politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New GE2015 projection from Oxford political scientist, Step

SystemSystem Posts: 12,250
edited October 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New GE2015 projection from Oxford political scientist, Stephen Fisher, suggests that Tories have 58 pc chance of a majority

I have enormous respect for political scientist, Oxford's @StephenDFisher
He was key member of team behind the GE2010 exit poll

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Alot of my "Open" cash at various bookmakers is disappearing into Paddy & Stan's pockets if this scenario plays out...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    tim said:

    Forecast Election Day Shares and 95% Prediction Intervals
    Con : 40.2 plus or minus 11.8 i.e. between 28 and 52
    Lab : 31.8 plus or minus 6.6 i.e. between 25 and 38
    LD : 11.8 plus or minus 14.5 i.e. between 0 and 26


    LOL.

    Implies odds of 20-1 against Lab over 38%...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,112
    What about the Scottish sub sample? Any surges? ;-)
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,301
    If he is right then I won't do very well at the GE. D:
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    Forecast Election Day Shares and 95% Prediction Intervals
    Con : 40.2 plus or minus 11.8 i.e. between 28 and 52
    Lab : 31.8 plus or minus 6.6 i.e. between 25 and 38
    LD : 11.8 plus or minus 14.5 i.e. between 0 and 26


    LOL.

    Just take solace in the fact that Fisher's model reduces the probability of a Con Maj down to just 58%.

    The Roderick, Lebo and Norpeth model has it as high as 99%.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    He's going to make a fortune if he's confident in his prediction
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    @tim - Why LOL?

    It is an enduring truth in political forecasting that people underestimate the chance of a big shift from current polling. Those 95% intervals imply, for example, that there is 2.5% chance of the Tories getting less than 28% and a 2.5% chance of them getting over 52%. Seems reasonable.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Pulpstar said:

    tim said:

    Forecast Election Day Shares and 95% Prediction Intervals
    Con : 40.2 plus or minus 11.8 i.e. between 28 and 52
    Lab : 31.8 plus or minus 6.6 i.e. between 25 and 38
    LD : 11.8 plus or minus 14.5 i.e. between 0 and 26


    LOL.

    Implies odds of 20-1 against Lab over 38%...
    Somewhat longer that tthat actually - there's a chance it falls under the lower bound, so the probability it's above the higher bound is 2.5% or thereabouts, depending on the distribution.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    RichardNabavi said:

    @tim - Why LOL?

    It is an enduring truth in political forecasting that people underestimate the chance of a big shift from current polling. Those 95% intervals imply, for example, that there is 2.5% chance of the Tories getting less than 28% and a 2.5% chance of them getting over 52%. Seems reasonable.

    The Labour top end looks a bit low to me.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,758
    Hope Sean T and other PB Tories put their money where their mouth is on Tory win

    Cmon lads its 3/1 taking Candy from babies stuff if that forecast is close

    Me I will continue to hedge between Lab outright and nom
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.

    BT have come along way over the past decade - it used to be 3 months for a shared line.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Grandiose said:

    Pulpstar said:

    tim said:

    Forecast Election Day Shares and 95% Prediction Intervals
    Con : 40.2 plus or minus 11.8 i.e. between 28 and 52
    Lab : 31.8 plus or minus 6.6 i.e. between 25 and 38
    LD : 11.8 plus or minus 14.5 i.e. between 0 and 26


    LOL.

    Implies odds of 20-1 against Lab over 38%...
    Somewhat longer that tthat actually - there's a chance it falls under the lower bound, so the probability it's above the higher bound is 2.5% or thereabouts, depending on the distribution.
    Yes you are right... but it is AT Least 20-1. I don't know how the two tails fare probability wise outside the CI.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Pulpstar said:

    RichardNabavi said:

    @tim - Why LOL?

    It is an enduring truth in political forecasting that people underestimate the chance of a big shift from current polling. Those 95% intervals imply, for example, that there is 2.5% chance of the Tories getting less than 28% and a 2.5% chance of them getting over 52%. Seems reasonable.

    The Labour top end looks a bit low to me.
    It is possible that Fisher is discounting the ground game.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,061
    Mr. Max, cheer up, for the country will do better.

    Mr. T, seen any cats?

    This is an interesting prediction. How does Mr. Fisher's history of predictions play out?
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    Mike,

    Your link to Stephen's piece goes directly to your comment on it, rather than the top of the article.

    Unless you meant to do that...
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    tim said:

    Will you offer me 40/1 on Lab >38%?

    It's not my forecast!
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    It really isn't tim's day today.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line

    2013, or 2014?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited October 2013
    Next said:

    Mike,

    Your link to Stephen's piece goes directly to your comment on it, rather than the top of the article.

    Unless you meant to do that...

    Here:

    http://electionsetc.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/a-long-range-forecast-for-2015-british.html?showComment=1382714874717#c562023867383452052
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,047
    Having read "here" on Mikes piece I have to say it reads like Jack's ARSE. just wooly platitudes and guesses. There isn't a single fact in his entire hypothesis.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    I think this is the main part of the methodology that I would disagree with:

    "a tendency for parties to move back towards their long-run average level of support."

    There is a long-term downward trend in support for the main two parties, but his methodology will act to predict its reversal, by construction.

    I'd also be interested to know whether he took any account of the increase in accuracy of the opinion polls, which would presumably affect his results, if I'd understood his methodology.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,847
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.

    Is she getting a new line, or swapping providers, or something else?
    If a new line, the following says it should be 14 days:
    http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/products/landline/new-landline

    One thing that annoys me is the length of time it can take to switch providers. I can understand the physical complexities of getting a new line installed (e.g. to a new property, or a second line), but when switching, with power in particular, two to three months is is patently ridiculous.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    tim said:

    I must've missed this bit of the Tory manifesto

    Ed Conway ‏@EdConwaySky 8m
    The sector of the UK economy that's grown most since the start of the crisis is Government & Other Services pic.twitter.com/Q8faO6Id3y

    You also missed it when you said that Osborne's fiscal policies were choking the recovery.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Can still get 2.2 on Con most seats.

    Lab woukd have to come back from 29% whilst incumbency.
  • Gerry_ManderGerry_Mander Posts: 621
    bigjohnowls said:

    Hope Sean T and other PB Tories put their money where their mouth is on Tory win

    Cmon lads its 3/1 taking Candy from babies stuff if that forecast is close

    Me I will continue to hedge between Lab outright and nom

    I've got money on a Labour win.

    I'll need the winnings if they do get into power.

    If they lose, I'll still have a job.

    Betting on a Labour win is called disaster planning. Its like taking insurance. You hope they don't have to pay out.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    A lot of experts are going to end up with egg on their face.

    Didn`t Nate Silver predict Labour to end up with 212 at the last election?
  • GarethofthevaleGarethofthevale Posts: 503
    Mike - There is something wrong with these bar charts as it cannot be more likely that Labour gets a majority then Labour is largest party (For Labour to get a majority it has to be largest party by default so Labour to be largest party % has to include all of the Lab majority % and some of the hung parliament %)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited October 2013
    tim said:

    I must've missed this bit of the Tory manifesto

    Ed Conway ‏@EdConwaySky 8m
    The sector of the UK economy that's grown most since the start of the crisis is Government & Other Services pic.twitter.com/Q8faO6Id3y

    You can't hold the Tories responsible for what Brown and Darling did between the start of the crisis and the 2010 election.

    Government and other services has grown less than the whole economy since 2010, though it has grown in real terms, which does put austerity in an interesting light.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,061
    Mr. T, I wouldn't worry about hyenas. Hippos, and baboons, on the other hand...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWfY9GRe7SI
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Well done OGH, this should keep the place more lively in to the friday night lull...
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    CarlottaVance said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line

    2013, or 2014?
    2013, but it's still bloody silly.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,301
    tim said:

    I must've missed this bit of the Tory manifesto

    Ed Conway ‏@EdConwaySky 8m
    The sector of the UK economy that's grown most since the start of the crisis is Government & Other Services pic.twitter.com/Q8faO6Id3y

    "Other" is where the creative industries are included which have boomed since 2010.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Oh Wow Gareth you're right

    Pr(Lab majority) = 15%
    Pr(Lab largest party) = 12%

    Any 'model' that produces that result is a complete crock of shit.
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    JosiasJessop said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.

    Is she getting a new line, or swapping providers, or something else?
    If a new line, the following says it should be 14 days:
    http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/products/landline/new-landline

    One thing that annoys me is the length of time it can take to switch providers. I can understand the physical complexities of getting a new line installed (e.g. to a new property, or a second line), but when switching, with power in particular, two to three months is is patently ridiculous.
    It's simply activating the existing line that goes to the property already.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Ouch!

    "Farewell then Sunny Hundal. The libellous blogger and tweeter has announced that he is no longer going to keep up his self-published website ‘Liberal Conspiracy’. One reason – far beyond satire – is that he is going to go to the University of Kingston to lecture on journalism."

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2013/10/is-sunny-hundal-the-best-person-to-lecture-on-journalism/
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Garethofthevale said:

    Mike - There is something wrong with these bar charts as it cannot be more likely that Labour gets a majority then Labour is largest party (For Labour to get a majority it has to be largest party by default so Labour to be largest party % has to include all of the Lab majority % and some of the hung parliament %)

    Yes, the Conservative one's are rubbish too.

    Hung Parliament only 28%, but Con largest party - Con majority = 31%.

    They match the figures that Stephen Fisher gives on his blog post, though, so the error is obviously his rather than Mike's.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Garethofthevale said:

    Mike - There is something wrong with these bar charts as it cannot be more likely that Labour gets a majority then Labour is largest party (For Labour to get a majority it has to be largest party by default so Labour to be largest party % has to include all of the Lab majority % and some of the hung parliament %)

    The figures in the bar chart are taken directly from Stepen's article.

    I have asked him for clarification.

  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Reselection ballot for Crispin Blunt from 31 October. Result expected for November 18.

    Supportive MPs...it's easier to look at who has pledged his support
    http://www.blunt4reigate2015.com/comments.php
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,847
    OblitusSumMe said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.

    Is she getting a new line, or swapping providers, or something else?
    If a new line, the following says it should be 14 days:
    http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/products/landline/new-landline

    One thing that annoys me is the length of time it can take to switch providers. I can understand the physical complexities of getting a new line installed (e.g. to a new property, or a second line), but when switching, with power in particular, two to three months is is patently ridiculous.
    It's simply activating the existing line that goes to the property already.
    Then it sounds ridiculous. Complain, and ask for the reasons.

    Is she getting the service from BT, or is it through another provider (BT still have to do the physical work)?

    However, in our last house move last year, ISTR that BT got the work done a week earlier than they said. So perhaps they give you a worst-case. Or perhaps not...
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Woah. This is, er, complete bollox!
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,047
    edited October 2013
    @SeanT.



    "I had a farm in Africa at the foot of the Ngong Hills. The Equator runs across these highlands, a hundred miles to the north, and the farm lay at an altitude of over six thousand feet. In the day-time you felt that you had got high up; near to the sun, but the early mornings and evenings were limpid and restful, and the nights were cold."

    Move over Karen Blixen!

    "AAAAAFRRRIIIIKAAAA

    See de white triller writin fella he come in de whirlycopter."


  • MontyMonty Posts: 346
    Interesting and will give a lot of optimism to the Tories on here. However, no UKIP whatsover from what I can see, and seems overly generous to the Tory share even despite that. 40% +/- 11% for the Tories apparently. Really? Anyone think they are going to get 51% of the vote?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Stephen Fisher, the Oxford politics don who is projecting a 58% chance of a CON majority, is to produce revised foecasts every week.

    There goes Friday nights on PB then
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    Spoof surely....

    Ed Balls‏@edballsmp2h
    Receiving my @TumbleBeesleeds Star Jump Award in Churwell - fun afternoon with local parents & under 5s pic.twitter.com/AsmDBhtZvY
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Pulpstar said:

    Oh Wow Gareth you're right

    Pr(Lab majority) = 15%
    Pr(Lab largest party) = 12%

    Any 'model' that produces that result is a complete crock of shit.

    The first three bars sum to 100%.

    The last two bars sum to 100%.

    They are two discrete data series.

  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    Look at his key assumption.

    historical tendencies for the Conservatives to over perform and Labour to under perform their vote intention figures in the polls when it comes to election day

    But pre-92 polls were horribly skewed by the "shy Tory" syndrome.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Page 15 of his paper contains a similiar error. No mention of Scotland in his paper which is the only scenario that could in a million years throw this up (Lib Dems wiped out say, Labour win 300 English & Welsh seats, Con win all the rest including Scotland), the Scottish seats abstain so Con has Largest party but the Gov't is de facto a Labour Majority. The odds of that happening are rather less than a trillion to one, but logically it is the only way out of the largest seats/majority conundrum.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,735
    I have no idea if this is right or not. A Tory vote share of 40% would be some achievement. But as I have said a few times on here, the Tories *should* win in 2015.

    The one issue may be that the model is based on past performance when for the next election we have no comparable situation to work from. But maybe that does not matter.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited October 2013
    It has probably already been asked...but why is hung parliament probability so low given the probabilities of Con largest party and Lab largest party without a majority?

    Ok, it should be read as Con maj (57), Lab maj (15), Hung parliament (28)=100

    Con largest 88 + Lab largest 12= 100
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    MikeSmithson said:

    Stephen Fisher, the Oxford politics don who is projecting a 58% chance of a CON majority, is to produce revised foecasts every week.

    There goes Friday nights on PB then

    Onwards and upwards!

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    AveryLP said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Oh Wow Gareth you're right

    Pr(Lab majority) = 15%
    Pr(Lab largest party) = 12%

    Any 'model' that produces that result is a complete crock of shit.

    The first three bars sum to 100%.

    The last two bars sum to 100%.

    They are two discrete data series.

    2 mutually incompatible models. Pr(Lab Majority) < Pr (Lab Seats)
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    Pulpstar said:

    Oh Wow Gareth you're right

    Pr(Lab majority) = 15%
    Pr(Lab largest party) = 12%

    Any 'model' that produces that result is a complete crock of shit.

    I think I see how he has done this.

    He generates his confidence intervals on the seats from the 95% confidence interval on the party shares, and *assumes* that this represents a normal distribution with a 95% confidence interval, but the statistics is a lot more complicated than this, and beyond my meagre abilities.

    So in his model you will have situations where both the main parties have more than 326 seats, and this is why the probability for Labour majority is larger than Labour largest party. This is because the distribution of seats does not follow a normal distribution, or at least not one that is symmetric, and defined only by its 95% confidence interval.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    SouthamObserver said:

    I have no idea if this is right or not. A Tory vote share of 40% would be some achievement. But as I have said a few times on here, the Tories *should* win in 2015.

    The one issue may be that the model is based on past performance when for the next election we have no comparable situation to work from. But maybe that does not matter.

    Is that 'should' in the sense Spurs 'should' beat Hull this weekend but most likely will find a way not to?
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Just for Tim

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/the-spectators-notes/9064601/the-spectators-notes-how-one-longed-as-a-child-to-be-abducted-by-the-gypsies/
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,047
    edited October 2013
    @Carlotta

    "Farewell then Sunny Hundal. The libellous blogger and tweeter has announced that he is no longer going to keep up his self-published website ‘Liberal Conspiracy’. One reason – far beyond satire – is that he is going to go to the University of Kingston to lecture on journalism."

    Nasty article. does everything he accuses Hundal of doing and what self respecting journalist sues a rival for libel?
  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    a tendency for parties to move back towards their long-run average level of support....suggest a Conservative recovery

    Pardon?
  • macisbackmacisback Posts: 382
    Has Tim in any of his 12135 posts had anything even slightly positive to comment on anything Conservative. Can anybody shed any light on his bitterness.

    Give me some understanding please.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    edited October 2013
    Roger said:

    what self respecting journalist sues a rival for libel?

    One who has been libelled?

    Hundal admitted it & settled....or is it not libel when a left winger does it?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,061
    Mr. Scrapheap, Balls is always trying to get his mug in the local paper, whether that's with Morley's famously patriotic St. George's Day celebrations or anything else. He's well aware that a 1,000 majority isn't great (although he'll hold on, I suspect).
  • FattyBolgerFattyBolger Posts: 299
    Unpersuasive forecast in my view. There are too many new variables. Post coalition politics. Tactical unwind. Scotland after the ref. Ukip. For this model to provide much confidence. I think it isallallin flux and no one really can be have much of an idea. Dice are certainly rolling but who knows?


    My personal favourite guesstimate is large scale reversion of "Tory" UKIP
    to Con for fear of Red Ed wbile the Kippers keep the WWC ex Lab voters. I just cannot see northern and Midlands C2s rallying to metro Ed's banner

  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,047
    @Macisback

    "Has Tim in any of his 12135 posts had anything even slightly positive to comment on anything Conservative"

    Yep! He said IDS was a plank. Quite flattering really
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited October 2013
    CarlottaVance said:

    Roger said:

    what self respecting journalist sues a rival for libel?

    One who has been libelled?

    Hundal admitted it & settled....or is it not libel when a left winger does it?
    The irony is that Hundal was given every opportunity to retract the allegations, which under the circumstances was jolly decent of Murray.

    “Mr Hundal was invited to retract. After a certain amount of evasion on his part he did so, thus ensuring that the case never reached court. Had it done so I would have won the case and it would have cost Mr Hundal a very large amount of money. As it was he agreed to pay my costs. The gorier details of this process are not something I will make public because they are deeply embarrassing for Mr Hundal.”

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/douglas-murray/2013/05/a-reply-to-certain-critics/

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    Looks a bit on the high side for the Tories, even discounting the anomalies which I think are probably caused by the reasons Oblitus cites.

    Still favouring NOM with Tories most seats here [at the prices].
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    macisback said:

    Has Tim in any of his 12135 posts had anything even slightly positive to comment on anything Conservative. Can anybody shed any light on his bitterness.

    Give me some understanding please.

    You miss the point, just enjoy the show..... throw him the odd bit of red meat a few times a day and stand back. PB's piranha in a tank.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Tissue_Price said:

    Looks a bit on the high side for the Tories, even discounting the anomalies which I think are probably caused by the reasons Oblitus cites.

    Still favouring NOM with Tories most seats here [at the prices].

    Will Hill's lovely "Other" and Lib-Con markets combined with Shadsy's generous NOM odds mean this result is ok for me too - Labour Minority Gov't is my prediction at this stage.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Well, it's a view I suppose. Not one I share, I have to say.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    edited October 2013
    Given the total lack of stereotyped Tory herd, tea party etc etc response to this projection, I suppose it falls to me to say - Tory Maj nailed on! You heard it here first.....

    There's that's us done again for the thread.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,574
    Looking forward to look back, his Labour % upper bound and Lib Dem seat upper bound are both 'brave' CIs.

    Con upper bound looks high too.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @Carlotta - a couple of points and then I'll leave it.
    1. You said Grangemouth (which supplies 80% of Scotland) was in trouble because its prices were too high, didn't you? Don't try to change history just concede the point and move on.
    2. Please don't misquote me. It's plain wrong.

    Ends.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,098
    Why will kippers stay as kippers? They are the equivalent of a frustrated caller to British Gas being kept on hold and promising all kinds of vengeance only to be meekness itself when the nice Scottish lady eventually answers the phone.

    Most kippers are it's-all-gone-to-hell-in-a-handbasket Tories with an edge for those who want out of Europe. It is dinner party fun for them to support UKIP but, as GE2015 approaches, more and more will return to the fold. It's not even that Dave has given them a look-me-in-the-eye promise of a referendum. It is because they are conservatives for a reason. The clue is in the name.

    UKIP come GE2015 = 3-5%. Perhaps that is generous.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Theresa May?
    macisback said:

    Has Tim in any of his 12135 posts had anything even slightly positive to comment on anything Conservative. Can anybody shed any light on his bitterness.

    Give me some understanding please.

  • R0bertsR0berts Posts: 391
    It's Garbage In Garbage Out, isn't it?

    Pre-92 (Shy Tory) polls produce unrealistic Tory uplifts compared to the actual result, so his model does too.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    @Bobajob - no on both counts. It's hardly my fault you have a tenuous grip on economics - however your continued pleading that the general tax payer of the UK should continue to support well off Londoners is noted.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238

    Iain Duncan Smith on John Major: ‘I’m forever in awe of an intellect that brought us cones hotline’
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    antifrank said:

    Well, it's a view I suppose. Not one I share, I have to say.

    Yes - I'd say our chances of saying "wasn't that prescient!" much less likely than "what was he thinking?"
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Roger said:

    @Macisback

    "Has Tim in any of his 12135 posts had anything even slightly positive to comment on anything Conservative"

    Yep! He said IDS was a plank. Quite flattering really

    Not to planks!

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    edited October 2013
    'DfE reported a free school to the police after tens of thousands of taxpayers money went missing it has emerged - more soon' wstewarttes

    'Dept for Educ says "serious failings" in financial mangt at Kings Science Academy", Bradford free school which Gove once called "flagship"' crick
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good evening colleagues. My initial reaction on reading Mike's tweet of this new thread: Rod Crosby strikes again!

    In 2010 like many others I doubted Rod's hung parliament predictions and have since then been on record as saying he was spot on and now consider him one of the most informed political contributors to this site.

    I know a great deal can happen between now and May 2015 but there is a growing sense that George Osborne was correct and the 2 Eds as wrong as they and their former boss were 1997-2010.

    The only thing is if we start seeing polls suggesting this outcome, our resident wine expert will reach 50,000 postings by May 2015. Deep joy!
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    old_labour said:


    Iain Duncan Smith on John Major: ‘I’m forever in awe of an intellect that brought us cones hotline’

    As I said on the phantom thread earlier this afternoon, the cones hotline arguably marked one of the most important philosophical shifts in government of the last two generations. The idea that government might be accountable for its actions against externally measured metrics was novel at the time, but we've never looked back.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    antifrank said:

    old_labour said:


    Iain Duncan Smith on John Major: ‘I’m forever in awe of an intellect that brought us cones hotline’

    As I said on the phantom thread earlier this afternoon, the cones hotline arguably marked one of the most important philosophical shifts in government of the last two generations. The idea that government might be accountable for its actions against externally measured metrics was novel at the time, but we've never looked back.
    Indeed! The bien pensants sneered - and the hoi poloi picked up the phone..

  • roserees64roserees64 Posts: 251
    In terms of policy initiatives suggested and enacted by the Coalition, most fail the Hutchinson test.i.e. In moral terms is it right or wrong to establish this policy? Even a cursory look at the initiatives would establish that most would fail this moral test.No wonder there are stirrings of disapproval amongst the old guard of the Tory Party.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    roserees64 said:

    In terms of policy initiatives suggested and enacted by the Coalition, most fail the Hutchinson test.i.e. In moral terms is it right or wrong to establish this policy? Even a cursory look at the initiatives would establish that most would fail this moral test.No wonder there are stirrings of disapproval amongst the old guard of the Tory Party.

    Give us some examples of immorality.

  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Carlotta - I'd go back through your posts if I were you before you make any more of a fool of yourself.

    And don't misquote me.

    Thanks
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    edited October 2013
    tim said:

    Carola said:

    'DfE reported a free school to the police after tens of thousands of taxpayers money went missing it has emerged - more soon' wstewarttes

    'Dept for Educ says "serious failings" in financial mangt at Kings Science Academy", Bradford free school which Gove once called "flagship"' crick

    Once the media start following the money Gove has a problem
    There will be more finance issues come to light re ed. Not only free schools.

    National strike delayed apparently until after talks with govt.

    DfE link:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/department-for-education-statement-on-kings-science-academy
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    One for Sunil. And maybe Josias:

    http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/whats-on/events/events-calendar#beeching
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,735
    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    I have no idea if this is right or not. A Tory vote share of 40% would be some achievement. But as I have said a few times on here, the Tories *should* win in 2015.

    The one issue may be that the model is based on past performance when for the next election we have no comparable situation to work from. But maybe that does not matter.

    Is that 'should' in the sense Spurs 'should' beat Hull this weekend but most likely will find a way not to?

    Something like that! Put it this way, if the Tories do not win outright in 2015 it's not going to be because of the compelling case Labour has put to the electorate. To not win when the economy is recovering, the opposition's narrative is patchy (to say the least) and its leader is not popular would in many ways be a pretty heroic achievement - just like taking one point off Wigan in the season they got relegated.

  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    I've had a great idea for a benefits scam. Loan out your kids to another family so they can pretend they're theirs and claim benefits for them and vice versa. I wish i'd thought of it before i could of done it with my brothers.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited October 2013
    I think he's putting the LDs too low at 21 seats. And the Tories will find it very tough to go above about 315 IMO because they're bound to lose about 10 seats to Labour in places like London and Brighton.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,729
    Probability of Lab majority = 15%
    Probability of Lab largest party = 12%

    The above surely HAS to be wrong!

    Chance of largest party must be greater than chance of majority.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    SeanT said:

    OblitusSumMe said:

    Sorry to go off-topic, but given that my daughter's mother has been told she has to wait until Nov 25th for BT to activate her phone line, I hardly see that privatisation there has lead to any great improvement.

    It's still the same old rubbish.

    Oh FFS. Tell her to get a bloody cellphone.

    "sorry to go offtopic, but given that my uncle's cousin has been told he has to wait until Lammasday for his favourite goose-quill to be sharpened, I hardly see that electrification has led to any great improvement"

    You seem to be forgetting that cell phone coverage is still pretty rubbish in large swathes of the country outside London.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    @Bobajob - if I want to make a fool of myself I'll know who to ask for advice!
  • macisbackmacisback Posts: 382
    tim said:

    IDS should open a Blonde Girl Hotline.
    Although it'd only be rolled out across the whole of Tameside by 2025

    Tim surely no sane man could question the IDS determination to go to war against professional welfare claimants. Come on give some credit where it is due, you really want to.
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    SouthamObserver said:

    Scrapheap_as_was said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    I have no idea if this is right or not. A Tory vote share of 40% would be some achievement. But as I have said a few times on here, the Tories *should* win in 2015.

    The one issue may be that the model is based on past performance when for the next election we have no comparable situation to work from. But maybe that does not matter.

    Is that 'should' in the sense Spurs 'should' beat Hull this weekend but most likely will find a way not to?

    Something like that! Put it this way, if the Tories do not win outright in 2015 it's not going to be because of the compelling case Labour has put to the electorate. To not win when the economy is recovering, the opposition's narrative is patchy (to say the least) and its leader is not popular would in many ways be a pretty heroic achievement - just like taking one point off Wigan in the season they got relegated.

    indeed - and even that was only with an injury time own goal that Wigan gave us!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,847
    Carola said:

    One for Sunil. And maybe Josias:

    http://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/whats-on/events/events-calendar#beeching

    Cheers for that; it looks interesting. Sadly I'm not available that night.

    My guess at an answer to the question would be political interference. The Heart of Wales was kept open despite being a prime Beeching candidate. Coincidentally enough, it served six marginal constituencies ...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,047
    @Tim

    "Once the media start following the money Gove has a problem"

    The schools prog from Yorkshire has been all over everywhere today. The lead characters now look like becoming stars. I'm going to try to get to watch it. Not a dry eye in the house apparently
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited October 2013
    Grangemouth survival package agreed and positive GDP figure, a very good news day.
    I suspect that Ed Miliband's strategy of going big on squeezed living costs is going to crash and burn in the same way as Ed Balls 'too far too fast' and time for Plan B on austerity did as we get nearer the GE. As the economic recovery gathers momentum, Osborne can claim that this Government did provide stability as it has rebalanced the economy, thus providing more sustainable growth while reducing the deficit.

    Its the economy stupid, and that alone blows any chance of Miliband and Balls being able to claim that they are a credible alternative when it comes to stewardship of the economy. David Cameron got it right when he called Ed Miliband a conman this week, the idea that this economic recovery is some how the 'wrong type of growth' when its providing increased employment and job security after the turmoil of the last five years really is one big con.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    tim said:

    MrJones said:

    I've had a great idea for a benefits scam. Loan out your kids to another family so they can pretend they're theirs and claim benefits for them and vice versa. I wish i'd thought of it before i could of done it with my brothers.

    The total benefits would be the same, you'd just be living with different children.
    Those BNP think tanks must be fearsome
    The key word you're missing is "addition."
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Carola said:

    tim said:

    Carola said:

    'DfE reported a free school to the police after tens of thousands of taxpayers money went missing it has emerged - more soon' wstewarttes

    'Dept for Educ says "serious failings" in financial mangt at Kings Science Academy", Bradford free school which Gove once called "flagship"' crick

    Once the media start following the money Gove has a problem
    There will be more finance issues come to light re ed. Not only free schools.

    National strike delayed apparently until after talks with govt.

    DfE link:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/department-for-education-statement-on-kings-science-academy
    Didn't know this:

    "Academies and free schools are subject to tougher financial accountability measures than maintained schools. Unlike maintained schools, academies must have their accounts externally audited."
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    What is Mr Fisher's track record ? What was his forecast result for the 2010 GE in October/November 2008 .? Does he have any forecasts from the past on which we can judge his accuracy ?
This discussion has been closed.