British adults are more likely to oppose than support the proposal to scrap the Conservative Party’s commitment to reduce net migration to the UK to below 100,000 (49% oppose v 32% support, with 19% saying don’t know).
Is the Tory manifesto actually going to include any concrete proposals on reducing EU migration, once we've left the EU?
Apologies if it's already been discussed earlier, but does anyone know how many UKIP and Green candidates will be standing at the general election? Also how many LDs aren't standing?
Don't know about the others but I understand LD are standing in 630, which I think is everywhere except, NI, the speaker, and the green Carolina Lucas.
The most significant other finding is probably the relatively modest 45-35 Tory lead in "I have found myself leaning more to this side" question. That's potentially a leading indicator, though we've yet to see the Tories say anything significant.
British adults are more likely to oppose than support the proposal to scrap the Conservative Party’s commitment to reduce net migration to the UK to below 100,000 (49% oppose v 32% support, with 19% saying don’t know).
Is the Tory manifesto actually going to include any concrete proposals on reducing EU migration, once we've left the EU?
As part of the below 100,000 target yes
Yes, but are they going to say how exactly the target will be met, once they have all the powers to do so?
Come to that, is 100,000 going to remain a "target", or will it be an actual limit.
Voters love all of Labour's spending commitments - HOWEVER...
- No sign that the pollster also asked the public which of their taxes they would like putting up to pay for it all (this, admittedly, would be hard to tie in with Labour's manifesto itself, given that a few spending commitments are tied into hypothecated taxes, but most of them are unfunded.) - Labour ahead on health and education, but Tories ahead on economic competence, crime and defence. - Over half of respondents said Corbyn would be a disaster as PM.
And, right at the very end...
"Asked which party is running the best election campaign 42% said the Tories, 20% Labour, 5% Lib Dems and 2% UKIP."
People love free everything, but only if they feel that it really *IS* free, i.e. that it's not going to return to haunt them in the form of horrid tax rises. The Scottish Government can offer free student tuition, prescriptions and elderly care and get away with it, because it's paid for by a whacking great subsidy. Labour will try to pretend that it can raise everything it needs through a combination of massive, entirely consequence-free, borrowing and taxing the rich until the pips squeak, but a critical mass of the electorate won't believe that. Borrowing does not come without consequences, and there aren't enough wealthy individuals available to finance the 373 squillion quids' worth of new spending that Labour would like.
Some voters will always be seduced, whether through political inclination or wishful thinking, into buying enthusiastically into the magic money tree. But many more others know that if it were really that easy then one or the other of the big parties would already have done it, and reaped immense political rewards as a result.
Labour's plans are a fantasy, designed to try to shore up the core vote. This, in fact, is probably a good strategy for a party that has given up on winning in the country and is concentrating on defending its citadels, but it won't get them anywhere near power.
We know they want to get 30% so they can claim they have a mandate to carry on.
Also rumoured to be true, yes.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Apologies if it's already been discussed earlier, but does anyone know how many UKIP and Green candidates will be standing at the general election? Also how many LDs aren't standing?
Don't know about the others but I understand LD are standing in 630, which I think is everywhere except, NI, the speaker, and the green Carolina Lucas.
Thanks. Just found out that UKIP are contesting 42% of seats in the South West. I can't see them contesting more than 50% overall on that basis, although I'll stand corrected if wrong.
So based on Comres tonight we can conclude British voters want a government which puts up tax on the rich, nationalises the railways, Royal Mail and energy companies, ends tuition fees but takes Britain out of the EU and puts tough controls on immigration, so basically a complete reverse of the Blair and Cameron years, they want some Corbyn economics with a dash of May nationalism
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
The manifesto isn't actually all that bad, I wouldn't say it's extreme - just incredibly unrealistic. The issue is whether you believe that Corbyn and co. have the competence to deliver on such a manifesto while negotiating a successful Brexit. I do not.
British adults are more likely to oppose than support the proposal to scrap the Conservative Party’s commitment to reduce net migration to the UK to below 100,000 (49% oppose v 32% support, with 19% saying don’t know).
Is the Tory manifesto actually going to include any concrete proposals on reducing EU migration, once we've left the EU?
As part of the below 100,000 target yes
Yes, but are they going to say how exactly the target will be met, once they have all the powers to do so?
Come to that, is 100,000 going to remain a "target", or will it be an actual limit.
I bet it would be a target, as it should be. A limit ties your hands too much.
As for how exactly the target will be met I can't imagine exact proposals being put out because they'd be hostages to fortune. We haven't had our negotiations yet with the EU and as with all negotiations nothing is final until everything is final. We need to complete those first before we can know exact actions that will follow whatever is negotiated.
A principle can be out there on which to be judged but no government ever says exactly what will happen years in the future as without a crystal ball it is unknowable.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Worth remembering that almost all polls in the period leading up to the election in 2015 were reporting Labour shares of 31-35%
Almost all polls now for Labour are in the range 27-31%
Labour is polling about 4% less now than it was last cycle. How much of that is due to the polls being fixed and how much due to a change in popularity? Its hard to tell but there is a change.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
Labour still have four weeks to do their 2017 version of the Ed Stone or Mrs. Duffy.
Wouldn't bet against a bit of nationalisation leg being shown by the Tories in their manifesto. Big talk of 'industrial stategies' and temporary nationalisation of individual railways if franchises found to be failing etc.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
Labour still have four weeks to do their 2017 version of the Ed Stone or Mrs. Duffy.
Well they are trying...yesterday jeering a veteran, today running over a member of the media.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Worth remembering that almost all polls in the period leading up to the election in 2015 were reporting Labour shares of 31-35%
Almost all polls now for Labour are in the range 27-31%
Labour is polling about 4% less now than it was last cycle. How much of that is due to the polls being fixed and how much due to a change in popularity? Its hard to tell but there is a change.
I have asked a few pollsters to contribute to a thread, where they present their VI using their current methodologies and the VI using their 2015 methodologies.
The responses have ranged from 'I'll see what I can do' or 'I need to speak to the boss to check if that is ok' or 'Fuck off'
Now we know ComRes for a long time said their weighting were screwed and not to infer things. Then they started to release VI polling numbers again.
However, if it was a proper VI poll why hasn't it been referred to? Given just 13% lead you would think the Mirror would be interested in telling people that.
I would take some of the percentages that Electoral calculus have for chances of winning with a big pinch of salt. I have just looked at the seat I live in and the numbers for the individual wards are often quite crazy and likely to be wrong wide margins. The actual overall result for the seat looked somewhat plausible but how they got there did not.
LOL, even I would say the Conservatives have the most "thought through" policies.
Of course. Darth Sidious thought very carefully on how to take over the galaxy, the point he was in control no matter who won a civil war. Obviously the Tories aren't quite that great yet in the planning.
Sunil: Remember back to your early teachings. "All who gain power are afraid to lose it." Even the REMAINERS.
TSE: The REMAINERS use their power for good.
Sunil: Good is a point of view, Anakin, er, I mean TSE. The LEAVERS and the REMAINERS are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power.
TSE: The LEAVERS rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves.
Sunil: And the REMAINERS don't?
TSE: The REMAINERS are selfless... they only care about others.
Sunil: [looking a little frustrated] Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Smithson "the Wise"?
TSE: No.
Sunil: I thought not. It's not a story the LibDems would tell you. It's a Blogging legend. Darth Smithson was a Dark Lord of the Sith who lived many years ago. He was so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians to create... AV threads. He had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying from boredom on Thursday Nights.
TSE: He could do that? He could actually save people from boring themselves to death?
Sunil: The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many policy platforms some consider to be unelectable.
TSE: What happened to him?
Sunil: He became so powerful... the only thing he was afraid of was losing his power, which eventually, of course, he did. Unfortunately, he taught his apprentice everything he knew, and then one night, his apprentice wiped his servers' hard drives while he slept. It's ironic that he could save others from obscurity, but not himself.
Its occurred to me that there are so many angles that its unlikely Trump and his team can shut them down. Today's raid on the GOP related lobbying and communications firm certainly points to easily identifiable players and certain investigative channels.
Way way back before polling day in the US election I said Trump was in way over his head but the scale of this thing, if all the dots being plotted are connected (I have some doubts but even then is a lot there that is fact), its so staggering that Trump isn't so much on over his head, as he is going to drown.
And its probably going to be all about the money.
All bets are off on next stand-in president if Trump is shoved out.
I'm going to throw a long range Democrat Candidate to run for President, Caroline Kennedy. 2020 probably too early, 2024 not.
Do you think Pence would be implicated too?
I'm wondering whether, if it takes a while for this to play out, the 2018 midterms effectively become a vote on the next President (as I think the Speaker of the House is next in line after the President and VP).
Now we know ComRes for a long time said their weighting were screwed and not to infer things. Then they started to release VI polling numbers again.
However, if it was a proper VI poll why hasn't it been referred to?
It's not a proper VI.
IE they asked a basic VI question, not the full suite, like who did you vote for last time, certainty to vote etc, nor did they apply their turnout filters.
Now we know ComRes for a long time said their weighting were screwed and not to infer things. Then they started to release VI polling numbers again.
However, if it was a proper VI poll why hasn't it been referred to?
It's not a proper VI.
IE they asked a basic VI question, not the full suite, like who did you vote for last time, certainty to vote etc, nor did they apply their turnout filters.
Now we know ComRes for a long time said their weighting were screwed and not to infer things. Then they started to release VI polling numbers again.
However, if it was a proper VI poll why hasn't it been referred to? Given just 13% lead you would think the Mirror would be interested in telling people that.
Labour numbers are horrendous, as are the Corbyn like/dislike numbers (27-64)
Wouldn't bet against a bit of nationalisation leg being shown by the Tories in their manifesto. Big talk of 'industrial stategies' and temporary nationalisation of individual railways if franchises found to be failing etc.
Wonder what would be the fall out on here to that from the tory pb ?
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
My hunch is that the Conservatives will do better than the polls suggest, by a process of elimination. It's not that Theresa May is good, it's that her opponents are all useless.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
Makes sense but then the question is where are the votes going to go?
I can't see Tories beating Thatcher or Blair so 44% I can't see Labour beating Foot/not being down a bit on Miliband so that's 28% I can't see Lib Dems reaching the teens so 12% I can't see UKIP beating their 2010 total considerably so 4% I can't see SNP not being down a bit on last time so 4% I can't see NI being over 2% I can't see Others doing better than last time so that is 4%
Which means even if everyone hits their upper limit there is at least 2% of votes that can't go to anyone at all. Something has to break but what?
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
My hunch is that the Conservatives will do better than the polls suggest, by a process of elimination. It's not that Theresa May is good, it's that her opponents are all useless.
You honestly think they will break 50%? Genuine question.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
Makes sense but then the question is where are the votes going to go?
I can't see Tories beating Thatcher or Blair so 44% I can't see Labour beating Foot/not being down a bit on Miliband so that's 28% I can't see Lib Dems reaching the teens so 12% I can't see UKIP beating their 2010 total considerably so 4% I can't see SNP not being down a bit on last time so 4% I can't see NI being over 2% I can't see Others doing better than last time so that is 4%
Which means even if everyone hits their upper limit there is at least 2% of votes that can't go to anyone at all. Something has to break but what?
We could just have a super-low turnout - meaning the Tories could beat Blair& Thatcher in voteshare without coming close in raw number of votes, Labour could match Miliband's voteshare without matching raw number of votes, etc.
Its occurred to me that there are so many angles that its unlikely Trump and his team can shut them down. Today's raid on the GOP related lobbying and communications firm certainly points to easily identifiable players and certain investigative channels.
Way way back before polling day in the US election I said Trump was in way over his head but the scale of this thing, if all the dots being plotted are connected (I have some doubts but even then is a lot there that is fact), its so staggering that Trump isn't so much on over his head, as he is going to drown.
And its probably going to be all about the money.
All bets are off on next stand-in president if Trump is shoved out.
I'm going to throw a long range Democrat Candidate to run for President, Caroline Kennedy. 2020 probably too early, 2024 not.
Do you think Pence would be implicated too?
I'm wondering whether, if it takes a while for this to play out, the 2018 midterms effectively become a vote on the next President (as I think the Speaker of the House is next in line after the President and VP).
Ryan is definitely in the firing line on one of the lines of investigation which is why bets are off. Pence I'm not sure he is involved in that particular thread but he knows more about connections to the Russians via Mike Flynn than is pretended. Flynn apparently had to go for misleading Pence. He didn't mislead Pence at all, but whether that is the thin end of a much thicker wedge of a story on Pence I do not know.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
My hunch is that the Conservatives will do better than the polls suggest, by a process of elimination. It's not that Theresa May is good, it's that her opponents are all useless.
You honestly think they will break 50%? Genuine question.
By the by, I've been laid down even more than my usual sedentary position due to a cold that is just now ramping up like LD seat projections pre-May - If I have written or do write anything particularly loopy in the coming days, that's my excuse.
Feel free to extend that excuse onwards for any future mistakes.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
My hunch is that the Conservatives will do better than the polls suggest, by a process of elimination. It's not that Theresa May is good, it's that her opponents are all useless.
You honestly think they will break 50%? Genuine question.
I think it's possible.
My hunch is they'll get between 40 and 45% but like you I don't think 50% can be ruled out at the moment. It depends how bad the Labour campaign continues to be.
That's on account of them applying this uniform national swing to the seat which implies the UKIP vote in Donny goes to the Tories. Whereas last week Labour picked up a council seat.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
+100
Sticking with a methodology because it is easy to use is a nonsense if it doesn't actually work any more.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
Who are you giving that 6-8% to?
I know its a conundrum...Polls keep showing Lib Dems on ~10%, I guess we can give them at least 4 of those, then who knows...the Monster Raving Loony Party(s)...
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
My hunch is that the Conservatives will do better than the polls suggest, by a process of elimination. It's not that Theresa May is good, it's that her opponents are all useless.
Basically.
Labour membership need to understand the importance of electing a leader who actually has leadership skills. It's clear that aspects of Corbynism *are* popular, but that's no use if voters think your guy is useless when it comes to leadership skills. And let's not talk about the fact they need to avoid electing anyone who is sympathetic to Marxism, or has controversial views/statements on the IRA, Hamas, Castro, Chavez etc.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
Almost inevitably not. How can they have done so up until now? Moreover, will most of their respondents know whether or not Ukip will be on the ballot paper in their own constituency in future? This is actually rather interesting: I bet one Hell of a lot of Ukip voters are going to turn up in the polling booths on June 8th, discover that Ukip is missing from their ballot papers, and have to make a snap decision on which way to jump. This could materially affect the final outcome in quite a lot of seats.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
Barry Gardiner is winning my nomination for most annoying Shad Cab member presently...
he wasn't to bad on the local eletions which he had to do for hours...
Actually he is by far the best of a bad bunch. Pretty much the only one that can defend their position on Tv and put forward any sort of considered coherent argument.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
Almost inevitably not. How can they have done so up until now? Moreover, will most of their respondents know whether or not Ukip will be on the ballot paper in their own constituency in future? This is actually rather interesting: I bet one Hell of a lot of Ukip voters are going to turn up in the polling booths on June 8th, discover that Ukip is missing from their ballot papers, and have to make a snap decision on which way to jump. This could materially affect the final outcome in quite a lot of seats.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
UKIP aren't standing in quite a lot of seats where they did extremely well in 2015 like Bournemouth West, Devon West, Witham, etc. As you say, this could seriously mess up the pollsters' accuracy. On the other hand, it provides a handy excuse for them if they do get it wrong. They can simply say that there was no way for them to account for whether UKIP were standing in particular constituencies which is why, for instance, they may underestimate the final Tory share.
Its occurred to me that there are so many angles that its unlikely Trump and his team can shut them down. Today's raid on the GOP related lobbying and communications firm certainly points to easily identifiable players and certain investigative channels.
Way way back before polling day in the US election I said Trump was in way over his head but the scale of this thing, if all the dots being plotted are connected (I have some doubts but even then is a lot there that is fact), its so staggering that Trump isn't so much on over his head, as he is going to drown.
And its probably going to be all about the money.
All bets are off on next stand-in president if Trump is shoved out.
I'm going to throw a long range Democrat Candidate to run for President, Caroline Kennedy. 2020 probably too early, 2024 not.
Do you think Pence would be implicated too?
I'm wondering whether, if it takes a while for this to play out, the 2018 midterms effectively become a vote on the next President (as I think the Speaker of the House is next in line after the President and VP).
No chance whatsoever that could happen. It would take the simultaneous impeachment of both the President and VP, which would require a two-thirds majority of the Senate. Otherwise if they weren't impeached simultaneously a new and unimpeachable GOP VP could be inaugurated after the first resignation.
There is actually precedent for this in 73/74. In 73 President Nixon's Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned and was replaced by Gerald Ford. In 74 Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment, meaning the unelected VP Ford ascended to the Presidency. Rockefeller then became VP meaning that incredibly neither the President nor the Vice President had been elected at the last election.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
Personally I am finding it hard to think they will do as well as Ed Miliband...but then I also really don't believe 1 in 2 voters will vote for the Tories. Knock 3-4% off both and I might be more convinced.
That's what my old constituency chairman said the other day, he said as popular as Mrs May is, he really can't see her outpolling Mrs Thatcher or Blair at their best, which is 44%
Makes sense but then the question is where are the votes going to go?
I can't see Tories beating Thatcher or Blair so 44% I can't see Labour beating Foot/not being down a bit on Miliband so that's 28% I can't see Lib Dems reaching the teens so 12% I can't see UKIP beating their 2010 total considerably so 4% I can't see SNP not being down a bit on last time so 4% I can't see NI being over 2% I can't see Others doing better than last time so that is 4%
Which means even if everyone hits their upper limit there is at least 2% of votes that can't go to anyone at all. Something has to break but what?
We could just have a super-low turnout - meaning the Tories could beat Blair& Thatcher in voteshare without coming close in raw number of votes, Labour could match Miliband's voteshare without matching raw number of votes, etc.
The result seems like such a foregone conclusion that turnout could dip below the 59.4% in 2001, or even the record low of 57.2% in 1918.
BTW, have we commented on the fact that today's YouGov has Labour statistically tied with the Tories among the working-age 18-65 population?
Tories only ahead because of a MAMMOTH lead with the workshy scrounger pensioners.
That is remarkable Con lead Labour 65-15 among the over 65s Over 65s far more energised by Brexit than other age groups Over 65s highest propensity to vote. Still suspect it is an iffy sample
It also has Conservatives getting nearly double the Labour vote in Scotland.
Amazing news — no LD candidate in Skipton & Ripon.
Seems so but if you look at the SOPN there are 5 sets of proposers assentors and nominators but only 4 candidates
Usually where you see that it is because one candidate has huge number of nominations....
Yes often there are more than the required nominators but it is unusual to have more than 1 proposer and seconder
That's standard too. E.g. Look at this SOPN - in the third row of the Conservative nomination for Michael at least one local Tory councillor is included, yet all rows have proposers and seconders:
That's on account of them applying this uniform national swing to the seat which implies the UKIP vote in Donny goes to the Tories. Whereas last week Labour picked up a council seat.
Just a few miles down the road from where I live is Stevenage. Labour majority council. Returned a Tory MP at last election with a 5,000 majority, may well get into five figures now Ukip have withdrawn. We must always remember that local and general elections are clean different things, and one can only read across from the former to the latter to a limited extent.
That said, Don Valley is still an exceptionally challenging target for the Conservatives.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
Almost inevitably not. How can they have done so up until now? Moreover, will most of their respondents know whether or not Ukip will be on the ballot paper in their own constituency in future? This is actually rather interesting: I bet one Hell of a lot of Ukip voters are going to turn up in the polling booths on June 8th, discover that Ukip is missing from their ballot papers, and have to make a snap decision on which way to jump. This could materially affect the final outcome in quite a lot of seats.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
Officially at least aren't most of the seats where UKIP aren't standing because the seat already has a pro-Brexit MP? Which almost exclusively means it has a Tory MP? Which means its essentially safe given how the polls are? Which means that the absence of UKIP won't affect the result?
BTW, have we commented on the fact that today's YouGov has Labour statistically tied with the Tories among the working-age 18-65 population?
Tories only ahead because of a MAMMOTH lead with the workshy scrounger pensioners.
That is remarkable Con lead Labour 65-15 among the over 65s Over 65s far more energised by Brexit than other age groups Over 65s highest propensity to vote. Still suspect it is an iffy sample
It also has Conservatives getting nearly double the Labour vote in Scotland.
It's not that out-of-step with other polls.
I was making a semi-serious point. When people talk about Labour "only doing well with young voters", they seem to be assuming that they only do well with people in their early 20s. But that's not the case. Most polls also have them roughly level or sometimes a little ahead with the 25-49 age bracket, and they don't do too disgracefully even with the 50-64 age bracket. It's only in the 65+ age bracket that they enter the slaughterhouse - and obviously pensioners are growing in number and are much likely to vote, but they're not the ONLY ones who make up the whole electorate.
BTW, have we commented on the fact that today's YouGov has Labour statistically tied with the Tories among the working-age 18-65 population?
Tories only ahead because of a MAMMOTH lead with the workshy scrounger pensioners.
That is remarkable Con lead Labour 65-15 among the over 65s Over 65s far more energised by Brexit than other age groups Over 65s highest propensity to vote. Still suspect it is an iffy sample
It also has Conservatives getting nearly double the Labour vote in Scotland.
It's not that out-of-step with other polls.
I was making a semi-serious point. When people talk about Labour "only doing well with young voters", they seem to be assuming that they only do well with people in their early 20s. But that's not the case. Most polls also have them roughly level or sometimes a little ahead with the 25-49 age bracket, and they don't do too disgracefully even with the 50-64 age bracket. It's only in the 65+ age bracket that they enter the slaughterhouse - and obviously pensioners are growing in number and are much likely to vote, but they're not the ONLY ones who make up the whole electorate.
Not most polls I've seen in the past 5 months. Many polls have put Labour behind with every age group apart from 18-24.
BTW, have we commented on the fact that today's YouGov has Labour statistically tied with the Tories among the working-age 18-65 population?
Tories only ahead because of a MAMMOTH lead with the workshy scrounger pensioners.
That is remarkable Con lead Labour 65-15 among the over 65s Over 65s far more energised by Brexit than other age groups Over 65s highest propensity to vote. Still suspect it is an iffy sample
It also has Conservatives getting nearly double the Labour vote in Scotland.
It's not that out-of-step with other polls.
I was making a semi-serious point. When people talk about Labour "only doing well with young voters", they seem to be assuming that they only do well with people in their early 20s. But that's not the case. Most polls also have them roughly level or sometimes a little ahead with the 25-49 age bracket, and they don't do too disgracefully even with the 50-64 age bracket. It's only in the 65+ age bracket that they enter the slaughterhouse - and obviously pensioners are growing in number and are much likely to vote, but they're not the ONLY ones who make up the whole electorate.
Not most polls I've seen in the past 5 months. Many polls have put Labour behind with every age group apart from 18-24.
Yes, quite a lot have put them behind, but they're almost always in spitting distance with the 25-49 bracket even if they're not ahead.
I doubt fox hunting will make it to the Tory manifesto. The last thing they need to do is rack up the leafy shire vote whilst Don Valley is in play.
Don Valley isn't in play though. Even Shadsy who I think has been overly negative on Labour hold prospects in the North has Ms Flint at 6/1 on.
6/1 for her still means it's in play, surely, just not even close to being a given for TP.
Do these odds factor in the fact Tissue Price was a 'multiple screen namer', right here on PB? Hard to see how he could ride out such a dark past in the white heat of a general election campaign.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
Almost inevitably not. How can they have done so up until now? Moreover, will most of their respondents know whether or not Ukip will be on the ballot paper in their own constituency in future? This is actually rather interesting: I bet one Hell of a lot of Ukip voters are going to turn up in the polling booths on June 8th, discover that Ukip is missing from their ballot papers, and have to make a snap decision on which way to jump. This could materially affect the final outcome in quite a lot of seats.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
Officially at least aren't most of the seats where UKIP aren't standing because the seat already has a pro-Brexit MP? Which almost exclusively means it has a Tory MP? Which means its essentially safe given how the polls are? Which means that the absence of UKIP won't affect the result?
They're standing down in quite a few places with Remainer MPs where Tories are second: Norwich South (Lab MP Clive Lewis), North Norfolk (LD MP Norman Lamb), for example.
I wonder whether the opinion pollsters will take into account the fact that UKIP may not be standing in about 50% of seats, if that turns out to be the case.
Almost inevitably not. How can they have done so up until now? Moreover, will most of their respondents know whether or not Ukip will be on the ballot paper in their own constituency in future? This is actually rather interesting: I bet one Hell of a lot of Ukip voters are going to turn up in the polling booths on June 8th, discover that Ukip is missing from their ballot papers, and have to make a snap decision on which way to jump. This could materially affect the final outcome in quite a lot of seats.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
Officially at least aren't most of the seats where UKIP aren't standing because the seat already has a pro-Brexit MP? Which almost exclusively means it has a Tory MP? Which means its essentially safe given how the polls are? Which means that the absence of UKIP won't affect the result?
I'm afraid I don't know, beyond the fact that this clearly isn't the case everywhere: there's been a fair amount of chatter on PB and elsewhere about North Norfolk - in that case, Ukip has stood aside and asked its voters to lend their support to the Tories in order to give Lamb the chop.
In other seats, they may decline to stand because they lack a candidate, a local organisation, the deposit money, or all three.
I doubt fox hunting will make it to the Tory manifesto. The last thing they need to do is rack up the leafy shire vote whilst Don Valley is in play.
Don Valley isn't in play though. Even Shadsy who I think has been overly negative on Labour hold prospects in the North has Ms Flint at 6/1 on.
6/1 for her still means it's in play, surely, just not even close to being a given for TP.
Do these odds factor in the fact Tissue Price was a 'multiple screen namer', right here on PB? Hard to see how he could ride out such a dark past in the white heat of a general election campaign.
That's on account of them applying this uniform national swing to the seat which implies the UKIP vote in Donny goes to the Tories. Whereas last week Labour picked up a council seat.
All seats have their own individual features.
In Don Valley, for example, Labour would have benefitted in 2015 from the EdM leadership.
Comments
And lots more of it to come from the sun, mail, express and others over the next four weeks
The most significant other finding is probably the relatively modest 45-35 Tory lead in "I have found myself leaning more to this side" question. That's potentially a leading indicator, though we've yet to see the Tories say anything significant.
Come to that, is 100,000 going to remain a "target", or will it be an actual limit.
And I'm still convinced that all these results around 30% for Labour are evidence of another polling fail. But we still have to wait another four weeks to find out, of course...
As for how exactly the target will be met I can't imagine exact proposals being put out because they'd be hostages to fortune. We haven't had our negotiations yet with the EU and as with all negotiations nothing is final until everything is final. We need to complete those first before we can know exact actions that will follow whatever is negotiated.
A principle can be out there on which to be judged but no government ever says exactly what will happen years in the future as without a crystal ball it is unknowable.
Almost all polls now for Labour are in the range 27-31%
Labour is polling about 4% less now than it was last cycle. How much of that is due to the polls being fixed and how much due to a change in popularity? Its hard to tell but there is a change.
The one thing I am totally convinced of is that UNS is totally and utterly waste of time in this GE.
The only Tory policy I've heard is one for a vote on Fox Hunting.
I think people are answering a different question !
The responses have ranged from 'I'll see what I can do' or 'I need to speak to the boss to check if that is ok' or 'Fuck off'
However, if it was a proper VI poll why hasn't it been referred to? Given just 13% lead you would think the Mirror would be interested in telling people that.
I would take some of the percentages that Electoral calculus have for chances of winning with a big pinch of salt.
I have just looked at the seat I live in and the numbers for the individual wards are often quite crazy and likely to be wrong wide margins.
The actual overall result for the seat looked somewhat plausible but how they got there did not.
TSE: The REMAINERS use their power for good.
Sunil: Good is a point of view, Anakin, er, I mean TSE. The LEAVERS and the REMAINERS are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power.
TSE: The LEAVERS rely on their passion for their strength. They think inward, only about themselves.
Sunil: And the REMAINERS don't?
TSE: The REMAINERS are selfless... they only care about others.
Sunil: [looking a little frustrated] Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Smithson "the Wise"?
TSE: No.
Sunil: I thought not. It's not a story the LibDems would tell you. It's a Blogging legend. Darth Smithson was a Dark Lord of the Sith who lived many years ago. He was so powerful and so wise that he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians to create... AV threads. He had such a knowledge of the dark side that he could even keep the ones he cared about from dying from boredom on Thursday Nights.
TSE: He could do that? He could actually save people from boring themselves to death?
Sunil: The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many policy platforms some consider to be unelectable.
TSE: What happened to him?
Sunil: He became so powerful... the only thing he was afraid of was losing his power, which eventually, of course, he did. Unfortunately, he taught his apprentice everything he knew, and then one night, his apprentice wiped his servers' hard drives while he slept. It's ironic that he could save others from obscurity, but not himself.
TSE: Is it possible to learn this power?
Sunil: Not from a LibDem...
I'm wondering whether, if it takes a while for this to play out, the 2018 midterms effectively become a vote on the next President (as I think the Speaker of the House is next in line after the President and VP).
IE they asked a basic VI question, not the full suite, like who did you vote for last time, certainty to vote etc, nor did they apply their turnout filters.
27% is, for me, the floor so its narrow range.
Tories only ahead because of a MAMMOTH lead with the workshy scrounger pensioners.
I can't see Tories beating Thatcher or Blair so 44%
I can't see Labour beating Foot/not being down a bit on Miliband so that's 28%
I can't see Lib Dems reaching the teens so 12%
I can't see UKIP beating their 2010 total considerably so 4%
I can't see SNP not being down a bit on last time so 4%
I can't see NI being over 2%
I can't see Others doing better than last time so that is 4%
Which means even if everyone hits their upper limit there is at least 2% of votes that can't go to anyone at all. Something has to break but what?
David Cameron: Theresa May needs a big majority to stop an extreme Brexit http://bit.ly/2r4fm8O
The mask is slipping.
Of course Trump has put tariffs on the Canadian lumber business and the Canadian's are hitting back with their own threats.
Trump and disharmony seem to go together
https://twitter.com/LiberalCyclist/status/862691814255587328
Feel free to extend that excuse onwards for any future mistakes.
Sticking with a methodology because it is easy to use is a nonsense if it doesn't actually work any more.
Labour membership need to understand the importance of electing a leader who actually has leadership skills. It's clear that aspects of Corbynism *are* popular, but that's no use if voters think your guy is useless when it comes to leadership skills. And let's not talk about the fact they need to avoid electing anyone who is sympathetic to Marxism, or has controversial views/statements on the IRA, Hamas, Castro, Chavez etc.
I don't think that any of the polls contain any questions to the effect of: "Ukip voters: what is your second preference if your own favoured party can't be arsed?" So we are left to guess. Will the results in seats where this happens generally favour the Tories, Labour, neither, or be wildly different between individual constituencies? We just don't know.
There is actually precedent for this in 73/74. In 73 President Nixon's Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned and was replaced by Gerald Ford. In 74 Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment, meaning the unelected VP Ford ascended to the Presidency. Rockefeller then became VP meaning that incredibly neither the President nor the Vice President had been elected at the last election.
BURKE Stephen Bernard (Labour Party)
LAMB Norman Peter (Liberal Democrat)
WILD James Oliver (The Conservative Party Candidate)
Couldn't believe it when I saw that this was uploaded onto YT today.
The one between Campbell and Owen Jones is hilarious though.
Con lead Labour 65-15 among the over 65s
Over 65s far more energised by Brexit than other age groups
Over 65s highest propensity to vote.
Still suspect it is an iffy sample
It also has Conservatives getting nearly double the Labour vote in Scotland.
https://m.dorsetforyou.gov.uk/media/221629/Mid-Dorset-and-North-Poole---Statement-of-Persons-Nominated-and-Notice-of-Poll/pdf/Mid_Dorset_and_North_Poole_-_Statement_of_Persons_Nominated_and_Notice_of_Poll.pdf
That said, Don Valley is still an exceptionally challenging target for the Conservatives.
I was making a semi-serious point. When people talk about Labour "only doing well with young voters", they seem to be assuming that they only do well with people in their early 20s. But that's not the case. Most polls also have them roughly level or sometimes a little ahead with the 25-49 age bracket, and they don't do too disgracefully even with the 50-64 age bracket. It's only in the 65+ age bracket that they enter the slaughterhouse - and obviously pensioners are growing in number and are much likely to vote, but they're not the ONLY ones who make up the whole electorate.
lol
In other seats, they may decline to stand because they lack a candidate, a local organisation, the deposit money, or all three.
In Don Valley, for example, Labour would have benefitted in 2015 from the EdM leadership.