politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ComRes becomes the 3rd pollster in a week to have UKIP fourth

first

third

rugby is crap

Greens going nowhere, Corbyn surges to 16 point deficit.

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/843160705943715844

A terrible week for the Conservative Party, as it adds to a 16 point lead over Labour.

I think that's about a Tory majority of 146 with Labour down to 163 seats...

FPT: Good evening, everyone.

Scarcely watched any rugby (checked the England score, though. Disappointing) but was perplexed and intrigued by the 100 minute game in France. The Welsh must be a bit pissed off.

On-topic: as Mr. Quidder said, this is the new normal.

Mr. Artist, yes, I read that too.

The correct figure for Conservatives is 42% not 45% . Other parties figures are as given as per Comres website

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

Labour at 25 20pt deficit.. what will it need to get rid of Corbyn..

Loss of 1000 councillors in May ? Maybe not even that.

They are only defending around 520 seats in England and fewer than 1,000 including Scotland and Wales

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/843160263293636609

Those are almost directly in proportion to the number of people affected!

For lovers of Scottish sub samples Comres has

SNP 52
Con 21
LDem 14
Lab 9
Green 3

5...4...3...2..1...Justin Short Straws tells us it isn't that bad for Labour, and given what happened in the 1898 Bognor By-Election, Labour could still win.

...even after a budget u turn Labour flounder. Possibly another Tory bounce due once article 50 triggered.

I cant see Labour closing the gap.

45p has always seemed fair to me. Taking literally half seems extreme

Apologies for the mistake on the size of the CON share. Problem of trying to post while watching the rugby and looking after grandchildren all at same time.

MarkSenior said:

surbiton said:

SquareRoot said:

Labour at 25 20pt deficit.. what will it need to get rid of Corbyn..

Loss of 1000 councillors in May ? Maybe not even that.

They are only defending around 520 seats in England and fewer than 1,000 including Scotland and Wales

I agree that total lab losses are limited because they are not defending that many seats, this time, and I'm shore the lab leadership will try to spin it as 'not that bad' but thay are defending a bit more that 1000.

from wikipidia, seats won at last elections (so will have changed a bit from by-elections)

England 538
Scotland 394
Wales 577
Total: 1509

As an aside, does anybody expect UKIP to do well in the welsh LG elections?

ComRes

14/03/13
Lab 37
Con 28
LibD 9

24/03/13
Lab 38
Con 28
Libd 12

19/03/09
Con 41
Lab 30
LibD 17

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate

Labour polled much worse in the corresponding May local elections than ComRes polled them in March.

SeanT said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

18 minutes to go and not a single decent England attack.

Pretty dismal. Deserved Ireland victory.

Its a replay of the 2011 game.

Any thoughts on now some Russian oligarch and George Osborne have made your profession look ridiculous.

Does anyone really care about the Standard? It's a tabloid. I'm surprised at the over-reaction.

Ireland deserve to be further ahead, and they deserve the win I think they'll get

Ireland certainly deserve to win.

The reaction is about privilege versus meritocracy, responsibility to your job and the willingness of senior politicians to arse-lick dubious people.

Superb from the Irish. England have never quite got it right. It was a grand slam blowout in Dublin that was the making of England World Cup winning team, though. This is where Jones really starts to earn his money.

BigRich said:

kle4 said:

45p has always seemed fair to me. Taking literally half seems extreme

And what if, there was good reason to believe that having a lower rate of tax on high earners would generate more money for the government?

At what point does having a lower tax on high earners generate less money for the government ?

Because that obviously happens at some point.

At which point I don't know but there appears to be the assumption among some people that lower tax on high earners is always the right thing to do.

Would you, for example, support a lower rate of tax on high earners than what the median person pays ?

another_richard said:

ComRes

14/03/13
Lab 37
Con 28
LibD 9

24/03/13
Lab 38
Con 28
Libd 12

19/03/09
Con 41
Lab 30
LibD 17

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate

Labour polled much worse in the corresponding May local elections than ComRes polled them in March.

Of course Labour polled much worse in the local elections which are mostly in the England county shires .
Actual vote shares were

2009

Con 43.5%
Lab 13.5%
LDem 24.7%
UKIP 4.6%
Green 4.4%
BNP 2.5%
Others 6.8%

2013

Con 34.5%
Lab 21.3%
LDem 13.7%
UKIP 20.2%
Green 3.4%
BNP 0.3%
Others 6.6%

It would be interesting to see the 2015 GE vote shares for only the seats with elections this May . I suspect the Conservatives would be around 50%

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Superb from the Irish. England have never quite got it right. It was a grand slam blowout in Dublin that was the making of England World Cup winning team, though. This is where Jones really starts to earn his money.

England have only played really well in one game - Scotland. They arguably deserved to lose against Wales and France. Even Italy troubled them.

They didn't deserve the Slam.

Achieving things without deserving them is rarely good for you and England have been unimpressive this year.

They peaked in Australia.

This sounds a bit pish.

https://twitter.com/NoQuotesPowell/status/843165862995660800

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Superb from the Irish. England have never quite got it right. It was a grand slam blowout in Dublin that was the making of England World Cup winning team, though. This is where Jones really starts to earn his money.

England have only played really well in one game - Scotland. They arguably deserved to lose against Wales and France. Even Italy troubled them.

They didn't deserve the Slam.

League table doesn't lie...

Theuniondivvie said:

This sounds a bit pish.

twitter.com/NoQuotesPowell/status/843165862995660800

I thought Joshua was fighting the Machine shortly?

MarkSenior said:

felix said:

BigRich said:

MarkSenior said:

For lovers of Scottish sub samples Comres has

SNP 52
Con 21
LDem 14
Lab 9
Green 3

Wonder how the LD will do in the Scottish LG elections in May? They may be a lot of peoples second chose, which in the AV system will help.

We actually had proper Scot poll earlier:

Holyrood voting intention (const): SNP: 51% (+3) CON: 24% (-1) LAB: 14% (-1) LDEM: 6% (-) GRN: 4% (+1) (via YouGov / 09 - 14 Mar)

Holyrood voting intention (list): SNP: 40% (+1) CON: 25% (+1) LAB: 14% (-) GRN: 12% (+1) LDEM: 5% (-1) (via YouGov / 09 - 14 Mar)

Ironically much better for the Tories and not so good for the LDs. how amusing of Mark Senior to omit it.

There will not be a Holyrood election this May , there will be local elections with Independents taking around 10-12% of the vote , the question is who will they take them from ?

First pref - currently I'd expect SNP 45%, SCON 18% , SLAB 14%, Ind 12%, SLID 6%, Greens 3%
- next week's S.30 shenanigans will no doubt have an impact !!

FrancisUrquhart said:

Theuniondivvie said:

This sounds a bit pish.

twitter.com/NoQuotesPowell/status/843165862995660800

I thought Joshua was fighting the Machine shortly?

Spoof, apologies!
Stranger things have happened in boxing, mind..

SeanT said:

That was also a notably boring, stodgy game of rugby. I cannot remember one decent flowing back movement from either team. Just dull.

Football is the best form of.... football

SeanT said:

That was also a notably boring, stodgy game of rugby. I cannot remember one decent flowing back movement from either team. Just dull.

A single try says it all - when was the last time you saw that in a rugby game ?

England looked tense from the start, I'm just annoyed I didn't think of having a bet at that point.

another_richard said:

MarkSenior said:

another_richard said:

ComRes

14/03/13
Lab 37
Con 28
LibD 9

24/03/13
Lab 38
Con 28
Libd 12

19/03/09
Con 41
Lab 30
LibD 17

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate

Labour polled much worse in the corresponding May local elections than ComRes polled them in March.

Of course Labour polled much worse in the local elections which are mostly in the England county shires .
Actual vote shares were

2009

Con 43.5%
Lab 13.5%
LDem 24.7%
UKIP 4.6%
Green 4.4%
BNP 2.5%
Others 6.8%

2013

Con 34.5%
Lab 21.3%
LDem 13.7%
UKIP 20.2%
Green 3.4%
BNP 0.3%
Others 6.6%

It would be interesting to see the 2015 GE vote shares for only the seats with elections this May . I suspect the Conservatives would be around 50%

Labour polled much worse in the NEV than the polls suggested.

And its NEV which matters not actual votes.

NEV is very hard to calculate correctly when the national elections held in a particular year are very unrepresentative of the country as a whole . This is especially the case in CC years 2009/2013 and this year . This year ( unlike 2009 and 2013 ) does have elections in Wales and Scotland . In my view comparing the actual vote shares this year with 2009 and 2013 will give a better pictures .

One thing England need to some how manage is to not concede as much possession. They are fantastic in defence, but you can't give the likes of the All Blacks 75% of the ball and hope to be within touching distance no matter how organized you are and how well you tackle.

Throughout the 6-nations England gave every team they played plenty of the ball and won several matches by having amazing defence for long spells.

Rugby used to be a game played by 15 players in a team for 80 minutes . Nowadays 10 players play for 80 minutes and another ten are only fit enough to play for an average of 40 minutes .

MarkSenior said:

felix said:

BigRich said:

MarkSenior said:

For lovers of Scottish sub samples Comres has

SNP 52
Con 21
LDem 14
Lab 9
Green 3

Wonder how the LD will do in the Scottish LG elections in May? They may be a lot of peoples second chose, which in the AV system will help.

We actually had proper Scot poll earlier:

Holyrood voting intention (const): SNP: 51% (+3) CON: 24% (-1) LAB: 14% (-1) LDEM: 6% (-) GRN: 4% (+1) (via YouGov / 09 - 14 Mar)

Holyrood voting intention (list): SNP: 40% (+1) CON: 25% (+1) LAB: 14% (-) GRN: 12% (+1) LDEM: 5% (-1) (via YouGov / 09 - 14 Mar)

Ironically much better for the Tories and not so good for the LDs. how amusing of Mark Senior to omit it.

There will not be a Holyrood election this May , there will be local elections with Independents taking around 10-12% of the vote , the question is who will they take them from ?

STV makes this kind of polling almost but not quite pointless. Knowing first preference is useful but not the be all and end all as there has been clear "Unionist Transfers" in council by-elections since the Referendum.

Entirely OT, apologies, but thought the PB brains trust would be a good one to consult about this. if one had to make an emergency visit to touristy Cape Town, what jabs/medication/visa details should one know?

Dixie said:

SeanT said:

Dixie said:

another_richard said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Superb from the Irish. England have never quite got it right. It was a grand slam blowout in Dublin that was the making of England World Cup winning team, though. This is where Jones really starts to earn his money.

England have only played really well in one game - Scotland. They arguably deserved to lose against Wales and France. Even Italy troubled them.

They didn't deserve the Slam.

Achieving things without deserving them is rarely good for you and England have been unimpressive this year.

They peaked in Australia.

They haven't peaked...they played most of the 6 nations with only half the starting team. No Big Billy and Bro, no Kruis , no Robshaw, no Watson, no Tuilagi,

In top level modern rugby you're always going to without some first choice players and with England's greater strength in depth this works to their advantage.

Outplayed by Ireland from the start. It was a fair result. A number of players just aren't good enough. Cole, Ford, Hartley for a start.

Bit harsh. In two seasons, England have gone from historic World Cup flops, to a Grand Slam, followed by a Championship, and a world record (equalling) run of victories, including an historic whitewash away against Australia.

lol. They played some unintelligent rugby today (and all season) but Jones is building a potentially brilliant team.

Credit must go to Ireland, much as I hate to write those words. England outplayed. I just think there needs to be more depth.

By depth, you realise England were still missing a whole bench of players through injury that would normally get in the squad.

SeanT said:

Dixie said:

SeanT said:

Dixie said:

another_richard said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

another_richard said:

SeanT said:

SouthamObserver said:

Superb from the Irish. England have never quite got it right. It was a grand slam blowout in Dublin that was the making of England World Cup winning team, though. This is where Jones really starts to earn his money.

England have only played really well in one game - Scotland. They arguably deserved to lose against Wales and France. Even Italy troubled them.

They didn't deserve the Slam.

Achieving things without deserving them is rarely good for you and England have been unimpressive this year.

They peaked in Australia.

They haven't peaked...they played most of the 6 nations with only half the starting team. No Big Billy and Bro, no Kruis , no Robshaw, no Watson, no Tuilagi,

In top level modern rugby you're always going to without some first choice players and with England's greater strength in depth this works to their advantage.

Outplayed by Ireland from the start. It was a fair result. A number of players just aren't good enough. Cole, Ford, Hartley for a start.

Bit harsh. In two seasons, England have gone from historic World Cup flops, to a Grand Slam, followed by a Championship, and a world record (equalling) run of victories, including an historic whitewash away against Australia.

lol. They played some unintelligent rugby today (and all season) but Jones is building a potentially brilliant team.

Credit must go to Ireland, much as I hate to write those words. England outplayed. I just think there needs to be more depth.

Ireland beat the All Blacks. They're a good team. They out-thought England by turning the game into an attritional display of disruption, and England simply lacked enough possession, mainly because of errors.

But England are still champions, and now (equal) world record holders in consecutive victories. It's hardly a catastrophe.

I agree with the comment down-thread that many of them might not really want to go to NZ with the Lions. What's the point in the Lions, these days, apart from generating much-needed cash for our Antipodean friends?

Now we are Brexit-ing, don't we have to look to do more of that ;-)

another_richard said:

rcs1000 said:

another_richard said:

MarkSenior said:

another_richard said:

ComRes

14/03/13
Lab 37
Con 28
LibD 9

24/03/13
Lab 38
Con 28
Libd 12

19/03/09
Con 41
Lab 30
LibD 17

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate

Labour polled much worse in the corresponding May local elections than ComRes polled them in March.

Of course Labour polled much worse in the local elections which are mostly in the England county shires .
Actual vote shares were

2009

Con 43.5%
Lab 13.5%
LDem 24.7%
UKIP 4.6%
Green 4.4%
BNP 2.5%
Others 6.8%

2013

Con 34.5%
Lab 21.3%
LDem 13.7%
UKIP 20.2%
Green 3.4%
BNP 0.3%
Others 6.6%

It would be interesting to see the 2015 GE vote shares for only the seats with elections this May . I suspect the Conservatives would be around 50%

Labour polled much worse in the NEV than the polls suggested.

And its NEV which matters not actual votes.

I think all Mark is suggesting is that, to compare how parties are doing relative to 2013 and 2009, we look at vote share changes on a like for like basis. That doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

Certainly.

But I prefer to do so on a NEV basis.

It is after all the basis upon which they're reported:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_local_elections,_2013

The problem with looking at actual vote chares is that not every year has the same set of elections.

The calculation of NEV relies on there being a number of wards being fought that are representative of the country as a whole . That is not possible in 2009/2013 and 2017 and so makes the comparison of NEV with other years more inaccurate . Looking at actual vote shares will give us an almost completely accurate comparison for this May with 2009 and 2013

rcs1000 said:

HYUFD said:

surbiton said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

Anyone for WTO terms?

https://twitter.com/afp/status/843142169640812544

Renegotiating not abandoning and Trump always said he would do this, it will be directed against Mexico and China not the UK

The WTO does not mentions countries by name as far as I am aware. A protectionist WTO is protectionist for everyone.

A great thing for a country where 30% of its GDP comes from foreign trade.

If Trump withdrew the US from the WTO or did a major renegotiation of terms he could well do a free trade deal with the UK, Israel, Australia, Canada and a few selected others while imposing heavy tariffs on goods and services from the likes of China, Mexico and quite possibly the EU. The US is of course the largest destination for UK exports

The US already has free trade deals with Canada, Australia and Israel.

Ultimately, the US wants to leave the WTO so it can impose terms on others. The WTO stops large countries from bullying smaller ones. We, as a mid sized country, benefit from the world's trade being rule based. If the US were to leave the WTO so as to levy discriminatory tariffs, that would not be a positive for the world.

Donald Trump has a fundamental misunderstanding. Trade deficits are not caused by having too low tariffs with China, or a too expensive currency. If they were, then Switzerland (zero tariffs with China, and an incredibly expensive currency) would have a massive trade deficit. It actually has a trade surplus.

Trade deficits are the result of consumers spending too much and saving too little. There is a near perfect correlation between savings rates and trade balances. So long as American consumers wish to consume more than they make, the US will run a trade deficit.

To solve America's trade deficit you need to implement policies that - as Germany did in the early 2000s - depress consumption. This works two ways: firstly it means you suck in less in exports immediately. And secondarily, it lowers the cost of capital for business, encouraging investment, and - longer-term - boosting exports.

What is the US doing instead? They are implementing a massive stimulus package that will... oh yes... cause US consumer spending to rise, paid for by rising US debt.

I understand the "depress consumption" argument, but, with interest rates at 0%, isn't our cost of capital very low anyway, yet we still have little investment.. (except in BTL)....

Stephen Daisley - No peace after the PM’s victory in Four-Day War

"Speaking on Thursday, Mrs May told an interviewer: ‘When the SNP government say that it’s the time to start talking about a new independence referendum, I say that just at this point, all our energies should be focused on our negotiations with the European Union about our future relationship… That’s my job as Prime Minister. Right now we should be working together, not pulling apart. And so, for that reason, I say to the SNP, now is not the time.’

This was pitched perfectly to Scottish voters, to whom she was really talking. The Prime Minister refused to be drawn into an unseemly public spat with the SNP leader, instead making her common sense case to the electorate. Westminster, she was saying, was not preventing Scotland from holding another independence referendum. But we have Brexit to get through so let’s stick with one constitutional crisis at a time."

"Every time the Nats get themselves into a jam, every time it looks like they might finally have to stop girning and start governing, up pop the six little anoraks, festooned with CND badges and brimming with good intentions, and they come to the rescue. Time after time, Mr Harvie drags the SNP out of a hole and gets nothing in return except a pat on the head. That isn’t leadership; it’s the political instincts of Lassie.

The Greens’ amening of Miss Sturgeon’s gambit is different from previous acts of handmaidenry because it breaks the party’s pledge to the voters. In the manifesto they were elected on last May, the Greens promised"

BigRich said:

another_richard said:

BigRich said:

kle4 said:

45p has always seemed fair to me. Taking literally half seems extreme

And what if, there was good reason to believe that having a lower rate of tax on high earners would generate more money for the government?

At what point does having a lower tax on high earners generate less money for the government ?

Because that obviously happens at some point.

At which point I don't know but there appears to be the assumption among some people that lower tax on high earners is always the right thing to do.

Would you, for example, support a lower rate of tax on high earners than what the median person pays ?

Good question, and no, I would have exactly the same tax rate for everybody. abolish NI, and tax brakes like ISAs and pensions, and Then have a universal welfare payment, the same amount going to everybody so the system as a whole is 'simple' and 'Progressive' and embodies 'equality be for the law'

I think this would generate the most amount of money from high earners, most - well almost everybody likes to think of themselves as a good person, and will only do bad things if they can find a way of justifying them and saying they are not bad. for some rich people this will be 'pore people don't pay income tax and middle income people use ISAs and pensions to avoid paying tax so why shouldn't I try to do the same. it may feel odd to those of us not earning very high incomes but may of those that do feel that the 50% and now 45% victimise them.

What do you think?

I'd tax everyone earning over £1million at 80% rather than trying to cap the ridiculous sums paid to people who don't deserve it or need it. And I would appoint a personal HMRC minder to ensure they don't wriggle out of it. If they want to leave the UK, bye bye.

logical_song said:

"What is the right punishment for blasphemy?"
Christ knows.

Or in this case, Mohammad knows?

BigRich said:

Dixie said:

Dixie said:

MarkSenior said:

another_richard said:

ComRes

14/03/13
Lab 37
Con 28
LibD 9

24/03/13
Lab 38
Con 28
Libd 12

19/03/09
Con 41
Lab 30
LibD 17

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2/communicate

Labour polled much worse in the corresponding May local elections than ComRes polled them in March.

Of course Labour polled much worse in the local elections which are mostly in the England county shires .
Actual vote shares were

2009

Con 43.5%
Lab 13.5%
LDem 24.7%
UKIP 4.6%
Green 4.4%
BNP 2.5%
Others 6.8%

2013

Con 34.5%
Lab 21.3%
LDem 13.7%
UKIP 20.2%
Green 3.4%
BNP 0.3%
Others 6.6%

It would be interesting to see the 2015 GE vote shares for only the seats with elections this May . I suspect the Conservatives would be around 50%

I think the outcome will replicate the 2009 results. Won't be a big issue for Jezza because they won't lose many seats or Councils. 2018 is the big one for them.

This is what a Labour fella thinks of the forthcoming election:

http://labourlist.org/2017/03/luke-akehurst-what-would-a-good-series-of-local-election-results-look-like/

That article comes across as very optimistic.

Makes it easier to slag off Jezza when we underperform.

Theuniondivvie said:

Is this a new Indy poll? Strange way of reporting it if so.

'Most Britons say Brexit vote makes break-up of UK more likely – poll

Any future vote is likely to be closer, with 47% of Scots polled saying that they would prefer a yes vote in a new referendum, against 44% who prefer no.'

https://tinyurl.com/lcy2ftv

There must be more than a few prominent unionist figures reading the runes and wondering when to time their conversion 'with a heavy heart' to independence. Once it begins to appear inevitable, the questions will become defined more by post-independence politics.

Also, the moment A50 is invoked, the international dimension will be transformed and senior people in other EU member states will feel much more liberty to opine on the practicalities for seamless Scottish reentry.