I would be happy with a Labour minority govt. Happier than with any form of Boris govt.
You're happy for the Anti-Semite to become PM? A clear case of Brexit insanity...
No. I would be unhappy with the antisemite as PM. I would be even more unhappy for a narcissistic, self-promoting liar to be PM. The choice is between bl**dy awful and f*****g awful. That is not my fault
So personal failings are worse than anti-semitism. Thank you for claritying your worldview.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
The money is not “free”. It will be paid for. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves.
We know that...and so do the WASPI's i'm sure.
However, they can quietly put there cross in the Labour box happy in the knowledge they will get a cheque through the door for thousands of pounds.
The Tories might get over the line with a majority this time* but they won't if they face a hard-left Labour in 2024 who will have no limits to their vote buying.
There is no way to compete.
*I actually think Labour have got a couple of last minute offers to reveal. They may as well offer to scrap student fees and refund all those who have already paid.
That will definitely be enough to stop a Tory majority and will probably get them enough seats to get JC in to #10 on the back of a coalition.
They won’t get a cheque in the post. They’ll get an amount added onto their existing pension payable over 5-10 years, depending on age.
But some of the gullible s believe they will get a cheque for £ 30,000 in the post.
I think the Labour party are data-harvesting the email addresses of the gullible.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten
Please don't start changing your model now Barnseian. Having just invested actual money in it, I'm wanting you to have absolute and unshakable confidence.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
Have you looked at what parameters would fit the changes seen in previous elections?
How do you say goodbye in French without saying au revoir?
"je vous voir, mais je ne vous suis" (le joke)
Godsdammit, I will miss making jokes in French. Can we cancel Brexit? I want to go back making jokes in more than one language. I'm sure nobody will mind.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten
Please don't start changing your model now Barnseian. Having just invested actual money in it, I'm wanting you to have absolute and unshakable confidence.
The basic model stays the same but I am fine tuning it as constituency polls come out and as people make sensible suggestions and observations. The main driver is the polls as they come out and drop into the exponential moving average. Don't invest too much into it! I have put money on >25.5 LD seats even though my model is now predicting only 26. I haven't put money on North Cornwall though the odds look good value.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
Thanks - yes, it is a tricky one. Too much arithmetic swing has side effects in Con-Lab marginals so there's a choose your poison aspect.
One other thing following on from our discussion last week. How sensitive is the model to the assumption that tactical voting is based on 2019 base projection rather than 2017 known result. Southport is the one that stands out for me - Labour were 2nd last time, and are throwing huge numbers of volunteers from accross Merseyside at the seat to try and win it, whereas your model has them being squeezed down to 10%. If it isn't too much work, I'd be interested in the model's results if TV was based on 2017 positions.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
Have you looked at what parameters would fit the changes seen in previous elections?
No I haven't. Good suggestion. If I have time, when I'm not canvassing or delivering, I'll predict the 2017 result based on the 2015 results and final 2017 share and see what balance of additive and multiplicative models best fits. The tactical voting environment was different though.
In North Cornwall it is 55% Tory 34% LD with Yougov MRP and in North Devon it is 52% Tory and 33% LD and in Eastbourne it is 48% Tory and 38% LD.
You include them but omit Cities of London and Westminster where it is 40% Tory and 27% LD and Kensington where it is 37% Tory and 29% LD and Esher and Walton where it is 49% Tory and 38% LD. https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
In North Cornwall it is 55% Tory 34% LD with Yougov MRP and in North Devon it is 52% Tory and 33% LD and in Eastbourne it is 48% Tory and 38% LD.
You include them but omit Cities of London and Westminster where it is 40% Tory and 27% LD and Kensington where it is 37% Tory and 29% LD. https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
yes - you can see the comparisons between my model and the MRP in the spreadsheet I published. I also include constituency polls where available. My model is completely different from the YouGov MRP model. It also does not have local knowledge about Cities of London and Kensington. I don't know if the MRP model does. It will be interesting compare these various estimates with the actual results.
Yougov MRP has Canterbury staying Labour but the Tories gaining seats like West Bromwich East and West, Great Grimsby, Vale of Clwyd and Bolsover from Labour you omit. https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
In North Cornwall it is 55% Tory 34% LD with Yougov MRP and in North Devon it is 52% Tory and 33% LD and in Eastbourne it is 48% Tory and 38% LD.
You include them but omit Cities of London and Westminster where it is 40% Tory and 27% LD and Kensington where it is 37% Tory and 29% LD and Esher and Walton where it is 49% Tory and 38% LD. https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
In fairness to Barnesian, I think you have local factors in both CoLaW and Kensington that it is hard to build any model to take account of. Kensington's baseline is a Con-Lab supermarginal, and any application of national swings will still have it as such and the model will drive tactical voting accordingly. Not saying you are wrong in your view of Kensington dynamics, but I don't see any way Barnesian could build a model based on national poll swings that would have Kensington being a Con-LD race. It probably falls under the DYOR caveat.
Yesterday the FT polling average was on Con 43%, Lab 32%, LD 14%. I'm not sure those figures are going to change at all as a result of tonight's polls because although there has been a slight movement to Labour it may not be enough to move them up to 33%. It may do. https://www.ft.com/content/263615ca-d873-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17
11% lead whilst many of the postals have gone out - and get returned.
Yep. That is one positive. At this point the lead was narrowing fast in 2017.
I'd imagine that people using postal ballots would be motivated to return theirs earlier this election in order to beat the weather / Christmas posting rush. Does some resourceful person have any data about this kind of thing?
I think there are restrictions on reporting on postal votes. Not totally sure.
It's well-established that most PVs are returned almost immediately. It is illegal to reveal their contents, though agents are present at the ongoing verification (when the cover sheet is checked, but not the vote) and have quite high success rates in estimating the trend by looking through the back of the votes (I've never been able to myself, but I believe those who say they can). They then (illegally) share it with colleagues and efforts in the final days are adjusted accordingly.
I agree that most PVs being sent when the Tories are about 10 points clear favours the Tories whatever happens next, though one can exaggerate these things, because PVs tend to be sent by the most committed voters (that's why they bothrered to organise getting a PV) and they are least likely to change their votes irrespective of when they vote.
Does Bath come out as their strongest seat in the UK, or does Orkney and Shetland still take that slot? Hazel Grove stands out as the name I don't recognise in that list.
Huge shift in prices in Portsmouth South. Lib Dems have collapsed from FAV to 20/1.
Best prices:
Lab 11/10 Con 7/4 LD 20/1
The contrast between Deltapoll and the LD Survation poll for Portsmouth S is really quite stark and the difference in dates surely can't account for that much of it. I think this reinforces the suspicion that the LDs must have commissioned a lot more constituency polls with Survation, all with relatively small samples thus ensuring a lot of random sample variation, and then published only the results which they liked.
All political parties do that: only release private polling that shows them in a good light.* Oh, to have access to their own data archives!!
However, wise political parties do not only look at the good bits in reports, but absorb, and try to deal with the more negative things. This seems to be where the Lib Dems have failed: they have swallowed their own fairy-tale.
(*This is why many - including Baxter - omit polling conducted by political parties from their models. Note that even biased media organisations do the same thing.)
By the way, I think you’re wrong with the dates theory. I think that the difference in fieldwork dates is far more likely than sample size to account for the large difference in VI
It isn't right or healthy for the politics of the generations to be that heavily polarised.
So, it isn’t right or healthy that only 25% of young people support the Conservatives, but it is right and healthy that a massive 25% of Scots support the Conservatives.
Yesterday the FT polling average was on Con 43%, Lab 32%, LD 14%. I'm not sure those figures are going to change at all as a result of tonight's polls because although there has been a slight movement to Labour it may not be enough to move them up to 33%. It may do. https://www.ft.com/content/263615ca-d873-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17
11% lead whilst many of the postals have gone out - and get returned.
Yep. That is one positive. At this point the lead was narrowing fast in 2017.
I'd imagine that people using postal ballots would be motivated to return theirs earlier this election in order to beat the weather / Christmas posting rush. Does some resourceful person have any data about this kind of thing?
I think there are restrictions on reporting on postal votes. Not totally sure.
It's well-established that most PVs are returned almost immediately. It is illegal to reveal their contents, though agents are present at the ongoing verification (when the cover sheet is checked, but not the vote) and have quite high success rates in estimating the trend by looking through the back of the votes (I've never been able to myself, but I believe those who say they can). They then (illegally) share it with colleagues and efforts in the final days are adjusted accordingly.
I agree that most PVs being sent when the Tories are about 10 points clear favours the Tories whatever happens next, though one can exaggerate these things, because PVs tend to be sent by the most committed voters (that's why they bothrered to organise getting a PV) and they are least likely to change their votes irrespective of when they vote.
In North Cornwall it is 55% Tory 34% LD with Yougov MRP and in North Devon it is 52% Tory and 33% LD and in Eastbourne it is 48% Tory and 38% LD.
You include them but omit Cities of London and Westminster where it is 40% Tory and 27% LD and Kensington where it is 37% Tory and 29% LD and Esher and Walton where it is 49% Tory and 38% LD. https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
I don't think either North Cornwall or North Devon will be particularly close, and I think the YouGov MRP estimates there are pretty much spot one.
St Ives, on the other hand, could go either way. I think the YG MRP misses some of the - errr - local issues. On balance I'd say another narrow Conservative hold.
Eastbourne is a tough call. The local MP was independent for most of this parliament, having defied the LD whip to vote for Mrs May's deal. I think that may well stand him in good stead with his constituents. I'm going to go for narrow LD hold.
HRH is going to choke on her cornflakes this morning. The Earl of Inverness headlines just keep getting worse.
Mail - Exposed: The damning details of Prince Andrew's deals with tax haven tycoons
Times - Andrew ‘passed government memos to friend’
Sun - Leaked emails show Prince Andrew ‘repeatedly exploited his role to work for controversial multi-millionaire financier’
The list of crimes he is now suspected of becomes very long. Almost impressive. Has Moriarty been hiding under our very noses all these decades?
Surely court action becomes inevitable at some point, or is England’s judicial system really so corrupt that members of the Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha clan are given blanket protection?
Thank goodness the Earl of Inverness can be held accountable by another, more independent, judiciary.
Astonishingly, you can still get an amazingly generous 10/11 (PP) on Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Lesley Laird, holding Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath.
If she and Murray are the only two SLab survivors (I suspect there will be more), then there will be more talent and competence in the tiny SLab Westminster group than in the entire group of 23 SLab MSPs.
Thanks Barnesian One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
There is also the fact that the Lib Dems are doing a much better job of targeting this time, and they have a far stronger campaign in those seats.
Barnesian has Devon North and North Cornwall as LD gains. Both available at 5/1, so a couple of value/fun/barnesianbeliever bets there.
Both those seats voted for Brexit: 57% in Devon N and 59.5% in North Cornwall.. Personally I would hesitate before betting on the LDs there.
The LibDems had a little, er, difficulty when their (American) candidate in North Devon basically implied in a radio interview the people in her constituency were knuckle-dragging Neanderthals - and had to be replaced: "When questioned about the enthusiasm for leaving the EU in her North Devon constituency, she responded with, "Demographically it's 98% white, we don't have a lot of ethnic minorities living in north Devon. "People aren't exposed to people from other countries. They don't travel a lot. "I think there is a slight disconnect with North Devon being isolated, being rural and low income, perhaps they don't appreciate the advantages of being in the European Union". https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2019-09-19/north-devon-lib-dem-parliamentary-candidate-kirsten-johnson-resigns-after-offensive-radio-interview/ Punching the voters in the face before asking for their vote....unwise. Suspicions that her attitude is still secretly the view of metropolitan LibDems is hardly helping them in the SW.
Britain Elects@britainelects Berwick upon Tweed, constituency voting intention: CON: 60% (+7) LDEM: 20% (-1) LAB: 17% (-8) GRN: 2% (-) via @DeltapollUK, 22 - 26 Nov Chgs. w/ GE2017 - no sign of Berwick returning to the orange fold - Labour to Con swing 7.5%. If that is indicative of a change further south in the NE, then Bishop Auckland, Stockton South and Darlington are lost for Labour, Sedgefield is at risk, but NW Durham not.
Britain Elects@britainelects Berwick upon Tweed, constituency voting intention: CON: 60% (+7) LDEM: 20% (-1) LAB: 17% (-8) GRN: 2% (-) via @DeltapollUK, 22 - 26 Nov Chgs. w/ GE2017 - no sign of Berwick returning to the orange fold - Labour to Con swing 7.5%. If that is indicative of a change further south in the NE, then Bishop Auckland, Stockton South and Darlington are lost for Labour, Sedgefield is at risk, but NW Durham not.
The LDs can take some small comfort that they've retaken second place on those numbers
Thanks Barnesian One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
There is also the fact that the Lib Dems are doing a much better job of targeting this time, and they have a far stronger campaign in those seats.
On the general topic of local campaigning - I'm sure it has an impact, but only up to a point. The Lib Dems are renowned for working their local patches hard, and I'm sure they did so in 2015. Didn't stop about 80% of their Parliamentary party getting the chop though, did it?
Britain Elects@britainelects Berwick upon Tweed, constituency voting intention: CON: 60% (+7) LDEM: 20% (-1) LAB: 17% (-8) GRN: 2% (-) via @DeltapollUK, 22 - 26 Nov Chgs. w/ GE2017 - no sign of Berwick returning to the orange fold - Labour to Con swing 7.5%. If that is indicative of a change further south in the NE, then Bishop Auckland, Stockton South and Darlington are lost for Labour, Sedgefield is at risk, but NW Durham not.
The LDs can take some small comfort that they've retaken second place on those numbers
Age is the divide in Britain now, with the Boomers increasingly aligned to Tories and Brexit, and the Millenials to Labour and Greens. The Lib Dems have their strongest vote in Gen X. Berwick is disproportionately Boomer, so increasingly difficult territory for the LDs.
The remain argument that Brexit will only just be starting with the WA being voted through parliament is of course technically correct.
However, for the vast majority of leavers it is the end point. You will find the EU falls off the radar of leavers pretty quickly I suspect.
But not of politics or politicians. We are surely going to spend a lot more time hearing about the EU and its rules in the future, even well into the future (ask the Norwegians or Swiss). Leavers who think the EU disappears from our politics or our lives are in for a disappointment.
Which is precisely why we should be aiming for a Canada or Japan deal with the EU. An arrangement that is entirely trade-based and leaves us out of EU politics.
HRH is going to choke on her cornflakes this morning. The Earl of Inverness headlines just keep getting worse...
Indeed, but it could be worse. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/prince-andrew-interview-disaster.html The United Kingdom and the United States bear striking similarities. When it comes to hard politics, both governments are currently led by oddly coiffed misogynistic leaders whose fans love them for their misconduct, dishonesty, and lack of impulse control. But the royal family is different: It still at least notionally aspires to standards political leaders seem to have abandoned. Americans watch the royals, rapt, for signs of slippage and failure, but also out of a kind of awe at how long they’ve sustained the illusion of honor. Yes, they’re mooches and hypocrites, but—as my colleague Ben Mathis-Lilley has written—maybe hypocrisy is better than the alternative. ...
Britain Elects@britainelects Berwick upon Tweed, constituency voting intention: CON: 60% (+7) LDEM: 20% (-1) LAB: 17% (-8) GRN: 2% (-) via @DeltapollUK, 22 - 26 Nov Chgs. w/ GE2017 - no sign of Berwick returning to the orange fold - Labour to Con swing 7.5%. If that is indicative of a change further south in the NE, then Bishop Auckland, Stockton South and Darlington are lost for Labour, Sedgefield is at risk, but NW Durham not.
The LDs can take some small comfort that they've retaken second place on those numbers
Age is the divide in Britain now, with the Boomers increasingly aligned to Tories and Brexit, and the Millenials to Labour and Greens. The Lib Dems have their strongest vote in Gen X. Berwick is disproportionately Boomer, so increasingly difficult territory for the LDs.
There is no reason for any young person to stay in the Berwick constituency. No jobs. No fun. No future. They move to Newcastle.
What a fucking liar Corbyn is. Given that he is on the record as believing the exact opposiye for his entire political career, including his leadership years:
Jeremy Corbyn says he is "not happy" with UK police or security services operating a "shoot-to-kill" policy.
In an interview three days after the Bataclan attacks in Paris, the Labour leader told the BBC such an approach could "often be counter-productive".
Only a couple of weeks ago Corbyn was saying it would be better if al-Baghdadi could have been arrested. As though you can just rock up to his hideout in Syria and serve a warrant. At best Corbyn is stupendously naive, but I believe in reality he would rather do nothing then dirty his hands as he would see it.
Nah, Corbyn spent the whole of the 80s in favour of a shoot first, hawkish policy. Just not for our side.
I've just recalled another recent incident. There was Brit rescued in the Phillipines with his wife last week, who were held captive by Abu Sayyaf. British forces were involved in that. Can you imagine Corbyn having to make decisions about such things?
Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron have all said that the single most difficult part of being PM was to be the person who gave the final nod to special forces raids abroad, then watching them play out. Corbyn wouldn’t want to get his hands so dirty.
What a fucking liar Corbyn is. Given that he is on the record as believing the exact opposiye for his entire political career, including his leadership years:
Jeremy Corbyn says he is "not happy" with UK police or security services operating a "shoot-to-kill" policy.
In an interview three days after the Bataclan attacks in Paris, the Labour leader told the BBC such an approach could "often be counter-productive".
Only a couple of weeks ago Corbyn was saying it would be better if al-Baghdadi could have been arrested. As though you can just rock up to his hideout in Syria and serve a warrant. At best Corbyn is stupendously naive, but I believe in reality he would rather do nothing then dirty his hands as he would see it.
Nah, Corbyn spent the whole of the 80s in favour of a shoot first, hawkish policy. Just not for our side.
I've just recalled another recent incident. There was Brit rescued in the Phillipines with his wife last week, who were held captive by Abu Sayyaf. British forces were involved in that. Can you imagine Corbyn having to make decisions about such things?
Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron have all said that the single most difficult part of being PM was to be the person who gave the final nod to special forces raids abroad, then watching them play out. Corbyn wouldn’t want to get his hands so dirty.
And Johnson may well charge off in the wrong direction.
Does Bath come out as their strongest seat in the UK, or does Orkney and Shetland still take that slot? Hazel Grove stands out as the name I don't recognise in that list.
Once held by the liberal Dr Michael Winstanley adjacent to Cheadle I think
I think the key takeaway from the polls right now is Tories are generally low 40s, Labour generally low 30s. That was also true last time at this stage, and it changed. But if it doesn't change, it is totally impossible to see any result other than a Tory majority. Labour need to be getting up towards 39 at least (in the end they clocked just over 40 on the mainland in 2017). So far, they seem to be struggling to cut through.
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
So Labour are planning a “central train booking system”. Because that’s not something we already have, is it…?
But the current one is run by evil capitalists, even traded on the disgusting stock market, and in Corbynite Utopia no-one should be allowed to make money from transport - especially not yours and my pension funds. https://investors.thetrainline.com/
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
The LD share is almost double last time. My basic swing model is 75% arithmetic UNS and 25% multiplicative to reflect "lumpiness" i.e. LDs do somewhat better in delta share where they are already strong. That's why the shares are high in strong LD areas. Whether that is a reasonable model we shall see! Thanks for highlighting it though. You make a reasonable point. Perhaps 25% is too high a weighting for multiplicative. If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is Tory majority of ten The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
Your model is getting better every day
Yes, impressive work from those trying to model the election, an election where the traditional UNS models are clearly not going to work, where there’s lots of local issues, MPs changing party, and Brexit still being unresolved has moved loyalties in different directions. Personally I can’t get too involved in betting on this one - too busy with work and family problems to do it properly, and I lost money in 2017 so a little wary of doing it half-heartedly.
Comments
Yup. That'll work...
One point to consider. In the last election, the LibDems only got over 50% of the vote in one constituency - Twickenham. You have them clearing 50% in 19 seats, some by quite a lot.
Barnesian has Devon North and North Cornwall as LD gains. Both available at 5/1, so a couple of value/fun/barnesianbeliever bets there.
If I reduce it to 20% weighting the Tory majority increases from 4 to 10 and the LD seats reduce from 29 to 26 - so it is a very sensitive assumption. I think I will reduce it to 20% so my best guess is
Tory majority of ten
The LD shares drop as expected and the three LD seats that drop out of the LD column are Guildford, Chippenham and Eastleigh.
https://action.labour.org.uk/page/content/1950s-women
At least the emails can be sold on to scammers as a sucker's list.
(le joke)
One other thing following on from our discussion last week. How sensitive is the model to the assumption that tactical voting is based on 2019 base projection rather than 2017 known result. Southport is the one that stands out for me - Labour were 2nd last time, and are throwing huge numbers of volunteers from accross Merseyside at the seat to try and win it, whereas your model has them being squeezed down to 10%. If it isn't too much work, I'd be interested in the model's results if TV was based on 2017 positions.
You include them but omit Cities of London and Westminster where it is 40% Tory and 27% LD and Kensington where it is 37% Tory and 29% LD and Esher and Walton where it is 49% Tory and 38% LD.
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
My model is completely different from the YouGov MRP model. It also does not have local knowledge about Cities of London and Kensington. I don't know if the MRP model does. It will be interesting compare these various estimates with the actual results.
like West Bromwich East and West, Great Grimsby, Vale of Clwyd and Bolsover from Labour you omit.
https://yougov.co.uk/uk-general-election-2019/
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/11/27/key-findings-our-mrp
I agree that most PVs being sent when the Tories are about 10 points clear favours the Tories whatever happens next, though one can exaggerate these things, because PVs tend to be sent by the most committed voters (that's why they bothrered to organise getting a PV) and they are least likely to change their votes irrespective of when they vote.
Hazel Grove stands out as the name I don't recognise in that list.
However, wise political parties do not only look at the good bits in reports, but absorb, and try to deal with the more negative things. This seems to be where the Lib Dems have failed: they have swallowed their own fairy-tale.
(*This is why many - including Baxter - omit polling conducted by political parties from their models. Note that even biased media organisations do the same thing.)
By the way, I think you’re wrong with the dates theory. I think that the difference in fieldwork dates is far more likely than sample size to account for the large difference in VI
Tory blindness in a nutshell.
St Ives, on the other hand, could go either way. I think the YG MRP misses some of the - errr - local issues. On balance I'd say another narrow Conservative hold.
Eastbourne is a tough call. The local MP was independent for most of this parliament, having defied the LD whip to vote for Mrs May's deal. I think that may well stand him in good stead with his constituents. I'm going to go for narrow LD hold.
Mail - Exposed: The damning details of Prince Andrew's deals with tax haven tycoons
Times - Andrew ‘passed government memos to friend’
Sun - Leaked emails show Prince Andrew ‘repeatedly exploited his role to work for controversial multi-millionaire financier’
The list of crimes he is now suspected of becomes very long. Almost impressive. Has Moriarty been hiding under our very noses all these decades?
Surely court action becomes inevitable at some point, or is England’s judicial system really so corrupt that members of the Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha clan are given blanket protection?
Thank goodness the Earl of Inverness can be held accountable by another, more independent, judiciary.
Astonishingly, you can still get an amazingly generous 10/11 (PP) on Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland, Lesley Laird, holding Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath.
If she and Murray are the only two SLab survivors (I suspect there will be more), then there will be more talent and competence in the tiny SLab Westminster group than in the entire group of 23 SLab MSPs.
"When questioned about the enthusiasm for leaving the EU in her North Devon constituency, she responded with, "Demographically it's 98% white, we don't have a lot of ethnic minorities living in north Devon.
"People aren't exposed to people from other countries. They don't travel a lot.
"I think there is a slight disconnect with North Devon being isolated, being rural and low income, perhaps they don't appreciate the advantages of being in the European Union".
https://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/2019-09-19/north-devon-lib-dem-parliamentary-candidate-kirsten-johnson-resigns-after-offensive-radio-interview/
Punching the voters in the face before asking for their vote....unwise. Suspicions that her attitude is still secretly the view of metropolitan LibDems is hardly helping them in the SW.
Berwick-upon-Tweed
Britain Elects@britainelects
Berwick upon Tweed, constituency voting intention:
CON: 60% (+7)
LDEM: 20% (-1)
LAB: 17% (-8)
GRN: 2% (-)
via @DeltapollUK, 22 - 26 Nov Chgs. w/ GE2017
- no sign of Berwick returning to the orange fold
- Labour to Con swing 7.5%. If that is indicative of a change further south in the NE, then Bishop Auckland, Stockton South and Darlington are lost for Labour, Sedgefield is at risk, but NW Durham not.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/sep/18/prisoners-indeterminate-sentences-ipps
Of course, the Tories used to talk about leaving the ECHR, so perhaps they'd rather not talk about this.
Berwick is disproportionately Boomer, so increasingly difficult territory for the LDs.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/prince-andrew-interview-disaster.html
The United Kingdom and the United States bear striking similarities. When it comes to hard politics, both governments are currently led by oddly coiffed misogynistic leaders whose fans love them for their misconduct, dishonesty, and lack of impulse control. But the royal family is different: It still at least notionally aspires to standards political leaders seem to have abandoned. Americans watch the royals, rapt, for signs of slippage and failure, but also out of a kind of awe at how long they’ve sustained the illusion of honor. Yes, they’re mooches and hypocrites, but—as my colleague Ben Mathis-Lilley has written—maybe hypocrisy is better than the alternative. ...
They move to Newcastle.
Corbyn wouldn’t want to get his hands so dirty.
That was also true last time at this stage, and it changed.
But if it doesn't change, it is totally impossible to see any result other than a Tory majority.
Labour need to be getting up towards 39 at least (in the end they clocked just over 40 on the mainland in 2017). So far, they seem to be struggling to cut through.
https://investors.thetrainline.com/
Personally I can’t get too involved in betting on this one - too busy with work and family problems to do it properly, and I lost money in 2017 so a little wary of doing it half-heartedly.
188.7k Tweets.
ie 284 per day.
Definitely not a Bot. Heh.