd consider], he's got a great background but little experience. Who else is there?

    Maybe Stella Creasy, but she hasn't been mentioned much.

    Cooper's voice is an octave or two lower than it was. Plus allies of her husband will be her allies too.

    Mind you, they chose Ed Miliband last time. Based on that quality of judgement, they'll probably make Umunna leader.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,234
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit If, as I expect, the EU referendum is something like 51-49% In then UKIP will get as big a boost across the UK as the SNP did in Scotland. Certainly they could pick up a few more eurosceptic Tories if a Cameroon leads the Tories in 2020, which is why the Tories will probably pick a rightwinger after Cameron, albeit offering up a chance for Labour and the LDs to win back centrist voters in the suburbs

    If it was 51/49 then that would mean a Conservative party split.
    Don't expect to see a Labour block vote for In. I can't be the only person planning to vote Out to give Cam a bloody nose for calling the referendum in the first place.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,658
    edited May 2015


    I read somewhere that Tamworth was the constituency in the UK that had seen the biggest increase in employment during the coalition years.
    I suggest this goes some way to explain the Tories' good results in the not-too-faraway North Warwickshire and Nuneaton.

    The 2m rise in employment is perhaps the hidden story of this election. Labour desperately tried to dismiss it because they were 'all' 'exploitative' zero hours contracts, but ultimately it was a success story for the Government.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Alistair said:

    It's impossible to overstate how right the polls got Scotland.


    It's easier when there is a landslide and a clear-cut result.
    Not really.

    It says that the polls are generally accurate in a two horse fight with no insurgent party.

    The solution for the pollsters is actually quite simple (if costly) poll by region given party contests (i.e. not necessarily on a geographic basis).
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,844
    Angela Eagle is considering running...

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Labour leadership.

    Sensible Labour folk (yes, there are some, not MPs) have noted that the party should decide their philosophy and platform, then select the best person to sell it.

    Luckily they have already abandoned that plan and moved straight to a beauty contest.

    From my perspective the person I would least like to win (I think would be best facing Cameron across the despatch box regardless of policy) would be

    1. not from Gordo's cabinet
    2. A woman

    On that basis, and because none of them are favourites I have backed pretty much the field at odds of up to 100/1

    If any of them win I am covered.

    Of course I will be just as happy if none of them get it and Andy Burnham crashes and burns in 2020.

    This post sponsored by ToriesForBurnham™
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Me too - what can they possibly do now bar feel like they lost their Party?
    AndyJS said:

    Does anyone else see Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband listlessly wandering around Westminster for the next five years?

    I reckon Sheffield Hallam and Doncaster North will be the first by-elections of the new Parliament, possibly within months.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Angela Eagle is considering running...

    Almost as good as Andy Burnham...
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited May 2015
    Pong said:

    isam said:

    Pong said:

    I remember this competition. I sent my entry by post - have you still not received it Mike? It's probably stuck in the post office - it'll drop through your letterbox on monday morning, then you can update the figures with my entry at the top.

    :)

    Anyway, I've just done all my GE2015 accounting.

    I had a betting bank of just over £12k, with pretty much all of it invested by the exit poll.

    Net profit = £5793.22

    Longest odds winner; Conservatives winning margin of over 40 seats - BACK £0.07 @ 989/1 = +£67 (matched on Thursday AM, thanks to the betfair overround bot)

    ; the SNP to win Glasgow SW @ evens minutes after the Ashcroft poll had a 21 point lead.

    Most profitable single bet - Labour to come 2nd in Wyre forest (£200 per point @ 0.5, equiv 19/1) = +£1800

    Largest single loss: over 2.5 UKIP seats @ 6/4 = -£500

    Bookie of the election; (Joint winners) Coral & William Hill

    Best Advice to myself (that I didn’t take); Between 10pm & midnight bet on the exit poll, ESPECIALLY if it doesn’t seem *right*

    Best advice to myself (that I reluctantly took); Bet on Con Maj if the odds are high enough, however remote the possibility seems.

    Advice for next time – Don’t underestimate the uncertainty. NOM should have never been anywhere near as low as it was (as short as 1.05, on thurs PM, I believe).

    What was everyone else's P/L & best/worst election bets?

    I laid out £4400 and lost £2682

    I think it's probably easier to win if you have accounts with all online bookies.. I have one

    The premise for all of my bets was that ukip would easily get over 10%. I offered 4/6 under 10% on here two years ago when lads were 1/5 because I was bored on a Saturday night in...

    I guess being proved right when being lairy was quite satisfying

    No ones paid yet mind!

    Unfortunately that premise led me to bet a lot of big price ukip constituencies on the thinking 2-3 would come in if I was right about the 11-14% vote share...and obviously none did!

    The Farage -6.5 bets and ukip*4 to by lib dems were obv bad value when I made them but I was just bored really! And fancied a bet... Silly me!

    Bad luck - I hope the loss is bearable.

    In fairness, UKIP really were an unknown factor. I bought them on the spreads (@8.5, 6.5 & 5) - and even though I lost a fair chunk - the value was definitely there at the time.
    Cheers... It's ok I have had a good week betting, still in front!

    Obviously I wanted ukip to succeed without the financial interest...that hurt more than the money as I know how hard they worked.
This discussion has been closed.