(Personally, I find it hard to believe it could be that bad for Labour. But then I remember 2015 in Scotland, 1997 for the Tories, 2015 for the Lib Dems and wonder if I'm incredulous because it's genuinely improbable or just outside of my experience.
I don't see any reason to think that it couldn't be as bad as that for Labour. When you consider the political situation, we have:
On the Labour side: (a) The party led by undoubtedly the worst leader any major party has chosen in living memory in the UK, (b) a Labour team (if that's not too positive a word) who mostly compete with their leader on incompetence, (c) an extremely divided party, with the PLP having expressed no confidence in its own leader, (d) absurd contradictions in major policy areas such as Trident and Brexit, (e) a complete lack of any strategic direction, not just now but in reality since 2009.
On the Tory side: (a) A newish leader, still enjoying a honeymoon period, who, for now at least, exudes calm confidence and who seems exactly the right person to lead us through Brexit, (b) a windfall crop of ex-UKIP voters, propelled back to the Tories both by Brexit and by UKIP's implosion, (c) a very decent economic backdrop.
The polling and the politics seem to me to be entirely consistent. What's more, the polling is clear across multiple pollsters and in the supplementary questions, and is supported by anecdotal evidence all over the place.
Does anyone know whether Metro Mayor results will be published on either a local authority or constituency basis, or will it just be for the area as a whole without splits?
Obviously, this would give a particularly strong indication of local strength. Local council results are useful, but it's hard to know if a result is driven by a handful of well known, strong councillors from one party or other in a locality. For the Metro Mayors, the candidates are the same across a broad area, so a relatively strong result in constituency X in the West Mids for Labour (say) and a relatively weak one in constituency Y would say quite a lot about respective prospects.
Presumably election agents etc will get a good idea at verification, but will us ordinary punters know?
They will be collated by local authority, so we should at least get some breakdown.
In addition to a London-wide result the London elections also publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
Has anybody had a read over at LabourList recently?
Given the knives being wielded in some of the comments, red is the correct colour. Maybe they should follow Nelson's advice and do the floors with red paint to hide the stains....
We need a London poll. I'm convinced things are going differently in the capital - I want to see the Lab -> Lib Dem swing there.
There was one in early April and it does indeed show a somewhat different picture developing:
CON 34%(-1), LAB 37%(-7), LDEM 14%(+6), UKIP 9%(+1) (YouGov, comparison with GE2015).
Obviously, that's close to a doubling of the LD position, which is much better than national polls, and no sign of UKIP squeeze from the Tories we've seen elsewhere.
But, as you say, would be useful to have more data, and it's a few weeks old so the fact it's not showing that UKIP dip and Tory spike isn't surprising. It would also be interesting to see things regionally within London - London as a whole was heavily Remain, but a few outer Boroughs (Barking, Hillingdon etc) were very much for Leave.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Does anyone know whether Metro Mayor results will be published on either a local authority or constituency basis, or will it just be for the area as a whole without splits?
Obviously, this would give a particularly strong indication of local strength. Local council results are useful, but it's hard to know if a result is driven by a handful of well known, strong councillors from one party or other in a locality. For the Metro Mayors, the candidates are the same across a broad area, so a relatively strong result in constituency X in the West Mids for Labour (say) and a relatively weak one in constituency Y would say quite a lot about respective prospects.
Presumably election agents etc will get a good idea at verification, but will us ordinary punters know?
They will be collated by local authority, so we should at least get some breakdown.
The London elections publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
This is spin rather than analysis. The tracker poll shows very clearly that people are not united about the Brexit decision, even if they see May as the only adult who can deal with it.
Actually, May is indeed the only person who can deal with Brexit, since she is prime minister. But she has no idea what she is doing, she realises that, despite the spin and the press headlines, she is incredibly weak and out of her depth, so she has gone for a cut and run election before the general public reallise she is selling them down the river.
It is truly hilarious that Sturgeon's gamble has backfired, whilst May's looks to succeed massively.
A politically United Kingdom also strengthens the UK's hand in the EU negotiations.
May won't have to watch her back quite so much, and the EU can't play divide and rule as well.
SNP solid mid-40% support - likely do very well in next week's council elections & get >50 seats GE2017.
Meanwhile SCON have replaced SLAB as the 25-30% second party.
The MSM howls of "peak SNP" echoed by many of those PBers, who probably lost their shirts betting against the SNP in GE2015, is what I find truly hilarious ! - if I had a £100 for every time I seen "peak SNP" being called in the last 10 years I'd be able to retire comfortably !!
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
"The commentator Iain Dale is forecasting a majority of 74 and I would agree with him."
Oh my.
Iain Dale is well known for his money making forecasts.
SNP solid mid-40% support - likely do very well in next week's council elections & get >50 seats GE2017.
Meanwhile SCON have replaced SLAB as the 25-30% second party.
The MSM howls of "peak SNP" echoed by many of those PBers, who probably lost their shirts betting against the SNP in GE2015, is what I find truly hilarious ! - if I had a £100 for every time I seen "peak SNP" being called in the last 10 years I'd be able to retire comfortably !!
(Personally, I find it hard to believe it could be that bad for Labour. But then I remember 2015 in Scotland, 1997 for the Tories, 2015 for the Lib Dems and wonder if I'm incredulous because it's genuinely improbable or just outside of my experience.
I don't see any reason to think that it couldn't be as bad as that for Labour. When you consider the political situation, we have:
On the Labour side: (a) The party led by undoubtedly the worst leader any major party has chosen in living memory in the UK, (b) a Labour team (if that's not too positive a word) who mostly compete with their leader on incompetence, (c) an extremely divided party, with the PLP having expressed no confidence in its own leader, (d) absurd contradictions in major policy areas such as Trident and Brexit, (e) a complete lack of any strategic direction, not just now but in reality since 2009.
On the Tory side: (a) A newish leader, still enjoying a honeymoon period, who, for now at least, exudes calm confidence and who seems exactly the right person to lead us through Brexit, (b) a windfall crop of ex-UKIP voters, propelled back to the Tories both by Brexit and by UKIP's implosion, (c) a very decent economic backdrop.
The polling and the politics seem to me to be entirely consistent. What's more, the polling is clear across multiple pollsters and in the supplementary questions, and is supported by anecdotal evidence all over the place.
Maybe. But if you use the rule of thumb that the best figure in the polls for the Tories is usually correct and the worst figure in the polls for Labour is usually correct (and take an average for the Lib Dems) you get - after this adjustment and using Con 50, Lab 24, LD 11 (SNP 43 in Scotland): Con - 498 (17 in Scotland) Lab - 79 LD - 14 SNP - 39
I find it very hard to encompass Labour net losses of 150 seats. Again - it's quite possibly because it's so far out of my experience. And a Tory majority of 346 seems truly incredible.
Replying to Big_G last thread - yes, I've offered to be considered. We'll know later this week.
On topic: most constituencies have substantial numbers of people who voted either way in the referendum and who consider it an important enough issue to influence their votes. But lots of people don't, really. They're planning to vote according to habit, the economy, immigration, May/Corbyn, the NHS, etc. On the whole, my impression is that it's middle-class Remain voters who are keenest to quiz candidates on their willingness to see a path to calling Brexit off, while Leave voters are tending more to feel job done, now what about issue X?
I live in a WWC Leave area and have canvassed here as well as in both Remain and Leave parts of Broxtowe. Very few WWC voters mention Brexit at all.
Does anyone know whether Metro Mayor results will be published on either a local authority or constituency basis, or will it just be for the area as a whole without splits?
Obviously, this would give a particularly strong indication of local strength. Local council results are useful, but it's hard to know if a result is driven by a handful of well known, strong councillors from one party or other in a locality. For the Metro Mayors, the candidates are the same across a broad area, so a relatively strong result in constituency X in the West Mids for Labour (say) and a relatively weak one in constituency Y would say quite a lot about respective prospects.
Presumably election agents etc will get a good idea at verification, but will us ordinary punters know?
They will be collated by local authority, so we should at least get some breakdown.
The London elections publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
Interesting, thanks.
At first they will probably only publish a metro-wide result, no idea how long it will take to get the breakdown.
Does anyone know whether Metro Mayor results will be published on either a local authority or constituency basis, or will it just be for the area as a whole without splits?
Obviously, this would give a particularly strong indication of local strength. Local council results are useful, but it's hard to know if a result is driven by a handful of well known, strong councillors from one party or other in a locality. For the Metro Mayors, the candidates are the same across a broad area, so a relatively strong result in constituency X in the West Mids for Labour (say) and a relatively weak one in constituency Y would say quite a lot about respective prospects.
Presumably election agents etc will get a good idea at verification, but will us ordinary punters know?
They will be collated by local authority, so we should at least get some breakdown.
In addition to a London-wide result the London elections also publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
On topic:- I agree with Alistair, reluctantly, and think Lab are on course to do even worse than UNS, and lose up to 100 seats to the Tories.
HOWEVER, the corollary to this is that Labour really might have a chance of gaining a few Remainy, metropolitan seats from the Tories (even while losing bucketloads of Leave seats to them). Look to Cardiff North, Bristol North West, Brighton Kemptown, possibly even Battersea, where the EU split was very heavily Remain and are getting more Labourish demographics all the time. There's no way to square the (probably accurate) ICM numbers showing Labour falling by MUCH more than average in their own seats, unless they're also gaining a bit in SOME (though probably not many) Tory-held seats.
Labour are only lukewarm Remain if at all, I can't see them gaining much from the 48%.
Again, though, there's no way to square polling numbers that show Labour "only" down a few points from 2015 overall, yet also show Labour dropping like a rock in Leave Labour seats, unless they're also gaining somewhere to make the overall numbers add up.
It's also worth saying that, when we're talking about some of these big-city seats, there don't actually need to be many switchers to Labour in order for Labour to gain the seats; demographic change could do the work. In Cardiff North, for example, since 2015, quite a few elderly Tory voters will have left the seat and gone to retire somewhere quieter (say, Vale of Glamorgan?), while younger Labour voters will have moved into the seat.
I think the Tories held with an increased majority last time and after the Welsh poll yesterday it's hard to see them not increasing again. Battersea also bucked the London trend last time and i'd expect an increased majority. Possible Labour gain in Croydon central but I wouldn't bet on it.
I think Croydon Central is a less likely gain because it was pretty much 50/50 in the referendum (possibly even marginally Leave), and it's demographics are a bit more typically "south-eastern" rather than typically "London". I'd expect a further swing to the Tories there.
Battersea on the other hand was 75/25 Remain, and has one of the highest young population of any constituency in the country. Probably still a Tory hold, but maybe a swing away from them against the tide.
The sort of 'youngsters who can afford Battersea aren't gonna vote for Corbyn. I lived there for many years.
It would also be interesting to see things regionally within London - London as a whole was heavily Remain, but a few outer Boroughs (Barking, Hillingdon etc) were very much for Leave.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Does anyone know whether Metro Mayor results will be published on either a local authority or constituency basis, or will it just be for the area as a whole without splits?
Obviously, this would give a particularly strong indication of local strength. Local council results are useful, but it's hard to know if a result is driven by a handful of well known, strong councillors from one party or other in a locality. For the Metro Mayors, the candidates are the same across a broad area, so a relatively strong result in constituency X in the West Mids for Labour (say) and a relatively weak one in constituency Y would say quite a lot about respective prospects.
Presumably election agents etc will get a good idea at verification, but will us ordinary punters know?
They will be collated by local authority, so we should at least get some breakdown.
In addition to a London-wide result the London elections also publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
That's done electronically though, isn't it?
Yes, although that doesn't preclude eventually getting a breakdown by ward if not done electronically. I have no idea if we will get that info, just that the metro-mayor elections have tried to copy the London model as much as possible.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Maybe. But if you use the rule of thumb that the best figure in the polls for the Tories is usually correct and the worst figure in the polls for Labour is usually correct (and take an average for the Lib Dems) you get - after this adjustment and using Con 50, Lab 24, LD 11 (SNP 43 in Scotland): Con - 498 (17 in Scotland) Lab - 79 LD - 14 SNP - 39
I find it very hard to encompass Labour net losses of 150 seats. Again - it's quite possibly because it's so far out of my experience. And a Tory majority of 346 seems truly incredible.
Well, yes, at some point Labour will be scraped down to bedrock and the Tories will hit their ceiling. I agree that those figures are implausible. But a majority of 150 or even more, and Labour losing well over 100 seats (which is well ahead of what the betting markets currently indicate) doesn't seem outlandish.
We are all getting over excited. In 5 weeks time it will look different. The Conservatives are at the peak in the polls, they can only fall back
I think that is true, but it is not a certainty - Corbyn is worse even than has been shown early on, and while my thinking is around a stubborn core of labour voters being so loyal as to look past that, along with a core of anti-Tories, they could maintain this lead for some time even if I am right about that, and of course we know it is possible for there to be a tipping point. That, as AM points out, they have been stable or been slightly up in some polls, is why so far I still beleive Labour will hold up better than thought. But it is along way to go.
Labour has actually been pretty stable with some pollsters for quite a while. The latest ICM has them on 27% , which is the same as late July last year - ie 9 months ago.Even with Yougov they have not really slipped for almost 5 months. The bigger Tory lead is due to the collapse of UKIP - rather than Labour.
The most important opinion poll is the one on 4th May. OK, not everywhere is voting but there is no margin of error in an election. If Labour get trounced in the locals it merely confirms the narrative that they will do badly in GE2017.
If Labour does badly in real elections, losing seats across Wales and England (never mind Scotland - only 1 MP to defend there), then it'll set off a whole new bout of panic, infighting and multiple contradictory policies and strategies. It'll also affect morale in those areas for the next 5 weeks.
Obviously, the morale issue works both ways, if Labour does much better than expected.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
The fucking cheeky twat.
He's lifted my piece from Sunday.
If it’s any consolation, it was no better on reading the second time..!
We are all getting over excited. In 5 weeks time it will look different. The Conservatives are at the peak in the polls, they can only fall back
I think that is true, but it is not a certainty - Corbyn is worse even than has been shown early on, and while my thinking is around a stubborn core of labour voters being so loyal as to look past that, along with a core of anti-Tories, they could maintain this lead for some time even if I am right about that, and of course we know it is possible for there to be a tipping point. That, as AM points out, they have been stable or been slightly up in some polls, is why so far I still beleive Labour will hold up better than thought. But it is along way to go.
Labour has actually been pretty stable with some pollsters for quite a while. The latest ICM has them on 27% , which is the same as late July last year - ie 9 months ago.Even with Yougov they have not really slipped for almost 5 months. The bigger Tory lead is due to the collapse of UKIP - rather than Labour.
The most important opinion poll is the one on 4th May. OK, not everywhere is voting but there is no margin of error in an election. If Labour get trounced in the locals it merely confirms the narrative that they will do badly in GE2017.
If Labour does badly in real elections, losing seats across Wales and England (never mind Scotland - only 1 MP to defend there), then it'll set off a whole new bout of panic, infighting and multiple contradictory policies and strategies. It'll also affect morale in those areas for the next 5 weeks.
Obviously, the morale issue works both ways, if Labour does much better than expected.
Indeed. I think the locals will strongly impact the narrative for GE2017. That is when we will know if a true meltdown is on the way. The locals seem to have been forgotten in all the excitement of a GE.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Some of it is trite (some Lab voters are really tribal, votes aren't always helpfully distributed under FPTP) some meh (local factors more important now because facebook etc). I'd be interested if anyone could confirm or deny that "CCHQ is scrambling to be ready for the election. There is no money. Nobody is in charge" (though even if it's true I can't believe it isn't even more true of Labour).
The big question though is whether he is right that there is no fear factor driving the tory vote because everyone knows Corbyn will lose (whereas last time a Mili/SNP coalition was a real threat). Might be true; the counter-possibility is that fear equals likelihood of bad result multiplied by degree of badness if it happens, and that Corbyn is so much more awful than Miliband that the unlikelihood of his succeeding is cancelled out.
SNP solid mid-40% support - likely do very well in next week's council elections & get >50 seats GE2017.
Meanwhile SCON have replaced SLAB as the 25-30% second party.
The MSM howls of "peak SNP" echoed by many of those PBers, who probably lost their shirts betting against the SNP in GE2015, is what I find truly hilarious ! - if I had a £100 for every time I seen "peak SNP" being called in the last 10 years I'd be able to retire comfortably !!
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
However Ashcroft Scottish Constituency polling put up under easily guessable URLs is deffo fair game. Innocent face.
I was aware of that polling 9am the day before publication.
I was too stunned to bet (though I had followed Alastair's tips from the summer of 2014) but betting more would have felt greedy.
Do you think it wrong to commission a private poll and bet on the results?
No. I'll let you into a little secret, a financial institution spent a six figure on an exit poll for Brexit.
Said exit poll said easy Remain, lots of people gambled heavily on Remain based on that poll.
They lost six figure sums.
So why would you say betting on an embargoed poll is wrong? Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
Looking at Yougov's numbers, the Conservatives will do well in Middle class seats. But, they'll do even better in working class seats, especially working class seats where few people have high educational attainment.
I'd therefore suggest that you bet on places like Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Hartlepool falling, before places like Exeter and Leeds NE do.
It would also be interesting to see things regionally within London - London as a whole was heavily Remain, but a few outer Boroughs (Barking, Hillingdon etc) were very much for Leave.
Hillingdon includes Hayes and Harlington.
Yes, but McDonnell is, er, hardly the most passionate Remainer, and there isn't a huge UKIP vote there. There are also much better Tory targets nearby so, regrettably, he'll be fine.
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
However Ashcroft Scottish Constituency polling put up under easily guessable URLs is deffo fair game. Innocent face.
I was aware of that polling 9am the day before publication.
I was too stunned to bet (though I had followed Alastair's tips from the summer of 2014) but betting more would have felt greedy.
Do you think it wrong to commission a private poll and bet on the results?
No. I'll let you into a little secret, a financial institution spent a six figure on an exit poll for Brexit.
Said exit poll said easy Remain, lots of people gambled heavily on Remain based on that poll.
They lost six figure sums.
So why would you say betting on an embargoed poll is wrong? Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
Being given a poll under embargo is being given a bond of trust to not use or publish the info. To use the info before the embargo time is to abuse the trust. It would be a moral failing
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
I am not aware that there is anything which prevents people who have attended the verification of postal votes from taking a trip to the bookie though!
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Some of it is trite (some Lab voters are really tribal, votes aren't always helpfully distributed under FPTP) some meh (local factors more important now because facebook etc). I'd be interested if anyone could confirm or deny that "CCHQ is scrambling to be ready for the election. There is no money. Nobody is in charge" (though even if it's true I can't believe it isn't even more true of Labour).
The big question though is whether he is right that there is no fear factor driving the tory vote because everyone knows Corbyn will lose (whereas last time a Mili/SNP coalition was a real threat). Might be true; the counter-possibility is that fear equals likelihood of bad result multiplied by degree of badness if it happens, and that Corbyn is so much more awful than Miliband that the unlikelihood of his succeeding is cancelled out.
I agree with almost all of that. On the fear point, I think the counter to the 'lazy Tory voter' will be balanced the 'embarrassed/depressed Labour voter' who can't bring him/herself to put an 'X' next to Corbyn's party. I have no idea of the how much of a balance it will be.
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
However Ashcroft Scottish Constituency polling put up under easily guessable URLs is deffo fair game. Innocent face.
I was aware of that polling 9am the day before publication.
I was too stunned to bet (though I had followed Alastair's tips from the summer of 2014) but betting more would have felt greedy.
Do you think it wrong to commission a private poll and bet on the results?
No. I'll let you into a little secret, a financial institution spent a six figure on an exit poll for Brexit.
Said exit poll said easy Remain, lots of people gambled heavily on Remain based on that poll.
They lost six figure sums.
So why would you say betting on an embargoed poll is wrong? Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
The nature of an embargo is that the person providing the information does so on the promise you won't use it until a particular time. Using it (whether by publishing or betting on the back of it) is a breach of that promise. That's the principle behind it, not that it's inherently unfair to use information unless everyone in the world actually has it.
Doing/commissioning your own poll is something anyone is allowed to do. If you do it and get an advantage on me because I haven't bothered, that's fair enough.
Midpoint for SNP seats is 48.5 on SPIN if you want a fair fulcrum. 50 is obviously too high as the borders are lost + Orkney so you're into a game with a maximum of 2 and plenty of potential downside.
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
However Ashcroft Scottish Constituency polling put up under easily guessable URLs is deffo fair game. Innocent face.
I was aware of that polling 9am the day before publication.
I was too stunned to bet (though I had followed Alastair's tips from the summer of 2014) but betting more would have felt greedy.
Do you think it wrong to commission a private poll and bet on the results?
No. I'll let you into a little secret, a financial institution spent a six figure on an exit poll for Brexit.
Said exit poll said easy Remain, lots of people gambled heavily on Remain based on that poll.
They lost six figure sums.
So why would you say betting on an embargoed poll is wrong? Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
That's like paying for geological research and then buying the stock of the mining company which has just bought the land. Whereas using an embargoed poll is the journalistic equivalent of insider trading.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Some of it is trite (some Lab voters are really tribal, votes aren't always helpfully distributed under FPTP) some meh (local factors more important now because facebook etc). I'd be interested if anyone could confirm or deny that "CCHQ is scrambling to be ready for the election. There is no money. Nobody is in charge" (though even if it's true I can't believe it isn't even more true of Labour).
Scrambling to be ready? Yes, but then so is everyone. This really was a snap election rather than a well-kept but widely-shared secret
No money? Don't know, but I'd be amazed if it can't be found even if it is true.
Nobody in charge? Nonsense. From what I've seen (which as an Association chairman is quite a lot), CCHQ and the regional offices seem very much on the ball and that only happens if there's clear lines of authority and decisions are being made as they should.
On topic:- I agree with Alistair, reluctantly, and think Lab are on course to do even worse than UNS, and lose up to 100 seats to the Tories.
HOWEVER, the corollary to this is that Labour really might have a chance of gaining a few Remainy, metropolitan seats from the Tories (even while losing bucketloads of Leave seats to them). Look to Cardiff North, Bristol North West, Brighton Kemptown, possibly even Battersea, where the EU split was very heavily Remain and are getting more Labourish demographics all the time. There's no way to square the (probably accurate) ICM numbers showing Labour falling by MUCH more than average in their own seats, unless they're also gaining a bit in SOME (though probably not many) Tory-held seats.
Labour are only lukewarm Remain if at all, I can't see them gaining much from the 48%.
Again, though, there's no way to square polling numbers that show Labour "only" down a few points from 2015 overall, yet also show Labour dropping like a rock in Leave Labour seats, unless they're also gaining somewhere to make the overall numbers add up.
It's also worth saying that, when we're talking about some of these big-city seats, there don't actually need to be many switchers to Labour in order for Labour to gain the seats; demographic change could do the work. In Cardiff North, for example, since 2015, quite a few elderly Tory voters will have left the seat and gone to retire somewhere quieter (say, Vale of Glamorgan?), while younger Labour voters will have moved into the seat.
I think the Tories held with an increased majority last time and after the Welsh poll yesterday it's hard to see them not increasing again. Battersea also bucked the London trend last time and i'd expect an increased majority. Possible Labour gain in Croydon central but I wouldn't bet on it.
I think Croydon Central is a less likely gain because it was pretty much 50/50 in the referendum (possibly even marginally Leave), and it's demographics are a bit more typically "south-eastern" rather than typically "London". I'd expect a further swing to the Tories there.
Battersea on the other hand was 75/25 Remain, and has one of the highest young population of any constituency in the country. Probably still a Tory hold, but maybe a swing away from them against the tide.
Tax and school fees will be quite significant issues in middle-class Battersea.
That's not the same bet at all! The most Calum could possibly win is £90 whereas you could, in theory, win £500 (although obviously the likelihood starts to tail off getting into the big money).
Midpoint for SNP seats is 48.5 on SPIN if you want a fair fulcrum. 50 is obviously too high as the borders are lost + Orkney so you're into a game with a maximum of 2 and plenty of potential downside.
I wasn't the one bragging about SNP performance...
That's not the same bet at all! The most Calum could possibly win is £90 whereas you could, in theory, win £500 (although obviously the likelihood starts to tail off getting into the big money).
Put a symetrical ceiling of max £90 (or equivalent in Ayrshire* turnips).
*Ayr used to be a pretty safe Tory seat. Has its demographics changed much? is it worth a few quid on the blues?
(Personally, I find it hard to believe it could be that bad for Labour. But then I remember 2015 in Scotland, 1997 for the Tories, 2015 for the Lib Dems and wonder if I'm incredulous because it's genuinely improbable or just outside of my experience.
I don't see any reason to think that it couldn't be as bad as that for Labour. When you consider the political situation, we have:
On the Labour side: (a) The party led by undoubtedly the worst leader any major party has chosen in living memory in the UK, (b) a Labour team (if that's not too positive a word) who mostly compete with their leader on incompetence, (c) an extremely divided party, with the PLP having expressed no confidence in its own leader, (d) absurd contradictions in major policy areas such as Trident and Brexit, (e) a complete lack of any strategic direction, not just now but in reality since 2009.
On the Tory side: (a) A newish leader, still enjoying a honeymoon period, who, for now at least, exudes calm confidence and who seems exactly the right person to lead us through Brexit, (b) a windfall crop of ex-UKIP voters, propelled back to the Tories both by Brexit and by UKIP's implosion, (c) a very decent economic backdrop.
The polling and the politics seem to me to be entirely consistent. What's more, the polling is clear across multiple pollsters and in the supplementary questions, and is supported by anecdotal evidence all over the place.
Maybe. But if you use the rule of thumb that the best figure in the polls for the Tories is usually correct and the worst figure in the polls for Labour is usually correct (and take an average for the Lib Dems) you get - after this adjustment and using Con 50, Lab 24, LD 11 (SNP 43 in Scotland): Con - 498 (17 in Scotland) Lab - 79 LD - 14 SNP - 39
I find it very hard to encompass Labour net losses of 150 seats. Again - it's quite possibly because it's so far out of my experience. And a Tory majority of 346 seems truly incredible.
But the polls underestimated Labour in 2010 - 1983 - and February 1974. Moreover , whenever the polls have pointed to a party having a massive lead , it has never fully materialised at the ballot box. That was true of 2001 - 1997 - 1983 - and 1966. Some might wish to add October 1974 to the list.
O/T Is there a site where you can look for Tory campaign events near where you live? The Labour site is quite good for this. Put in your postcode and it finds loads of events. The Conservative site just seems to direct you towards jointing or what have you.
That's not the same bet at all! The most Calum could possibly win is £90 whereas you could, in theory, win £500 (although obviously the likelihood starts to tail off getting into the big money).
I know it's not the same bet, but it's based on the original premise "likely do very well in next week's council elections & get >50 seats GE2017."
I am trying to gauge Calum's level of confidence in his predictions
Looking at Yougov's numbers, the Conservatives will do well in Middle class seats. But, they'll do even better in working class seats, especially working class seats where few people have high educational attainment.
I'd therefore suggest that you bet on places like Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Hartlepool falling, before places like Exeter and Leeds NE do.
Leeds NE was Keith Joseph's seat. It is not very working class at all.
That's not the same bet at all! The most Calum could possibly win is £90 whereas you could, in theory, win £500 (although obviously the likelihood starts to tail off getting into the big money).
I know it's not the same bet, but it's based on the original premise "likely do very well in next week's council elections & get >50 seats GE2017."
I am trying to gauge Calum's level of confidence in his predictions
Foxinsox's suggestion is a good'un. Cap winnings at £90 either way. That's also broadly in line with the spreads if they are at 48.5 (haven't checked) as of course the downside risk and low maximum win will nudge it down.
In the City it's called "front running" and is frowned upon (as well as being illegal)
I consider part of my rewards of editing PB, I do of all of this pro bono.
I'd never bet on embargoed polling.
However Ashcroft Scottish Constituency polling put up under easily guessable URLs is deffo fair game. Innocent face.
I was aware of that polling 9am the day before publication.
I was too stunned to bet (though I had followed Alastair's tips from the summer of 2014) but betting more would have felt greedy.
Do you think it wrong to commission a private poll and bet on the results?
No. I'll let you into a little secret, a financial institution spent a six figure on an exit poll for Brexit.
Said exit poll said easy Remain, lots of people gambled heavily on Remain based on that poll.
They lost six figure sums.
So why would you say betting on an embargoed poll is wrong? Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
If you get it by virtue of your position (esteemed editor of PB) it's different to paying for it yourself
(Personally, I find it hard to believe it could be that bad for Labour. But then I remember 2015 in Scotland, 1997 for the Tories, 2015 for the Lib Dems and wonder if I'm incredulous because it's genuinely improbable or just outside of my experience.
I don't see any reason to think that it couldn't be as bad as that for Labour. When you consider the political situation, we have:
On the Labour side: (a) The party led by undoubtedly the worst leader any major party has chosen in living memory in the UK, (b) a Labour team (if that's not too positive a word) who mostly compete with their leader on incompetence, (c) an extremely divided party, with the PLP having expressed no confidence in its own leader, (d) absurd contradictions in major policy areas such as Trident and Brexit, (e) a complete lack of any strategic direction, not just now but in reality since 2009.
On the Tory side: (a) A newish leader, still enjoying a honeymoon period, who, for now at least, exudes calm confidence and who seems exactly the right person to lead us through Brexit, (b) a windfall crop of ex-UKIP voters, propelled back to the Tories both by Brexit and by UKIP's implosion, (c) a very decent economic backdrop.
The polling and the politics seem to me to be entirely consistent. What's more, the polling is clear across multiple pollsters and in the supplementary questions, and is supported by anecdotal evidence all over the place.
Maybe. But if you use the rule of thumb that the best figure in the polls for the Tories is usually correct and the worst figure in the polls for Labour is usually correct (and take an average for the Lib Dems) you get - after this adjustment and using Con 50, Lab 24, LD 11 (SNP 43 in Scotland): Con - 498 (17 in Scotland) Lab - 79 LD - 14 SNP - 39
I find it very hard to encompass Labour net losses of 150 seats. Again - it's quite possibly because it's so far out of my experience. And a Tory majority of 346 seems truly incredible.
But the polls underestimated Labour in 2010 - 1983 - and February 1974. Moreover , whenever the polls have pointed to a party having a massive lead , it has never fully materialised at the ballot box. That was true of 2001 - 1997 - 1983 - and 1966. Some might wish to add October 1974 to the list.
Against that, there is more than a whiff of 2015 SLAB about the current campaign.
I think all parties are running improvised campaigns at present, but that must favour the government. I am sure that we will get some odd commitments as a result.
The Tories will truly own Brexit by the end of June. No denying the £350 million per week promise this time round.
Looking at Yougov's numbers, the Conservatives will do well in Middle class seats. But, they'll do even better in working class seats, especially working class seats where few people have high educational attainment.
I'd therefore suggest that you bet on places like Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Hartlepool falling, before places like Exeter and Leeds NE do.
Leeds NE was Keith Joseph's seat. It is not very working class at all.
I think that's exactly Sean_F's point. He thinks you should bet on more working class seats like Bassetlaw before less working class ones like Leeds NE.
It would also be interesting to see things regionally within London - London as a whole was heavily Remain, but a few outer Boroughs (Barking, Hillingdon etc) were very much for Leave.
Hillingdon includes Hayes and Harlington.
Yes, but McDonnell is, er, hardly the most passionate Remainer, and there isn't a huge UKIP vote there. There are also much better Tory targets nearby so, regrettably, he'll be fine.
Tories held the seat in 1992. He lost to Terry Dicks by 52 votes - almost certainly courtesy of Kinnock's 'we're all right!'.
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
That's not the same bet at all! The most Calum could possibly win is £90 whereas you could, in theory, win £500 (although obviously the likelihood starts to tail off getting into the big money).
Put a symetrical ceiling of max £90 (or equivalent in Ayrshire* turnips).
*Ayr used to be a pretty safe Tory seat. Has its demographics changed much? is it worth a few quid on the blues?
I've been looking at Unionist West of Scotland seats for a Con bet as intuition says there should be something there given there is a Con council but I can't quite make any of them work.
Maybe you should put together some sort of graph or bar chart showing your success in the past, and then promise to only bet with previously acquired winnings?
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
How does he get 5 Non Norn-Irish Others? Speaker + 3 Greens + 1 UKIP?
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
How does he get 5 Non Norn-Irish Others? Speaker + 3 Greens + 1 UKIP?
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
How does he get 5 Non Norn-Irish Others? Speaker + 3 Greens + 1 UKIP?
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
Interesting Peter. Thanks for posting.
Dr Fisher was one of the few psephologists to predict the small Con majority in 2015 wasn't he?
The best news for Labour would be for Corbyn to suffer a massive heart attack sufficient to incapacitate him and force him to withdraw.
Charming...
No doubt the Corbynites would claim that was plotted by MI5 and continue their delusion.
But somebody would immediately have to replace him if he suffered such an attack.I am not actually wishing it - but such a scenario is pretty much an unspoken statement of fact!
I don't know if Theresa May is having any media training but she needs to relax and speak a little slower. Perhaps she will improve as the campaign progresses, after all, it's still early days.
The best news for Labour would be for Corbyn to suffer a massive heart attack sufficient to incapacitate him and force him to withdraw.
There is no scenario that is 'best news' for Labour. Corbyn steps down, McDonnell takes over. They would lose even more seats in the ensuing chaos.
Labour's only hope is that Corbyn resigns before the McDonnell amendment is passed - but he won't, and it will, therefore consigning Labour to oblivion. It's as stark as that.
The best news for Labour would be for Corbyn to suffer a massive heart attack sufficient to incapacitate him and force him to withdraw.
There is no scenario that is 'best news' for Labour. Corbyn steps down, McDonnell takes over. They would lose even more seats in the ensuing chaos.
Labour's only hope is that Corbyn resigns before the McDonnell amendment is passed - but he won't, and it will, therefore consigning Labour to oblivion. It's as stark as that.
There is no way that Macdonnell would take over. It would be either Tom Watson - or more likely Cooper or Starmer.
My favourite psephologist, Prof. Stephen Fisher of Oxford University, has commenced his coverage of the 8 June General Election and his opening forecast is based on the eight most recent polls up to and including 24 April. I'm not sure how often he intends to issue his forecasts, they was weekly in 2015, but his opening shot is as follows:
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
How does he get 5 Non Norn-Irish Others? Speaker + 3 Greens + 1 UKIP?
Comments
On the Labour side: (a) The party led by undoubtedly the worst leader any major party has chosen in living memory in the UK, (b) a Labour team (if that's not too positive a word) who mostly compete with their leader on incompetence, (c) an extremely divided party, with the PLP having expressed no confidence in its own leader, (d) absurd contradictions in major policy areas such as Trident and Brexit, (e) a complete lack of any strategic direction, not just now but in reality since 2009.
On the Tory side: (a) A newish leader, still enjoying a honeymoon period, who, for now at least, exudes calm confidence and who seems exactly the right person to lead us through Brexit, (b) a windfall crop of ex-UKIP voters, propelled back to the Tories both by Brexit and by UKIP's implosion, (c) a very decent economic backdrop.
The polling and the politics seem to me to be entirely consistent. What's more, the polling is clear across multiple pollsters and in the supplementary questions, and is supported by anecdotal evidence all over the place.
In addition to a London-wide result the London elections also publish a breakdown by borough and ward so hopefully we might get even more detailed info.
Given the knives being wielded in some of the comments, red is the correct colour. Maybe they should follow Nelson's advice and do the floors with red paint to hide the stains....
CON 34%(-1), LAB 37%(-7), LDEM 14%(+6), UKIP 9%(+1) (YouGov, comparison with GE2015).
Obviously, that's close to a doubling of the LD position, which is much better than national polls, and no sign of UKIP squeeze from the Tories we've seen elsewhere.
But, as you say, would be useful to have more data, and it's a few weeks old so the fact it's not showing that UKIP dip and Tory spike isn't surprising. It would also be interesting to see things regionally within London - London as a whole was heavily Remain, but a few outer Boroughs (Barking, Hillingdon etc) were very much for Leave.
[I think it's fairly poor as a thought-piece, TBH, but it does offer a different perspective. Also amused that Sion Simon has had a sex change and is not Sian Simon.]
Meanwhile SCON have replaced SLAB as the 25-30% second party.
The MSM howls of "peak SNP" echoed by many of those PBers, who probably lost their shirts betting against the SNP in GE2015, is what I find truly hilarious ! - if I had a £100 for every time I seen "peak SNP" being called in the last 10 years I'd be able to retire comfortably !!
Oh my.
Iain Dale is well known for his money making forecasts.
Con - 498 (17 in Scotland)
Lab - 79
LD - 14
SNP - 39
I find it very hard to encompass Labour net losses of 150 seats. Again - it's quite possibly because it's so far out of my experience. And a Tory majority of 346 seems truly incredible.
On topic: most constituencies have substantial numbers of people who voted either way in the referendum and who consider it an important enough issue to influence their votes. But lots of people don't, really. They're planning to vote according to habit, the economy, immigration, May/Corbyn, the NHS, etc. On the whole, my impression is that it's middle-class Remain voters who are keenest to quiz candidates on their willingness to see a path to calling Brexit off, while Leave voters are tending more to feel job done, now what about issue X?
I live in a WWC Leave area and have canvassed here as well as in both Remain and Leave parts of Broxtowe. Very few WWC voters mention Brexit at all.
He's lifted my piece from Sunday.
Obviously, the morale issue works both ways, if Labour does much better than expected.
The big question though is whether he is right that there is no fear factor driving the tory vote because everyone knows Corbyn will lose (whereas last time a Mili/SNP coalition was a real threat). Might be true; the counter-possibility is that fear equals likelihood of bad result multiplied by degree of badness if it happens, and that Corbyn is so much more awful than Miliband that the unlikelihood of his succeeding is cancelled out.
Isn't it the same principle? Betting on information you have that isn't publicly available...
Looking at Yougov's numbers, the Conservatives will do well in Middle class seats. But, they'll do even better in working class seats, especially working class seats where few people have high educational attainment.
I'd therefore suggest that you bet on places like Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Hartlepool falling, before places like Exeter and Leeds NE do.
It feels like insider trading.
How about £10 a seat?
50 seats exactly no bet.
The power of PB
Doing/commissioning your own poll is something anyone is allowed to do. If you do it and get an advantage on me because I haven't bothered, that's fair enough.
Of course this isn't a regulated product so he's not about to get locked up, but it's little unseemly
Not remotely the same thing.
No money? Don't know, but I'd be amazed if it can't be found even if it is true.
Nobody in charge? Nonsense. From what I've seen (which as an Association chairman is quite a lot), CCHQ and the regional offices seem very much on the ball and that only happens if there's clear lines of authority and decisions are being made as they should.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39704840
*Ayr used to be a pretty safe Tory seat. Has its demographics changed much? is it worth a few quid on the blues?
Is there a site where you can look for Tory campaign events near where you live?
The Labour site is quite good for this.
Put in your postcode and it finds loads of events.
The Conservative site just seems to direct you towards jointing or what have you.
I am trying to gauge Calum's level of confidence in his predictions
I'll stick with the boring old £50 single bet on SNP > 50 seats if that's ok.
I will email PtP
Thanks
I think all parties are running improvised campaigns at present, but that must favour the government. I am sure that we will get some odd commitments as a result.
The Tories will truly own Brexit by the end of June. No denying the £350 million per week promise this time round.
Mr. Calum, sounds harsh. My sympathies.
Conservative .......... 390
Labour ................... 181
LibDems ................... 9
SNP ......................... 47
Others (incl N.I.) ...... 23
Total ...................... 650
Con. Majority ......... 130
Maybe you should put together some sort of graph or bar chart showing your success in the past, and then promise to only bet with previously acquired winnings?
No doubt the Corbynites would claim that was plotted by MI5 and continue their delusion.
We want to lead the world in preventing tourism... "
https://twitter.com/ReclaimTheNews/status/856866750314536960
Dr Fisher was one of the few psephologists to predict the small Con majority in 2015 wasn't he?
13 or 14 would be my estimate. I'm on 0-19 at something like 11-2 I think, and have laid 60+ seats.
Labour's only hope is that Corbyn resigns before the McDonnell amendment is passed - but he won't, and it will, therefore consigning Labour to oblivion. It's as stark as that.
Moreover the amendment will not be passed.
Just waiting for something juicy in the 20-29 range to appear.