Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Labour share of the vote in 2020
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Labour share of the vote in 2020
My initial reaction was to back ‘fall’ because of the appalling personal polling figures that Jeremy Corbyn has, but to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, there’s quite a few known unknowns about the next general election that might have an impact on this bet, they are, inter alia,
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If treaty change isn't possible we should at least have a legally binding agreement separate from the big treaties. If we avoid the agreement being legally binding because we don't trust oppositions to co-operate with them, then that suggests the agreement wouldn't be upheld should one of those oppositions get into power.
The other option would be a binding agreement that it will be integrated into the next treaty, which should come along shortly to sort out the Eurozone. We could sign it into law that if this isn't done in X years, then it automatically triggers another UK referendum.
Sovereign nations are not remotely free to abrogate these agreements and circumstances. A government cannot spend more than it can tax and borrow. The UK will not become a Rogue State and withdraw from the Geneva Convention, UNCLOS, etc., probably ECHR too. The consequences would be dire.
The entire sovereigntist argument against the EU is based on utter fantasy of a world which does not exist and a UK which never could exist.
The entire sovereigntist argument against the EU is based on utter fantasy of a world which does not exist and a UK which never could exist.
An argument that could equally be applied to Scottish Independence. Thankfully for both Scotland as an Independent country and the UK outside the EU it is an entirely false argument based as it is on a logical fallacy.
Post ref - I can't see Leave being happy if it goes against them, and it'll rumble on like SIndy.
The areas of similarity are not the basis and justification for Scottish Independence. Scotland needs independence to avoid becoming the next Wales, it is an economic necessity.
Nothing like this exists in the EU framework which functions purely as a trading club and all of whose strictures would exist were the UK outside of it as I highlighted before.
650 -> 600
I was a reluctant Remain, came to same conclusion and then looked at what I felt - and accepted I was really a Leave on some fundamental issues that I'd tried to ignore.
Seems like a long time to tie up capital for what (to a novice at least) looks like poor odds.
Nothing like this exists in the EU framework which functions purely as a trading club and all of whose strictures would exist were the UK outside of it as I highlighted before.
Absolutely wrong and even the most ardent pro Europeans would not argue that the EU functions purely as a trading club. You really are quite detached from reality if that is what you believe.
I've gone stats snowblind and seen too many *conventional wisdom debunked* ones to remember.
My reasoning:
His personal ratings really are dire, considering this is his honeymoon.
The terrorist-lover mud is very likely to stick.
While the Tories may split, that wouldn't necessarily increase Labour's vote share.
UKIP might indeed surge after the referendum but I don't see how that increases Labour's share either. Surely it would reduce both that and the Tory share?
Labour itself may split. I think the chances of this are quite high as Corbyn's opponents really have no other option.
I don't expect Labour to recover significantly in Scotland.
Politicians who involve the Crown in politics deserve punishment.
I would expect next year to be the year of the Labour split if only I could bring myself to believe that
a) Labour MPs had the nerve to do it, and
b) Labour voters could stop voting tribally.
Voter retention from 2015:
CON 90
LAB 85
UKIP 8
LD 60
Labour loses to (LAB 2015 vote):
CON 3
LD 4
UKIP 5
Labour gains from (Other Parties 2015 vote):
CON 1
LD 17
UKIP 5
The average voter profile of both Labour and the LD is still changing after the 2015 GE, look also at the Corbyn doing a good job ratings among voters now and those from 2015:
Voters now:
LAB 56
LD 14
UKIP 9
CON 6
2015 Voters:
LAB 44
LD 26
UKIP 13
CON 7
So about 10% of Labour voters who don't like Corbyn have left mainly for the LD and UKIP, and about 15% of LD who like Corbyn left the LD for Labour, plus a few from UKIP who also liked Corbyn and went to Labour.
As a result Labour becomes becomes more and more Corbyn friendly as it attracts Corbyn supporters from other parties and repels Corbyn haters to other parties mainly the LD and UKIP, Labour becomes more left wing, LD&UKIP more right wing.
My guess is that the Labour vote share wont budge from 2015 levels.
In terms of seats I can predict that Labour will do very poorly in the Tory heartland of the east midlands where Corbyn hate and Cameron love is most extreme there, especially in seats that pensioners are in very large numbers since that is the only common thing among Corbyn's and Cameron's approvals.
I saw an advert earlier today about the Homeowners ISA - for every £200 deposited, you'll get £50 from HMG up to £3k.
It looked a very attractive and simple offer to me.
1955 Labour vote went down from 1951
1966 Tory vote went down from 1964
1974 Feb Labour vote went down from 1970
1974 Oct Tory vote went down from 1974 Feb
1983 Labour vote went down from 1979
except
2001 Tory vote went UP slightly * from 1997
2015 Labour vote went UP slightly more ^ from 2010
Tory vote went up slightly compared to 1997
^ Miliband's Labour actually bucked the trend even better despite the big loss in Scotland. Labour gained vote share in every other region except Scotland where it almost halved !
I'm roughly X% confident it will be between Y% & Z%
X, Y-Z;
99%, 0%-60%
75%, 17.5%-45%
50%, 20%-40%
Basically, I dunno. These are strange times. 2020 may well be an even stranger time.
Can anyone predict the 50% confidence band with any more certainty?
Also (and as UKIP also found to its cost) it's not how many votes you win that matters under FPTP; it's *where* you win them. Labour pushed up its vote strongly in most safe seats, and in quite a lot of unwinnable seats. But it did badly in Con/Lab marginals. And, the rout in Scotland cost 40 seats, nearly 7% of the total, despite the loss of votes amounting to no more than 1.2% of the UK total
One of the consequences of the Tory pledge to reduce the number of seats from 650 to 600 does not have the same consequences for Labour as it did prior to 2015. The distribution of the votes more or less actually achieved that.
If the Boundary Commission acts independently as it is obliged to do, then many new marginal seats will be thrown up and presumably close to half of those may indeed favour Labour.
Given neither party is willing to countenance any major changes to the housing market/property taxation you either target buyers or social renters with resources and Planning Gain. Understandably from his point of view Osborne has chosen the former.
Higher than it was in 2015 unless the party splits and loses a LOT of MPs.
"(c) Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development."
Yes, "finance flows". Basically we're witnessing the beginning of a global welfare system, with nations rather than people getting welfare handouts.
This is a disaster of unfathomable proportions. Naturally everyone in the West just sucks it up. Well, I've had enough. Not sure what I can do about it though... go off-grid, pay no tax, emigrate, who knows.
More than half of all new cases of FGM occurred in London, official figures show
https://t.co/7bl1DAezJ1 https://t.co/0vj3rKZ8wi
[1] given the tenor of this board, I assume everybody will clasp their hand to their forehead and say "oh, if only Cameron had negotiated X I'd've voted STAY, but he didn't, such a pity..." where X = 10% more of Y
and Y = whatever Cameron negotiates.
Tories 38
Labour 31
Was and is my prediction of the 2020 GE under Corbyn since this summer.
Corbyn is a polarizing figure, there will be little change on the voting totals as shown already, but there is a change in the makeup of those totals.
It's the way of it that you can already do some reasonable assumption as to which seats will Labour gain and lose with a stable vote share.
For instance hatred of Corbyn is concentrated among the over 65's in the East Midlands with no special class preference, which are also the only groups that like Cameron too (although C2DE's prefer UKIP), therefore it is easy to assume that Labour will not win an extra seat there but lose a few, but which ones?
Looking at the demographic profile of each seat you easily see N.E Derbyshire and Gedling being sure loses, with Mansfield and Chesterfield on possible loses.
On the other hand David Cameron, according to Comres, is more unpopular with voters under the age of 55 than Corbyn is, something that has been overlooked, regionally that is in the N.W, N.E, Wales and in London where Corbyn has better net figures than Cameron.
So you can expect Labour to do well in terms of seat gains in those areas where pensioners are fewer than average.
Presumably the £65 bn will be recycled back into Western deposit accounts, and the property markets of Western capital cities.
I wouldn't have it any higher than the 24.3% Lab got in Scotland.
4 years is a hell of a long time long time and politics is speeding up. Parties can collapse in real-time.
There is no God-given right for the labour party to exist.
You import third world people, you get third world problems.
But it is not an attractive bet. A tory party that has torn itself apart on the referendum, with less attractive leadership, possibly facing a slow down and a persistent deficit could, just maybe, make Labour look more attractive, especially if Corbyn has gone. Tying money up on those kind of odds for 4 years makes very little sense.
This is not the continental European way.
We are up against a political elite in Europe who are convinced that there is one solution for Europe and not only must they go forward with their programme but that it is in any case inevitable.
Hmm. Quite hard to predict this. I'd guess down.
I am aware that this board has users that are unusually rich: I think at least two have a net worth in the millions. But even given that, I am surprised by the equanimity with which "£300K" was recieved. You'd need a salary of over 70K and be under 40 to get that. Most adults do not fall into that category.
[Edit to repair HTML]
If anything, whatever the outcome, and once things settle down, the Tories will benefit from a UKIP that has lost its core/original raison d'être... and then UKIP will no doubt focus mainly on immigration and that will hurt Labour more in t'North.
I tried to press "fall" but I couldn't get it to work, I assume a ~10% lead at this stage in the electoral cycle will result in a large drop in Labour's vote in 2020
If we are determined to follow this course we will need very strong frontiers.
But it hasn't impacted Labour a bit, 31 in the GE, around 31 still, simply because Corbyn is attracting a lot of LD and a few UKIP's to compensate for those who left to the LD and UKIP.
So net change is zero.
Also this factor that is overlooked, from the comres poll:
Is Corbyn/Cameron doing a good job, net by age:
18-24: +17 / -27
25-34: +16 / -26
35-44: -15 / -22
45-54: -25 / -23
55-64: -38 / -2
65+: -52 / +18
Time to dust up the old maps of pensioner share in constituencies, for that will be the dominant factor in 2020 in seats, since pensioners love Cameron and detest Corbyn, but those under the age of 55 like Corbyn more than Cameron, but it's also geographical:
Scotland: -12 / -26
N.E : -8 / -14
N.W : -14/ -17
Y&H. : -26/ -9
W.Mid. :-20/ -12
E.Mid. : -39/ +4
Wales : -8/ -23
East : -37/ -3
London : -8/ -16
S.E. : -31/ -9
S.W. : -24/-9
So the focus in 2020 will be in Labour seats in the East Midlands (since Labour has got almost no seats left in the East, or the S.E) with lots of pensioners (I named 4 earlier) and Tory seats in the N.W, N.E, Wales and London with few pensioners.
And I agree with OGH that the 'doing a good job' question is a bad one.
I also suspect given your description of the churn - and leaving the boundary changes aside -that results in a net loss of seats with a constant vote as there simply aren't any seats with substantial numbers of left wing 2015 Lib Dems that Labour didn't already hold or gain. Local election results seem to bear this out.
A Labour party led by Corbyn or a hard left successor to him.
A Conservative party led by a Eurosceptic and probably more right wing than Cameron.
A UKIP party that after the referendum has no main purpose (In or out the EC), those votes are more likely going to the Conservatives.
Which leaves the question as to whether we are going to have a significant europhile/centrist/Blairite/Progress/establishment/statist party come together? Will it be a new party or will it be formed from the Lib Dems? As an army it will have the Officers at the start, but will it have many troops and the finance?
"Oh great rcs1000, we are sorry we ever doubted you. We now realise the EU renegotiation thing was not all a prearranged farce."
(It is, instead, a farce of the kind I forecast: where Cameron struggles to get all 27 other EU members to agree anything at all. Because they all have their pet desires, wants and needs.)
I think that this was once undoubtedly true but given the growth of UKIP and the number of sceptics that left I really doubt it is now. If able people such as SeanF came back to the party it might be different but I think that will only happen if UKIP becomes even more embarrassing than it is now.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/elections/regionales-2015/2015/12/13/35002-20151213LIVWWW00001-en-direct-elections-regionales-resultats-du-second-tour.php
If it is a very close result - say 51:49 in favour of staying - then I fear for the Conservative Party.
What is your evidence that the majority of the current membership of the Tory party are Eurosceptic? I would be interested to see it.
I think that this was once undoubtedly true but given the growth of UKIP and the number of sceptics that left I really doubt it is now. If able people such as SeanF came back to the party it might be different but I think that will only happen if UKIP becomes even more embarrassing than it is now.
The surveys from Conhome when they share the membership parts have shown a consistent picture. Anecdotally, my own discussions with members show a move to the Leave camp.
Even if that is the case is it likely to be determinative in a leadership election following an 'In' vote (assuming for the moment that happens). I have no idea about the internal machinations of the Cons but won't they be looking for the most likely election winner?
The Congress Party in India are still around 68 years after Independence.